Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Paula Fox and David Roach.

Any Member who is substituting for another Member should so indicate together with the name of the relevant absent Member.

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White attended the meeting as substitute for Councillor Paula Fox.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2017 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 2 March 2017 were confirmed as a correct record and were signed by the Chairman.

Report No: DEV/SE/17/013

Reserved Matters Application – Submission of details under Planning Permission DC/13/0932/HYB – the means of access, appearance, landscaping, layout, parking, and scale for Development Zones G and H

Reserved Matters Application – Submission of details under Planning Permission DC/13/0932/HYB – the means of access, appearance, landscaping, layout, parking, and scale for Development Zones G and H.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee because it was an application for a major development and because both Bury St Edmunds Town Council and Fornham All Saints Parish Council raised objections to the scheme.

The Committee was advised that as a result of Parish boundary changes that came into effect on 1 April 2017 the application site now fell within Bury St Edmunds, when previously it came under Fornham All Saints.  Accordingly, as both Parish Councils had been consulted on the application the Chairman had permitted both to address the meeting.

The development proposal was considered to comply with the relevant policies of the development plan and Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 53 of Report No: DEV/SE/17/013.

The Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that planning permission was sought for the approval of details submitted in pursuance of outline planning permission DC/13/0932/HYB and reference was made to the significant number of conditions that were agreed in connection with that approval.

As part of his presentation the Officer drew attention to amended plans that had been submitted by the applicant which demonstrated the cycle lanes to be included as part of the scheme.  Members were informed that an additional condition was to be added to the report’s recommendation to require further plans which set out how the cycle lanes would connect to the existing cycle-ways within the green corridor.

The Committee was also advised that the Council’s Strategy and Enabling Officer had raised concerns with the size of the two-bed properties within the original scheme, accordingly amended plans had been submitted which increased the size of these properties and the Officer no longer had any concerns in that respect.

Speakers:    Councillor Diane Hind (Bury St Edmunds Town Council) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Howard Quayle (Fornham All Saints Parish Council) spoke against the application

                   Nicky Parsons (agent) spoke in support of the application

A number of reservations with the development were voiced by Members of the Committee, these primarily related to; the size of the properties, the density, the degree of open space, the level of parking provision and concern with regard to the width of the roads within the scheme.

The Case Officer reminded the Committee that the public open space for the development was approved as part of the outline planning permission, and that the Highways Authority was satisfied that sufficient parking was provided within the scheme.

The Acting Head of Planning also responded to the concerns raised and outlined the ‘golden thread’ that related to the planning application before Members, this being; Vision 2031 – the agreed Masterplan – the approved outline planning application.

Councillor Peter Stevens stated that he did not consider the issues voiced by some Members of the Committee to be sufficiently  ...  view the full minutes text for item 302.

Report No: DEV/SE/17/014

Outline Planning Application (Means of Access and Structural Landscaping to be considered) - Employment Uses Classes B1 and B8 (An element of the site (4.05 hectares) is proposed in outline form for a B1/B2 and B8 Use) with all matters reserved except for access (including vehicular, pedestrian, and cycle links) and framework landscaping, with provision for the installation of drainage and services infrastructure as amended by the plans and details submitted on 31st January 2017 which altered the Footpath/Cycle link alignment to the south west corner of the site, provided additional planting details, additional landscaping assessment and landscaping details to explain the context of the proposal; provided amended Parameter Plans and application drawings and other minor updates to provide additional information and clarifications to explain the proposals in full - As amended by details received 7/3/2017 which propose additional mitigation

Outline Planning Application (Means of Access and Structural Landscaping to be considered) - Employment Uses Classes B1 and B8 (An element of the site (4.05 hectares) is proposed in outline form for a B1/B2 and B8 Use) with all matters reserved except for access (including vehicular, pedestrian, and cycle links) and framework landscaping, with provision for the installation of drainage and services infrastructure as amended by the plans and details submitted on 31st January 2017 which altered the Footpath/Cycle link alignment to the south west corner of the site, provided additional planting details, additional landscaping assessment and landscaping details to explain the context of the proposal; provided amended Parameter Plans and application drawings and other minor updates to provide additional information and clarifications to explain the proposals in full - As amended by details received 7/3/2017 which propose additional mitigation.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee because the Borough Council had a financial interest in the land concerned.

The Committee was advised that as a result of Parish boundary changes that came into effect on 1 April 2017 one small part of the application site now fell within Bury St Edmunds, with the majority still being in Rushbrooke with Rougham. 

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 63 of Report No: DEV/SE/17/014.

As part of his presentation the Principal Planning Officer – Major Projects drew attention to the following updates/amendments:

·         The footpath along Lady Miriam Way was to be shared as an adopted cycle-way and would link to the existing pedestrian/cycle routes at the A14 underpass;

·         Further mitigation had been agreed to reduce the impact on the landscape and the surrounding area, which included graded colour buildings and barrelled roofs;

·         The small square pocket of land adjacent to the A14 that was not included as part of the scheme was subject to a currently undetermined planning application for a garage, submitted by BP;

·         Since publication of the agenda, as result of discussion between the Case Officer and the applicant, the conditions listed in the report had been subject to some reordering/amalgamation; and

·         Two additional conditions were to be added to the recommendation: (i.) to restrict businesses opening and operating prior to the Eastern Relief Road being in place; and (ii.) if Treatt failed to relocate to the Suffolk Business Park then the employment Uses Classes for the entire scheme would revert to B1 and B8.

