Agenda and draft minutes
Venue: Conference Chamber, West Suffolk House, Western Way, Bury St Edmunds IP33 3YU
Contact: Helen Hardinge
Email: helen.hardinge@westsuffolk.gov.uk
Note: This was the last meeting of St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Development Control Committee before it’s dissolution on 6 May 2019. As a result, the minutes of the meeting remain as drafted following the meeting and cannot be confirmed by the Committee and signed by the Chair. This is consistent with all other dissolved Committees and bodies.
Items
No. |
Item |
|
This
was the last meeting of St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s
Development Control Committee before it’s dissolution on 6
May 2019. As a result, the minutes of the meeting remain as
drafted following the meeting and cannot be confirmed by the
Committee and signed by the Chair. This is consistent with
all other dissolved Committees and bodies.
|
101. |
In Remembrance
Minutes:
On opening the meeting the Chairman advised
all present of the recent passing of Mike Jones, former St
Edmundsbury Borough Councillor and
previous Vice Chairman of the Development Control Committee.
Members were informed that Councillor Peter
Stevens was representing the Committee at the funeral which was
being held that morning and he would join the meeting later.
The Chairman then asked all present to stand
in order to observe a one minute silence in remembrance of their
friend and former colleague.
|
102. |
Apologies for Absence
Minutes:
There were no apologies for absence.
The Democratic Services Officer reminded the
Committee that Councillor Peter Stevens had indicated that he would
be attending but would be arriving late to the meeting.
|
103. |
Substitutes
Any Member who is substituting for another
Member should so indicate together with the name of the relevant
absent Member.
Minutes:
There were no substitutes present at the
meeting.
|
104. |
Minutes PDF 157 KB
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on
7 March 2019 (copy attached).
Minutes:
The minutes of the meeting held on 7 March
2019 were unanimously received as an accurate record and were
signed by the Chairman.
|
105. |
Planning Application DC/18/0382/FUL - Cornhill Walk, Brentgovel Street, Bury St Edmunds (Report No: DEV/SE/19/022) PDF 169 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/022
Planning Application -
Demolition and redevelopment of the Cornhill Walk Shopping Centre
to provide mixed use development comprising (i) 1,666sq.m (Use Class A1/D2) at the ground floor
(ii) 49 no. residential units (Use Class C3) to three upper floors
including parking, bin storage, access and other associated works
as amended by plans received 13th December 2018
Additional documents:
-
DEV.SE.19.022 Cornhill Walk, BSE - Location Plan , item 105.
PDF 198 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.022 Cornhill Walk, BSE - Site Plan , item 105.
PDF 3 MB
-
DEV.SE.19.022 Late Paper - Cornhill Walk, BSE , item 105.
PDF 78 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.022 Additional Supplement - Cornhill Walk, BSE , item 105.
PDF 29 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.022 Additional Supplement - Cornhill Walk, BSE PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN_REV T , item 105.
PDF 2 MB
- There are a further 3 documents.View the full list of documents for item 105.
Minutes:
Planning Application - Demolition and redevelopment of the
Cornhill Walk Shopping Centre to provide mixed use development
comprising (i) 1,666sq.m (Use Class
A1/D2) at the ground floor (ii) 49 no. residential units (Use Class
C3) to three upper floors including parking, bin storage, access
and other associated works as amended by plans received 13th
December 2018
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee at the request of one of the Ward
Members (Eastgate).
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.
Bury St Edmunds Town Council had raised
objections, together with a number of other third parties.
The Senior Planning Officer explained that a
number of changes had been made to the scheme throughout the
process of the application in order to address some of the concerns
raised.
Since publication of the agenda ‘late
papers’ had been circulated which set out the full wording of
the proposed conditions; together with amended plans reflecting
further changes that had been made to the scheme.
The day before the meeting further amended
plans had been submitted which the Officer made reference to her
presentation and highlighted the changes to the Committee.
Members were also advised that further late
objections had been received from residents who had made prior
representations and whom largely reiterated their previous points
raised.
Speakers: Roderick Reese (Bury St Edmunds
Society) spoke against the application
Bill Goodsall (Chairman, Well Street
Association) spoke against the application
Phil Cobbold (on behalf of Orchard Street and Short Brackland residents) spoke against the
application
Graham Ashley (neighbouring resident) spoke against the
application
Kieran Rushe (agent) spoke in support of the application
Councillor David Nettleton spoke against the
proposal, citing concerns in relation to:
·
The height/mass/bulk of the building;
·
The impact on the character of the area, including the Conservation
Area;
·
The viability of the proposed retail units;
·
Parking and highways impact – including concerns relating to
delivery vehicles;
·
Air quality; and
·
The impact on the residential amenity of the neighbouring
properties.
