Minutes - 29 September 2010

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, 29 SEPTEMBER 2010

            PRESENT:                              Mr R W Thake – Chairman

Mr D H Keane, Mr G S White and Mr R Whiting were unable to be present.

Quick Links

40    Substitutes
41    Declaration of Interests
42    Minutes
43    Petitions
44    Questions from Members
45    Site Inspections
46    Planning Applications for Determination by the Committee
47    Proposed Non Material Amendment

40    SUBSTITUTES

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

Mr A J Hinton (substituting for Mr G S White)
Mr N A Ridley (substituting for Mr D H Keane)

• Top of page

41    DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Mr A J Hinton declared a personal interest in Item No. 5 (Application No. B/10/00719) as the Chairman of East Bergholt Parish Council which had been consulted on the application.  He stated that he had taken no part in the discussion at the Parish Council, and was able to speak and vote on the matter.

Mr P G Gibson declared a prejudicial interest in Item No. 4 of Paper K103 by virtue of being a close friend of the occupiers of a property abutting the site and left the meeting during the discussion on this item.

Mr C W Arthey subsequently declared a prejudicial interest in Application No. B/10/010206 by virtue of being a business associate of the applicant and left the meeting when the vote was taken on whether to hold a site inspection (Minute No. 45 below refers).  He also stated that he would not attend the site inspection.

• Top of page

42        MINUTES

RESOLVED

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 September 2010 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

• Top of page
  

43        PETITIONS

Application No. B/10/00796 – Construction of Retail Store, Business Units and 21 Dwellings:  2 – 4 Brook Street, Glemsford

A petition signed by approximately 420 persons strongly opposing the above planning application at the former Downs Factory site.

The petition will be taken into account when the planning application is determined at a future meeting of the Development Committee.  In accordance with Council Procedure Rules, the Chief Executive reported the receipt of the petition to the Council Meeting held on 28 September 2010.

• Top of page

44        QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS

None received.

• Top of page

45        SITE INSPECTIONS

RESOLVED

(1)       That site inspections be held on Wednesday, 6 October 2010 in respect of the undermentioned sites prior to consideration of the applications by the Committee:-

Mr B D Hurren, Ward Member for Boxford, requested a site inspection for Members to assess the impact on the environment and the surrounding area.

Mr P Jones, Ward Member for Brook Ward, requested a site inspection to assess the environmental impact of the proposal.

Mr B Riley, Ward Member for Hadleigh (North), requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the traffic implications and the impact of the proposal on the surrounding area.

The Chief Planning Control Officer requested a site inspection to enable Members to understand the several site specific issues raised by the application.

Mr J A B Long, Ward Member for Chadacre, requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the proposals in relation to the sensitivity of the site, its proximity to a Grade I Listed Building (the Church), the effect on the building within the grounds known as The Old School House and in relation to visibility issues.

Mr B D Hurren, Ward Member for Boxford, requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the impact on the countryside and the surrounding area.

Mrs S M Wigglesworth, Ward Member for Lower Brett, requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the impact on the surrounding area.

NOTE:     Mr C W Arthey was not present when the vote was taken on the above item.

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

• Top of page

46        PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION BY THE COMMITTEE

Members had before them an Addendum to Paper K103 (circulated to Members prior to the commencement of the meeting) summarising additional correspondence received since the publication of the Agenda, but before 12 noon on the working day before the meeting, together with errata.

Details of further representations received in respect of Item Nos. 3 and 5 were reported to the meeting and considered and taken into account before a decision was made 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/10/00576/VOT                     Mr R Pearson (Applicant)
B/10/00620                             Ms J Brownfoot (Applicant)
B/10/00719                             Mr R Balmer (Agent for applicant)

RESOLVED

That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise) in accordance with delegated powers under Council Minute No. 48(a) dated 19 October 2004, decisions on the items referred to in Paper K103 be made as follows:-

RESOLVED

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

• Materials
• Hours of opening
• Restriction on goods to be sold
• Cessation of existing farm shop use upon occupancy of new premises
• Landscaping
• Details of refuse storage

RESOLVED

That subject to the receipt of an appropriate protected species survey and a specialist assessment of the building structure (as recommended by Suffolk County Council), the Chief Planning Control Officer be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the following conditions:-

• Permitted development rights removed
• Restriction to holiday accommodation only
• Detail of surface water and foul sewage
• Materials

RESOLVED

(1)    That planning permission be refused for the following reason:-

Adverse impact on the countryside and Special Landscape Area by virtue of the siting, scale and height of the proposed building (CR01, CN01 and CR04).

