Reserved Matters
Application – Submission of details under DC/16/2825/OUT
– the means of appearance, layout, scale and landscaping for
2no. industrial/logistics buildings (B8 with ancillary B1a
offices), together with associated car parking, service yard and
landscaping as amended by plans and details received.
The application had been referred to the
Development Control Committee because the Council had a financial
interest in the land.
The Reserved Matters application sought
consent for layout, scale and appearance and on plot landscaping.
The application also sought consent for two large storage and
distribution buildings (B8) that would have ancillary B1 offices to
serve the principle B8 use, with car parking, cycle storage, yard
space and Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) parking, turning and unloading
areas. The description of the two buildings were listed in
paragraph 2 and 3 of the report.
The two proposed units would operate in
isolation from each other and would be served by separate accesses
which were approved as part of the new internal road that was being
constructed. Each unit would have an entrance for the main car park
and pedestrian access and there would be a separate entrance for
HGV vehicles.
The application had been amended since
submission as outlined in paragraph 5 of the report.
Representations had been received from Bury St
Edmunds Town Council and Rushbrooke
with Rougham Parish Council who were
both in support of the application.
Speakers:
Mr Neil Osborne (Agent) spoke in support of the application.
Members commended the Case Officer for
producing a clear and high quality report.
Given that the application was considered a
signature development along the A14 that would showcase the entire
business park, it was suggested that Members would have liked to
have seen elevations that would be visible from the A14 in order to
obtain an understanding of what it would look like from the view of
travelling down the highway.
Whilst Members’ were generally in
support of the application, the following concerns were raised:
·
The applicant had submitted a Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method
(BREEAM) statement
and achieved a standard of ‘Very Good’, however Members
would have liked to have seen a standard of ‘Excellent’
achieved.
·
The amount of light pollution that was generally produced from
industrial estates.
·
The amount of on-site parking available to manage the loading and
unloading of multiple HGVs to ensure that they do not have to park
off-site.
The case officer responded to the comments and
concerns raised:
·
The achievement of ‘Excellent’ for the BREEAM statement
was deemed as unrealistic by the applicant due to the speculative
nature of the proposal and other factors outside of their control.
The developer had proposed that they would include other
enhancements included in the BREEAM statement.
·
An environmental statement was submitted at the application’s
outline stage that included conditions that future occupiers of the
site would have to comply with to reduce the impact of light
pollution.
·
A sufficient amount of on-site parking had been provided for HGVs
as well as electrical charging ...
view the full minutes text for item 355.