Councillor Nettleton proposed that the
application be refused for these reasons and this was duly seconded
by Councillor Julia Wakelam who echoed the concerns raised.
In response to the reasons cited for refusal,
the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that
she would not recommend the inclusion of:
·
The viability of the proposed retail units – the site had
been identified for retail units and was within the primary
shopping area of the town, furthermore, there was no evidence to
suggest that the retail units would not be viable;
·
Parking and highways impact, including concerns relating to
delivery vehicles – the Highways Authority had not objected
in this regard and the existing nearby retail units would have
regular deliveries, furthermore, there was a specific condition
included for a Delivery Management Plan to be provided; and
·
Air quality – Environmental Services had not objected in this
regard. ...
view the full minutes text for item 105.
|
106. |
Planning Application DC/18/1498/FUL - Boyton Meadows, Anne Suckling Road, Little Wratting (Report No: DEV/SE/19/023) PDF 167 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/023
Planning Application - 38no. dwellings and
associated access works
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Planning Application
- 38no. dwellings and associated access
works
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee as it was a major application.
Haverhill Town Council objected to the
application, contrary to the Officer recommendation of approval,
subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and conditions
as set out in Paragraph 65 of Report No DEV/SE/19/023.
The Senior Planning Officer explained that
since publication of the agenda ‘late papers’ had been
circulated which set out amendments to two of the proposed
conditions (Nos 10 and 13) together with two additional conditions
in respect of ecological mitigation/enhancements.
Members were also advised that a further late
objection had been received from Haverhill Town Council who had
largely reiterated their previous points raised in their earlier
representation.
Speakers: Julie Richards (neighbouring objector)
spoke against the application
Alasdair Vaux (agent) spoke in support of the application
Councillor John Burns spoke in favour of the
design and layout of the scheme but stated that he felt unable to
support the application due to concerns with the proposed
access.
Councillor Burns explained that he considered
that the access needed to be moved further along Anne Suckling Road
in order to protect existing residents, particularly in light of
the adjacent Persimmon Homes development which had led to increased
parking along the road already.
The Committee was advised that the Highways
Authority were satisfied with the access proposed which would
result in some leylandii trees being
removed, the Council’s Tree Officer had been consulted on
this aspect and had no objection to what was proposed.
Other Members raised queries in respect of;
waste collection, Police and Crime Officer comments and holding
objections. All of which, the Case
Officer responded to in turn and provided further explanation; she
also clarified that all holding objections had been resolved.
Further debate highlighted additional Member
concerns in relation to the parking provision within the
scheme. The Senior Planning Officer
confirmed that the Highways Authority were satisfied with what was
proposed.
Councillor David Roach stated that he also
felt unable to support the scheme in view of the proposed access
and parking provision. He therefore
proposed that consideration of the application be deferred in order
to allow Officers additional time in which to work with the
applicant in light of these concerns.
This was duly seconded by Councillor David Nettleton.
Upon being put to the vote and with 9 voting
for the motion, 2 against and with 2 abstentions, it was resolved
that
Decision
Consideration of the application be DEFERRED in order allow additional time for Officers to work
with the applicant, in light of the concerns raised by the
Committee in respect of access and parking provision.
|
107. |
Planning Application DC/18/1024/FUL - Hengrave Farm, Stanchils Farm Lane, Hengrave (Report No: DEV/SE/19/024) PDF 166 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/024
Planning Application - Importation and
engineering of suitable restoration materials to allow use of land
for agriculture
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Planning Application
- Importation and engineering of suitable restoration materials to
allow use of land for agriculture
Members were advised that the application site
was a remnant of historic sand and gravel workings of approximately
1ha. The application proposed
restoration of the site to return it to agricultural
use. The proposal, at the same time,
would also be a waste recovery operation and would require an
Environmental Permit alongside planning permission.
Minerals extraction and waste management were
normally dealt with at County Council level. However, pre-application advice was sought from
Suffolk County Council by the applicant and the use of imported
material to achieve restoration was not viewed as ‘disposal
of waste’ as the material would be put to a beneficial
use. It was therefore considered to be
an engineering operation and due to the modest scale of the
proposal this should be dealt with by the Local Planning
Authority.
Henceforth, the application was referred to
the Development Control Committee following call-in by the Ward
Member, Councillor Susan Glossop (Risby) because of concerns raised by local
residents. The application, being a
major application by site area, was therefore referred directly to
the Committee.
Officers were recommending that the
application be approved subject to conditions, as set out in
Paragraph 57 of Report No DEV/SE/19/024.
The Senior Planning Officer informed the
Committee that during the course of the application amendments were
made to the access and internal routing of HGVs and additional
information was submitted regarding ecology.
Speakers: Wendy Smith (neighbouring objector)
spoke against the application
Dr Jeremy Field (neighbouring objector) spoke against the
application
Councillor Susan Glossop (Ward Member: Risby) spoke on the application
Edward Vipond (application) spoke in support of the application
Councillor John Burns made reference to
proposed condition No 11 and asked that it be amended to clarify
that no deliveries or works shall take place on weekends or Public
Holidays.
Councillor Terry Clements spoke in support of
the proposal and moved that the application be approved, as per the
Officer recommendation. This was duly
seconded by Councillor David Nettleton.
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:
- The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 3
years from the date of this permission.
- The developer shall notify the Local Planning Authority in
writing 2 weeks prior to the implementation of this planning
permission and of the commencement of the infill of the
Site.
- The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except
in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans
and documents.
- Constructions Method Statement (04D)
Prior to
commencement of development, including any works of demolition, a
Construction Method Statement shall be submitted to, and approved
in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement
shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The
Statement shall provide for:
i)
Loading and unloading of plant and
materials;
ii)
Storage ...
view the full minutes text for item 107.
|
108. |
Planning Application DC/18/2395/FUL - Sheldon, 2 Stoney Lane, Barrow (Report No: DEV/SE/19/025) PDF 85 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/025
Planning Application - (i) 1no. dwelling with
detached garages for new and existing dwellings (ii) Creation of
vehicular access (Previous application DC/16/0001/FUL)
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Planning Application
- (i) 1no. dwelling with detached garages for new and existing
dwellings (ii) Creation of vehicular access (Previous application
DC/16/0001/FUL)
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee following consideration by the
Delegation Panel. The item was
presented to the Panel due to the Parish Council having objected to
the proposed development and Councillor Ian Houlder (Ward Member:
Barrow) having raised concerns.
Officers were recommending that the
application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in
Paragraph 28 of Report No DEV/SE/19/025.
Within her presentation to the Committee the
Senior Planning Officer made reference to the planning history of
the site. Members were also advised of
a related application where development had commenced according to
the applicant. Officers were in the
process of assessing the site in question but reminded the
Committee that it was not relevant to the proposal they were
considering.
Councillor Ian Houlder (Ward Member: Barrow)
addressed the meeting on behalf of Barrow Parish Council who had
been unable to attend. He outlined
their comments/concerns in relation to the application.
Councillor David Nettleton moved that the
application be approved, as per the Officer
recommendation. This was duly seconded
by Councillor Robert Everitt.
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 approved plans and
documents.
3 No development above
slab level shall take place until samples of the facing and roofing
shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with
the approved details.
4 The new vehicular
access shall be laid out and completed in all respects in
accordance with Drawing No. CS-002; and with an entrance width of
11metres at the boundary of the carriageway and made available for
use prior to occupation. Thereafter the access shall be retained in
the specified form.
5 The gradient of the
vehicular access shall not be steeper than 1 in 20 for the first
5metres measured from the nearside edge of the adjacent metalled
carriageway.
6 The access driveway
shall be constructed at a gradient not steeper than 1 in
8.
7 No development above
ground shall take place until details have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the
means to prevent the discharge of surface water from the
development onto the highway. The approved scheme shall be carried
out in its entirety before the access is first used and shall be
retained thereafter in its approved form.
8 Prior to first use
of the development hereby permitted, the area(s) within the site
shown on drawing No. CS-002 for the
purpose of loading, unloading, manoeuvring and ...
view the full minutes text for item 108.
|
109. |
Planning Application DC/18/2496/OUT - Land at 27, Hollybush Corner, Bradfield St George (Report No: DEV/SE/19/026) PDF 87 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/026
Outline Planning Application (means of access
to be considered) - 1no. dwelling (Revised plans received 1/2/19
showing access proposed)
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Outline Planning
Application (means of access to be considered) - 1no. dwelling (Revised plans received 1/2/19 showing
access proposed)
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee as the Parish Council objected to the
proposal which was in conflict with the Officer’s
recommendation for approval, subject to conditions as set out in
Paragraph 27 of Report No DEV/SE/19/026.
