Venue: Council Chamber - Council Offices, Needham Market
Contact: Email: Committees@baberghmidsuffolk.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
Apologies for absence/substitutions Minutes: An apology for absence was received from Councillors Roy Barker,Lesley Mayes and Matthew Hicks
|
|
To receive any declarations of pecuniary or non-pecuniary interest by Members Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
Declarations of Lobbying Minutes: It was noted that Members had been lobbied on the application. |
|
Declarations of Personal Site Visits Minutes: Councillors David Whybrow, Lavinia Hadingham, Michael Burke, Julie Flatman and Sarah Mansel declared they had undertaken a personal site visit. |
|
Questions by the Public The Chairman to answer any questions from the public of which notice has been given no later than midday three clear working days before the day of the meeting in accordance with Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rule 7. Minutes: None received. |
|
Questions by Councillors The Chairman to answer any questions on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affects the District and which falls within the terms of reference of the Committee, of which due notice has been given no later than midday three clear working days before the day of the meeting in accordance with Committee and Sub-Committee Procedure Rule 8. Minutes: None received. |
|
RF/17/2 Schedule of planning applications PDF 334 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: Report RF/17/2
In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on planning applications representations were made as detailed below:
application Number Representations From
3506/16 Steve Butler (Barking Parish Council) Xy Stansfield (Needham Market Town Council) Mark Stannard (Objector) Robert Eburne (Applicant) Application Number: 3506/16 Proposal: Outline planning permission with vehicular access (all other matters reserved) for the construction of 152 residential dwellings (including market and affordable homes), garages, parking, vehicular access with Barking Road, estate roads, public open space, play areas, landscaping and amenity green space with sustainable drainage systems, with associated infrastructure, including provision for additional car parking and improved vehicular access to Needham Market Country Practice Site Location: BARKING, NEEDHAM MARKET – Barking Road, Needham Market IP6 Applicant: Hopkins Homes Limited
The application had been considered by Development Control Committee B on 14 June 2017 when Members were minded to defer the application for a site visit and referral to the Planning Referrals Committee.
The Case Officer presented the application to the Committee outlining how the proposed site crossed the boundary between Needham Market and Barking. The Officer outlined how the consultation responses received had resulted in the recommendation of approval subject to conditions as detailed in the report.
The Case Officer responded to Members’ questions on how the existing Doctor’s surgery was built within the flood plain and public transport issues had been addressed through the travel plan and improvements to the bus shelter.
Matt Hullis, Suffolk County Council’s Flood Management Team, responded to Members’ questions that the attenuation pond was designed to cope with extraordinary events and possible extra capacity.
The Case Officer continued by answering Members’ questions that there were no public footpaths within the site and that there were no plans to put in a pedestrian crossing.
Xy Stansfield, Needham Market Town Council, endorsed the statement that would be delivered by Councillor Mike Norris and also raised concerns about the additional pressure on infrastructure and inquired whether a roundabout could be accommodated for the junction of the Barking Road.
Steve Butler, Barking Parish Council, said that the Barking road was already a busy and dangerous road and that two fatal accidents had happened between 2005 and 2016. He continued by stating agreement with Needham Market Town Council’s comments and that the infrastructure did not support additional traffic and strain on schools.
Mark Stannard, Objector, said that any development should have the infrastructure in place before construction began and that there had been little reassurance from the developer that flooding would not happen. He concluded by saying that he believed the proposed basin on the north of the site was not to take existing water but for a future application.
Robert Eburne, Applicant, outlined how the attenuation ponds were designed to cope with a 1 in 100 year flooding event with a built in capacity for climate change and 40% excess. Drainage was at a rate of 11 litres per second. He continued by outlining that a highways scheme had been proposed ... view the full minutes text for item 38. |