Agenda and minutes
Venue: Frink Room (Elisabeth) - Endeavour House. View directions
Contact: Committee Services: 01449 724930
Note: Please note that consideration of the items in Paper PL/18/20 will not commence before 1:30pm.
No. | Item | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
DECLARATION OF INTERESTS Members to declare any interests as appropriate in respect of items to be considered at this meeting.
Minutes: 67.1 Councillor Simon Barrett declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/18/00606 as he owned a business in Long Melford but advised that it had no relationship to the application before Members.
|
|||||||||||
PL/18/18 TO CONFIRM THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 28 NOVEMBER 2018 To Follow Minutes: 68.1 The Chair advised that the minutes of the meeting from 28 November 2018 were to be deferred until the next meeting of the Planning Committee as a draft had not yet been completed.
68.2 RESOLVED
That the confirmation of the minutes from the 28 November be deferred to the next meeting of the Babergh Planning Committee. |
|||||||||||
TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL'S PETITION SCHEME Minutes: 69.1 None received.
|
|||||||||||
SITE INSPECTIONS In addition to any site inspections which the Committee may consider to be necessary, the Acting Chief Planning Officer will report on any other applications which require site inspections.
The provisional date for any site inspections is Wednesday 19 December 2018.
Minutes: 70.1 The Area Planning Manager gave a brief presentation of two applications, both of which had been referred to Committee for determination following consideration by the Delegation Panel.
70.2 RESOLVED
That site inspections be held on 16 January 2019 in respect of the following applications:
(1) DC/18/04798 – Land South of High bank, Melford Road, Sudbury, Suffolk.
Full Planning Application: Erection of 5No dwellings, garages and landscaping with alterations to improve existing junction with the highway.
(2) DC/18/03832 – Old Buckenham School, Brettenham Park, Brettenham, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP7 7PH
Full Planning Application – Erection of 8no. dwellings and associated carports following demolition of 2 no. existing dwellings (proposal would utilise existing access.) |
|||||||||||
PL/18/19 PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE PDF 55 KB An Addendum to Paper PL/18/19 will be circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting summarising additional correspondence received since the publication of the agenda but before 12 noon on the working day before the meeting, together with any errata.
Additional documents: Minutes: In accordance with the Council’s arrangements for Public Speaking at Planning Committee, representations were made as detailed below relating to the items in Paper PL/18/19 and the speakers responded to questions put to them as provided for under those arrangements.
It was RESOLVED
That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise) in accordance with delegated powers under Council Minute No. 48(a) (dated 19 October 2004) decisions on the items referred to in Paper PL/18/19 be made as follows:-
|
|||||||||||
DC/18/00606 Land to the East of Station Road, Long Melford PDF 732 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 72.1 Item 1
Application DC/18/00606 Proposal Outline Planning Application (means of access to be considered) – erection of up to 150 dwellings with public open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage system and a vehicular access point. Site Location LONG MELFORD – Land to the East of Station Road, Long Melford, Sudbury, CO10 9HP Applicant Gladman Developments Ltd
72.1 Before the presentation of the application to the Committee, the Acting Chief Planning Officer advised Members that an email had been received from the Save Our Skylarks (SOS) Campaign Group and Planning Direct (of which Members had a copy of) which outlined how the reasons for refusal could be stronger.
72.2 The Acting Chief Planning Officer responded to the points contained within the email outlining that from the perspective of Officers, the reasons that were recommended to Members were appropriate.
72.3 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining that the application had been submitted for non-determination appeal and as such the Officer Recommendation was to formally confirm that Members would have refused permission had the appeal not been lodged, and to confirm the reasons for refusal that Members would have chosen.
72.4 The Case Officer presented the layout of the site, the late papers that were before the Committee, and the Officer Recommendation.
72.5 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, Liz Malvisi.
72.6 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: whether the Parish Council had supported other development sites. The Parish Council responded that they had not supported them.
72.7 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Lisa Tipper.
72.8 The Objector responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the flooding within the local area, the setup and structure of the SOS Group and their objectives.
72.9 In response to a comment regarding the ecology on the site, the Case Officer advised Members that a breeding survey (of the Skylarks) had taken place in the summer (2018) but that the information had not been submitted to Officers from the Applicant. The Case Officer advised that this had not been added as reason for refusal as it was likely that this reason would fall away if the information was provided by the applicant.
72.10 Members considered the representation from the Ward Member, Councillor John Nunn.
72.11 The Ward Member responded to questions from Members on issues including: the number of dwellings in the village, and the access onto the site.
72.12 Members considered the representation from the Ward Member, Councillor Richard Kemp.
72.13 The Ward Member responded to questions from the Committee on issues including: flooding that had been previously recorded in the village.
72.14 Members debated the application on the issues including: the vehicle movements in the area, the gradient and landscaping of the site, that the site was rejected from the Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHELAA), and the negative impact on the townscape.
72.15 Councillor Simon Barrett Proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the Officer ... view the full minutes text for item 72. |
|||||||||||
DC/18/02316 Land on the South side of Whatfield Road, Elmsett PDF 561 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 73.1 A short comfort break was taken between 10:39-10:48
73.2Item 2
Application DC/18/02316 Proposal Planning Application – Residential Development comprising 42 dwellings, incorporating 35% affordable homes, creation of new vehicular access and public open space Site Location ELMSETT- Land on the south side of Whatfield Road, Elmsett, Suffolk Applicant Mr C Course
73.3 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal, the layout of the site and the Officer Recommendation of Approval with conditions.
73.4 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, Alan Newman.
73.5 The Parish Council representative responded to Members questions on issues including: that there were spaces in the local Primary school but not in the Secondary school.
73.6 The Case Officer advised Members that the significance of the setting of the listed building and the surrounding area had been lowered but that there was some identified harm to the listed building.
73.7 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Ian Poole.
73.8 The Objector responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the allocated sites within the Draft Neighbourhood Plan.
73.9 Members considered the representation from the Applicant, Charles Course.
73.10 Immediately after the applicant spoke, Councillor Clive Arthey advised Members that he had not, until this point, been aware of the applicants identity, and that he was a personal friend. As such Councillor Arthey chose to leave the meeting for the rest of application DC/18/02316 and did not take part in the debate and vote.
73.11 The Applicant responded to Members’ questions on issues including: that the shape of the site compared to the allocation was due to a more detailed design being provided, and the facilities in the village.
73.12 Councillor Alan Ferguson, Ward Member, chose to reserve his comments for the debate on the application.
73.13 Members debated the application on the issues including: the cumulative impact on the village when referencing other applications that had been recently approved, the relation of the proposal and locally identified need, that the Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment (SHEELA) identified the site for 20 houses, and the impact on the listed heritage asset.
73.14 The Case Officer advised Members that there was a conflict between local need and Core Strategy Policy CS11 and outlined that the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) did not place a ceiling on growth.
73.15 Members continued to debate the application on the issues including: the balance of the public benefit and the harm of the proposal, the impact that the approval of the development would have on the emerging Neighbourhood Plan, and the local housing need.
73.16 Councillor Simon Barrett Proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the Officer Recommendation. Councillor Jennie Jenkins seconded the motion.
73.17 The motion was lost.
73.18 Councillor Alan Ferguson Proposed that the application be refused on the reasons as detailed below:
(1) The proposal does not represent a well designed development of an appropriate size, scale, layout and character in relation to its setting and to ... view the full minutes text for item 73. |
|||||||||||
DC/18/00706 Klondyke Field West of Bourne Hill, Wherstead PDF 674 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 74.1 Councillor Clive Arthey re-joined the meeting after the completion of application DC/18/02316 but before the commencement of DC/18/00706.
74.2 Item 3
Application DC/18/00706 Proposal Hybrid Application. Outline Planning Application (Access to be considered) erection of up to 75 dwellings and vehicular access. Change of use from private woodland to suitable alternative natural greenspace/ community woodland and woodland education. Site Location WHERSTEAD- Klondyke Field West of, Bourne Hill, Wherstead, Suffolk Applicant Pigeon Investment Management Ltd
74.3 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining to Members the proposal, the layout of the site, and the Officer Recommendation of approval with conditions.
74.4 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, David Baldry.
74.5 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: that there had been issues of flooding of surface water on Bourne Hill.
74.6 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Robin Coates.
74.7 The Objector responded to Members’ questions on issues including that the proposed crossing would be on Wherstead Road and not Bourne Hill.
74.8 Members considered the representation from the Applicant, Andrew Fillmore.
74.9 The Applicant responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the ownership and maintenance of the woodland could be given as a commuted sum to the District Council or could be maintained via a management company as paid for by the residents through a maintenance charge.
74.10 Before Councillor Ridley spoke as the Ward Member, he declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/18/00706 as he was a distant relative of the owner.
74.11 Members considered the representation from the Ward Member, Councillor Nick Ridley.
74.12 Members debated the application on the issues including: the proximity of the application to Ipswich and the possibility of the identity of the village being lost and the location of the boundary with Ipswich.