A Member site visit was held prior to the
meeting.
The Senior Planning Officer advised that since
publication of the agenda the applicant had made changes to the
indicative layout and the amended plans were shown to Members as
part of her presentation to the Committee. However, Members were reminded that the plans were
indicative only in light of the application before the Committee
being in outline form.
Attention was also drawn to the application
previously made for the site and the related TPO; Members were
assured that the Council’s Tree Officer had raised no
concerns with the application before them.
Speakers: Patrick Stephenson (supporter) spoke
in support of the application
Councillor Peter Squirrell (Chairman, Bradfield St George Parish
Council) spoke against the application
Councillor Sara Mildmay-White (Ward
Member: Rougham) spoke against the
application
Councillor Julia Wakelam raised questions in
relation to the required tree protection area in respect of the
tree onsite which was subject to a TPO.
The Service Manager (Planning – Development) advised that
this would be addressed at the reserved matters stage.
Councillor David Nettleton moved that the
application be approved as per the Officer recommendation, this was
duly seconded by Councillor Terry Clements.
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 Application
for the approval of the matters reserved by conditions of this
permission shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the
expiration of three years from the date of this permission. The
development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than
whichever is the latest of the following dates:-
i) The expiration of
three years from the date of this
permission; or
ii) The
expiration of two years from the final approval of
the reserved matters; or,
In
the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the
last such matter to be approved.
2 Prior to
commencement of development details of the [appearance,
landscaping, layout, and scale] (hereinafter called "the reserved
matters") shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out as
approved.
3 The development
hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete
accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and
documents.
4 The site demolition,
preparation and construction works shall be carried out between the
hours of 08:00 to18:00 Mondays to Fridays and between the hours of
08:00 to 13:30 Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays
without the prior written consent of the Local Planning
Authority.
5 ...
view the full minutes text for item 109.
|
110. |
Planning Application DC/18/1147/FUL - Land Adjacent to The Forge, The Street, Lidgate (Report No: DEV/SE/19/027) PDF 82 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/027
Planning Application - (i) 1no. dwelling; (ii)
1no. ancillary outbuilding and (iii)
improvements to existing vehicular access
Additional documents:
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Land adj to the Forge, The Street Lidgate - Working Paper 1 , item 110.
PDF 129 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Land adj to the Forge, The Street Lidgate - Location Plan , item 110.
PDF 112 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Land adj to the Forge, The Street Lidgate - Site Plan , item 110.
PDF 9 MB
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Late Paper - Land adj to the Forge, The Street, Lidgate , item 110.
PDF 38 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Additional Supplement - Land adj to The Forge, The Street, Lidgate , item 110.
PDF 75 KB
-
DEV.SE.19.027 Additional Supplement - Land adj to The Forge, The Street, Lidgate REPORT , item 110.
PDF 3 MB
Minutes:
Planning Application
- (i) 1no. dwelling; (ii) 1no. ancillary outbuilding and (iii) improvements to
existing vehicular access
At the meeting of the Development Control
Committee on 7 March 2019 Members resolved to defer consideration
of this application in order to allow Officers additional time in
which to consider the further study that had been undertaken on the
site and subsequent comments from Historic England in response to
that study.
The application had been originally referred
to the Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel;
having been referred to the Panel because the Parish Council
objected to the proposal.
A Member site visit was held prior to the 7
March 2019 meeting and a supplementary ‘late paper’ was
issued after publication of the agenda.
The Senior Planning Officer advised Members
that the day before the meeting a further archaeological report
concerning the Lidgate Castle
Pond/Mere, produced by John Rainer of Suffolk Archaeology Field
Group, was submitted to the Planning Authority and Historic
England.
The Officer explained that he made direct
contact with Historic England in respect of the report and had
received an email in response which he read out to the
Committee. In summary, Historic England
stated that: “although interesting, nothing
presented warrants their reassessment [of the planning
application]”.
In light of this response, Officers considered
there to be no reason to further delay determination of the
application and were continuing to recommend that it be approved
subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 19 of Report No
DEV/SE/19/027.
