26.1    Apologies were received from Councillor Rachel Eburne.

26.2    Councillor Andrew Mellen substituted for Councillor Rachel Eburne.

27.1    Councillor Andrew Mellen declared a local non-pecuniary interest in respect of application DC/20/03457 as the application falls within his County Council division.

27.2    Councillor John Field declared a local non-pecuniary interest in respect of application DC/20/03457 as the agent was known to him.

28.1    All Committee Members apart from Councillor Mellen declared that they had been lobbied on application DC/20/03457.

29.1    There were no personal site visits declared.

It was RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 June 2021 were confirmed and signed as a true record.

31.1    Councillor Muller advised that paragraph 12.1 of the minutes should read Cedars Park Community Interest Company Limited.

It was RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 23 June 2021 were confirmed and signed as a true record with the correction as identified by Councillor Muller.

None received.

Note:  The Chairman may change the listed order of items to accommodate visiting Ward Members and members of the public.

In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on planning applications, representations were made as detailed below:

Item 8A

Application              DC/20/03457

Proposal                 Reserved Matters application relating to Hybrid Permission 4410/16. Submission of details for the Outline Planning Permission for Layout, Appearance, Scale and Landscape for the construction of 28 no dwellings (9 affordable = 32.1%). Note Access details were determined at outline stage.

Site Location           FRESSINGFIELD - Land and Buildings at Red House Farm, Priory Road, Fressingfield, Suffolk

Applicant                 Caburn Properties Ltd

34.1    The Area Planning Manager presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the location and layout of the application, the design of the buildings, access to the site and the officer recommendation of approval.

34.2    The Chief Planning Officer provided Members with an update on the new NPPF issued by central Government and confirmed that this would not effect the officer recommendation.

34.3    The Area Planning Manager and Chief Planning Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: adoption of the roads, who will be responsible for the maintenance of the attenuation pond, proposed heating of the dwellings, access to the site, potential flood risk, involvement of sustainability officers, any link between this application and the scout hut, provision for visitor parking, and consultation with the Parish Council over drainage issues.

34.4    Members considered the representation from Ed Thuell who spoke as the agent.

34.5    The agent and the Area Planning Manager responded to questions from Members on issues including: adoption of the roads, proposed heating of the dwellings, whether there would be any affordable bungalows on site, and the plans for maintenance of the attenuation basin.

34.6    Members considered the representation from Councillor Lavinia Hadingham who spoke as the Ward Member.

34.7    The Area Planning Manager responded to questions from Members on issues including: the proposed plans for the sewage system.

34.8    Members debated the application on issues including: the design of the dwellings, parking plans, and the proposed heating systems.

By 6 votes for and 2 against

It was RESOLVED:

That Reserved Matters approval be GRANTED subject to appropriate conditions that shall include

1. Link to outline expiry condition

2. Approved drawings

3. Specified materials to be used but actual samples to be further agreed

4. Landscaping delivery

5. EV charging provision (and ensure available within parking courts).

6. Removal of PD rights for dwellings; extensions, new openings, and   alterations (inc. upward extensions to bungalow units)

7. Drainage condition

A short break was taken from 10:20 until 10:35am.

Item 8B

Application              DC/20/03098

Proposal                  Submission of details application (Reserved Matters) and Discharge of Conditions 11 and 12 for Outline Planning Permission DC/17/02760. Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale to be considered for the erection of up to 69no dwellings, open space and associated infrastructure.

Site Location           BOTESDALE – Land to the South of, Diss Road, Botesdale, Suffolk

Applicant                 Bennett PLC

35.1    The Area Planning Manager presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including the location and layout of the site, and the recommendation of approval.

35.2    The Area Planning Manager responded to questions from Members on issues including: proposed parking on site, triple parking, orientation of the buildings, the location of the affordable housing on site, the Parish Council objection to the application, proposed open spaces on site, whether a design statement had been submitted by the applicant, and the implications of the updated NPPF (20.07.2021).

35.3    The Chair read out a statement from Ward Member, Councillor Jessica Fleming, who was unable to attend the meeting in person.

35.4    The Area Planning Manager responded to questions from Members on issues including: adherence to the Neighbourhood Plan and location of visitor parking on site.