74.13 At 12:50 the Chair Adjourned the meeting for a lunch break and reminded Members to not discuss the application during the adjournment.
74.14 At 1:36 the Chair re-opened the meeting in the King Edmund Chamber and noted that Councillor Sue Burgoyne had left the meeting during the lunch adjournment.
74.15 The Case Officer advised Members that during the adjournment he had clarified the boundary of Ipswich with relation Wherstead and provided Members with a map of this on the powerpoint presentation.
74.16 Councillor Simon Barrett proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the Officer Recommendation. Councillor Michael Creffield seconded the motion.
74.17 Members continued to debate the application on the issues including: policy CS11 and Policy CS2.
74.18 RESOLVED
That authority be delegated to Acting Chief Planning Officer to GRANT outline planning permission for the residential development and FULL planning permission for the change of use of the woodland area [such determination to be simultaneous and linked only] The outline residential development is not to be granted in advance of or without the Full permission for the woodland area
(1) Subject to the prior agreement of a Section 106 Planning Obligation on appropriate terms to ... view the full minutes text for item 74. |
|||||||||||
PL/18/20 PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE PDF 56 KB An Addendum to Paper PL/18/20 will be circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting summarising additional correspondence received since the publication of the agenda but before 12 noon on the working day before the meeting, together with any errata.
Minutes: In accordance with the Council’s arrangements for Public Speaking at Planning Committee, representations were made as detailed below relating to the items in Paper PL/18/20 and the speakers responded to questions put to them as provided for under those arrangements.
It was RESOLVED
That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise) in accordance with delegated powers under Council Minute No. 48(a) (dated 19 October 2004) decisions on the items referred to in Paper PL/18/20 be made as follows:-
|
|||||||||||
DC/17/04049 The Paddocks, Lawshall Road, Hartest PDF 412 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 76.1Item 1
Application DC/18/04049 Proposal Full Planning Application - Erection of 6 single storey dwellings and associated outbuildings, improvements to existing vehicular access and highways improvements. As amended by agent’s email dated 17/8/17 and amended drawings numbered 17/60/02A, 03A and 12A showing changes to proposed footpath arrangement. Further amended drawings received 9/11/17 numbered 17/60/02B, 03B, 04A, 05A, 06A, 07A, 08A, 09A, 10A, 11A, 12B, and 14B showing changes to layout and form of dwellings. Site Location HARTEST- The Paddocks, Lawshall Road, Hartest, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP29 4DR Applicant Lewis Morgan Ltd.
76.1 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal, the layout of the site, the history of the application before committee, and the updates in the report that Members had undertaken a site visit and that in paragraph 4.33 of the report it should state that “there are no sequentially preferable sites within Hartest.” The Case Officer concluded that the Officer Recommendation was for Refusal.
76.2 Officers clarified the distance from the Built up area boundary and how this distance may have been derived by the previous case officer. Members were shown the relationship on the presentation so they could understand the relationship. Officers advised the precise distance was not a determinative factor in the consideration of the application.
76.3 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, Jo Pask.
76.4 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Ralph Carpenter.
76.5 The Objector responded to Members questions on issues including: the current stage that the Neighbourhood plan was at (currently looking at allocating sites), and the impact of the development compared to the currently existing development, the sustainability of the properties in Green View.
76.6 Members considered the representation from the Agent, Dean Pearce.
76.7 The agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the impact of the closure of the Doctors Surgery.
76.7 Members debated the application on issues including: the sustainability of the proposal compared to the existing properties in the area, the relevance of paragraph 77 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2018 and paragraph 4.5 of the officer report which outlined that the Draft Neighbourhood Plan included the need for smaller homes.
76.8 The Case Officer advised Members to be mindful of the applications location within a special landscape and conservation area and that if approved it would effect the rural edge of the village and that there were landscaping issues that still needed to be addressed as set out in the first reason for refusal and that weight could not be given to the Neighbourhood Plan as it was currently still a draft.
76.9 Members continued to debate the application on issues including: the impact on the village, the balance when considering the identified need, the harm that would be caused by the proposal, the issues of building within the countryside, the relevance of Paragraph 78, 8 of the NPPF (2018), the consistency of decisions that were made by the Planning Committee and the previous decision of ... view the full minutes text for item 76. |
|||||||||||
DC/18/04309 Land off Bantocks Road, Great Waldingfield PDF 397 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 77.1 Item 2
Application DC/18/04309 Proposal Application for approval of reserved matters following Outline Planning Permission DC/18/00200/OUT Erection of 32 dwellings (including 11 affordable units) and garages. – Submission of details for appearance, landscaping and layout. Site Location GREAT WALDINGFIELD- Land Off, Bantocks Road, Great Waldingfield, Suffolk Applicant Lynch
77.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal, the layout of the site and the Officer Recommendation of Approval with conditions.