Speakers: Professor Paul Watchman (on behalf of
objecting Lidgate residents) spoke
against the application
Councillor John Whitefield (Chairman, Lidgate Parish Council) spoke against the
application
Dean Pearce (agent) spoke in support of the application
Councillor Mike Chester made reference to the
historical importance of the site and suggested that a further
deferment might be prudent.
Councillor John Burns raised questions in
respect of condition No 17. The Service
Manager (Planning – Development) explained that it was a
standard condition requested by Suffolk Archaeology and which
contained nationally used terminology.
Councillor Ian Houlder spoke in support of the
application and proposed that it be approved, as per the Officer
recommendation. This was duly seconded
by Councillor David Roach.
Upon being put to the vote and with 13 voting
for the motion and with 1 abstention, 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. No development above
slab level shall take place until samples of the external materials
to the house and outbuilding have been shall be submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved
details.
3. The dwelling hereby
approved shall not be occupied until the area(s) within the site
shown on Drawing No. 18/25/03 for the purposes of [LOADING,
UNLOADING,] manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has been
...
view the full minutes text for item 110.
|
111. |
Planning Application DC/19/0136/FUL & DC/19/0135/LB - 41 Cornhill, Bury St Edmunds (Report No: DEV/SE/19/028) PDF 82 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/028
Planning Application - Installation of
security shutter to rear entrance
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Planning Application
- Installation of security shutter to rear entrance (and associated
Listed Building Consent)
These applications had been referred to the
Development Control Committee as St Edmundsbury Borough Council was the applicant.
The Case Officer explained that the wrong plan
had been mistakenly appended to the agenda (Page 151) and the
correct version was shown to the Committee as part of his
presentation.
Bury St Edmunds Town Council had no objections
to the proposal. Officers were
recommending that the applications be approved, subject to
conditions as set out in Paragraphs 22 and 23 of Report No
DEV/SE/19/028.
Councillor Robert Everitt raised a question
with regard to the prevention of anti-social behaviour and was
advised that the gates at the rear of the premises were
lockable.
Councillor David Nettleton proposed that the
applications be approved, as per the Officer
recommendations. This was duly seconded
by Councillor Everitt.
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 approved plans and documents
And,
Listed Building Consent be GRANTED subject to the
following conditions:
1.
The works to which this consent relates must be
begun not later than 3 years from the date of this
notice.
2.
The development hereby permitted shall not be
carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on
the approved plans and documents.
|
112. |
Planning Application DC/18/2523/FUL - Aviary, Abbey Gardens, Angel Hill, Bury St Edmunds (Report No: DEV/SE/19/029) PDF 96 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/029
Planning Application - Installation of new
plant sales retail building (A1 use) including removal of existing
timber frame gardener's store and part of existing aviary
Additional documents:
Minutes:
(Councillor Julia
Wakelam declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item as she was a
member of the Abbey of St Edmund Heritage Partnership. She would remain in the meeting and take part in
the debate and voting thereon.)
Planning Application
- Installation of new plant sales retail building (A1 use)
including removal of existing timber frame gardener's store and
part of existing aviary
This application had been referred to the
Development Control Committee as St Edmundsbury Borough Council was the applicant.
Bury St Edmunds Town Council had no objections
to the proposal. Officers were
recommending that the application be approved, subject to
conditions as set out in Paragraph 35 of Report No
DEV/SE/19/029.
Councillor David Nettleton spoke against the
application; specifically in relation to the removal of part of the
existing aviary building. He stated
that the aviary was enjoyed by many visitors to the Abbey Gardens
and, in view of this, a public consultation should have been
undertaken on the proposal.
The Service Manager (Planning –
Development) explained that the Committee was to determine the
application before them irrespective of the Council being the
applicant. The decision whether or not
to remove part of the aviary was not a material planning
consideration and was not a matter for the Committee to determine
in their role as Local Planning Authority.
Councillor Julia Wakelam spoke in support of
the application and moved that it be approved, as per the Officer
recommendation. This was duly seconded
by Councillor Ian Houlder.
Upon being put to the vote and with 11 voting
for the motion and with 3 abstentions, 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 approved plans and
documents.
