46.1    Apologies were received from Councillor Tim Passmore.

46.2    Councillor Dave Muller substituted for Councillor Passmore.

47.1    Councillor Meyer declared an other non-registerable interest in respect of application numbers DC/22/03093 and DC/22/03231 as the Agent, James Bailey, was a resident of his Ward. However the item under discussion did not directly relate to the finances or wellbeing of that interest or affect the finances or wellbeing of that interest to a greater extent than the majority of inhabitants. Therefore, Councillor Meyer was not prevented from participating in the debate and vote in respect of this application.

47.2    Councillor Mansel declared an other registerable interest in respect of application number DC/22/03423 as a Member of Elmswell Parish Council and confirmed that she would speak on the application in her capacity as a Ward Member and then leave the room for the duration of the debate and vote.

47.3    Councillor Matthissen declared an other non-registerable interest in respect of application number DC/22/03423 as he was previously a Member of Elmswell Parish Council during the time the site was acquired. However the item under discussion did not directly relate to the finances or wellbeing of that interest or affect the finances or wellbeing of that interest to a greater extent than the majority of inhabitants. Therefore, Councillor Matthissen was not prevented from participating in the debate and vote in respect of this application.

47.4    Councillor Field declared an other registerable interest in respect of application numbers DC/22/03093 and DC/22/03231 as the applications sites are visible from his property and he was previously a County Councillor for the area. However the item under discussion did not directly relate to the finances or wellbeing of that interest or affect the finances or wellbeing of that interest to a greater extent than the majority of inhabitants. Therefore, Councillor Field was not prevented from participating in the debate and vote in respect of this application.

47.5    Councillor Humphreys MBE declared an other registerable interest in respect of application numbers DC/22/03093 and DC/22/03231 as a Member of Stowmarket Town Council Planning Committee, and confirmed that he had abstained from voting on either of the applications. The items under discussion did not directly relate to the finances or wellbeing of that interest or affect the finances or wellbeing of that interest to a greater extent than the majority of inhabitants. Therefore, Councillor Humphreys MBE was not prevented from participating in the debate and vote in respect of this application.

47.6    Councillor Muller declared an other registerable interest in respect of application numbers DC/22/03093 and DC/22/03231 as a Member of Stowmarket Town Council Planning Committee, and confirmed that he had abstained from voting on either of the applications. The items under discussion did not directly relate to the finances or wellbeing of that interest or affect the finances or wellbeing of that interest to a greater extent than the majority of inhabitants. Therefore, Councillor Muller was not prevented from participating in the debate and vote in respect of this application.

48.1    All Members declared that they had been lobbied in respect of application numbers DC/22/03093, DC03231 and DC/22/03423.

49.1    Councillor Meyer declared a personal site visit in respect of application number DC/22/03423.

It was RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2022 be confirmed and signed as a true record.

51.1    The Governance Officer confirmed that a valid petition had been received objecting to application number DC/22/03423. The petition had 39 valid signatures and no rejected signatures.

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

52.1    In accordance with the Councils procedures for public speaking on planning applications, representations were made as follows:

53.1    Item    7A

          Application              DC/21/03287

Proposal                  Full Planning Application – Residential Development of 258no. dwellings (91no. affordable) with new public open space, landscaping, access and associated infrastructure.

Site Location           STOWMARKET – Land North West of, Stowupland Road, Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 5AN

Applicant                 Crest Nicholson Operations Limited & John Henry Diaper and…..

53.2    The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the previous decision by Committee to defer the application on 29 September 2022, the location and layout of the site, the development brief including the concept plan, the proposed parking plan, the location of the affordable dwellings within the site, the proposed access plans including vehicular access, cycle paths and pedestrian crossings and the wider connectivity plan, the amended design for the proposed apartment block and dwellings at the northern boundary of the sit, the contents of the tabled papers, and the officer recommendation of approval.

53.3    The Case Officer read out a statement to Members from the Sustainability Officer which had been received after the publication of the agenda and tabled papers.

53.4    The Chief Planning Officer and the Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: whether the issues raised at the previous committee meeting on 29 September 2022, including triple parking on site, the location of the apartment block, and the proposed heating types, had been addressed.

