Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Jason Crooks, Robert Everitt, Paula Fox, Ian Houlder and David Roach. 

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

Councillor Frank Warby attended the meeting as substitute for Councillor Paula Fox.  And Councillor Sara Mildmay-White attended as substitute for Councillor Ian Houlder.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 1 November 2018 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 November 2018 were unanimously received by the Committee as an accurate record and were signed by the Chairman. 

Report No: DEV/SE/18/042

Planning Application - Provision of sixth form college with new access from Beetons Way and associated parking and landscaping; provision of new signalised junction; improvements to existing playing fields and replacement of existing all-weather pitch with 3G pitch for King Edward VI Upper School.  As amended by plans and documents received on 16th August, 5th October and 1st November 2018

(The following Councillors all declared non-pecuniary interests in this item due to the appointments they held as listed against their names below:

·         Councillor Terry Clements - Co-opted Governor of King Edward VI School and Trustee of Abbeycroft Leisure

·         Councillor Sara Mildmay-White - St Edmundsbury Borough Council representative on the King Edward VI School Bury St Edmunds Foundation

·         Councillor Julia Wakelam - Trustee of Suffolk Academies Trust and Governor of West Suffolk College 

All of the above Members would remain in the meeting and would take part in the discussion and voting thereon.) 

Planning Application - Provision of sixth form college with new access from Beetons Way and associated parking and landscaping; provision of new signalised junction; improvements to existing playing fields and replacement of existing all-weather pitch with 3G pitch for King Edward VI Upper School.  As amended by plans and documents received on 16th August, 5th October and 1st November 2018

This application had been referred to the Development Control Committee at the request of one of the Ward Members (Risbygate).

Since publication of the agenda, supplementary ‘late papers’ were issued in respect of this item and which included:

·         A corrected site plan;

·         Further comments received from the Environment Agency; and

·         A full list of recommended conditions.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Officers were recommending that the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and conditions, as set out in the supplementary ‘late papers’.

The Senior Planning Officer made a detailed presentation to the meeting which was recognised and thanked by the Committee. 

It was highlighted to Members, as part of the presentation, that whilst Sport England no longer objected to the application there was still a policy conflict in respect of DM42 and this had to be recognised in the planning balance.

Attention was also drawn to Paragraph 56 of Report No DEV/SE/18/042 which explained that the National Policy Statement set out the Government’s view that the creation and development of state-funded schools was strongly in the national interest.

Speakers:    Mr Paul Nightingale (Former PE teacher, King Edward VI School) spoke against the application

Councillor David Nettleton (Ward Member: Risbygate) spoke against the application

Mr Alan Gunne-Jones (agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Julia Wakelam (the other Risbygate Ward Member) spoke in support of the application.  She considered the site to be the best location for the proposed facility in order to provide linkage with neighbouring West Suffolk College.  Councillor Wakelam also highlighted that the development would, by default, free up much needed space on the King Edward VI School’s existing site.  She therefore proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.

Councillor Terry Clements duly seconded the motion for approval and equally spoke in support of the application.  He highlighted the need for the development; which would provide excellent sports facilities.

A lengthy debate ensued with a number of Members making comments both in support and in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/043

Planning Application - (i) change of use of site from agriculture use (Sui Generis) to equine educational establishment (Class D1); (ii) conversion of existing agricultural storage barn to stables, tack room and storage; (iii) 1no. manege; (iv) 1no. rural worker's dwelling and (v) 1no. classroom building

As a result of further representations received in relation to this application since the publication of the agenda, and in light of uncertainties raised within such at this late stage, a decision had been made to WITHDRAW this item from the agenda.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/044

Planning Application - 1no. flat over existing car parking spaces with additional car parking bay created

Planning Application - 1no. flat over existing car parking spaces with additional car parking bay created

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel.

Bury St Edmunds Town Council objected to the proposal; raising concerns in relation to parking, loss of amenity and overlooking.

As part of his presentation the Senior Planning Officer drew attention to Paragraph 14 of the report and explained that over the course of the application the previously proposed roof lights had been replaced with sun pipes.

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 22 of Report No DEV/SE/18/044.

Speakers:    Ms Jenny Curtlin (resident) spoke against the application

Councillor David Nettleton (Ward Member: Risbygate) spoke on the application in order to endorse the consideration of the item by the Committee

Mr Phillip Cobbold (on behalf of the Agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Julia Wakelam (other Risbygate Ward Member) raised a number of concerns in relation to the application relating to:

·         The cramped site which could restrict car movement/parking;

·         The potential impact on neighbouring residential amenity and lack of shadow drawings;

·         Potential difficulties with emergency access; and

·         The materials proposed being out-of-keeping.

A number of other Members echoed these concerns.  Councillor John Burns raised particular issue with the four parking spaces and their relationship with the adjacent staircase access.  He also questioned as to whether four vehicles would actually be able to park in the space provided. 

Councillor Burns therefore proposed that the application be deferred in order to allow for these matters to be investigated, however, this motion did not achieve a seconder.

In response, the Case Officer explained that Suffolk County Council Highways Authority had not objected to the parking provision, access or the relationship with the adjacent staircase.  Furthermore, the materials to be used could be controlled by way of a condition.

