Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Mick Bradshaw.

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

The following substitution was declared:

Councillor Don Waldron substituting for Councillor Mick Bradshaw.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2023 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 6 September 2023 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any disclosable pecuniary interest, other registerable or non-registrable 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.

Members’ declarations of interest are recorded under the item to which the declaration relates.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/029

Planning application - four dwellings with associated car parking and access

Planning application - four dwellings with associated car parking and access

The application was referred to the Development Control Committee because it represented a departure from the Development Plan given the site was outside of the settlement boundary.

Furthermore, the Parish Council had objected to the scheme which was in conflict with the Officer recommendation of approval, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 79 of Report No DEV/WS/23/029.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that outline planning permission was granted on the application site in July 2017 for four dwellings, following the demolition of an agricultural workshop, with all matters reserved and subject to a number of conditions. Reserved matters were granted in January 2021.

Since the grant of outline permission, the site had been cleared and the agricultural workshop demolished. Whilst the application had been submitted on the basis that the previous permission had expired, there was a reasonable likelihood that the earlier permission was extant.

Speaker:      Chris Wilkie (agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Susan Glossop remarked on the parking that often took place along the highway by the entrance to the application site.

Councillor Jon London commended the applicant for seeking permission in this way irrespective of the previous permission in place for the site. He proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation and this was duly seconded by Councillor Ian Houlder.

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 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, unless otherwise stated.

3.   Notwithstanding the material details shown on the approved plans, no development above slab level shall take place until details of the proposed roof tiles and feature cladding 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.   No development shall take place within the area indicated [the whole site] until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured, in accordance with the approved Written Scheme of Investigation. Prior to any investigation taking place a competent person or persons/organisation shall be nominated to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation.

The site investigation shall be completed prior to development, or in such other phased arrangement, as agreed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5.   No building shall be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed, submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in accordance with the programme set out in the Written Scheme of Investigation approved under Condition 1 and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 383.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/030

Planning application - change of use of existing residential swimming pool to be used by swim school (sui generis)

(Councillor Rachel Hood declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in this item and advised that as she had made a personal representation in respect of the application she had sought the Monitoring Officer's advice and would be withdrawing from the meeting during the Committee's consideration of the application.)

Planning application - change of use of existing residential swimming pool to be used by swim school (sui generis)

This application was originally referred to the Development Control Committee on 6 September 2023 following consideration by the Delegation Panel on 1 August 2023.

At that meeting Members resolved to defer the consideration of the application in order to allow a site visit to take place, which was subsequently scheduled for 2 October 2023.

Newmarket Town Council objected based on their suggested conditions not being applied to the application.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 46 of Report No DEV/WS/23/030, inclusive of an amendment to the wording of condition No. 5 to reflect that the application was retrospective.

The Planning Officer informed the Committee that a late representation had been received from the Jockey Club who stated that they did not object to the scheme subject to three additional conditions being applied:

     i.        Wednesday is the only day of the week when lessons are allowed to take place before 1pm (in this case between 9.30am and 11am);

    ii.        Classes on Wednesday mornings are restricted to three swimmers, as per the applicant’s supporting statement which also says that “most attendees are siblings that come in one car”;

   iii.        All vehicles park within the site and not on the private access road or Bury Road.

However, Members were advised that it would not be possible to include iii. as parking on the private access road and/or Bury Road could not be conditioned as part of the application.

Speakers:    Tim Merrell (on behalf of Patricia Merrell, neighbouring objector) spoke against the application

                   Nicola Dale (neighbouring objector) spoke against the application

                   Calum Gawthrope (founder/owner of CG Swim School and user of the pool) spoke in support of the application

                   Councillor Sue Perry (Ward Member: Newmarket East) spoke against the application

                   Stephen Redhead (applicant) spoke in support of the application

                   (Councillor Perry was not present at the meeting in order to address the Committee, instead the Democratic Services Officer read out a pre-prepared statement on her behalf)

(On conclusion of the public speaking Councillor Hood left the meeting, following her earlier declaration of interest.)

Considerable discussion took place on the application and the private access road. Councillor Jon London asked if it would be possible to restrict pedestrian access to the swimming pool in order to prevent users parking on the private road.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that use of the private road was a civil matter and was not a Material Planning Consideration. Furthermore, it would not be possible to restrict pedestrian access to the swimming pool as it would preclude those opting to walk  ...  view the full minutes text for item 384.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/031

Planning application - change of use from residential (C3) to residential children's home (C2)

Planning application - change of use from residential (C3) to residential children's home (C2)

This application was originally referred to the Development Control Committee on 6 September 2023 following consideration by the Delegation Panel.

At the September meeting the Committee resolved that it was ‘minded to refuse’ the application based on the adverse impacts upon amenity arising from the modest extent of outdoor amenity space at the property, and on the basis of the impacts upon highway safety.

Accordingly, the Decision Making Protocol was invoked, requiring a risk assessment to be produced which set out the potential risks that might arise should planning permission be approved contrary to Officer recommendation.

A Member site visit was held prior to the September meeting.

Attention was drawn to the supplementary ‘late paper’ that was issued after publication of the agenda and which set out clarification in respect of the red line of the application site.

The Planning Officer also advised Members that one further neighbour objection had been received since the late papers were issued; which largely reiterated the points/comments raised in previous representations.

A letter had also been received from the owners of the property; who explained the current number of vehicles accommodated at the premises and highlighted the fact that a number of children had grown up in the household.

Lastly, it was highlighted to the meeting that the premises could operate as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) for up to six residents without planning permission being required.

Officers were continuing to recommend that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in Paragraph 37 of Report No DEV/WS/23/031.

