BABERGH DISTRICT COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, COUNCIL OFFICES, CORKS LANE, HADLEIGH ON WEDNESDAY, 26 APRIL 2006

PRESENT: Mr C W Arthey – Chairman

Mrs E F Bates, Mr D H Keane and Mr J J Quinlan were unable to attend.

1 SUBSTITUTES

It was noted that in accordance with Council Procedure Rule No. 5, substitutes were in attendance as follows:-

Mr C J Hunt (substituting for Mrs E F Bates)
Mr H N Todd (substituting for Mr D H Keane)
Mr J M Owen (substituting for Mr J J Quinlan)

2 ELECTION OF VICE-CHAIRMAN

The following Members were proposed and seconded:-

Mr A J Hinton
Mr J J Quinlan

RESOLVED

That Mr A J Hinton be appointed Vice-Chairman of the Development Committee for the ensuing year.

3 DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Mr R W Thake declared a prejudicial interest in Application No. B/06/00479 (Paper F9 – Item 1) by virtue of being a friend of the applicant, and was not present during its discussion.

Mr C J Hunt declared a personal interest in Application No. B/05/01607 (Paper F9 – Item 5) in his capacity as a member of Nayland Parish Council, and confirmed that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matter concerned.

Mr P K Beer declared a personal interest in Application No. B/06/00375 (Paper F9 – Item 10) in his capacity as a member of Great Cornard Parish Council, Sudbury Town Council and Suffolk County Council, and also by virtue of living near to the application site. He subsequently declared a prejudicial interest in the item in his capacity as a member of the Health Scrutiny Committee and withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the item.

Mr P Jones declared a personal interest in Application No. B/06/00431 (Paper F9 – Item 8) by virtue of having background information and knowledge of the business of the applicant, but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matter concerned.

Miss J J Chapman and Mr B L Lazenby both declared personal interests in Application Nos. B/06/00354 and B/06/00431 (Paper F9 – Items 7 and 8) by virtue of being members of Hadleigh Town Council, but indicated that their interest was such that they were able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

Mr J M Owen declared a personal interest in Application Nos. B/06/00479, B/06/00303, B/06/00437 and B/05/02159 (Paper F9 – Items 1, 3, 4 and 14) in his capacity as a member of the Sudbury Town Council Planning Committee, but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

Mr H N Todd declared a personal interest in Application Nos. B/06/00185 and B/06/00375 (Paper F9 – Items 6 and 10) by virtue of his membership of Great Cornard Parish Council, but indicated that his interest was such that he was able to speak and vote on the matters concerned.

4 MINUTES

RESOLVED

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 29 March 2006 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

5 PETITIONS

The Acting Head of Legal and Administrative Services reported that in accordance with the Council Procedure Rule No. 13, a petition had been submitted to the Chief Executive relating to:-

Application No. B/06/00563/OUT - erection of detached two-storey dwelling with garage. Construction of new vehicular access, part side garden of The Old Rectory, The Street, Chattisham (signed by approximately 42 residents).

Members noted that in accordance with the Procedure Rules, the Chief Executive will report the receipt of the petition to the Council Meeting on 20 June 2006.

6 QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

None received.

7 SITE INSPECTIONS

RESOLVED

(1)That site inspections be held on Wednesday, 3 May 2006 in respect of the undermentioned sites prior to consideration of the applications by the Committee:-

Mr P Jones, Ward Member for Brook, had requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the impact of the application on the setting of the nearby listed building.

Mr A J Hinton, Ward Member for Dodnash, requested a site inspection to enable Members to consider the access visibility of the site, and to assess the possible impact on residential amenity.

Mrs E F Bates, Ward Member for Waldingfield, had requested a site inspection to enable Members to familiarise themselves with the site, given its location inside a Conservation Area.

(2) That a Panel comprising the following Members be appointed to inspect the sites:-

8 PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE

Details of further objections and representations received in respect of Item Nos. 1, 3, 6, 8, 11, 13, 14 and 15 were reported to the meeting, and were considered and taken into account before a decision was reached in each case. In accordance with the Council’s procedure for public speaking on planning applications, representations were made as detailed below:-

Planning Application No. Representations From

B/06/00479        Mr Whymark (Agent for the applicant)

B/06/00185        Mr Fitt (Representing Great Cornard Parish Council)
                          Mrs Baker (Objector)
                          Mr Presslee (Agent for the applicant)

B/06/00431       Mr Shepherd (Objector)
                          Mr Cobbold (Agent for the applicant)

B/05/00589       Mr Shapley (Representing Chilton Parish Council)
                         Mrs Hart (Objector)
                         Mr Pomeroy (Agent for the applicant)

RESOLVED

That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise), in accordance with the delegated powers under Council Minute No. 63(d) dated 27 April 1999, decisions on the items referred to in Paper F9 be made as follows:-

RESOLVED

That subject to no objections being raised by the outstanding consultees at the end of the consultation period, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the following condition:-

-restrict the extension to hot-food takeaway (Class A5)

Notwithstanding the recommendation of the Head of Planning (Control) to grant planning permission, a motion of refusal was moved because Members were concerned at the loss of a retail unit in the area, and the affect the proposal could have on residential amenity and traffic in the area. Upon being put to the vote, this motion was lost.

RESOLVED

That the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the following conditions:-

-opening hours
-as recommended by the Head of Environmental Services.

RESOLVED

That it be noted that this application had been withdrawn by the applicant.

Members noted that the applicant for this proposal was Barratts and not Nestlé Purina as shown on the report.

A motion of refusal was moved because Members considered the proposal to be overdevelopment of the site and out of character with the surrounding development. On being put to the vote, this motion was lost. Members noted that Network Rail had confirmed the withdrawal of their objection to the proposed development, although they were currently negotiating with the applicant regarding safety improvements to the rail crossing. Members requested that Officers should reconsult with the Environment Agency to determine whether interceptors should be used to deal with any possible drainage problems.

RESOLVED

(1) That subject to there being no new material planning objections resulting from outstanding consultations, the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to secure an amendment to the existing Section 106 Planning Obligation to secure:-

- affordable housing
- education contributions
- public open space management provision
- commuted sums to:-

§ fund provision of the rail halt; and
§ enable the Local Authority to purchase land adjacent to complete the riverside 
walk

(2) That subject to the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above being secured, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to such conditions as he considers appropriate, but including:-

- details for laying out, maintenance and future management of public open space to be agreed
- management strategy of wildlife habitats to be agreed
- protection of existing trees and hedges during construction
- landscaping
- details of finished ground floor levels to be agreed
- strategy for dealing with decontamination to be agreed
- details of external lighting to be agreed
- new footway/cycle way to be provided
-drainage details to be agreed
-as recommended by County Highway Authority
- as recommended by Network Rail
- inclusion of interceptors if recommended by the Environment Agency

(3) That in the event of the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above not being completed, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:

- lack of provision of adequate mitigation measures
- inadequate access to the detriment of highway safety

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused, for the following reasons:-

-contrary to Policies ENV2 and ENV4 of the Suffolk Structure Plan 2001, Policies LP49, LP50 – 51 and LP93 of the Babergh Local Plan (Alteration No. 1) and Policies CR01, CR29 and CR30 of the Babergh Local Plan (Alteration No. 2 Second Deposit Draft) – loss of building from agricultural use, and impact on highway safety.

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:-

-inappropriate development due to the location of part of the site being outside of the built-up area boundary harmful to the open character of the countryside
-inappropriate development harmful to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and wider locality
-insufficient information on and inappropriate access detrimental to highway safety
-non-provision of affordable housing
-non-provision of public open space contribution

It was noted that the Head of Technical Services had confirmed that the street scene elevation submitted was accurate except that the ridge height on the adjoining property (1 Greenview) had been shown 500mm too low. This would make the proposed building appear higher than it actually would be.

RESOLVED

That subject to no adverse views from the Arboricultural Officer, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the following conditions:-

-materials to be submitted
-as recommended by County Highway Authority
-obscure glazing to south elevation windows
-removal of PD to south elevation – additional windows and roof alterations
-boundary treatments
-as recommended by the Arboricultural Officer
-floor levels

RESOLVED

That subject to the satisfactory resolution of outstanding matters, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to approve this submission of reserved matters, subject to conditions:-

-additional fire hydrant
-any as required relating to landscaping, including the additional landscaping along the eastern boundary
-landscaping
-implementation of acoustic bunding
-details of layout of site (in lieu of emergency access area deleted from the application by the agents)

During discussion of the item referred to above, the Committee adjourned for lunch at 1.15 p.m. and resumed at 1.50 p.m. when the following Members were present:-

Mr C W Arthey – Chairman

RESOLVED

That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:-

-contrary to Policies LP21 and HS19, whereby the proposed extension creates an annexe, which is not tied to the residential occupation of 27 High Street by a necessary Section 106 Obligation, and therefore the proposal is tantamount to the formation of a new dwelling in an unsuitable location

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted, subject to the following condition:-

-skip storage shall not exceed 2.6 metres and shall be confined to that area defined by the block plan received on 28 February 2006

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted, subject to the following condition:-

-materials

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted.

RESOLVED

(1) That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to secure a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of public open space contributions.

(2) That subject to the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above being secured, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the following conditions:-

- materials to be submitted (including re-use/recycling of materials arising from the demolition works)
- landscaping (hard and soft including surface finish of access road and parking area) and landscape maintenance
- proposed boundary treatments
- finished ground floor levels relative to existing and proposed finished ground levels
- as recommended by County Highway Authority – improvements to the access, provision of visibility splays and the provision of parking/manoeuvring areas
- as recommended by Suffolk Wildlife Trust
- services details, including routes of service pipes and cables, location and depths of soakaways etc.

(3) That in the event of the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above not being completed, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:-

- inadequate provision of public open space and play equipment (off site)

RESOLVED

That planning permission be granted, subject to the following conditions:-

-materials to be submitted
-landscaping scheme to be submitted

RESOLVED

(1) That subject to the satisfactory resolution of highway issues, the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to secure a Planning Obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 in respect of:-

- public open space
- affordable housing
- education

(2) That upon completion of the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to conditions.

(3) That in the event of the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above not being completed, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the following reasons:-

- the principle is unacceptable and will result in the loss of employment land without robust marketing to demonstrate that other uses cannot be accommodated on site contrary to LP47 and EM15
- unacceptable access geometry, visibility splays, footpath link prejudicial to pedestrian and highway safety contrary to ENV3, TP13 and TP14
- insufficient information on slope stability contrary to PPG14
- no provision for education contribution contrary to LP1
- no provision for affordable housing contrary to HS08
- no provision for public open space contrary to HS16

9 PLANNING PERFORMANCE

The Head of Planning (Control) introduced a report (Paper F15) advising the Committee on the performance figures expected by Central Government and Babergh’s performance against the set targets.

RESOLVED

(1)That the report be noted.

(2)That the Head of Planning (Control) makes reports on this basis to the Development Committee each quarter.

Note: The meeting was adjourned between 11.15 a.m. and 11.35 a.m. for refreshments.

The business of the meeting was concluded at 4.10 p.m.

...............................................................

Chairmam