Agenda and minutes

The Chair formally commenced the meeting and jointly welcomed all present and those externally viewing the Development Control Committee.

A number of housekeeping matters and remote meeting guidance were highlighted to all.

No apologies for absence were received.

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

No substitutions were declared.

The Democratic Services Officer verbally outlined all Members of the Committee who were present, together with any attending Councillors and the names of the Officers supporting the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 3 March 2021 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 March 2021 were unanimously confirmed as a correct record.

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.

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

Report No: DEV/WS/21/006

Planning application - change of use from single dwelling house (C3) to a holiday let property (sui generis)

Planning application - change of use from single dwelling house (C3) to a holiday let property (sui generis)

Due to the recent planning history and the level of local interest in the site the application was referred directly to the Development Control Committee at the request of the Assistant Director, Planning and Regulatory Services.

As part of his presentation to the meeting the Planning Officer drew attention to the relevant planning and appeal history, he also took Members through videos of the site by way of a virtual ‘site visit’.

Reference was made to enforcement queries that had been submitted to the Planning Authority in connection with the application site, Members were advised that these were being investigated separately and the matter was not pertinent to the consideration of the application before the Committee.

Officers were recommending that the application be approved, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 77 of Report No DEV/WS/21/006.

Speakers:    Nigel French (neighbouring objector) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Miranda Martin (Market Weston Parish Council) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Carol Bull (Ward Member: Barningham) spoke on the application

                   Juliet Hargrave (applicant) spoke in support of the application

(Nigel French and Councillor Martin did not connect to the meeting to personally address the Committee and instead the Democratic Services Officer read out pre-prepared submitted statements on their behalf.)

A number of Members made comment/posed questions on the application which the Case Officer responded to as follows:

Booking information – the Committee was advised that the booking details the Planning Authority had been provided with did not include the number of occupants for each booking;

Operation under GPDO – the Officer confirmed that under a General Permitted Development Order the property would be able to be hired out for 28 days per annum without planning permission; and

Noise monitoring/residential amenity – attention was drawn to the sections of the report which covered the comments made by Public Health & Housing.

Councillor Mike Chester spoke in support of granting the application but with a two-year temporary approval that was subject to a review after one year.  However, the Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that it would not be technically possible to grant permission in that way.

Councillor Jim Thorndyke then proposed that the application be granted but for a temporary 12-month occupation period. This was duly seconded by Councillor Andy Drummond.

The Planning Officer then verbally advised on the conditions that could be appended to a temporary permission including a noise management condition.

Upon being put to the vote and with 15 voting for the motion and with 1 against, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED FOR A TEMPORARY 12-MONTH OCCUPATION PERIOD subject to the following conditions:

1.           The holiday-let use of the property hereby permitted shall be discontinued and the property shall revert back to a single C3 dwelling house within 12 months from the date of this planning permission.

2.           The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

Report No: DEV/WS/21/007

Planning Application - 3no dwellings and access (following demolition of existing dwelling and garage)

(Councillor David Smith declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item in light of the fact that he had taken part in Haverhill Town Council’s consideration of the application when they resolved to oppose the scheme.  However, Councillor Smith stressed that he would keep an open mind and listen to the debate prior to voting on the item.)

Planning Application - 3no dwellings and access (following demolition of existing dwelling and garage)

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel, having been presented to the Panel at the request of the Ward Member Councillor Aaron Luccarini (Haverhill Central).

Haverhill Town Council objected to the scheme which was in conflict with the Officer’s recommendation of approval, subject to conditions at set out in Paragraph 70 of Report No DEV/WS/21/007.

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

Speakers:    Martin Espin (neighbouring objector and also on behalf of fellow neighbouring objectors Mr Kiddy & Mrs Webb) spoke against the application

                   Councillor Pat Hanlon (Haverhill Town Council) spoke against the application

                   Councillor John Burns (neighbouring Ward Member) made a statement against the application on behalf of Haverhill Central Ward Member Councillor Aaron Luccarini

In relation to a comment made by a speaker concerning the inaccuracy of a boundary map shown in the Case Officer’s presentation, the Officer displayed a map to the meeting which showed the correct boundary.

A number of Members voiced concern with the application; principally in relation to the existing dwelling being a non-designated heritage asset. Local Member Councillor Jason Crooks spoke at length on the history of the dwelling and its importance to the town.

Councillor Ian Houlder made reference to the need for additional housing and proposed that the application be approved as per the Officer recommendation. However, this failed to achieve a seconder.

Following further debate the Chair invited the Senior Conservation Officer (Buildings) to address the meeting and further elaborate on her comments which were included within the report.

