Agenda and minutes
Venue: The Apex, Charter Square, Bury St Edmunds, IP33 3FD
Contact: Helen Hardinge: Democratic Services Officer
Email: helen.hardinge@westsuffolk.gov.uk
Note: A map and directions to the meeting venue is linked below // It is intended that the meeting will be broadcast live; information and how to access this is published below // Public speakers are directed to the Protcol document linked below
Media
Items
No. |
Item |
147. |
Welcome
Minutes:
The Chair welcomed all present to the
Development Control Committee and a number
of housekeeping matters and guidance were highlighted to
all.
The Committee was advised that it had not been
possible for the minutes of the last meeting on 23 June 2021 to be
appended due to the short stretch of time between the two meetings.
These would therefore be included on the agenda for the subsequent
meeting on 4 August 2021.
Lastly, the Chair informed Members that if
Stage 4 of the Government’s road map was implemented on 19
July 2021 then the intention would be for the Committee’s
August meeting to be held at West Suffolk House.
|
148. |
Apologies for absence
Minutes:
Apologies for absence were received from
Councillors Richard Alecock, Jason Crooks and Ian Houlder.
|
149. |
Substitutes
Any member who is substituting for another
member should so indicate, together with the name of the relevant
absent member.
Minutes:
The following substitutions were declared:
Councillor Andy Neal substituting for
Councillor Richard Alecock; and
Councillor Brian Harvey substituting for
Councillor Ian Houlder
|
150. |
Declarations of interest
Members are reminded of their responsibility
to declare any pecuniary or local non pecuniary interest which they
have in any item of business on the agenda, no later than when
that item is reached and, when appropriate, to leave the
meeting prior to discussion and voting on the item.
Minutes:
Members’ declarations of interest are
recorded under the item to which the declaration relates.
|
151. |
Planning Application DC/21/0110/RM - Land NW of Haverhill, Ann Suckling Road, Little Wratting (Report No: DEV/WS/21/022) PDF 349 KB
Report No: DEV/WS/21/022
Reserved matters application - submission of
details under outline planning permission SE/09/1283 - the means of
access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for the
construction of 127 dwellings, together with associated private
amenity space, means of enclosure, car parking, vehicle and access
arrangements together with proposed areas of landscaping and areas
of open space for a phase of residential development known as phase
2b as amended by plans received 14.5.21 increasing number of units
to 129 and amendments to access, layout, scale, appearance and
landscaping as summarised in covering letter dated 14.5.21
Additional documents:
Minutes:
(Councillors John
Burns and David Smith each declared a non-pecuniary interest in
this item in light of the fact that they had taken part in
Haverhill Town Council’s consideration of the
application. However, they stressed
that they would keep an open mind and listen to the debate prior to
voting on the item.)
Reserved matters
application - submission of details under outline planning
permission SE/09/1283 - the means of access, appearance,
landscaping, layout and scale for the construction of 127
dwellings, together with associated private amenity space, means of
enclosure, car parking, vehicle and access arrangements together
with proposed areas of landscaping and areas of open space for a
phase of residential development known as phase 2b as amended by
plans received 14.5.21 increasing number of units to 129 and
amendments to access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping as
summarised in covering letter dated 14.5.21
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee following call-in from Ward Member
(Haverhill North) Councillor Joe Mason. In addition, the Town
Council had voiced objections to the application.
The Principal Planning Officer explained that
the application was part of the wider North West Haverhill site
which was one of two strategic growth sites for Haverhill
identified in the adopted Core Strategy. The application before the
Committee sought approval of the details for part of the second
phase of residential development.
Members were advised that the site had
previously been the subject of a significant public engagement
process through the preparation and adoption of a concept statement
and masterplan.
Outline planning permission was granted on 27
March 2015 for residential development, a primary school, local
centre including retail and community uses, public open space,
landscaping infrastructure, servicing and other associated works
alongside full permission for the construction of a relief
road.