Councillor Peter Stevens stressed the importance of focussing on material planning considerations and moved that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Terry Clements.

However, upon being put to the vote and with 4 voting for and 8 against, the motion was lost.

Councillor David Nettleton then proposed that the application be refused as contrary to the relevant policies of the development plan pertaining to the following reasons:

1.   The cramped and contrived overdevelopment of the site;

2.   The dominant and unneighbourly impact of the development; and

3.   The design being incongruous and out-of-keeping with the surrounding area.

This was duly seconded by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) confirmed that the Decision Making Protocol would not need to be invoked in this case and that a risk assessment was not considered necessary by Officers.

Therefore, upon being put to the vote and with 8 voting for the motion, 2 against and with 2 abstentions, it was resolved that

Decision  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/045

Outline Planning Application (all matters reserved) - 9no. dwellings

Outline Planning Application (all matters reserved) - 9no. dwellings

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee meeting on 4 October 2018 following consideration by the Delegation Panel and in light of the objection received from the Parish Council.

At the October meeting Members resolved that they were MINDED TO REFUSE THE APPLICATION, CONTARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, due to the following reasons:

1.   The evidence and risk of flooding in the vicinity and the further impact the development could have on this;

2.   Reservations relating to the fact that neither the Borough Council or a registered housing provider had been approached by the applicant with regard to the management of the affordable housing that was proposed – therefore being unable to demonstrate local need; and

3.   The lack of detail provided, in light of it being an outline application.

In light of the resolution, Officers invoked the Decision Making Protocol and the report before the Committee now also, therefore, contained a risk assessment.

A Member site visit was held prior to the October Committee.  Officers were continuing to recommend that the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and conditions, as set out in Paragraph 32 of Report No DEV/SE/18/045.

As part of her presentation the Senior Planning Officer explained that an additional condition had been added which outlined mitigation required in respect of flooding.

Members were also advised that since the October Committee meeting the Council’s Strategic Housing team had been in contact with the applicant and local registered providers and Officers were content that the proposed affordable housing could be delivered via the scheme.

Speaker:      Councillor Clive Mears (Bradfield Combust with Stanningfield Parish Council) spoke against the application

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White (Ward Member: Rougham) raised concerns at the mitigation proposed in the additional condition; which she considered would just relocate the flooding from the application site to elsewhere in the village.  This concern was echoed by a number of other Members.

Councillor Terry Clements made reference to a recent appeal decision on the site relating to landscape impact.  The Service Manager (Planning – Development) reminded the Committee that each application was to be considered on its own merits and to refer to the refusal reasons previously provided by Councillors.

Councillor David Nettleton proposed that the application be refused, for the two reasons as proposed by the Officer in Section C of the report.  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 REFUSED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, for the following reasons:

1.   Due to the unique topography of the site which sits in a hollow it appears to be subject to high risk of surface water flooding. Whilst a flood risk assessment has been submitted listing various recommendations to combat this risk these are not fully detailed and neither is it identified how  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/046

Planning Application -(i) 1no dwelling with attached ancillary outbuilding, (ii) new access and (iii) associated works  (following demolition of 2no existing barns)

Planning Application - (i) 1no dwelling with attached ancillary outbuilding, (ii) new access and (iii) associated works (following demolition of 2no existing barns)

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee on the basis of the defined conflict with policy, nothing that, in order to progress as a delegated item, proposals otherwise needed to be ‘consistent’ with the provisions of the Development Plan.

As part of her presentation the Case Officer drew attention to the supplementary ‘late papers’ which had been issued following publication of the agenda and which set out the full wording of the recommended conditions.

The Senior Planning Officer explained that Members should note the conflict identified within the report, alongside the material considerations that Officers believed in this circumstance justified a recommendation of approval subject to conditions, as set out in the supplementary ‘late papers’.

The Committee were also advised that:

·         The Parish Council were in support of the scheme;

·         The significant weight that needed to be attributed to the ‘fallback position’ of the barn conversion via the prior approval process;

·         The enhancements to the setting of the listed building Willow Tree Farmhouse as a result of the development; and

·         The other recent developments in the locality, which were indicated on a map.

Councillor Peter Stevens (Ward Member: Cavendish) spoke in support of the application which he considered would enhance the area.  He therefore moved 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.   The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 3 years from the date of this permission

2.   The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the following approved plans and documents

3.   Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order amending, revoking or re-enacting that Order), the dwelling shall not be extended in any way, and no structures shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling

4.   Demolition or construction works shall not take place outside 08:00 hours to 18:00 hours Mondays to Fridays and 08:00 hours to 13:00 hours on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, public holidays or bank holidays

5.   The acoustic insulation of the dwelling shall be such to ensure noise levels, with windows closed, do not exceed an LAeq (16hrs) of 35dB(A) within bedrooms and living rooms between the hours of 07:00 to 23:00, and an LAeq (8hrs) of 30dB(A) within bedrooms between the hours of 23:00 to 07:00

6.   The demolition of the barns shall not in any circumstances commence unless the Local Planning Authority has been provided with either:

i) A licence issued by Natural England pursuant to Regulation 53 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 authorizing  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/047

Planning Application - Conversion of building to provide 14 residential units, including addition of dormer extension, minor operational development and associated car parking

Planning Application - Conversion of building to provide 14 residential units, including addition of dormer extension, minor operational development and associated car parking

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee at the request of Councillor Paula Fox (Ward Member: Haverhill South).

