Venue: King Edmund Chamber, Endeavour House, 8 Russell Road, Ipswich. View directions
Contact: Committee Services
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE/SUBSTITUTIONS
An apology of absence was received from Councillor Rachel Eburne.
Councillor John Matthissen substituted for Councillor Eburne.
TO RECEIVE ANY DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY OR NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST BY MEMBERS
Councillor Lavinia Hadingham declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/19/01673 as she knew the Applicant.
Councillor Dave Muller declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/19/00662 as the Vice-Chair of Stowmarket Town Councils Planning and Development Committee.
Councillor Keith Scarff declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/19/00662 as he had signed the petition against the development, however this was before he was elected as a district Councillor and as such would be approaching the application with an open mind.
Councillor Sarah Mansel declared a non-pecuniary interest in DC/18/04267 as a member of Elmswell Parish Council.
Councillor Matthew Hicks declared a non-pecuniary interest in DC/19/00301 as the County Councillor for the area in which the application was located.
DECLARATIONS OF LOBBYING
Councillor Dave Muller declared that he had been lobbied on applications DC/18/02467 and DC/19/00301.
Councillors John Field, John Matthissen and Matthew Hicks declared that they had been lobbied on application DC/19/00662.
DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL SITE VISITS
It was resolved that the Minutes of the meeting from 13 March 2019 were confirmed and signed as a true record subject to the correction as detailed below:
That in the declarations of interest the following text is added:
· Councillor Lavinia Hadingham declared a non-pecuniary interest in application DC/18/05021 as she knew the Applicant.
TO RECEIVE NOTIFICATION OF PETITIONS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COUNCIL'S PETITION SCHEME
The Governance Officer advised Members that a petition had been received with regards to application DC/19/00662 with 1607 valid signatures supporting the following statement:
· We the undersigned petition the Council to: Refuse Planning Application DC/19/00662 Land East of Poplar Hill as it will irrevocably damage the landscape surrounding Grade 1 Listed St Mary’s Church degrade the natural and historic environment, have a detrimental impact on traffic and safety, put pressure on already overstretched healthcare services and schools and reduce the strategic gap between Stowmarket and the Village of Combs.
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 a representation was made as detailed below:
Schedule of Applications
8.1 Item 1
Proposal Outline Planning Application (some matters reserved) – erection of up to 138 dwellings with public open space, landscaping, sustainable drainage system (SuDS) and vehicular access point from Poplar Hill (re-submission of refused application DC/18/02380).
Site Location STOWMARKET- Land to the East of, Poplar Hill, Stowmarket, Suffolk, IP14 2EJ
8.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal, the layout of the site, and the officer recommendation of refusal.
8.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the consultee response from place services regarding the landscaping survey, and that a previous application on the site was currently being appealed by the Applicant to the Planning Inspectorate.
8.4 Members considered the representation from Nick Gowrley of Stowmarket Town Council, who spoke against the application.
8.5 The Town Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the engagement from the applicant with the Town Council regarding the application.
8.6 Members considered the representation from Tony Bamber of Combs Parish Council, who spoke against the application.
8.7 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: engagement with the community.
8.8 Members considered the representation from Desiree Shelley who spoke as an Objector.
8.9 Members considered the representations from the Ward Members, Councillor Keith Scarff and Councillor Gerard Brewster, who spoke against the application.
8.10 The Ward Members responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the impact on the highway network.
8.11 Members debated the application on the issues including: the impact on the landscape.
8.12 Councillor Sarah Mansel proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the officer recommendation. Councillor John Field seconded the motion.
8.13 Members continued to debate the application on the issues including: the harm to the listed building, the weight of the Stowmarket Area Action Plan (SAAP), the proximity to the Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), and the location of the site.