77.3 Members considered the representation from the Parish Council representative, Linda Rushton.
77.4 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Michael Barker.
77.5 The Objector responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the access to the site and the boundary of the property adjacent to the development and the site. The Case Officer advised that the access via the barn was not possible for construction as the area around the existing access would be built before the rest of the site.
77.6 Members considered the representation from the Agent, Leslie Short.
77.7 The Chair referred Members to an email contained within the addendum that included comments from the Ward Member, Councillor Margaret Maybury.
77.8 Members debated the application on the issues including: the way that the application fitted with the Settlement Boundary, the movement of construction traffic, and the response from Suffolk County Council’s Highways Department.
77.9 Councillor Michael Holt proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the Officer Recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councillor Luke Cresswell.
77.10 RESOLVED
Subject to satisfactory resolution of outstanding Highway Matters, that authority be delegated to the Acting Chief Planning Officer to Grant Reserved Matter subject to the conditions to his satisfaction and include:
· Approved plans and documents.
|
|||||||||||
DC/18/02099 Land West of Willows Nursing Home, Bury Road, Lawshall PDF 578 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 78.1Item 3
Application DC/18/02099 Proposal Outline Planning Application (Access to be considered) – Erection of 15 dwellings (including 5 affordables) with associated parking, drainage and new vehicular access. Site Location LAWSHALL – Land west of Willows Nursing Home, Bury Road, Lawshall, Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, IP29 4PJ Applicant Hartog Hutton Ltd
78.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the layout of the site and the Officer Recommendation of Refusal. The Chair advised Members that copies of the Lawshall Neighbourhood Plan were available for Members to view.
78.3 Members considered the representation from the Objector, Nigel Hughes.
78.4 Members considered the representation from Philip Cobbold, who spoke on behalf of the Agent.
78.5 The Agents representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: that the applicant had consulted with the Parish.
78.6 Members debated the application on the issues including: that Members should support the weight of the Neighbourhood Plan and that the Neighbourhood Plan did take into account possible issues around Affordable Housing provision.
78.7 Councillor Stephen Plumb Proposed that the application be Refused as detailed in the Officer Recommendation. Councillor Adrian Osborne seconded the motion.
78.8 RESOLVED
Refuse outline planning permission for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development, by virtue of its scale, density, siting and location, would result in the loss of a valued settlement gap, harmful to the local character of the Lawshall village, contrary to Policy LAW3 and LAW9 of the Lawshall Neighbourhood Plan 2017, Policy CS11 and CS15 of the Babergh Core Strategy (2014) and paragraph 170 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. The proposed development, by virtue of its scale, density and internal access arrangement, would result in a residential character alien to the established development pattern in Lawshall and surrounding hamlets, harmful to the local environment and local distinctiveness, contrary to Policy CS11 and CS15 of the Babergh Core Strategy (2014) and paragraph 170 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
3. The proposal would fail to deliver sustainable development, contrary to Policy CS1, CS11 and CS15 of the Babergh Core Strategy (2014), the Lawshall Neighbourhood Plan 2017 and the National Planning Policy Framework. In particular the application fails to demonstrate that a suitable sustainable urban drainage scheme can be provided on the site to adequately mitigate the risks of flooding.
|
|||||||||||
DC/18/03615 Land north west and south west of Norman Way, Lavenham PDF 416 KB Additional documents: Minutes: 79.1 Item 4
Application DC/18/03615 Proposal Submission of details under outline Planning Permission B/16/00437 – appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the erection of up to 25 residential dwellings Site Location LAVENHAM- Land north west of Norman Way, Lavenham, Suffolk Applicant Hartog Hutton Ltd.
79.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal, the layout of the site, and the Officer Recommendation of Approval with conditions.
79.3 Members considered the representation from the Agent, Philip Cobbold.
79.4 The Agent responded to a question from the Committee regarding the railway walk link.
79.5 Councillor Simon Barrett Proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the Officer Recommendation.
79.6 Councillor Clive Arthey seconded the motion.
79.7 RESOLVED
That the Acting Chief Planning Officer be authorised to approve reserved matters of appearance, layout, scale and landscaping subject to conditions including:
· Approved Plans
|