Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Andy Neal.

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 Andy Neal.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 3 January 2024 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 January 2024 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.

Councillor Jim Thorndyke stated that he would need to leave the meeting before consideration of Report number: DEV/WS/24/006 (Planning Application DC/23/0783/VAR - Doctors Hall, Bury Lane, Stanton). As ward member, he had produced a pre-prepared statement, which would be read out on his behalf by the Democratic Services Officer at the appropriate time during the consideration of that item.

Report No: DEV/WS/24/004

Planning application - create access into All Saints Golf and Country Club

(Councillor Marilyn Sayer declared a non registrable interest as she had previously commented on this application in her capacity as a local resident living in the vicinity of the proposed development. She left the meeting and therefore did not take part in the debate or vote on the item.)

Planning application – create access into All Saints Golf and Country Club

This application was presented to the Delegation Panel as the officer’s recommendation of approval conflicted with Fornham All Saints Parish Council and Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger’s, one of the ward members, objection. 

The application was referred to the Development Control Committee due to the public interest in the proposed development.

A supplementary ‘late paper’ was issued following publication of the agenda, which provided additional information supplied by the applicant. This included a statement by Highways Consultant G H Bullard & Associates LLP to address in detail concerns raised by local residents, the parish council and ward member. The information supported the officer recommendation of approval. Members noted that re-consultation with the Highways Authority was not required as no objection had been submitted regarding this development and the information did not change how the proposal was assessed.

A separate document from the applicant had also been provided as part of the ‘late paper’ named ‘All Saints Explanatory Note’ which contained further explanation relating to the need and justification for the development.

The Planning Officer reported that since the publication of the report, two further objections had been received from neighbouring residents which accorded with the concerns expressed by other objectors.

Speakers:    Malcolm Hancock (neighbouring resident) spoke against the application

Chris Bond (neighbouring resident) spoke against the application on behalf of himself and two other objectors present at the meeting, Daren Watson (neighbouring resident) and Jane Stewart (neighbouring resident)

Councillor Martin Loveridge (Chairman of Fornham All Saints Parish Council and also representing the views of Fornham St Martin cum St Genevieve Parish Council) spoke against the application

Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger (one of the ward members for The Fornhams and Great Barton Ward) spoke against the application.

Mark Knight (agent) spoke in support of the application

(Malcolm Hancock 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 Sarah Broughton, the other ward member for The Fornhams and Great Barton Ward was present at the meeting in support of the comments expressed by the objectors and Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger.)

The Committee acknowledged the strength of concern for the proposed construction of a new access road to the All Saints Golf and Country Club including the potential adverse impact on amenity, highway safety and the Conservation Area.

While noting that the Conservation Officer and Highways Authority had not objected to the proposal, some members expressed concern regarding the potential significant detrimental impact upon the historic environment and the potential harm caused to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Highway safety was also of concern and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 413.

Report No: DEV/WS/24/005

Planning application - change of use of agricultural land to enclosed field for dog training and exercising and associated access and parking

Planning application - change of use of agricultural land to enclosed field for dog training and exercising and associated access and parking

The application was considered at the last meeting of the Committee meeting held on 3 January 2024 following a site visit which had been undertaken the day before.

Officers were recommending that the planning application be refused for the reason outlined in Paragraph 30 of the report. This recommendation was in conflict with the view of Freckenham Parish Council and Councillor David Taylor (Manor Ward Member) who supported the proposal.

Members at the meeting resolved that they were ‘minded to’ approve the planning application, subject to conditions, contrary to the officer recommendation of refusal. At this point, the decision making protocol was invoked, requiring a Risk Assessment report to be prepared for this matter before any decision was made.

Members had resolved that they were ‘minded to approve’ the application as a result of taking into account the biodiversity benefits the native hedging and trees would bring about and they considered that the landscape impact of the proposals would not be adverse.

A risk assessment had been undertaken by officers in accordance with the Committee’s Decision-Making Protocol which set out the potential risks that might arise should planning permission be approved, as well as providing clarity on queries raised during the meeting and to also allow appropriate conditions to be drafted.

The report that had previously been presented to the Committee was attached as Working Paper 1, which contained details of the site and development, summaries of consultation responses and neighbour representations, and the officer assessment of the proposal.

A supplementary ‘late paper’ was issued following publication of the agenda, which gave details regarding the removal of two proposed conditions should permission be granted. For clarity, the revised list of proposed conditions was provided.

Speakers:    Councillor David Taylor (Ward Member: Manor) spoke in support of the application

Tracy Cannam (applicant) spoke in support of the application

Having considered the risk assessment undertaken by officers and having inspected the site, members remained in support of the proposal. It was acknowledged that the landscape would change as a result of the fencing; however, members considered the ecological benefits of the mitigation hedging and tree planting that were proposed to the perimeter and site frontage far outweighed any potential harm to the character of the landscape. To support the rationale for potentially approving the application, recognition was given to the openness of the area, that the fencing was a temporary structure, and that prior to modern farming methods, the countryside would have looked very different with numerous hedgerows providing natural divisions to the landscape into smaller parcels of land.

Recognition was also given to the economic, social and health benefits of the proposal. Members felt this was an innovative new business that would be a welcomed facility by users, which in turn would provide social, physical and well-being health benefits to those accessing the service.

Councillor Sara Mildmay-White proposed that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 414.

Report No: DEV/WS/24/006

Planning application - application to vary conditions 2 (approved plans), 4 (insulation details) and 6 (breeding bitch numbers) of DC/17/1652/FUL for the material change in the use of the land from paddock to the breeding and keeping of dogs comprising the following: (a) 2.1 metre high close boarded timber fence and concrete post; (b) car parking area; (c) 2no. dog kennels and (d) 1no. stable block as amended by plans received 15 November 2023

Planning application - application to vary conditions 2 (approved plans), 4 (insulation details) and 6 (breeding bitch numbers) of DC/17/1652/FUL for the material change in the use of the land from paddock to the breeding and keeping of dogs comprising the following: (a) 2.1 metre high close boarded timber fence and concrete post; (b) car parking area; (c) 2no. dog kennels and (d) 1no. stable block as amended by plans received 15 November 2023.

This application was presented before the Development Control Committee in December 2023, with a recommendation by officers for approval. The matter was deferred, for the completion of a ‘Risk Assessment’ report, with the Committee having resolved that it was ‘minded to refuse’ the application due to concerns about the noise implications of this proposal, and the consequential adverse effects upon amenity.

In accordance with the Council’s Decision Making Protocol, the Committee considered this report which provided a risk assessment of the ‘minded to refuse’ resolution.

This application was initially referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel. Stanton Parish Council objected to the application, contrary to the officer recommendation for approval.

Further background details regarding the application could be found in Working Paper 1 attached to the report.

A member site visit had previously been undertaken in November 2023.

Speakers:    Councillor Jim Thorndyke (Ward Member: Stanton) spoke against the application

Charlie Taylor (applicant) spoke in support of the application

(Councillor Thorndyke 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)

The Committee had previously expressed concerns regarding aspects of the operation of the site and although not material planning considerations but for members’ information, the Licensing team had undertaken an inspection of the premises in late 2023 and the site was considered to be meeting the terms of its dog breeding licence.

This led to a discussion regarding the making of referrals of non-material planning considerations to the appropriate body and The Chair outlined the reporting mechanism for this. It was agreed that a referral be made to the Licensing team as licensing authority for issuing dog breeding licences in West Suffolk in respect of raising the Committee’s concerns regarding the welfare of the dogs seen on site when the site visit was undertaken. 

Councillor Jon London then proposed that the application be approved, as per the officer recommendation, subject to the conditions set out in paragraph 40 of the report, together with making the referral outlined above to the licensing authority. This was duly seconded by Councillor Don Waldron.

A discussion was held on the planning merits of the application. Concern was expressed regarding the potential impact on the single-track lane that led to the site. Three car parking spaces had been allocated under the present planning permission; however, concern was raised that by increasing the number of breeding bitches from ten to 20, this would effectively be doubling the size of the business and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 415.

Report No: DEV/WS/24/007

Planning application - first floor flat above existing restaurant as amended by plans received 08 September 2023

Planning application - first floor flat above existing restaurant as amended by plans received 08 September 2023

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel. It was referred to the Delegation Panel at the request of Councillor Julia Wakelam, one of the ward members for Abbeygate Ward.

Bury St Edmunds Town Council had recommended refusal in line with the views of the West Suffolk Conservation Officer, and the Officer recommendation was one of refusal.

A Member site visit was undertaken prior to the meeting.

The Principal Planning Officer reported the following additional comments following the distribution of the agenda and papers for this meeting:

·         To clarify that the 2019 planning permission, approved in 2020 for a one bedroom flat at first floor level had now lapsed. That element now formed part of the current proposal albeit now with the addition of a flat roof side element.

·         Further comments had been received from the Georgian Society whereby there remained no objections in principle to the extending of the building; however, the proposal was still a relatively large structure in comparison to the host building and other adjacent heritage assets through its scale and massing. The society felt it would cause harm to the historic setting and surrounding Conservation Area and unless a less harmful scheme could be formulated, the society would recommend the application be refused.

Speaker:      Councillor Julia Wakelam (Ward Member: Abbeygate) spoke in support of the application.

Some members felt that having visited the site, although flat roofs were not in their opinion particularly aesthetically pleasing, it was felt that the proposed extension would not be publicly visible and therefore would not cause harm to the fabric of the existing listed building or its historical setting within the Conservation Area.

Councillor Lora-Jane Miller-Jones subsequently proposed approval of the application, contrary to the officer recommendation of refusal, which was duly seconded by Councillor Ian Houlder.

The debate continued and although a matter for Building Control, concern was expressed regarding provision of an adequate fire escape route which did not appear to have been satisfactorily provided in the design. The lack of bin storage provision was also of concern to some members; however, it was noted that if the application were to be approved, a condition could be placed on the applicant to provide suitable bin storage facilities.

Some members felt that if the applicant were to submit a proposal that was more sympathetic and in keeping with the Conservation Area, the principle of the development may be acceptable. Generally, it was felt by some and in agreement with officers and comments made by the Conservation Officer and Victorian Society that through the present proposal’s scale and massing, and for reasons of unsympathetic approach, in particular its flat roofed design being in conflict with the steeply pitched roofs of the host building to include historic extensions, it would dominate the historic structures causing harm to their setting and to the surrounding Conservation Area.

Before  ...  view the full minutes text for item 416.