Members were made aware that as it was an application for a ‘major’ development it had not first been presented before the Delegation Panel.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and conditions, as set out in Paragraph 50 of Report No DEV/SE/18/047.

As part of his presentation the Senior Planning Officer advised that:

·         The Town Council had objected to the scheme;

·         During the course of the life of the application the size of the units had been amended and they now complied with LACORS guidance; and

·         The applicant had submitted a viability appraisal justifying why affordable housing could not be provided as part of the application.  This had been considered and endorsed by the Council’s external consultant.

Speaker:      Mr Ben Pridgeon (Agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor John Burns spoke in objection to the application.  He queried how Vacant Building Credit could be applied to the scheme given that the building had only been vacant for a short period of time.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that Vacant Building Credit was legal requirement set out in the NPPF and it did not specify the length of time in which a building had to be vacant in order to qualify.

Councillor Peter Stevens spoke in support of the application.  He remarked on the need for this size of accommodation and considered the scheme to be an appropriate use of a vacant building.  He therefore moved that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Frank Warby.

Upon being put to the vote and with 9 voting for the motion, 2 against and with 1 abstention, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED subject to:

The completion of a Section 106 Agreement with the following contributions:

Primary School contribution: £24,362

Pre School contribution: £16,666

Library Contribution £224

And, the following conditions

 1       The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 3 years from the date of this permission.

 2       The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the following approved plans and documents:

 3       No individual dwelling hereby approved shall be occupied until the optional requirement for water consumption (110 litres use per person per day) in Part G of the Building Regulations has been complied with for that dwelling.

 4       The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until the area(s) within the site shown on 003_A-095 Rev 03 (indicating 19 allocated vehicle parking spaces and cycle storage for 38 cycles) for the purposes of [LOADING, UNLOADING,] manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter that area(s) shall be retained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/048

Planning Application - Change of use of B8 storage and distribution building to 1no. residential dwelling

Planning Application - Change of use of B8 storage and distribution building to 1no. residential dwelling

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee on the basis of the defined conflict with policy, nothing that, in order to progress as a delegated item, proposals otherwise needed to be ‘consistent’ with the provisions of the Development Plan.

The Planning Officer explained that Members should note the conflict identified within the report, alongside the material considerations that Officers believed in this circumstance justified a recommendation of approval subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 44 of Report No DEV/SE/18/048.

As part of his presentation the Planning Officer advised that:

·         The Ward Member was in support of the scheme, however, the Parish Council had registered objections;

·         The significant weight that needed to be attributed to the ‘fallback position’ of Permitted Development, irrespective of the application being contrary to policy; and

·         The three applications listed as refused under the ‘planning history’ section of the report were all won on appeal.

Speaker:      Mr Brian Barrow (Agent) spoke in support of the application      

Councillor Peter Stevens spoke in support of the application and moved that it be approved, as per the Officer recommendation.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Andrew Smith.

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       The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 10^th June 2019.

 2       The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and documents

 3       The areas to be provided for storage of Refuse/Recycling bins as shown on Drawing No. Rev.A 15.08.18 shall be provided in its entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for no other purpose.

 4       The use shall not commence until the areas within the site shown on Drawing No. Rev.A 15.08.18 for the purposes of manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been provided and thereafter those areas shall be retained and used for no other purposes.

 5       No development approved by this planning permission shall commence until the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority:

          i) A site investigation scheme (based on the approved Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) within the approved Desk Study), to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

          ii) The results of a site investigation based on i) and a detailed risk assessment, including a revised Conceptual Site Model (CSM).

          iii) Based on the risk assessment in ii), an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. The strategy shall include a plan providing details of how the remediation works  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

Report No: DEV/SE/18/049

Planning Application - 1 no. Portacabin to be used as treatment room

(Councillor John Burns declared a pecuniary interest in this item as he was a shareholder of the business who had submitted the application.  He therefore left the meeting during the consideration of this item.)

Planning Application - 1 no. Portacabin to be used as treatment room

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee as St Edmundsbury Borough Councillor John Burns had a partial interest in the application given part-ownership of the business.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 26 of Report No DEV/SE/18/049.

Councillor Susan Glossop raised a question with regard to the parking rights as made reference to in the comments received from the neighbouring business, as summarised in Paragraph 7 of the report.

In response, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that this was a private matter between the two premises in question and was not part of the planning process.

Councillor Frank Warby moved that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation, and this was duly seconded by Councillor Andrew Smith.

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. Time limit
2. Compliance with plans
3. Materials as specified
4. Parking/Manoeuvring to be provided (including the removal of the outdoor gym equipment)
5. Cycle storage to be provided and thereafter retained in accordance with details which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA