Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Chester, David Smith and Peter Stevens.

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

The following substitutions were declared:

Councillor Terry Clements substituting for Councillor Mike Chester

Councillor Diane Hind substituting for Councillor David Smith

Councillor Carol Bull substituting for Councillor Peter Stevens

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 7 August 2019 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 August 2019 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/015

Planning Application - 79 no. dwellings, a new vehicle access from Exning Road and public open space, together with associated external works including parking and landscaping

Planning Application - 79 no. dwellings, a new vehicle access from Exning Road and public open space, together with associated external works including parking and landscaping

This application had been referred to the Development Control Committee because the recommendation was both contrary to the Development Plan and the views of Newmarket Town Council.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

Supplementary ‘Late Papers’ had been circulated following publication of the agenda, which set out the fully worded conditions and gave further details with regard to the Newmarket Neighbourhood Plan which had reached examination stage.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to the conditions as set out in the Late Papers.

The Principal Planning Officer made reference to the following corrections to the report:

·         The primary school contribution set out in Paragraphs 91 and 112 should have read £351,648 (18 x £19,536 per place), as confirmed by Suffolk County Council and as made reference to in the Late Papers.

·         The tenure split of dwellings as listed in Paragraph 22 was incorrect; with the correct information being listed in Paragraph 88.

Speakers:    James Lay (public objector) spoke against the application

Councillor Rachel Hood (Mayor, Newmarket Town Council) spoke against the application

Neil Farnsworth (applicant) spoke in support of the application

(Prior to opening the debate, the Chair reminded Members to speak clearly into the microphones in order to allow the densely populated Public Gallery to hear all that was said.)

Councillor Andy Drummond advised the meeting that he had taken part in Newmarket Town Council’s consideration of the application in February 2019 when they resolved to oppose the scheme.  Furthermore, he had been quoted in the local press following the Town Council’s meeting.  However, Councillor Drummond stressed that he would keep an open mind and listen to the debate prior to voting on the item.

A number of questions/comments were made with regard to the emerging Site Allocations Local Plan (SALP) and the application site being related to the horseracing industry.

In response, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that the SALP was at a very advanced stage in the plan preparation process and the Inspectorate had, subject to agreed modifications, declared it sound.  The SALP was due to be presented to West Suffolk’s Full Council meeting on 19 September 2019, seeking adoption.  Therefore, the emerging plan was considered to have almost full weight in the planning balance of the proposal.

The Service Manager also drew Members’ attention to the very clear statement in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) with regard to the weight to be attached to emerging plans that were at an advanced stage of preparation, without unresolved objections and the degree of consistency of the plan with the NPPF.

Further debate continued with the Committee positing other questions which were responded to by the Principal Planning Officer as follows:

Refuse – The location of refuse bins was illustrated to Members on a plan of the site;

Highways – the Officer reiterated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/016

Planning Application - Planning Application - Provision of temporary holding area for storage of materials and machinery associated with the construction of Great Wilsey Park, including the siting of a portacabin to accommodate welfare facilities

Planning Application - Planning Application - Provision of temporary holding area for storage of materials and machinery associated with the construction of Great Wilsey Park, including the siting of a portacabin to accommodate welfare facilities

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee as a result of call-in by a Ward Member (Haverhill East).

The Committee was advised that the North-East Haverhill Great Wilsey Park site was granted outline planning permission for a development of 2,500 homes and associated development under Planning Application DC/15/2151/OUT.

Redrow Homes Limited were to deliver the first phases of the development and the compound and access sought in the scheme before Members were proposed to facilitate the construction work associated with those phases.

The application had been submitted at this juncture to ensure that construction infrastructure was in place ready to support the delivery of the development.

Members were informed that a separate application relating to a proposed construction access from Chalkstone Way (Planning Application DC/19/0225/FUL) was also being considered by the Local Planning Authority. 

However, the determination of the development before the Committee would not in any way prejudice the ongoing consideration of the separate Chalkstone Way application.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

Supplementary ‘Late Papers’ had been circulated following publication of the agenda, which set out the fully worded conditions and outlined an update from Suffolk County Council Flood and Water Management.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to the conditions as set out in the Late Papers.

As part of her presentation the Principal Planning Officer made reference to the Permitted Development ‘fall-back’ position which applied to the development proposed with the exception of the new access from Haverhill Road.

She also drew attention to the amendments that had been made during the course of the application to address issues raised by Suffolk County Council Highways Authority.

In light of the mitigation that could be secured by way of conditions, in respect of matters such as landscaping and amenity, this had been considered favourably in the planning balance of the recommendation.

Speakers:    Councillor John Burns (Mayor, Haverhill Town Council) read out a statement on behalf of the Town Council

                   Councillor John Burns (Ward Member: Haverhill East) spoke on the application

                   Chris Gatland (applicant) spoke in support of the application

During the debate a number of questions/comments were raised by the Committee which the Officer responded to as follows:

Construction Workers – it was confirmed that no-one would be living on site;

Buffer Zone – the agreed area of proposed green infrastructure ‘buffer zone’ as part of the previously approved application remained valid and was unconnected to the scheme before Members;

Housing – Members were advised that the first phases of the development to be delivered by Redrow, and to which this application related, concerned the first 900 homes only; and

Speed Limit and Visibility Splays – this had been stipulated by Suffolk County Council Highways Authority who were satisfied with the amended  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/017

Planning Application - Access road to serve residential development comprising 77 no dwellings - (resubmission of DC/17/0339/FUL)

Planning Application - Access road to serve residential development comprising 77 no dwellings - (resubmission of DC/17/0339/FUL)

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee in August 2019 as it related to a major planning application and the Parish Council objected to the scheme.

The Committee resolved at that meeting to defer consideration of the application in order seek clarification/further information in respect of a number of matters, namely; the related Masterplan, the road layout, emergency access, the impact on the tree belt and the purpose of Condition 21.

A Member site visit was held prior to the August meeting.  Officers were continuing to recommend approval, subject to conditions, as set out in Paragraph 68 of Working Paper 1 with the addition to Condition 21 as per Paragraph 18 of Report No DEV/WS/19/017.

The Principal Planning Officer drew attention to each of the matters Members raised at the last meeting and for which she had sought additional information, as set out in the report before the Committee.

Speakers:    Sara Hopkins (landowner) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Ben Lord (Chairman, Ixworth & Ixworth Thorpe Parish Council) spoke against the application

Daniel White (applicant, Persimmon Homes) spoke in support of the application

Councillor Jason Crooks moved that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation and this was duly seconded by Councillor Jim Thorndyke.

Upon being put to the vote and with 11 voting for the motion, 3 against and with 2 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       No development shall take place on 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 the analysis and records of the site investigation.

          e.  Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation.

          f.  Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation.

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

 4       The access road shall not be brought into use until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been completed in accordance with the programme set out in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/018

Planning Application - Demolition and redevelopment of the Cornhill Walk Shopping Centre to provide mixed use development comprising (i) 1,541sq.m (Use Class A1/D2) at the ground floor (ii) 48 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, 27th March 2019 and 5th July 2019

Planning Application - Demolition and redevelopment of the Cornhill Walk Shopping Centre to provide mixed use development comprising (i) 1,541sq.m (Use Class A1/D2) at the ground floor (ii) 48 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, 27th March 2019 and 5th July 2019

Prior to the Officer undertaking her presentation, Councillor Diane Hind advised the meeting that she had taken part in Bury St Edmunds Town Council’s consideration of the application when they resolved to oppose the scheme.  However, Councillor Hind stressed that she would keep an open mind and listen to the debate prior to voting on the item.

This application was originally referred to the (now dissolved) St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Development Control Committee in March 2019 at the request of one of the Ward Members (Eastgate).

In addition, Bury St Edmunds Town Council had raised objections together with a number of other third parties.