53.5    The Chief Planning Officer and the Case Officer responded to further questions from Members on issues including: the adoption of the design brief, the proposed number of bungalows on site, the density of the site, access to the site including the surface of the cycle paths, the location of the noise abatement fence, the details of the proposed heating types, the construction management plan, public transport provision to the site, the proposed landscaping plans including retention of existing tress and hedging, and electric vehicle charging provision.

53.6    Members considered the representation from Richard Clews who spoke as the Agent.

53.7    The Agent and Daniel Wilkinson (the Applicant), Andrew McManus (AES Sustainability Consultants) and Raymond Long (Richard Jackson Engineering Consultants and Chartered Building Surveyors), responded to questions from Members on issues including: whether purchasers would be given the option of having solar panels and air source heat pumps installed in properties, the expected timescales for the works to be complete and whether the dwellings would comply with future buildings regulations, whether any of the ground floor apartment would comply with M4(2) or M4(3) regulations, and sustainability issues including the proposed heating systems and the reasons why air source heat pumps were not being installed in all properties across the site, and the provision of solar panels and electric vehicle charging points.

53.8    Members considered the representation from Ward Member Councillor Carter who spoke against the application.

53.9    Members considered the representation from Ward Member Councillor Muller who spoke against the application.

53.10  Councillor Muller responded to questions from Members regarding whether the applicants had attended any Town Council meetings regarding the application.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.1    Item 7B

          Application              DC/22/03093

Proposal                  Presentation of a draft Design Code for approval by Council, as local planning authority, asrequired by Schedule 3, Part 7 of the S106 Agreement dated 09.12.2021 that accompanies the hybrid planning permission that contains an outline planning permission element [hybrid] ref:1856/17, dated 7 January 2022 for development that includes: ‘Phased development for the erection of up to 269 dwellings and affordable housing, together with associated access and spine road including works to Church Lane, doctor’s surgery site, amenity space including an extension to Church grounds, reserved site for pre-school and primary school and all other works and infrastructure.’

Site Location           BARHAM – Land North-West of, Church Lane, Barham, Suffolk

Applicant                 Taylor Wimpey

54.2    The Case Officer presented the draft Design Code to the Committee and confirmed to Members that the Design Code was required as part of the S106 Agreement accompanying the planning permission and was being presented to Members for transparency.

54.3    The Case Officer provided details to Members including: the location of the site, the consultation with local residents, how the principles of the design code had been applied, the purpose and content of the design code and how this applied to the application, and the officer recommendation of approval.

54.4    The Case Officer and the Chief Planning Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: whether the design code included some land which was not part of the development site, which Parish Councils were consulted as part of the application, the technicalities of the design code and how these could be endorsed, and whether the design code would be legally binding.

54.5    Members considered the representation from Mark Chapman who spoke as the Applicant.

54.6    Councillor Humphreys left the meeting at 13:01pm.

54.7    The Applicants, Mark Chapman and Andrew Wright, responded to questions from Members on issues including: the materials to be used for the green screens, the architectural features and characteristics mentioned in the design code, whether the chimneys would be functioning, and which building regulations the applicants would be adhering to.

54.8    Members considered the representation from the Ward Member, Councillor Whitehead, who spoke in support of the application.

54.9    Members debated the application on issues including: the level of consultation with local residents, and the quality of the design guide.

54.10  Councillor Muller moved that the officer recommendation be approved as detailed in the report.

54.11  Councillor Field seconded the motion.

By a unanimous vote

It was RESOLVED:

That the Design Code be endorsed as a material planning consideration in the determination of future Reserved Matters submission on this site.

55.1    Item 7C

          Application              DC/22/03231

Proposal                  Application for Approval of Reserved Matters pursuant to condition 25 of the Outline Planning permission reference 1856/17, granted on 7 January 2022: Submission of details for Appearance, Layout, Strategic Landscaping and Scale for erection of 269 no. residential dwellings, public open space, and associated infrastructure. (Please note: Access and the estate spine road are not Reserved Matters these details having been approved as part of the outline planning permission.) and, Submission of details pursuant to the following conditions attached to outline planning permission reference 1856/17conditions: 9 [surface water drainage scheme]; and 10 [implementation, maintenance and management scheme for surface water drainage], 40 [Market Housing Type]; and 48 [Noise Survey].

Site Location           BARHAM – Land North-West of, Church Lane, Barham, Suffolk

Applicant                 Taylor Wimpey East Anglia

55.2    A break was taken from 13:12pm until 13:48pm, after application number DC/22/03093, and before the commencement of application number DC/22/03231.