The Officer clarified that phase 2 of the
strategic site fell within two broad character areas defined in the
approved Design Code; Wratting Gardens to the North (the character
area for phase 1) and Boyton Place to the South which incorporated
the local centre and was envisaged as being more contemporary in
appearance.
The Southern part of phase 2 (known as phase
2b) was initially submitted with the Northern parcel in Planning
Application DC/16/0215/RM. However, it was withdrawn from that
application to enable further work to take place to improve its
character, layout and appearance.
Attention was drawn to the supplementary
‘late papers’ which had been circulated after the
agenda had been published and which set out the proposed conditions
in detail. The Principal Planning Officer made reference to an
error within the papers where it inaccurately referenced 127
dwellings, which had been increased to 129 units via amended
plans.
Lastly, the Committee was informed that three
further late public representations had been received since
circulation of the late papers. The Officer read out a summary of
the objections contained therein, all of which covered topics which
had been previously covered by earlier representations and which
were referenced within Report No DEV/WS/21/022.
Officers ...
view the full minutes text for item 151.
|
152. |
Planning Application DC/21/0623/FUL - Hillcrest Nursery, Barningham Road, Stanton (Report No: DEV/WS/21/023) PDF 238 KB
Report No: DEV/WS/21/023
Planning application - one temporary static
caravan for a period of three years
Additional documents:
Minutes:
(Councillor Jim
Thorndyke declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item in light
of the fact that he was acquainted with the applicant. However, he stressed that he would keep an open
mind and listen to the debate prior to voting on the item.)
Planning application
- one temporary static caravan for a period of three years
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee following consideration by the
Delegation Panel and in view of the fact that the Parish Council
did not object to the proposal which was in conflict with the
Officers’ recommendation of refusal, for the reasons set out
in Paragraph 53 of Report No DEV/WS/21/023.
As part of her presentation the Planning
Officer showed videos of the site by way of a virtual ‘site
visit’.
Attention was drawn to Paragraph 19 of the
report which inaccurately stated that there were three housing
settlement boundaries within Stanton, when there were actually
four.
Speakers: Councillor Jim Thorndyke (Ward Member:
Stanton) spoke on the application
Jonny Rankin (agent) spoke in support of the application
In response to queries concerning the
definition of a ‘key worker’ under Policy DM5, the
Service Manager (Planning – Development) gave further
explanation.
Councillor Roger Dicker proposed that the
application be refused, as per the Officer recommendation, and this
was duly seconded by Councillor Carol Bull.
Upon being put to the vote and with 11 voting
for the motion and 3 against, it was resolved that
Decision
Planning permission be REFUSED for the
following reasons:
1.
The St Edmundsbury Core Strategy (2010) via CS13
states that development outside of housing settlements, defined in
policies CS1 and CS4, will be strictly controlled, with residential
development outside of the settlement boundaries being resisted.
The Joint Development Management Policies Document (2015) further
supports both the NPPF and Core Strategy through policies DM5 and
DM27. DM5 states that areas designated as countryside will be
protected from unsustainable development and policy DM27 sets out
the strict circumstances where dwellings will be permitted outside
of settlement boundaries. The site falls outside of any designated
settlement boundaries, showing a dwelling in
the form of a static caravan. The proposed dwelling does not front
a highway or form an infill within a continuous built up frontage,
nor will it form a close knit
cluster of 10 or more dwellings. Policy DM26
is not relevant as the dwelling is not for an agricultural,
forestry or commercial equine essential worker. The proposal does
not therefore meet the provisions of any of these policies and
there are no material considerations, including the
applicant’s suggestions that the proposal be time limited and
personal, that outweigh this very significant conflict with the
Development Plan.
2.
Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Joint Development
Management Policies Document and the NPPF attach great importance
to good design, expecting new developments to be visually
attractive, responding to local character and reinforcing local
distinctiveness. Furthermore, policies CS2 and CS3 of the Core
Strategy state that a high quality, sustainable environment
will be ...
view the full minutes text for item 152.
|
153. |
Planning Application DC/21/0618/VAR - The Old Pumping Station, Lower Road, Hundon (Report No: DEV/WS/21/024) PDF 205 KB
Report No: DEV/WS/21/024
Planning application - Variation of conditions
2, 3, 8, 9, 10 12, 13 and 17 of DC/20/0227/VAR to allow alternative
drainage and the submission of details for the construction of a.
three dwellings and associated garages; b. pedestrian link to
public footpath; c. alterations to existing access
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Planning application
- Variation of conditions 2, 3, 8, 9, 10 12, 13 and 17 of
DC/20/0227/VAR to allow alternative drainage and the submission of
details for the construction of a. three dwellings and associated
garages; b. pedestrian link to public footpath; c. alterations to
existing access
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee because the application was contrary
to the Development Plan and was recommended for approval, subject
to conditions as set out in Paragraph 50 of Report No
DEV/WS/21/024.
The Senior Planning Officer explained that
planning permission was granted under DC/19/1817/FUL for three
dwellings at the Development Control Committee on 8 January 2020.
The principle of development had therefore been established.
This was followed by a subsequent planning
permission that sought to vary conditions No 2 (approved plans) and
No 11 (soft landscaping) of DC/19/1817/FUL.
As part of her presentation the Officer
explained that the applicant had requested that the proposed
wording of condition No 8 be slightly amended from that which was
set out in the report to aid clarity.
Speaker: Michael Hendry (agent)
spoke in support of the application
(Mr Hendry did not attend
the meeting to personally address the Committee and instead the
Democratic Services Officer read out a pre-prepared submitted
statement on his behalf.)
Councillor David Roach proposed that the
application be approved, as per the Officers’ recommendation,
and this was duly seconded by Councillor Andy Drummond.
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 three years from the
date planning permission DC/19/1817/FUL, 9 January 2023.
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 occupation of any
part of the permitted development shall take place until a
verification report demonstrating completion of works as set out in
the remediation strategy is submitted to and approved, in writing
by the Local Planning Authority.
4 If, during
development, contamination not previously identified is found to be
present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise
agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be
carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation
strategy to the Local Planning Authority detailing how this
unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written
approval from the Local Planning Authority. The remediation
strategy shall be implemented as approved.
5 Prior to first
occupation, all dwellings with off street parking shall be provided
with an operational electric vehicle charge point at reasonably and
practicably accessible locations, with an electric supply to the
charge point capable of providing a 7kW charge.
6 Demolition or
construction works shall not take place outside 8:00am hours to
6:00pm hours Mondays to Fridays and 8:00am hours to 1:30pm hours on
Saturdays and at no time on Sundays, public holidays or bank holidays.
7 The ...
view the full minutes text for item 153.
|
154. |
Planning Application DC/21/0946/CLP - West Suffolk House, Western Way, Bury St Edmunds (Report No: DEV/WS/21/025) PDF 143 KB
Report No: DEV/WS/21/025
Application for a certificate of lawfulness
for proposed use or development - extension to the existing
sub-station building, reconfiguration of associated footpath and
motorbike parking spaces
Additional documents:
Minutes:
Application for a
certificate of lawfulness for proposed use or development -
extension to the existing sub-station building, reconfiguration of
associated footpath and motorbike parking spaces
This application was referred to the
Development Control Committee because West Suffolk Council was the
applicant.
The Planning Officer explained that the
provision of a battery storage area was also originally included.
However, this was intended to be installed on the existing car
parking area of the site and this parking was required by condition
on the substantive approval for West Suffolk House to be retained,
meaning the battery storage element could not be classed as
‘permitted development’ under the relevant
regulations.
As a consequence, the battery storage area was
removed from the proposal and Officers were therefore recommending
that a Certificate of Lawful Development was granted, as per the
recommendation in Paragraph 14 of Report No DEV/WS/21/025.
Councillor John Burns proposed that the
Officers’ recommendation be accepted and this was duly
seconded by Councillor Andy Neal.
Upon being put to the vote and with the vote
being unanimous, it was resolved that
Decision
A Certificate of Lawful Development be
GRANTED.
|
|
In this section
|