The Committee resolved at the March meeting to defer consideration of the application in order to enable further consideration of the issues raised by Members in respect of the scale/design/mass of the building, its impact on amenity and the inclusion of the retail units and a 24 hour gym.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  Officers were continuing to recommend that the application be approved, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and conditions.

The Senior Planning Officer outlined the amendments that had been made to the scheme since the deferral of the application.

Members were also advised that since publication of the agenda a further 13 objections had been received in respect of the application together with a petition opposing the development signed by 613 people.

Speakers:    Paul Scarlett (agent representing Wells Street Association, Orchard Street residents and neighbouring objector Mr Ashley) spoke against the application

                   Roderick Rees (on behalf of the Bury St Edmunds Society) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Nicola Iannelli-Popham (Bury St Edmunds Town Council) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Trevor Beckwith (on behalf of Ward Member (Eastgate) Councillor Cliff Waterman) spoke against the application

                   Keiran Rushe (agent) spoke in support of the application

(During his address to the meeting Paul Scarlett attempted to display supporting visual aids; the Chair interjected and advised that the use of visual aids was not permitted by the Council within their public speaking policy and asked that they be put down.  Furthermore, following the objectors’ speeches the applicant came forward from the public gallery and interrupted the meeting objecting to some of the earlier statements made.  He was advised by the Chair to take his seat and that any further outbursts of that nature would result in him being asked to leave the Conference Chamber.)

Considerable debate then ensued by the Committee with Members continuing to raise a number of the same concerns as were raised at the meeting in March.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/019

Planning Application - (i) Change of use from Class A1 (retail) to Class D2 (gymnasium) (ii) minor external alterations to provide new entrance to front elevation

(Councillor John Burns declared a local non-pecuniary interest in this item given that he was the owner of an existing gym in Haverhill.  He would remain in the meeting and take part in the debate and voting thereon.)

Planning Application - (i) Change of use from Class A1 (retail) to Class D2 (gymnasium) (ii) minor external alterations to provide new entrance to front elevation

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel and in light of the objection by Haverhill Town Council.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 31 of Report No DEV/WS/19/019.

Speaker:      Jonathan Wadcock (agent) spoke in support of the application

Councillor John Burns asked if it would be possible to retain the Class A1 (retail) alongside adding the Class D2 (gymnasium) in respect of the unit, in order to not restrict any potential future use of the premises.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that it was not lawful to do so, however, a future planning application could be submitted at any point to revert the change of use.

A number of comments were made with regard to Condition 3 which stipulated the requirement for a Travel Plan.  Whilst this condition had been recommended by Suffolk County Council Highways Authority and was considered reasonable by Officers, the Senior Planning Officer advised the Committee that the wording of the condition would be amended in order for the Travel Plan to just relate to the unit in question and not the whole retail park, due to the modest scale of the scheme seeking determination.

Councillor Andy Drummond proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation and inclusive of the amendment to Condition 3, and this was duly seconded by Councillor Susan Glossop.

Upon being put to the vote and with 15 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.   The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the approved plans and documents.

3.   Prior to first occupation of the development, details of the travel arrangements to and from the site for employees in the form of a Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  This Plan shall include appointment of a suitably qualified travel plan coordinator, a commitment to monitor the Plan annually for a period of 5 years, with the monitoring report submitted to the Local Authority, and a suitable marketing strategy to ensure all employees are engaged in the process.  The site shall not be occupied until the Travel Plan has been agreed.  The approved Travel Plan shall be implemented and adhered to thereafter.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/020

Planning Application - (i) Conversion of two existing barns into holiday accommodation, (ii) a new-build timber framed treehouse venue space (iii) associated low impact 'no-dig' vehicle access and car parking and (iv) associated landscaping

The Chairman advised that this item had been WITHDRAWN from the agenda and would be considered at a future meeting of the Development Control Committee. 

Report No: DEV/WS/19/021

Planning Application - Creation of access from the A1101 to Norish's premises (resubmission of DC/18/0616/FUL)

The Chairman advised that this item had been WITHDRAWN from the agenda and would be considered at a future meeting of the Development Control Committee. 

Report No: DEV/WS/19/022

Planning Application - Provision of 1 no. agricultural worker's dwelling including conversion of existing single storey outbuilding (following demolition of existing pole barn and shed); change of use of agricultural land to garden.  As amended by plans received on 6th and 20th December 2018

Planning Application - Provision of 1 no. agricultural worker's dwelling including conversion of existing single storey outbuilding (following demolition of existing pole barn and shed); change of use of agricultural land to garden.  As amended by plans received on 6th and 20th December 2018

This application was originally referred to the Development Control Committee in August 2019, alongside its related Listed Building Consent application, following consideration by the Delegation Panel. 

At the meeting in August Members resolved to grant Listed Building Consent and were also minded to approve planning permission, which was contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal.

Accordingly, Officers had produced a Risk Assessment report for consideration by the Committee together with a detailed application appraisal from the Council’s appointed countryside consultants Kernon.

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

Officers were continuing to recommend refusal for the reason set out in Paragraph 29 of Report No DEV/WS/19/022.

However, if Members continued to be minded to grant planning permission Officers had included a list of conditions at Paragraph 28.  Specific attention was drawn to Condition 2; Officers had concerns that the applicant would be unable to comply with this condition, hence, their recommendation to refuse the application.

Speakers:    Councillor Carol Bull (Ward Member: Barningham) spoke on the application on behalf of the applicants

                   Paul Nunn (applicant) spoke in support of the application

During the debate Councillor Bull spoke in support of the application and highlighted that granting approval would protect and enhance the countryside and rural economy; and a number of other Members equally shared this view.

Councillor Andy Drummond proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal, and this was duly seconded by Councillor John Burns.

Upon being put to the vote and with 11 voting for the motion and with 5 against, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION OF REFUSAL, 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 occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted shall be limited to a person solely or mainly employed, or last employed, in the locality in agriculture as defined in Section 336(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, or in forestry or a dependent of such person residing with him or her, or a widow or widower of such a person.

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.   No development above ground level shall take place until a scheme of soft landscaping for the site drawn to a scale of not less than 1:200, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include accurate indications of the position, species, girth, canopy spread and height of all existing trees and hedgerows on and adjacent to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/023

Planning Application - To provide A11 mitigation land comprising of (i) Topsoil stripping to a depth of approx. 300mm to be taken from bare earth (126 hectares) (ii) Topsoil to be spread evenly across scrub area (99 hectares) resulting in approx. 400mm land raise (iii) Installation of predator-proof fencing

Planning Application - To provide A11 mitigation land comprising of (i) Topsoil stripping to a depth of approx. 300mm to be taken from bare earth (126 hectares) (ii) Topsoil to be spread evenly across scrub area (99 hectares) resulting in approx. 400mm land raise (iii) Installation of predator-proof fencing

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee as it related to a major planning application and Brandon Town Council objected to the scheme.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 50 of Report No DEV/WS/19/023.

Councillor David Palmer proposed that the application be approved, as per the Officer recommendation, and this was duly seconded by Councillor Terry Clements.

Upon being but 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 groundworks shall take place 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. Confirmation of the means by which ecological mitigation methodologies will minimise impacts on archaeological remains

          b. The programme and methodology of site investigation and recording

          c. The programme for post investigation assessment

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

          e. Provision to be made for publication and dissemination of the analysis and records of the site investigation

          f. Provision to be made for archive deposition of the analysis and records of the site investigation

          g. Nomination of a competent person or persons/organisation to undertake the works set out within the Written Scheme of Investigation.

          h. 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.

4        Within six months of the site investigation, post investigation assessment should be 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 3 and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.