55.3    The Case Office introduced the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the layout and location of the site, the connectivity plans, the proposed parking plans, the open space provision within the site, the proposed heating system, and the officer recommendation of approval as detailed in the report.

55.4    The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the noise assessment, the healthcare provision in the area, the existing public transport provision, ecology issues including hedgehog highways, whether the roads would be to an adoptable standard, the proposed housing mix, and the play area.

55.5    Members considered the representation from Mark Chapman who spoke as the Applicant.

55.6    The Applicant responded to questions from Members on issues including: whether the bungalows would comply with M(4) 2 regulations, the location of the cycle path and any proposed measures to prohibit parking on cycle lanes, who would have responsibility for the area of public open space, and the proposed plans for provision of electric vehicle charging points.

55.7    Members considered the representation from the Ward Member Councillor Whitehead.

55.8    The Case Officer responded to questions from Members regarding the proposed housing mix at the site.

55.9    Members debated the application on issues including: the provision of open spaces, the proposed housing mix, and the level of engagement with the local community.

55.10  Councillor Muller proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the officer recommendation.

55.11  Councillor Mansel seconded the motion.

By a unanimous vote

It was RESOLVED:

(1) That the amended Reserved Matters Details for APPEARANCE, LAYOUT,SCALE and STRATEGIC LANDSCAPING be APPROVED subject to conditions to include:

·        Link to outline permission

·        Approved drawings

·        Requirement for a Parish Council Liaison Statement

·        Further details of pumping station appearance

·        Failing greenscreens to be replaced with1.8m high brick walls only if greenscreen is not to be replaced

·        Use of 100% air source heat pumps

·        Requirement to offer a pv chargeable optional extra during build

·        Ecology conditions

·        Noise Testing of specified units to demonstrate theoretical levels of attenuation have been achieved

·        Such conditions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

56.1    Item 7D

          Application              DC/22/03423

Proposal                  Application for Outline Planning Permission (Access to be considered) Erection of 1no 1.5 storey dwelling and construction of new vehicular access.

Site Location           ELMSWELL – Land Adj 10 Crown Mill, Elmswell, IP30 9GF

          Applicant                 Elmswell Parish Council

56.2    The Case Officer introduced the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members including: the location of the site, the reasons for the site being considered public open space, the current uses of the site by local residents, the requirements regarding open space detailed in the National Planning Policy Framework, alternative open space provision in the area, the visibility splay, the privacy provision for the existing dwelling adjacent to the site, and the officer recommendation of refusal.

56.3    The Case Officer responded to questions from Members on issues including: the ownership of the proposed development site.

56.4    The Chief Planning Officer and the Planning Lawyer provided clarification regarding a recent decision made by Mid Suffolk District Council Cabinet regarding development on an area of public open space in Elmswell, and advised that that decision would not have any effect on this application.

56.5    The Case Officer responded to further queries from Members on issues including: the previous plans by Elmswell Parish Council for a footbridge to be built on the land, whether the land had previously been designated as public open space, and the distance from the adjacent dwellings to the site.

56.6    Members considered the representation from Peter Dow who spoke on behalf of the applicant.

56.7    Members considered the representation from Ward Member Councillor Mansel who spoke in support of the application.

56.8    Members considered the representation from Ward Member Councillor Geake who spoke in support of the application.

56.9    Councillor Mansel left the meeting at 15:08pm.

56.10  Members debated the application on issues including: whether the site was a designated public open space, and the alternative public open space provision in the area.

56.11  Councillor Eburne proposed that the application be approved.

56.12  The Area Planning Manager and the Planning Lawyer confirmed to Members that the site had been designated as open space, and provided clarification of the distance from the site to the existing dwellings and the privacy of the dwellings, and whether consideration should be given to the wider impact of the development.

56.13  Members continued to debate the application on issues including: the loss of open space, the existing use of the site by local residents, and the proximity of the site to existing dwellings.

56.14  Councillor Eburne withdrew her proposal of approval.

56.15  Councillor Meyer proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the officer recommendation.

56.16  Councillor Field seconded the motion.

56.17  The Chief Planning Officer provided clarification to Members regarding the principle of public open space and the requirements of paragraph 99 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

By a vote of 4 votes for and 1 against

It was RESOLVED:

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

1. The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

57.1    None requested.