(2)    That a note to the applicant be included with the Decision Notice stating the following:-

‘The applicant is advised that a change of use of the land (from agricultural to garden land) without the prior benefit of planning permission would be unlawful.  The applicant is also advised to enter into discussion with the Local Planning Authority in order to determine whether a sensitively designed smaller building (of less scale and mass) may be acceptable on the site.  However any such informal advice would be entirely without prejudice to any decision the Council may ultimately make upon receipt of a planning application.’

RESOLVED

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

• Removal of PD rights
• Materials to be agreed and samples of roofing materials
• Landscaping and boundary treatment be submitted and agreed
• Surface and foul water drainage
• Levels (existing and proposed for dwelling and garden)
• As recommended by LHA
• Permeable surface treatment to the parking areas.

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, to provide:

• A financial contribution towards public open space provision.
• An affordable dwelling

(2)    That, subject to the completion of the Planning Obligation referred to in Resolution (1) above to the satisfaction of the Solicitor to the Council, the Chief Planning Control Officer be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to conditions including:

• Standard time limit
• As recommend by the LHA
• Removal of PD rights
• Boundary treatment to be submitted and agreed
• Materials to be agreed
• Bat survey report
• Details of lighting
• Details of tree protection fencing to be submitted and agreed
• Archeological investigation
• Details of habitat enhancement
• Details of landscaping including replacement trees

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

• Inadequate provision of public open space and play equipment contrary to Local Plan Policy HS32 and affordable housing contrary to Local Plan Policy HS09.

• Top of page

47        PROPOSED NON MATERIAL AMENDMENT – REVISION TO DESIGN AND LAYOUT (PLOT 11); ERECTION OF GARAGES (PLOTS 6 & 8); ADDITIONAL GARAGE BAYS (PLOTS 7 & 9); REPOSITIONING OF BOUNDARY FENCES (PLOTS 4, 5, 9); INSERTION OF ROOFLIGHTS (PLOTS 6-9); INCREASE IN GROUND FLOOR LEVEL BY 300mm (PLOTS 6-9); FENESTRATION AMENDMENTS.

CONSTRUCTION OF 11 DWELLINGS WITH ASSOCIATED GARAGING. CONSTRUCTION OF NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS (DEVELOPMENT TO ENABLE THE RESTORATION OF THE LISTED WALLED GARDEN AND ASSOCIATED STRUCTURES)

PAUL DOUBLES NURSERY LTD, MAIN ROAD, WOOLVERSTONE

The Chief Planning Control Officer reported that planning permission was granted on 21 April 2010 (B/08/01067/FUL) for the erection of 11 dwellings with associated garaging and construction of a new vehicular access, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Planning Obligation.

The applicant was seeking changes which have been the subject of consultation with the Parish Council, Local Highway Authority and neighbouring properties in Main Road Woolverstone.  The Parish Council did not consider the amendment would complement the adjacent property Dairy House as the earlier design did,  while the Local Highway Authority had no objection.  No other comments had been received.

Members were made aware that S96a of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) provides that:

“In deciding whether a change is material, a Local Planning Authority must have regard to the effect of the change, together with any previous changes made under this section, on the planning permission as originally granted”.

Members also had before them the tests that are normally applied when considering a proposal for a non material amendment, and were aware that each request is to be considered on its merits having regard to all relevant circumstances. 

The Officer view in this case was that the proposed amendments would not substantially alter the development from that granted and the provision of additional garaging would fall within the description of development.  The design and form of the changes proposed were considered to be acceptable and in line with policy CN01 of the Babergh Local Plan. The garages and garage bays would be a brick and pantile construction with a pitch roof form that would sit comfortably within the development.  The design amendments to Plot 11 were considered to be acceptable and of the style and form of property that would be associated with the walled structure.  The changes proposed would not alter the relationship or impact of the development to the neighbouring properties in Main Road.

The impact of the proposed non material amendment was debated at some length, and Members took into account the circumstances surrounding the original application, the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling to Plot 11 and the context of the site.

RESOLVED

That the proposed non material amendment – revision to design and layout (Plot 11); erection of garages (Plots 6 and 8); additional garage bays (Plots 7 and 9); repositioning of boundary fences (Plots 4, 5, 9); insertion of rooflights (Plots 6 – 9); increase in ground floor level by 300mm (Plots 6 – 9); fenestration amendments - Paul Doubles Nursery Limited, Main Road, Woolverstone be approved subject to the following condition:-

• The materials to be as detailed in the applicant’s schedule and accompanying plan of brick bond dated 10 August 2010, with the garages that are the subject of the amendment and Plot 11 to be laid in Flemish bond.

Note:  

(1)       The meeting adjourned for refreshments between 10.50 a.m. and 11.10 a.m.

(2)       Mrs L M Sheppard, Senior Democratic Services Officer, was not present at the meeting during consideration of Item 1 of Paper K103 (Application No. B/10/00549).

The business of the meeting was concluded at 12.05 p.m.

                                                                                                             Chairman

• Top of page