5.       Prior to commencement of development details of a Construction Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP) detailing how surface water and storm water will be managed on the site during construction (including demolition and site clearance operations) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CSWMP shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan for the duration of construction. The approved CSWMP  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

Report No: DEV/WS/19/024

Planning Application - (i) 1no. dwelling (ii) detached double garage and (iii) creation of a shared access

Planning Application - (i) 1no. dwelling (ii) detached double garage and (iii) creation of a shared access

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel; having been called in by Ward Member (The Fornhams and Great Barton) Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.  The Parish Council supported the application, however, a number of objections had been received from third parties.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 55 of Report No DEV/WS/19/024.

As part of her presentation the Senior Planning Officer drew attention to the following amendments:

·         The scheme had been amended to allow the proposed dwelling to use the existing access, therefore, ‘(iii) creation of a shared access’  was to be removed from the application’s description; and

·         Two additional conditions were to be added in respect of:

                     i.        Removal of Permitted Development rights in respect of renewable energy and solar panels

                    ii.        Removal of Permitted Development rights with regard to extensions and outbuildings

Speakers:    Terry Wright (neighbouring objector) – with the agreement of the Chair a pre-prepared statement against the application was read out by Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger on behalf of Mr Wright, who was unable to attend the meeting

                   Councillor Beccy Hopfensperger (Ward Member: The Fornhams and Great Barton) spoke against the application

                   Lara Turner (agent) spoke in support of the application

Considerable debate took place by the Committee with a number of Members voicing concern at the loss of trees and the potential harm the development could cause to the trees being retained.

In response to which, the Chair invited the Council’s Arboriculture Officer to respond and further elaborate on his comments as set out in Paragraph 9 of the report.

Members raised other points with regard to the ownership of the access, the adjacent flint wall and the overhead power lines on the site.  All of which the Service Manager (Planning – Development) advised were separate matters to be dealt with outside of the planning process and were not material planning considerations.

Councillor Susan Glossop proposed that the application be refused, contrary to the Officer recommendation, due to the detrimental impact it would have on the character of the area.  This was duly seconded by Councillor Jason Crooks.

Upon being put to the vote and with 8 voting for the motion, 6 against and with 1 abstention it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be REFUSED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL, due to the detrimental impact it would have on the character of the area.

(Councillor Terry Clements left the meeting on conclusion of this item.)

Report No: DEV/WS/19/025

Planning Application - Installation of 6 x 2 Tonne Underground LPG Tanks including pipework network serving 60 properties (Retrospective)

Planning Application - Installation of 6 x 2 Tonne Underground LPG Tanks including pipework network serving 60 properties (Retrospective)

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel; having been called-in by Ward Member (Kentford and Moulton) Councillor Roger Dicker.

A Member site visit was held prior to the meeting.

The Parish Council, Ward Member and the one third party representation received all supported the application, which was contrary to the Officer recommendation of refusal for the reason set out at Paragraph 26 of Report No DEV/WS/19/025.

Councillor Dicker spoke in support of the retrospective application and made reference to the disruption and damage that would be caused if the applicant was forced to remove the underground tanks which were in situ.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) advised Members that the potential for enforcement action and subsequent disruption to residents was not a material consideration in the determination of the application.

In addition, in response to further comments made by the Committee, the Service Manager assured Members that no error had been made on the part of the Planning Authority in respect of the application.  However, she could investigate further and report back to Members directly should they wish; whilst being mindful that this was also not a material planning consideration.

Councillor Andy Drummond proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer recommendation, as it was not considered to be so detrimental to the character and amenity of the area, and this was duly seconded by Councillor David Gathercole.

Councillor Jim Thorndyke asked if the approval could be conditioned to ensure some form of landscaping/screening was put in place and the proposer and seconder endorsed the inclusion of this in their motion.

Upon being put to the vote and with the vote being unanimous, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION OF REFUSAL, as it was not considered to be so detrimental to the character and amenity of the area, subject to the following conditions:

1.   Compliance with plans

2.   Landscaping/screening scheme to be agreed