Speaker:      John Edwards (neighbouring resident objector, speaking on behalf of himself and other fellow residents in Tasman Road) spoke against the application

Jo Capuano (applicant) spoke in support of the application

                   (Ms Capuano was not present at the meeting in order to address the Committee, instead the Democratic Services Officer read out a pre-prepared statement on her behalf)

Some questions were posed on the operation of the proposed children’s home and if the occupants would be from the local area. The Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that this was not a Material Planning Consideration and did not form part of the application before the Committee.

Councillor David Smith referenced the importance and the benefits of inter-generational contact.

Councillor Rachel Hood drew attention to the number of resident concerns and the views of the Town Council and Ward Member; in light of which she stated that she would abstain from the vote on this item.

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation. This was duly seconded by Councillor Carol Bull.

Upon being put to the vote and with 11 voting for the motion, 2 against and with 3 abstentions it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1.   Time limit

The development hereby permitted shall be commenced no later than 3 years from the date  ...  view the full minutes text for item 385.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/032

Planning application - one dwelling

The Chair informed the meeting that this item had been withdrawn from the agenda.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/033

Reserved matters application - a. submission of details under DC/21/1950/OUT appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for plot 3 b. including details reserved by conditions 8 (cycle storage), 13 (biodiversity enhancement), 14 (hard and soft landscaping) and 15 (landscape management plan) of DC/21/1950/OUT

Reserved matters application - a. submission of details under DC/21/1950/OUT appearance, landscaping, layout and scale for plot 3 b. including details reserved by conditions 8 (cycle storage), 13 (biodiversity enhancement), 14 (hard and soft landscaping) and 15 (landscape management plan) of DC/21/1950/OUT

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

Mildenhall Town Council had voiced support for the application which was in conflict with the Officer’s recommendation for refusal, for the reasons set out in Paragraph 56 of Report No DEV/WS/23/033.

Members were advised that outline planning permission (all matters reserved) was granted on 7 September 2022 for residential development, comprising two detached dwellings on two separate plots. The application before the Committee considered development on one of those plots.

As part of his presentation to the meeting the Planning Officer provided videos of the site by way of a virtual ‘site visit’.

Speakers:    Councillor Ian Shipp (Ward Member: Mildenhall Kingsway and Market) spoke in support of the application

                   Craig Farrow (agent) spoke in support of the application

                   (Councillor Shipp was not present at the meeting in order to address the Committee, instead the Democratic Services Officer read out a pre-prepared statement on his behalf)

Councillor Lora-Jane Miller-Jones highlighted specific concerns with the insufficient information that had been submitted with the application in relation to the ecological context of the site, particularly noting the absence of surveys relating to bats and the potential impact of the proposed development on neighbouring trees.

Councillor Carol Bull asked if these elements could be conditioned, however, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that the outstanding matters related to the suitability of the scheme and Officers therefore considered it necessary to have this information prior to determination.

The Planning Officer confirmed that extended discussions and negotiations had taken place with the agent in order to seek the information requested. However, Officers were advised that the applicant wished for the scheme to be assessed and determined. Hence, it came before the Committee with the Officer recommendation of refusal.

Councillor Diane Hind proposed that the application be refused, as per the Officer recommendation. This was duly second by Councillor Miller-Jones.

Councillor Andy Neal spoke in support of the application and proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer recommendation, subject to receipt of the outstanding surveys and information.

The Chair advised Councillor Neal that there was already a motion on the table which would need to be voted on (unless withdrawn) prior to any alternative motion being taken.

Councillors Phil Wittam and Rachel Hood asked if the application could be deferred in order to allow a site visit to take place and to enable the applicant to have additional time in which to submit the required information.

The Chair again reminded the meeting that there was already a motion on the table which had been seconded.

Upon putting the motion to the vote and with 10 voting for the motion, 5 against and with 1  ...  view the full minutes text for item 387.

Report No: DEV/WS/23/034

Planning application - 10 dwellings with associated access and garages (following demolition of existing dwellings) as amended by plans received 28 April 2023

(Councillor Mike Chester declared, in the interests of openness and transparency, that he had been briefly acquainted with the applicant for this item, some years ago during his former career. However, this would have no bearing on his consideration of the application.)

Planning application - 10 dwellings with associated access and garages (following demolition of existing dwellings) as amended by plans received 28 April 2023

The application was referred to the Development Control Committee as it represented a departure from the Development Plan, as part of the site was situated within designated countryside.

West Row Parish Council had not objected to the proposal. Officers were recommending that it be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 90 of Report No DEV/WS/23/034.

Councillor Don Waldron opened the debate as one of the Ward Members (The Rows) for the application. He advised the meeting that the access for the proposal was on a bend and that there were often instances of flooding in that area of the village.

In response to queries from Members in respect of the lack of affordable housing in the scheme, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that whilst the application was for 10 dwellings, because there was already 3 properties on the site, which were to be demolished, the scheme only added a net total of 7 properties; therefore meaning this did not trigger the requirement for affordable housing to be provided.

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White voiced disappointment that three bungalows were to be demolished and none of the new properties proposed to be built were single-storey.

Councillor Diane Hind asked specific questions in relation to boundary treatment and the Planning Officer suggested that an additional condition was added to request these details.

Councillor Mike Chester proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation and inclusive of the additional condition regarding boundary treatment. This was duly seconded by Councillor Sara Mildmay-White.

Upon being put to the vote and with 13 voting for the motion, 2 against 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 three 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, unless otherwise stated.

 3       No development shall take place within the area indicated [the whole site] until the implementation of a programme of archaeological work has been secured, in accordance with a Written Scheme of Investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme of investigation shall include an assessment of significance and research questions; and:

          a. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording

          b. The programme for post investigation assessment

          c. Provision to be made for analysis of the site investigation and recording

          d. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 388.