3 The building hereby
approved for A1 retail purposes, shall be for the sale of plants
and associated items only, and shall only be open for trade to
members of the public during the following times:
Mondays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Tuesdays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Wednesdays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Thursdays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Fridays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Saturdays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
Sundays - 07:30am to 20:00pm
|
113. |
Planning Application DC/18/2161/FUL - West Stow Anglo Saxon Village and Country Park, Icklingham Road, West Stow (Report No: DEV/SE/19/030) PDF 107 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/030
Planning Application- (i) Replacement of existing heating systems with
Ground Source Heating System and associated pipe route and (ii)
External plant room
Additional documents:
Minutes:
(Councillors Susan
Glossop and Ian Houlder declared non-pecuniary interests in this
item as they were two of the St Edmundsbury Borough Council appointed
representatives on the West Stow Anglo Saxon Village
Trust. They would remain in the meeting
and take part in the debate and voting thereon.)
Planning
Application- (i) Replacement of
existing heating systems with Ground Source Heating System and
associated pipe route and (ii) External plant room
This application had been referred to the
Development Control Committee as St Edmundsbury Borough Council was the applicant.
The Parish Council had no objections to the
proposal. Officers were recommending
that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out
in Paragraph 43 of Report No DEV/SE/19/030.
Councillor Susan Glossop raised queries in
relation to the responses included within the report from statutory
consultees. The Service Manager
(Planning – Development) confirmed that all matters referred
to within the report had been resolved via negotiation with
relevant parties.
Councillor John Burns raised a specific
question with regard to the comments made by the Arboricultural Officer in Paragraph 6. He asked how the drill water would be disposed of
and how any potential contamination would be managed.
The Case Officer explained that condition No 5
required a Construction Method Statement this matter was covered as
part of this requirement at point (vii).
It was moved that the application be approved
as per the Officer recommendation and duly seconded.
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:
- The
development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than 3 years
from the date of this permission.
- The
development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in
complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans
and documents.
3.
All groundworks must only take place outside of the bird breeding
season which is considered to be between February and October
inclusive.
4.
Notwithstanding the details in the Arboricultural Method Statement (P1309 – AMS
01 V2) and the Tree Protection Plan (P1309 - TPP01), prior to
commencement of development a revised Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection
Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The Statement shall update the submitted
documents as follows:
a. extension of
the construction exclusion zone up to the ablution block over the
trees to be protected,
b. Indicate the
location and root protection area of all trees omitted from the
original plan and located adjacent to the works in particular those
located along the proposed ablution block connection pipe
c Detail
vehicle access routes and required ground protection
d. Detail the
location of site facilities and storage during construction
e.The Councils Arboricultural Officer shall be informed when the
tree protection fencing has been installed.
Thereafter, development shall proceed in accordance with these
revised details.
5.
Construction Method Statement:
Prior to the commencement
of development, including any works of ...
view the full minutes text for item 113.
|
114. |
Planning Application DC/19/0077/HH & Listed Building Consent DC/19/0078/LB - 143 Southgate Street, Bury St Edmunds (Report No: DEV/SE/19/031) PDF 71 KB
Report No: DEV/SE/19/031
(i) Householder Planning
Application - (i) single storey rear
extension (following demolition of existing rear extension) (ii)
loft conversion and (iii) demolition and replacement of boundary
wall (resubmission of DC/18/1700/HH)
(i)
Application for Listed Building Consent - (i) Demolition of boundary wall with No.143 and (ii)
replacement boundary wall
Additional documents:
Minutes:
(i)
Householder Planning Application - (i) single storey rear extension (following
demolition of existing rear extension) (ii) loft conversion and
(iii) demolition and replacement of boundary wall (resubmission of
DC/18/1700/HH)
(ii)
Application for Listed Building Consent - (i)
Demolition of boundary wall with No.143 and (ii) replacement
boundary wall.
The applications were referred to the
Development Control Committee as the applicant is employed by St
Edmundsbury Borough Council.
Bury St Edmunds Town Council had no objections
to the proposal. Officers were
recommending that the applications be approved, subject to
conditions as set out in Paragraph 23 of Report No
DEV/SE/19/031.
Councillor Julia Wakelam proposed that the
applications be approved as per the Officer
recommendations. This was duly seconded
by Councillor Terry Clements.
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 approved plans and
documents.
And,
Listed Building Consent 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 approved plans and
documents.
3 No development above
ground level along the boundary wall shall take place until details
in respect of the following have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority:
i) Samples of external
materials for the reconstruction of the boundary wall
The works shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved
details unless otherwise subsequently approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority.
|
115. |
Closing Remarks
Minutes:
This being the last St Edmundsbury Development Control Committee prior to
the formation of the West Suffolk Council, both the Chairman and
Service Manager (Planning – Development) gave thanks to
Members and Officers and wished those standing for re-election
well.
|
|
In this section
|