35.5    Members debated the application on issues including: the layout of the site, location of parking on site and any triple parking on site, and lack of engagement with the community.

35.6    A short break was taken from 11:20 until 11:25am.

35.7    Following legal advice it was agreed that the applicant, Adam Bell, could make a representation to the committee as they had only made themselves known to the Chair after the start of debate.

35.8    The applicant responded to questions from members on issues including: the number of visitor parking spaces on site, any liaison with the Parish Council and local residents, the proposed heating systems, electric vehicle charging points, and any proposals for installation of solar panels on site.

35.9    The Area Planning Manager confirmed the number of visitor parking spaces on site and advised this complied with current Suffolk County Council’s standard guidance.

35.10  Members continued to debate the application on issues including: the parish council objections, the updated NPPF, and the accuracy of the plans contained in the report.

35.11  Councillor Passmore proposed that the application be deferred to ensure all plans match in detail, explore improvements to appearance, and for Officers to provide analysis of design of Neighbourhood Plan (No 15 and Appendix Design Checklist.

35.12  Councillor Matthissen seconded the proposal.

By 6 votes to 2

It was RESOLVED:

That application number DC/20/03098 be deferred to allow officers to ensure all plans match in detail, explore improvements to appearance and for officers to provide analysis of design policy of Neighbourhood Plan (No 15 and Appendix Design Checklist).

A short break was taken from 11:52 until 11:54am.

Item 8C

Application              Dc/21/00522

Proposal                  Full Planning Application - Erection of 1No 3-bed dwelling with parking and access

Site Location           NORTON – Land South of Little Owl Lodge, Ashfield Road, Norton, Suffolk

Applicant                 Mrs Rebecca Jennings

36.1    The Case Officer presented the application to the committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the location and layout of the proposal and the officer recommendation of refusal.

36.2    The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the distance of the proposed building to the existing listed building and other adjacent properties.

36.3    Members considered the representation from Rebecca Jennings who spoke as the applicant.

36.4    The Chair read out a statement from Ward Member, Councillor Wendy Turner, who was unable to attend the meeting in person.

36.5    Members considered the representation from Councillor Harry Richardson who spoke as Ward Member.

36.6    The Area Planning Manager responded to a question from Members regarding other planning applications and appeals in the area and their location in relation to the settlement boundary, and the proposed settlement boundaries in the draft Joint Local Plan.

36.7    The Ward Member responded to questions from Members on issues including the distance from the site to the school.

36.8    Members debated the application on issues including design, the settlement boundary, sustainability of the location, heritage issues, public transport connections and distance from local amenities.

36.9    Councillor Hicks proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the officer recommendation.

36.10  Councillor Matthissen seconded the proposal.

By 6 votes for and 2 against

It was RESOLVED:

That the application is REFUSED planning permission for the following reasons:-

1          The proposed development is situated on land outside of the settlement boundary, in a countryside location, the proposal fails to accord with development permitted within the countryside, contrary to Policies CS1 and CS2 of the Core Strategy (2008) and Local Plan Policy H7. Furthermore, the development fails to comply with the requirements of paragraphs 8 and 11 of the NPPF (2018) with regards to the presumption in favour of sustainable development. The proposal is not considered to form sustainable development within the criteria set out by the NPPF, as the proposal would result in harm to the environmental objective, with particular regards to the lack of services in Little Norton, and access to services further afield requiring a private car so as to fail to move towards a low carbon economy. No exceptional circumstances or other material considerations have been demonstrated to outweigh the harm identified in this respect. As such the proposal is not acceptable in principle, being contrary Policies CS1, CS2 and CS5 of the Core Strategy (2008), Policy FC1 and FC1.1 of the Core Strategy Focused Review (2012) and Policies H7 and HB1 of the Mid Suffolk Local Plan (1998) and provisions of the NPPF.

2        The proposed dwelling is considered to result in a low level of less than substantial harm to the designated heritage asset known  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Note: Should a site inspection be required for any of the applications this will be held on Wednesday, {one week later} (exact time to be given).  The Committee will reconvene after the site inspection at 12:00 noon in the Council Chamber.

Would Members please retain the relevant papers for use at that meeting.