Councillor David Roach proposed that the application be refused, contrary to the Officer recommendation, due to (i) overdevelopment and the impact on the character of the area, (ii) access concerns, and (iii) the loss of the non-designated heritage asset. This was duly seconded by Councillor Don Waldron.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) explained that if Members were minded to refuse the application, contrary to the Officer recommendation, for the reasons stated by Councillor Roach then a Risk Assessment would need to be produced in respect of reason ‘(ii) access’ because Suffolk County Council, as statutory consultee as Highways Authority, had not raised concerns with the scheme in this respect.

However, if the proposer and seconder were content to pursue a refusal motion with just reasons (i) and (iii) as outlined above then a Risk Assessment would not be necessary.

The Chair sought clarification from Councillors Roach and Waldron who both agreed that reason (ii)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

Report No: DEV/WS/21/008

Householder planning application - a. Two bay car port/wood store b. brick enclosure for heat pump c. outdoor swimming pool d. rebuilding of front wall

Householder planning application - a. Two bay car port/wood store b. brick enclosure for heat pump c. outdoor swimming pool d. rebuilding of front wall

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel, having been presented to the Panel at the request of the Ward Member Councillor Susan Glossop (Risby).

The Committee were advised that Risby Parish Council had initially objected to the scheme, however, after being reconsulted on amended plans they withdrew their objections.

Officers were recommending that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions as set out in Paragraph 61 of Report No DEV/WS/21/008.

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

Members were also shown a detailed landscaping plan which had been submitted by the applicant since publication of the agenda and which related to condition No 4.

Speakers:    George Irving (neighbouring objector) spoke against the application

                   Jonathan Wooldridge (applicant) spoke in support of the application

(George Irving did not connect to the meeting to personally address the Committee and instead the Democratic Services Officer read out a pre-prepared submitted statement on his behalf.)

In response to questions posed by Members during the debate the Planning Officer confirmed that the cleaning/maintenance and soakaway of the swimming pool were not material planning considerations.

Councillor Mike Chester moved that the application be approved as per the Officer recommendation. This was duly seconded by Councillor Jim Thorndyke.

Upon being put to the vote and with 15 voting for the motion and with 1 against, 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.
3. Prior to the occupation of any unit/dwelling: 

i)             All of the noise protection and mitigation works associated with that pool as detailed in the submitted noise information dated 05/01/2021 shall be completed in their entirety in accordance with the approved details prior to the first use of the swimming pool hereby permitted. These works shall thereafter be retained for as long as the pool is in situ on site.

4.   All planting comprised in the approved landscaping plan submitted on the 06.04.2021 shall be carried out in the first planting season following the commencement of the development (or within such extended period as may first be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority). Any planting removed, dying or becoming seriously damaged or diseased within five years of planting shall be replaced within the first available planting season thereafter with planting of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent for any variation.

Report No: DEV/WS/21/009

Householder planning application - single storey side extension to create an annexe following demolition of existing garage

Householder planning application - single storey side extension to create an annexe following demolition of existing garage

This application was referred to the Development Control Committee following consideration by the Delegation Panel, having been presented to the Panel because Ixworth Parish Council raised no objections to the scheme which was in conflict with the Officer’s recommendation of refusal, for the reason set out in Paragraph 25 of Report No DEV/WS/21/009.

As part of her presentation the Planning Assistant provided videos of the site by way of a virtual ‘site visit’.

Councillor Jim Thorndyke spoke in support of the application but voiced preference for the finish to be in brick as opposed to timber cladding. In response to which, the Officer explained that the applicants had indicated that they would consider amending the material finish of the extension to a matching brick.

Councillor David Roach echoed the support for a brick finish and, subject to including this, he proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer recommendation, as he considered Policy DM2 to be subjective and in his opinion the proposal did respect the scale and character of the dwelling and the character and appearance of the surrounding area. This was duly seconded by Councillor Jim Thorndyke.

The Service Manager (Planning – Development) advised the Committee that if they were minded to approve the application contrary to the Officer recommendation a Risk Assessment would not be required.

The Planning Assistant then verbally outlined the conditions which could be appended to a permission.

In response to questions relating to conditions in respect of restricting the usage of the annex and electric charging points, Members were advised that neither of these were necessary or proportionate to the application.

Upon being put to the vote and with 13 voting for the motion and with 2 against, it was resolved that

Decision

Planning permission be GRANTED, CONTRARY TO THE OFFICER RECOMMENDATION and 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.

3.       Notwithstanding the detail shown on the submitted drawings or within the application form, the materials to be used in the   extension hereby approved shall match in type, colour and texture those on the existing building.

(Councillor Susan Glossop left the meeting at 1.01pm during the preliminary introduction of this item.)