Speaker:      Neil Osborn (agent) spoke in support of the application.

The Committee, as a whole, spoke very favourably of and in support of the application.

Councillor Robert Everitt made specific reference to the ‘lagoon’ that was adjacent to the site and raised concern at its unsightliness due to the large amount of debris that had accumulated in the area.  The Planning Officer explained that it was owned/controlled by Taylor Wimpy via a management company and in view of these comments  ...  view the full minutes text for item 303.

Report No: DEV/SE/17/015

Planning Application - (i) Conversion of existing offices on first and second floors to 3 no. apartments (ii) Three storey extension, with link building, to comprise of 2 no. apartments

Listed Building Consent - (i) Repairs and alterations to enable conversion of first and second floors to 3 no. apartments (ii) Three storey extension, with link building, to Northern elevation to form 2no. apartments

Planning Application - (i) Conversion of existing offices on first and second floors to 3 no. apartments (ii) Three storey extension, with link building, to comprise of 2 no. apartments; and

Listed Building Consent - (i) Repairs and alterations to enable conversion of first and second floors to 3 no. apartments (ii) Three storey extension, with link building, to Northern elevation to form 2no. apartments.

The applications were referred to the Development Control Committee due to the presence of two Member call-ins and in light of the level of public interest which raised balanced matters that Officers believed warranted consideration by the Committee.

The property concerned was a Grade II Listed building, hence, the proposed development was comprised of two applications to be jointly considered; a planning application and a listed building consent application.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Officers were recommending that the applications be approved subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 60 of Report No: DEV/SE/17/015, which was contrary to the views of Bury St Edmunds Town Council who had objected to the proposal.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that the Officer recommendation for approval was also subject to no objections being received from the National Amenities Societies and Historic England.  Since publication of the agenda Historic England had confirmed that they had no comments to make in respect of the listed building application and stated that the Planning Authority should reply on the advice of the Council’s Conservation Officer.

As part of her presentation the Officer drew attention to the following updates:

·         A further letter of objection had been received from a resident who had previously made representation in respect of the application, and who reiterated their earlier comments; and

·         Councillor Joanna Rayner, Ward Member for Abbeygate, had submitted comments via email which had also been copied to all Members of the Committee.  Councillor Rayner echoed many of the concerns raised by the neighbours who had made representations, she also made reference to the issues with resident parking in the historic core of the town which had become increasingly saturated.  Councillor Rayner had also stated that she would support a smaller development at the application site.

The Committee were advised that the scheme before them had been subject to a significant number of amendments in order to address some initial Officer concerns with the development.

Specific reference was made to the parking and manoeuvring arrangements for residents’ motor vehicles, which was supported by the Highways Authority.

Attention was also drawn to the detailed shadow projection drawings which demonstrated the effect the development would have on the surrounding properties.

Speakers:    Lisa Siftar (neighbour) spoke against the application

Councillor Diane Hind (Bury St Edmunds Town Council) spoke against the application

David Barker (agent) spoke in support of the application

Members opened the debate by thanking the neighbouring residents for allowing Committee Members into their homes during the site visit.

Whilst some of the Committee praised the design  ...  view the full minutes text for item 304.

Report No: DEV/SE/17/016

TPO 235 (1973) Tree Preservation Order - (i) Lime - T51 - Reduce by 7 metres (ii) Copper Beech - T52 - 1-2 metre lateral reduction all round

TPO 235 (1973) - Tree Preservation Order - (i) Lime - T51 - Reduce by 7 metres (ii) Copper Beech - T52 - 1-2 metre lateral reduction all round.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee in the interests of transparency as the applicant was a contracted member of staff employed by the Planning Authority.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 11 of Report No: DEV/SE/17/016.

The Planning Officer advised that one letter of objection had been received from a resident on grounds of privacy and the impact on wildlife.  He confirmed that neither of the issues raised were able to be taken into consideration in respect of TPO applications.

Councillor Susan Glossop raised a question with regard to the ivy that was on the tree in question.  The Officer confirmed that this would be dealt with as part of the works and did not require specific approval.

It was moved by Councillor Angela Rushen that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor John Burns.

Upon being put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1.   Works to be carried out to the latest arboricultural standards

2.   Works to be completed within 2 years

Report No: DEV/SE/17/017

TPO 452 (2007) Tree Preservation Order - T2 - Lime - (i) Raise crown to give a 7 metre clearance from ground level to the first branch (ii) Reduce 1no. limb back from the road by 2 metres

TPO 452 (2007) - Tree Preservation Order - T2 - Lime - (i) Raise crown to give a 7 metre clearance from ground level to the first branch (ii) Reduce 1no. limb back from the road by 2 metres.

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee in the interests of transparency as the applicant was a contracted member of staff employed by the Planning Authority.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 9 of Report No: DEV/SE/17/017.

The Planning Officer advised that no objections had been received in response to the application.

It was moved by Councillor Angela Rushen that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White.

Upon being put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED subject to standard arboricultural conditions:

1.   The authorised works shall be carried out to the latest arboricultural standards (ref BS 3998:2010 Tree Works: recommendations); and

2.   The works which are the subject of this consent shall be carried out within two years of the date of the decision notice.