8.14 By a unanimous vote
That authority be delegated to the Acting Chief Planning Officer to refuse outline planning permission for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development is situated on land outside of the settlement boundary of Stowmarket, the proposal fails to accord with the developments permitted within the countryside, contrary to Policies CS1 and CS2 of the Mid Suffolk Core Strategy (2008). The proposal is also contrary to the allocation of the site within policy 6.20 of the Stowmarket Area Action Plan (2013). 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 as the proposal would have limited benefits outweighed by harm identified to the environmental objective, with particular regards to the natural and historic environment. As such the proposal is not acceptable in principle, being contrary to paragraphs 8, 11, 193 and 196 of the NPPF (2018), Policies CS1, CS2 and CS5 of the Core Strategy (2008), Policy FC1 and FC1.1 of the ... view the full minutes text for item 8.
9.1 Item 2
Proposal Application for approval of Reserved Matters following Outline Planning Permission Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 – Scale, Appearance, Landscaping and layout for 60 no. dwellings granted under 3469/16
Site Location ELMSWELL -Land To the East of, Borley Crescent, Elmswell
Applicant Orbit Homes
9.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the layout of the site, the content of the tabled papers, and the officer recommendation of approval with conditions.
9.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the updates to the proposal from its previous presentation to committee, the public open space provision on the site, the location of fencing and brick walls for property boundaries, the proposed surfacing for the public footpath.
9.4 Members considered the representation from Geoff Armstrong who spoke as the Agent.
9.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the number of proposed bungalows on the site, the proposed surfacing of the public footpath, and the possibility of hedgehog fencing.
9.6 Members considered the representation from Councillor Sarah Mansel who spoke as the Ward Member.
9.7 Members debated the application on the issues including: the scale of the development.
9.8 Councillor Dave Muller proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the officer recommendation. Councillor Lavinia Hadingham seconded the motion.
9.9 Members continued to debate the application on the issues including: the layout of the affordable housing, the acoustic mitigation measures, and the Public Right of Way (PRoW).
9.10 After further discussion the proposer and seconder agreed that an extra condition be added to the recommendation to secure hedgehog friendly fencing.
9.11 By a unanimous vote
That authority be delegated to the Acting Chief Planning Officer - Growth & Sustainable Planning to Grant reserved matters, subject to the following conditions:
· Approved Plans and Documents
· Those required by SCC-Highways as set out in papers.
· Those already imposed as part of Outline Planning Permission Ref: 3469/16
· Hedgehog friendly fencing to be secured.
11.1 Item 4
Proposal Planning Application – Erection of agricultural crop drying building
Site Location STRADBROKE- Barley Brigg Farm, Laxfield Road, Stradbroke, Eye, Suffolk, IP21 5NQ
Applicant Rattlerow Farms Ltd
11.2 The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining the proposal before Members, the layout of the site, the contents of the tabled papers, including the amendment that point 1.3 be retracted from the Officer Report and that the officer recommendation was for approval.
11.3 The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on issues including: that the proposal was for crop drying only and what the proposals relationship was to the anaerobic digestor.
11.4 Members considered the representation from Steven Bainbridge who spoke as the Agent.
11.5 The Agent responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the access routes to the site, that the crops being dried in the barn would be incompatible with the functioning of the anaerobic digestor.
11.6 Members considered an email representation from Councillor Julie Flatman, which was read out by the Chair.
11.7 Members debated the application on the issues including: that there had been misconceptions for the use of the barn, the route for traffic going through the village and travelling to the site, and that the anaerobic digestor was not part of the application before Members.
11.8 Councillor John Field proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the officer recommendation. Councillor Sarah Mansel seconded the motion.
11.9 By a unanimous vote.
That authority be delegated to the Acting Chief Planning Officer to grant planning permission:
(1) Subject to conditions as summarised below and those as may be deemed necessary by the Acting Chief Planning Officer:
· Standard time limit
· Approved Plans (Plans submitted that form this application)
· Noise impact assessment
· HGV delivery management plan
· Landscaping scheme and timescale for implementation
· Hours of use to be agreed
(2) And the following informative notes as summarised and those as may be deemed necessary by the Corporate Manager:
· Proactive working statement
· Support for sustainable development principles
Note: Should a site inspection be required for any of the applications this will be decided at the meeting.
Would Members please retain the relevant papers for use at that meeting.
12.1 None requested.