Babergh and Mid Suffolk District Councils
Democratic Services

Mobile menu icon

Agenda item

Minutes:

100.1 After the completion of DC/19/01708 but before the commencement of DC/19/04445, Councillor Mary McLaren rejoined the Committee

 

100.2 Item A

 

Application          DC/19/04445

Proposal             Planning Application- Erection of 1no. dwelling and detached garage

Site Location       LAVENHAM – Lavenham Priory, Water Street, Lavenham, Sudbury, Suffolk, CO10 9RW

Applicant             Ms R Sayed

 

100.3 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 before Members, and the officer recommendation of refusal.

 

100.4 Members considered the representation from A.W Sheppard of Lavenham Parish Council who spoke against the application.

 

100.5 The Parish Council representative responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the views from the nearby Bears Lane development, the policies within the adopted Lavenham Neighbourhood Plan and where the proposal could be seen from.

 

100.6 Members considered the representation from Anthony John Ranzetta who spoke as an Objector.

 

100.7 Members considered the representation from Soren Ramchelawon who spoke as a Supporter.

 

100.8 The Supporter responded to Members’ questions on issues including: the projected lifespan of the building.

 

100.9 Members considered the representations from Jonathan Hill and David Whymark who spoke as the Applicant and Agent respectively.

 

100.10 The Applicant and Agent responded to Members questions on issues including: whether pre-application advice was sought, consultation with the Parish Council, the economic benefits of the proposal, and the response regarding Heritage concern.

 

100.11 Members considered the representation from Councillor Margaret Maybury (ward Member) via an email that was read out by the Governance Officer.

 

100.12 Members considered the representation from Councillor Clive Arthey who spoke as the Ward Member.

 

100.13 Members debated the application on the issues including: the response from the Heritage Team, whether the proposal was an enhancement to the setting of the Listed Building, the level of harm associated with the proposal, that the proposal was exceptional in terms of design however it was in the wrong place, and the weight of the Adopted Lavenham Neighbourhood Plan.

 

100.14 Councillor Lee Parker proposed that the application be refused as detailed in the officer recommendation. Councillor Alastair McCraw seconded the proposal.

 

100.15 RESOLVED

 

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

 

The open, undeveloped land to the south of the buildings along Water Street makes an important contribution to the character and appearance of Lavenham Conservation Area. The Conservation Area Appraisal (2010, p.17-22) highlights that the historic relationship of the medieval core of Lavenham, with countryside directly to the rear of many of the streets within the historic core, such as Water Street, is relatively well preserved. Therefore, the narrative of a medieval town surrounded by open countryside, which likely served an important function for the town, such as paddock or arable land, remains readable here. The Lavenham Neighbourhood Plan (2016, 20) also argues that “the setting of the historic core is characterised by its close link to the countryside.” Due to the high degree of preservation of the historic core, and relative lack of later infill development, the importance of the undeveloped spaces is also considered to be increased by association.

 

Backland development on the proposed site would considerably erode the historic connection between the core of Lavenham along Water Street and its rural backdrop. While some parts of Lavenham Conservation Area have been subject to backland development, there remains little to the rear of the south of Water Street, especially beyond the existing building line.

 

The proposed development would cause less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset because the proposed development would erode an important characteristic of Lavenham Conservation Area in a particularly well preserved and sensitive part of the Conservation Area. It would also detract from a key view that contributes to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Furthermore, less than substantial harm to a designated heritage asset has been identified because the proposed development would dilute an identified key view of various listed buildings, that contributes to their significance. The limited public benefits of this development do not outweigh the considerable harm to the heritage assets and is not considered to be sustainable development. Therefore, the proposal conflicts with policies CN06 and CN08 of the Babergh Local Plan (adopted 2006), policies CS1, CS11 and CS15 of the Babergh Core Strategy (adopted 2014), policy H1 of the Lavenham Neighbourhood Plan (Adopted 2016). These policies are consistent with the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019, in particular paragraphs 8, 11, 186, 192, 193, 196 and 200.

Supporting documents: