Meeting Details

Meeting Summary
Planning Committee North
10 Sep 2024 - 14:00 to 16:16
  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Visitors
  • Declarations of Interests

Documents

Agenda

Meeting Details
MeetingDetails

Members are invited to a Meeting of the Planning Committee North

to be held in the Conference Room, Riverside, Lowestoft

on Tuesday, 10 September 2024 at 2.00pm

 

This meeting will be broadcast to the public via the East Suffolk YouTube Channel at https://youtube.com/live/Ud4p5Xs9-9U?feature=share

Open To The Public
1 Apologies for Absence and Substitutions
1
There were no apologies for absence received.
2 Declarations of Interest

Members and Officers are invited to make any declarations of interests, and the nature of that interest, that they may have in relation to items on the Agenda and are also reminded to make any declarations at any stage during the Meeting if it becomes apparent that this may be required when a particular item or issue is considered.

2

Councillor Plummer declared a non-registerable interest in Items 9 and 10 as ward member. 

 

Councillor Ashton declared a non-registerable interest in Items 6 as ward member. 

 

Councillor Ashdown declared a non-registerable interest in Items 7 and 8 as ward member. Councillor Ashdown stated he wished to speak on these items as ward member and so he would leave the Committee table for the items and leave the room for the vote. 

3 Declarations of Lobbying and Responses to Lobbying
To receive any Declarations of Lobbying in respect of any item on the agenda and also declarations of any response to that lobbying.  
3
There were no Declarations of Lobbying made.
4 pdf Minutes (155Kb)
To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 13 August 2024.
4

On the proposal of Councillor Plummer, seconded by Councillor Wakeling it was

 

RESOLVED

 
That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 August 2024 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

 
Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
5

The Enforcement Officer confirmed there was nothing additional to the report that had been published and invited questions. 

 

The Enforcement Officer confirmed that the site at the Pastures in North Cove was currently at appeal stage. There was a delay in inspectors making decisions and this could take up to two years in some cases. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed this had been feedback to government as part of the national planning policy consultation. There had been some recent changes to the appeals meaning people had fewer opportunities to appeal which should help speed up the process.

 

On the proposal of Councillor Pitchers, seconded by Councillor Gee it was 

 

RESOLVED

 

That the outstanding enforcement matters up to 21 August 2024 be noted.

Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
6

The Committee received report ES/2084 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and 
Coastal Management which related to planning application DC/24/0334/FUL.

 

The application related to permission to erect two, new detached dwellings and garages with associated access. The application was before the committee as the officer recommendation of approval was contrary to the recommendation received by the Parish Council. The application was considered by the Referral Panel on the 6th of August 2024 and referred to the committee for consideration.

 

The Committee received a presentation from the Planner who displayed the site location plan and aerial photographs of the site, and the site as it related to the Conservation Area Appraisal. 

 

The Committee was shown photographs demonstrating the following views through the site:

  • Along the boundary with Angel Lane to the south
  • From Angel Lane to the southern boundary
  • From Angel Lane into the site
  • From Angel Lane to the northern boundary
  • Along Angel Lane to the north
  • Views from the proposed access to Angel Lane
  • From the site to the neighbouring properties on Angel Lane
  • Along The Street
  • From The Street into the site

 

The Committee was shown the proposed block plan, elevations, floor plans of each of the proposed dwellings and a mock up of the street scene from the access point on Angel Lane. 

 

The Planner shared details of the materials and finishes that would be used.

 

The Planner stated that the site owner did need to come to an agreement with highways over ownership of the boundary of the site, but this would not impact the Committee's ability to come to a decision. 

 

The material considerations and key issues were summarised as:

  • Appearance and Design
  • Impact of character and appearance of the area
  • Layout and Density
  • Access
  • Surface Water
  • Effect on Wildlife 

 

The recommendation to delegate authority to the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management to approve the application for planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the report, was outlined to the Committee.

 

The Committee raised questions around:

  • Visibility splays
  • Open space and views
  • Plot elevations and layout of the plot
  • The pre-application process

Regarding visibility splays the Planner stated that some of the hedging on the site would have to be removed for the visibility splays. The trees sat within the neighbouring property, but the overhang which went into the highway boundary would be dealt with. There had been an issue with lack of detail in the application initially, but the applicant had now submitted a more thorough plan showing the visibility splays. Councillor Ashton stated he was aware this was not a reason to refuse the application but he was concerned with the visibility here. 


Regarding the classification of the site as 'open space', the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated this was classed as important/open/green/tree space and the Conservation Officer felt that the development maintained this openness. This had never been classed a public open space.

 

The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated he believed the plan of the site had been produced based on a topographical survey and so would be accurate. The Planner stated that there were conditions about the gradient on the site, the house and garage would be at the current ground level and there would be no significant excavation of the site as this would require permission. If it turned out the gradient had to be different there would need to be a further planning application. There would have to be some excavation of the existing verge to allow for visibility. It would be possible to put a condition in to require final ground levels to be submitted to planning before building commenced. The Planner shared images showing the proposed dwellings in relation to properties to the rear, and confirmed that the proposed dwellings would not be higher than the properties behind.

 

The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated that at pre-application officers did not advise on what should be submitted, but they would give feedback on whatever was submitted. It would then be down to the applicant and their architect to make any amendments. There was not an opportunity for a planning committee to consider pre-application proposals, committees had to consider the application before them. Efficient use of land was important, and in more urban locations then what could be achieved should be maximised. This was a modest site and a modest development in a conservation area and so these tests would not be so appropriate. There may be certain circumstances where more properties would have been more appropriate. 

 

The Chair invited Sam Stonehouse, the applicants agent to address the committee.

 

Mr Stonehouse stated that this application had been carefully prepared following discussions with officers. Four houses had been initially suggested however this was felt to be too much for this location. The Conservation Officer had stated that the sites openness should be retained, which had led to the choice of two houses. Pre-application discussions had also happened with Highways who had been clear that they preferred access to be onto angel lane. There were no records of accidents where the site access was proposed and several other properties had similar access. Plot one had been moved following feedback from the neighbour. The Parish Council had made comments about the contemporary design, but the officers had supported this due to the mixed development on Angel Lane. The application was supported by detailed work on trees and ecology, and new planting would be done on the western boundary. High quality local materials would be used to match the styles of the neighbouring properties. The dwellings would also be highly energy efficient. 

 

Mr Stonehouse stated plot one was 8.2m and plot two 7.2 m above floor level. The whole site is roughly a meter above road level. Details on the driveways could be produced, but the 1 in 12 gradient proposed was relatively shallow. Regarding turning points the space in front of the garages was a double car width which allowed space for a three point turn here. The garages themselves were positioned here to align with the houses and ensure an open gap in the middle of the properties. 

 

Mr Stonehouse stated they had not wanted an imitation of the properties around them, but clearly a modern design. Mr Stonehouse confirmed which materials would be used where. Painted brick was a modern take on traditional brickwork, and this would differentiate from the similar older buildings in the area.

 

Regarding the room layout, Mr Stonehouse stated that it was intended to provide good size family homes and ensuite bathrooms were important. Windows were floor to ceiling and so despite being narrow would provide good light and would frame the space. There would not be views across from one property to the other as there would be substantial hedging between the two and windows would be a ground level. The courtyard created in plot two was created by the house shape rather than being a design feature in itself. 

 

Mr Stonehouse confirmed there was a gap between the two which could in theory hold another house. The closest point between the properties was 12.8 metres and 28.5 between the furthest points on the longer sides. The two properties were not directly aligned so they would not look directly into each other. 

 

The Chair invited debate.

 

Councillor Pitchers stated the properties were very well designed, lots of space around the dwellings and a contemporary looking development which would fit in with the area.

 

Councillor Ashdown agreed that the layout was good and fit in well with the local area. 

 

Councillor Ashton agreed that the design was in-keeping with properties on Angel Lane. He did have concerns about the trade offs between heritage and other considerations generally, but this was not a concern for the committee at the moment. Councillor Ashton stated he supported the application as it was presented, despite the highways concerns. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated that applicants were encouraged to engage with the local community and parish councils about the form of developments. 

 

Councillor Ewart stated she felt these were very poorly designed and they would become a distraction in this location. She felt the architecture should be more in-keeping with the local area, and they would dominate the local area. Councillor Ewart stated that this would be seen as a mistake by the Council. Councillor Gee agreed that it was not in keeping with the village. 

 

On the proposal of Councillor Pitchers, seconded by Councillor Ashdown it was by a majority vote 

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be approved.

Conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with PW1362 PL01 and SK10 received 30/01/2024, 3935 SK01 P3 received 30/04/2024 and LSDP 2164.01 REV C, PW1362 PL07 REV A, PW1362 PL04 REV C and PW1362 PL03 REV B received 17/06/2024..

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.

3. Prior to construction above slab level, details of all external facing and roofing materials shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory external appearance of the development.

4. Before the access is first used visibility splays shall be provided as shown on Drawing No. 3935 SK01 Rev.P3 with an X dimension of 2.4 metres and a Y dimension of 43 metres tangential to the nearside edge of the carriageway and thereafter retained in the specified form. Notwithstanding the provisions of Part 2 Class A of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no obstruction to visibility shall be erected, constructed, planted or permitted to grow over 0.6 metres high within the areas of the visibility splays.

Reason: To ensure drivers of vehicles entering the highway have sufficient visibility to manoeuvre safely including giving way to approaching users of the highway without them having to take avoiding action and to ensure drivers of vehicles on the public highway have sufficient warning of a vehicle emerging in order to take avoiding action, if necessary.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) any means of frontage enclosure shall be set back 2.4 metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjacent highway. 

Reason: To provide visibility splays and to provide refuge for pedestrians in the interests of highway safety.

6. No other part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the new vehicular access has been laid out and completed in all respects in accordance with Suffolk County Council Standard Access Drawing No. DM01; with an entrance width of 4.5 metres for a shared access.

Reason: To ensure the access is laid out and completed to an acceptable design in the interests of the safety of persons using the access and users of the highway and to avoid multiple accesses that would be detrimental to highway safety.

7. Prior to the development hereby permitted being first occupied, the access onto the highway shall be properly surfaced with a bound material for a minimum distance of 5 metres measured from the nearside edge of the metalled carriageway, in accordance with details that shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure construction of a satisfactory access and to avoid unacceptable safety risks arising from materials deposited on the highway from the development.

8. The gradient of the vehicular access shall not be steeper than 1 in 20 for the first five metres measured from the nearside edge of the highway.

Reason: To ensure that vehicles can enter and leave the public highway in a safe manner.

9. The gradient of the access driveway shall not be steeper than 1 in 12 measured from the nearside of the edge of the highway.

Reason: To avoid unacceptable safety risk from skidding vehicles and provide for pedestrian and cycling access.

10. Before the development is commenced details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority showing the means to prevent the discharge of surface water from the development onto the highway including any system to dispose of the water.  Development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To prevent hazards caused by flowing water or ice on the highway.

11. Prior to occupation details of the areas and infrastructure to be provided for the manoeuvring and parking of vehicles and electric vehicle charging points shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To ensure the provision and long-term maintenance of adequate on-site space for the parking and manoeuvring of vehicles in accordance with the current Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2023) where on-street parking and manoeuvring would be detrimental to highway safety.

12. Prior to occupation details of the areas to be provided for the secure, covered and lit cycle storage including electric assisted cycles shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out as approved.

Reason: To promote sustainable travel by ensuring the provision at an appropriate time and long-term maintenance of adequate on-site areas and infrastructure for the storage of cycles and charging of electrically assisted cycles in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2023). 

13. A Construction Management Strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to work commencing on site. The strategy shall include access and parking arrangements for contractors vehicles and delivery vehicles (locations and times) and a  methodology for avoiding soil from the site tracking onto the highway together with a strategy for  remedy of this should it occur. The strategy should also include clear location and layout plans of these facilities. The development shall only take place in accordance with the approved strategy.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety to avoid the hazard caused by mud on the highway and to ensure minimal adverse impact on the public highway during the construction phase. This is a pre-commencement condition because an approved Management Strategy must be in place at the outset  of the development

14. Development must be undertaken in accordance with the ecological avoidance, mitigation, compensation, and enhancement measures identified within the Ecological Report (MHE Consulting, December 2023) as submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to  determination.

Reason: To ensure that ecological receptors are adequately protected and enhanced as part of the development.

15. Prior to commencement, a "lighting design strategy for biodiversity" shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall:

- identify those areas/features on site that are particularly sensitive for biodiversity likely to be impacted by lighting and that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their breeding sites and resting places or along important routes used to access key areas of their territory, for example, for foraging; and

- show how and where external lighting will be installed (through the provision of appropriate lighting contour plans and technical specifications) so that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not disturb or prevent the above species using their territory or having access to their breeding sites and resting places.

All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the specifications and locations set out in the strategy, and these shall be maintained thereafter in accordance with the strategy. Under no circumstances should any other external lighting be installed without prior consent from the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that impacts on ecological receptors from external lighting are prevented.

16. No development shall take place (including any demolition, ground works, site clearance) until a method statement for nesting birds, hedgehog, amphibians, and reptiles has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The content of the method statement shall include the:

a) purpose and objectives for the proposed works.
b) detailed design(s) and/or working method(s) necessary to achieve stated objectives (including, where relevant, type and source of materials to be used).
c) extent and location of proposed works shown on appropriate scale maps and plans.
d) timetable for implementation, demonstrating that works are aligned with the proposed phasing of construction.
e) persons responsible for implementing the works.
f) initial aftercare and long-term maintenance (where relevant).
g) disposal of any wastes arising from works.

The works shall be conducted strictly in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained in that manner thereafter.

Reason: To ensure that ecological receptors are adequately protected as part of the development

17. No development shall take place within the area indicated [the whole 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. 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

Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording, reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Policy SCLP11.7 of Suffolk Coastal Local Plan (2020) and the National Planning Policy Framework (DEC 2023).

18. No building shall be occupied until the site investigation and post investigation assessment has been 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 17 and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.

Reason: To safeguard archaeological assets within the approved development boundary from impacts relating to any groundworks associated with the development scheme and to ensure the proper and timely investigation, recording, reporting and presentation of archaeological assets affected by this development, in accordance with Policy SCLP11.7 of Suffolk Coastal Local Plan (2020) and the National Planning Policy Framework (DEC 2023).

19. In the event that contamination which has not already been identified to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is found or suspected on the site it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Unless agreed in writing by the LPA no further development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance, removal of underground tanks and relic structures) shall take place until this condition has been complied with in its entirety.

An investigation and risk assessment must be completed in accordance with a scheme which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (see National Planning Policy Framework) and conform with prevailing guidance (including BS8485:2015+A1:2019, BS 10175:2011+A2:2017 and Land Contamination Risk Management) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the review and confirmation in writing by the Local Planning Authority that likely risks have been identified and will be investigated accordingly.

Where remediation is necessary a detailed Remediation Strategy (RS) must be prepared, and is subject to the review and confirmation in writing by the Local Planning Authority as likely to address the risks identified. The RS must include detailed methodologies for all works to be undertaken, site management procedures, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria. The RS must be carried out in its entirety and the Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification prior to the commencement of the remedial works.

Following completion of the remediation strategy a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to, reviewed by and confirmed in writing by the LPA as likely to have addressed the risks identified.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

20. The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out in its entirety within 6 months of the commencement of the development or within such other period as may be agreed with the Local Planning Authority, and any trees or shrubs which die in the first 5 years shall be replaced in the next planting season.

Reason: To ensure the visual amenity afforded by the landscaping is secured.

21. Prior to commencement, the tree protection measures identified within the Tree Survey, AIA and Protection Plan (ref. LSDP 2164.01 REV C) shall be installed and retained until construction has finished on the site.

Reason: To protect the surrounding trees within and around the site.

22. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order), no extensions or structures permitted by class A (enlargement, improvement or other alteration of a dwellinghouse) and no building or structure permitted by Class E (buildings or enclosures within the curtilage of the house) of Schedule 2 Part 1 of the Order shall be erected without the submission of a formal planning application and the granting of planning permission by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order that the council may retain control over the size, scale and external appearance of such development in the interests of preserving the character of the countryside

23. Notwithstanding the provisions of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting the said Order) no walls or fences of any kind permitted by Class A (gates, fences, walls etc) of Schedule 2 Part 2 of the Order shall be erected without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order that the council may retain control over the external appearance of such development in the interests of preserving the character of the countryside

24. The development hereby approved shall be carried out in complete accordance with the phasing plan Ref PW1362 SK10, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order that the main infrastructure is delivered early in the process to provide a properly planned development.

25. The first floor side windows on the north elevation of plot 1 and the first floor side windows of the southern elevation of plot 2 shall be fitted and remain fitted with obscured glass, which shall have an obscurity of level 3 on the pilkington obscured glazing range (or equivalent by an alternative manufacturer) and be non-opening. These items shall thereafter be retained in their approved form. 

Reason: To avoid the possibility of unacceptable loss of privacy to neighbouring property.

Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
7

Clerks note: Councillor Ashdown left the committee table for the discussion. 

 

The Committee received report ES/2085 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management which related to planning application DC/24/1991/FUL.



The application was for retrospective planning permission for the continued use of land for the siting of 5 No. caravans for occupation by staff/contractors in connection with the nearby Broadland Sands development (approved under planning permission ref. DC/19/2949/COU). It was proposed that permission would be time limited to ensure there was no long term impact on the street scene and neighbours. 

 

The application was before the committee as the officer recommendation of approval was contrary to the recommendation received by the Parish Council. The application was considered by the Referral Panel on the 6th of August 2024 and referred to the committee for consideration.

 

The Committee viewed the site location plan, aerial photographs of the site, photographs from the Coast Road into the site and the block plan for the site.

 

The material planning considerations were summarised as: 

  • Temporary consent
  • Impact on character and appearance
  • Impact on amenity
  • Impact on highways
 

The recommendation to delegate authority to the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management to approve the application for planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the report, was outlined to the Committee.

 

 The Committee raised questions on:

  • Claims of rubbish around the site
  • Objections received
  • Use of the site

 

The Senior Planner stated some caravans had been stored on land to the north of the site and these had been removed. This was a retrospective application so there was still a breach with storage of caravans on this site. The Senior Planner stated that when he had visited the site he had not seen a huge amount of rubbish on site but this would need to be dealt with and managed by the applicants.

 

Regarding objections, the Senior Planner stated some of the issues raised were licensing issues, such as fire safety, and the licencing team had not raised an objection. The neighbouring properties were a significant distance away and it was not anticipated that there would be a disruption to the neighbours. 

 

 The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated the key concerns for the committee were the positioning of caravans. Caravan licensing had reviewed this and had no issues. As this was a constriction site it was acceptable to have construction worker accommodation on the site, or very close by.

 

Councillor Ewart stated that the committee were being asked to consider the application without considering the culture around the site. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated that the committee may ask these questions but officers were required to consider these applications on their own merits. 

 

Officers confirmed that permission would be from the date of approval, with a caveat that they be removed if construction was completed before this date.

 

The Chair invited Ian Butter, the applicants agent to address the Committee. 

 

Mr Butter apologised that this was a retrospective application. The application sought short term permission for the sighting of caravans in association with Broadland Sands caravan park. This would remove them from the caravan park and potential conflict with holiday makers. The caravans would be retained in the ownership of the company and would not become permanent dwellings. The application would support the local economy by enabling a multimillion investment at Broadland Sands, would reduce traffic in the area and be low impact due to utilising existing farmyards. The caravan licence would cover issues such as fire safety and waste disposal. 

 

Mr Butter confirmed that caravans and other materials had been stored in another location adjacent to the site. These had now been cleared and moved and so should not be an issue going forward.

 

Regarding the possible locating of worker caravans on the site, Mr Butter stated that the large majority of the caravans on the site were privately owned or rented, and some of these would need to be moved to accommodate worker caravans. It would also put construction traffic through the middle of the site rather than a short stretch of public road. They would also not be in place for very long until the development was completed. 

 

The Chair invited Councillor Ashdown to address the committee as ward member. 

 

Councillor Ashdown apologised that the Parish Council could not attend due to illness. The Parish Council had responded to both this application and the next one. When the original application for the extension of the caravan site itself came to the committee this was extensively debated and recommendations made on what was expected. This application had now come forward, and it was believed that this was too many caravans in too small a space which had resulted in fire. Councillor Ashdown stated he did not understand why these could be accommodated on site, or if local people could not be employed for these roles removing the need for accommodation. Broadland Sands did need to better communicate with local residents and had caused unnecessary aggravation with the local community. Tourism was a vital part of the economy of the area. Councillor Ashdown asked that disruption be avoided where possible. Should the committee grant these applications the number of caravans should be reduced, and details of the materials being stored in the barn made clear. The car park associated with the previous applications should also be delivered as soon as possible. 

 

Councillor Ashdown confirmed this development was a few hundred yards from the entrance of the caravan park and set behind trees. It had caused annoyance to neighbours due to increased vehicle movements and speeding from workers. Three caravans would be better than five to enable greater gaps around the caravans. Councillor Ashdown stated he had asked how many people would be living this but had not had a response. He did ask for a restriction on the number of people as there was the potential for twenty five to thirty people to be there at maximum capacity. 

 

Mr Butter confirmed that at the moment there were only four people in the caravans, but there would be no difficulty in restricting this. The footpath and car park associated with the previous application would happen, and this was being dealt with by highways. 

 

Mr Butter also confirmed that the site owners had also been campaigning for the speed to be reduced on the road outside the site for safety. 

 

Clerks note: Councillor Ashdown left the room for the debate.

 

The Chair invited debate. 

 

Councillor Pitchers stated he could not see a reason for these five caravans to be on this site in this configuration if they fit with the requirements of a caravan licence. It was however disappointing that this was being dealt with retrospectively.

 

Councillor Ashton agreed this was disappointing that it was retrospective application. This was an acceptable use of a small bit of land for a temporary length of time, and it was better that workers were here than taking up private rental units. There did need to be improved communication between site owners and local residents. 

 

Councillor Ewart stated felt Park Holidays did not operate in good faith and so she felt she had to vote against this development. 

 

On the proposal of Councillor Pitchers, seconded by Councillor Ashton it was by a majority vote 

 

 RESOLVED

 

To approve the application, granting temporary planning permission with conditions.


Conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be for a maximum period of 3 years from the date of this permission, or completion of the development approved under planning reference DC/19/2949/COU (or any subsequent approval that varies that permission), whichever occurs first. Within 60 days of this maximum period expiring, the 5 caravans hereby permitted, and the fence structure along the site boundary, shall be fully removed from site and the land reinstated to its former condition and agricultural use. 

Reason: Having regard to the non-permanent nature of the structures.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with Site Location Plan (50521R - 1) and Block Plan (50521R - 2) received 10/06/2024, and Block Plan (50521R-3) received 07/08/2024.

 Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.

3. No more than 5no. caravans, as defined in the Caravan Sites and Control of Development Act (1960) and the Caravan Sites Act (1968) as amended, shall be stationed on the site at any time. For the avoidance of doubt, "the site" is the area within by the red line on the Site Location Plan (no. 50521R - 1 ).

Reason: To ensure that the number of caravans on site is controlled in line with the description of development.

4. The 5no. Caravans, hereby permitted, shall solely be occupied by construction workers/contractors in relation to the extension to the Broadland Sands site approved under reference DC/19/2949/COU (or any subsequent approval that varies that permission) and shall not be occupied as a person's sole, or main place of residence. The owners/operators shall maintain an up-to-date register of the names of all occupiers of the premises, their main home addresses, and job in connection with the works at Broadland Sands, and shall make this information available at all reasonable times to the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development is occupied in accordance with the exception circumstances outlined within this application. 

Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
8

The Committee received report ES/2086 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management which related to planning application DC/24/2029/FUL.



The application was for retrospective planning permission for the change of use of an agricultural barn and yard to a B8 storage and distribution use in association with the nearby expansion/construction works at Broadland Sands. 



The application was before the committee as the officer recommendation of approval was contrary to the recommendation received by the Parish Council. The application was considered by the Referral Panel on the 6th of August 2024 and referred to the committee for consideration.

 

The Committee viewed the site location plan, photographs showing the view from Coast Road into the site, the block plan and existing and proposed elevations. 

 

The material planning considerations were summarised as: 

  • Temporary consent
  • Impact on character and appearance
  • Impact on amenity
  • Impact on highways

 

The recommendation to delegate authority to the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management to approve the application for planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the report, was outlined to the Committee.

 

 The Committee raised questions on:

  • Definition of storage
  • Highways impacts
  • Issues of littering on the site 

 

Officers confirmed that 'B8 Storage' was just the classification for buildings used for storage and distribution. Storage of gas canisters or any other flammable items was restricted under other legislation. Although there were no specific conditions restricting the use of the building only for construction, it was limited to storage only. 

 

Regarding highways impact the site was in agricultural use previously, which also had associated vehicle movements. There were no particular highways safety issues. Regarding vehicle movements on the site, this would be covered by health and safety legislation. 

 

Regarding littering concerns, the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stated that he was meeting regularly with Park Holidays about their sites across the district. Any issues could be raised here. 

 

On the proposal of Councillor Pitchers, seconded by Councillor Plummer it was by a unanimous vote

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application to grant temporary permission with conditions be approved subject to the conditions below:

Conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be for a maximum period of 3 years from the date of this permission, or completion of the development approved under planning reference DC/19/2949/COU (or any subsequent approval that varies that permission), whichever occurs first. Within 60 days of this maximum period expiring the building shall be returned to its former agricultural use.

Reason: Having regard to the non-permanent nature of the structure.

1. The development hereby permitted shall be completed in all respects strictly in accordance with:

- Site Location Plan, received 03/06/2024,
- Proposed Block Plan, received 03/06/2024,
- Proposed Roof and Floor Plan, 50521R - 2, received 26/06/2024,
- Proposed Elevations, 50521R - 4, received 26/06/2024.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.

Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
9

The Committee received report ES/2087 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management which related to planning application DC/24/1987/RG3.



The application was for reconfiguration, re-refurbishment and extension of the existing Grade II 
Listed White Lion building (currently comprising five flats and a commercial unit), to provide a total of nine flats and one commercial unit. 

 

The application was before the committee as the applicant was East Suffolk Council.

 

The Committee viewed the site location plan, views of the front of the White Lion Building from Smallgate Street, and the rear access to the building from Newgate Street. 

 

The Committee viewed the existing and proposed block plan and the existing and proposed elevations. The Senior Planner shared the proposed sectional elevation and floor plans showing how the residential flats would be separated from the public parts of the site. 

 

The material planning considerations were summarised as: 

  • Compliance with Policy
  • Design/Heritage
  • Neighbour amenity
  • Provision of additional housing
  • Improved community spaces

 

The recommendation to delegate authority to the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management to approve the application for planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the report, was outlined to the Committee.

 

The Committee raised questions around:

  • disabled access
  • roof elevations
  • sound proofing

 

Regarding disabled access while there would be generally improved access, there were no lifts in the building to access residential areas. Exiting restroom facilities were being reconfigured to provide better disabled access. There would also be better disabled access through the building by removing steps and changing levels in the building. Access to residential areas would be from Newgate and commercial from Smallgate.

 

The Senior Planner confirmed that part of the roof was flat in the centre, but this was not visible from the ground.  

 

Soundproofing and acoustics between the residential and private areas would be improved where appropriate and possible. 

 

On the proposal of Councillor Ashton, seconded by Councillor Plummer it was by a unanimous vote

 

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be approved subject to the following conditions:

Conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun within a period of three years beginning with the date of this permission.

Reason: In accordance with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans:

Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1400-P02 - Proposed GA Elevations - Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1101-P02 - Proposed GA Floor Plans - First, second and third floor plans -Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1100-P02 - Proposed GA Floor Plan - Ground Floor Plan- Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0002-P00 - Proposed Block Plan - Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1400-P02 - Proposed GA Elevations - Received 30 May 2024

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.

3. Development must be undertaken in accordance with the ecological avoidance, mitigation, compensation, and enhancement measures identified within the Preliminary Roost Assessment (The Landscape Partnership, July 2023) as submitted with the planning application and agreed in principle with the local planning authority prior to determination.

Reason: To ensure that ecological receptors are protected and enhanced as part of the development.

4. No demolition of buildings (whole or in part) shall take place between 1st March and 31st August inclusive, unless a competent ecologist has undertaken a careful, detailed check of vegetation and buildings for active birds' nests immediately before demolitions and provided written confirmation that no birds will be harmed and/or that there are appropriate measures in place to protect nesting bird interest on site. Any such written confirmation should be submitted to the local planning authority.

Reason: To ensure that nesting birds are protected.

5. The areas to be provided for the storage and presentation for collection/emptying of refuse and recycling bins as shown on Drawing No. 8616- FM- XX- ZZ- DR- A- 1100-P 02 shall be provided in their entirety before the development is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter for no other purpose.

Reason: To ensure that space is provided for refuse and recycling bins to be stored and presented for emptying and left by operatives after emptying clear of the highway and access to avoid causing obstruction and dangers for the public using the highway.

6. The use shall not commence until the areas within the site shown on drawing no. 8616-FM- XX- ZZ- DR- A- 1100-P 02 for the purposes of loading, unloading, manoeuvring and parking of vehicles, and secure cycle storage has / have been provided and thereafter the areas shall be retained, maintained and used for no other purposes.

Reason: To ensure that sufficient areas for vehicles to be parked are provided in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2023) where on-street parking and or loading, unloading and manoeuvring would be detrimental to the safe use of the highway and to promote sustainable travel by ensuring the provision at an appropriate time and long term maintenance of adequate on-site areas and infrastructure for the storage of cycles and charging of electrically assisted cycles in accordance with Suffolk Guidance for Parking (2023).

7. Prior to the installation of any fixed plant or machinery (e.g., heat pumps, compressors, extractor systems, air conditioning plant or refrigeration plant), a noise assessment should be submitted to include all proposed plant and machinery and be based on BS4142:2014+A1:2019.
 
A noise rating level (LAr) of at least 5dB below the typical background sound level (LA90,T) should be achieved at the nearest noise sensitive receptor. Where this noise rating level cannot be achieved, details of any noise mitigation measures considered should be explained and the achievable noise level should be identified and justified.
 
All equipment and/or measures included within the approved noise assessment should be installed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To protect the amenity of the area

8. Prior to occupation, evidence of how the required water efficiency standard of 110 litres per person per day will be achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason To ensure that the finished dwelling(s) comply with Policy WLP8.28 of the East Suffolk Council - Waveney Local Pan (2019), and to ensure Building Control Officers and Independent Building Inspectors are aware of the water efficiency standard for the dwelling(s).

9. In the event that contamination which has not already been identified to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is found or suspected on the site it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. Unless agreed in writing by the LPA no further development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance, removal of underground tanks and relic structures) shall take place until this condition has been complied with in its entirety. 

An investigation and risk assessment must be completed in accordance with a scheme which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons (see National Planning Policy Framework) and conform with prevailing guidance (including BS8485:2015+A1:2019, BS 10175:2011+A2:2017 and Land Contamination Risk Management) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the review and confirmation in writing by the Local Planning Authority that likely risks have been identified and will be investigated accordingly.

Where remediation is necessary a detailed Remediation Strategy (RS) must be prepared and is subject to the review and confirmation in writing by the Local Planning Authority as likely to address the risks identified. The RS must include detailed methodologies for all works to be undertaken, site management procedures, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria. The RS must be carried out in its entirety and the Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification prior to the commencement of the remedial works.

Following completion of the remediation strategy a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to, reviewed by and confirmed in writing by the LPA as likely to have addressed the risks identified.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.

Report of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management.
10

The Committee received report ES/2088 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management which related to planning application DC/24/1988/LBC.



The application was for listed building consent for the reconfiguration, re-refurbishment and extension of the existing Grade II Listed White Lion building (currently comprising five flats and a commercial unit), to provide a total of nine flats and one commercial unit. 



The application was before the committee as the applicant was East Suffolk Council.

 

The Senior Planner stated that the information for the site had been shared with the previous agenda item, and he had nothing further to add.

 

On the proposal of Councillor Gee, seconded by Councillor Ewart it was by a unanimous vote

 

RESOLVED

 

That the application be approved subject to the following conditions:


Conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun not later than the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: This condition is imposed in accordance with Section 18 of the Act (as amended).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be completed in accordance with the following plans:

Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1400-P02 - Proposed GA Elevations - Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1101-P02 - Proposed GA Floor Plans - First, second and third floor plans -Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1100-P02 - Proposed GA Floor Plan - Ground Floor Plan- Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-0002-P00 - Proposed Block Plan - Received 30 May 2024
Drawing No: 8616-FM-XX-ZZ-DR-A-1400-P02 - Proposed GA Elevations - Received 30 May 2024

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.

3. Details in respect of the following shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council as Local Planning Authority before the work is begun. The work shall be carried out in accordance with such approved details:

a) Treatment of existing windows/rear of windows to ground floor Female w.c.s to be confirmed.
b) Representative details of new internal doors to former White Lion hotel (only), including fire doors, to show materials, appearance and ironmongery.
c) Details of hard landscape design to rear courtyard.
d) Full specification of external materials to rear extensions to former White Lion hotel.
e) Representative details for replacement second floor rear living room window (Flat 4) to show materials, type of glazing, glazing bar mouldings, ironmongery and opening operation.
f) Representative details for fenestration to rear extensions to show materials, opening operation and ironmongery.
g) Confirmation of final extent of proposed roof-mounted PV arrays to include panel sizes and area.
h) Brick type, brick bond and mortar type in brickwork to rear extensions.

Reason: In order to safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the building.

4. Notwithstanding the submission drawing, all new external rainwater goods and soil pipes on the visible elevations shall be of cast metal, painted black.

Reason: In order to safeguard the special architectural or historic interest of the building.

5. Prior to commencement of works the Heritage Asset Assessment shall be submitted to the Suffolk Historic Environment Record with proof of deposition to be provided to Local Planning Authority by email. 

Reason: To ensure that an appropriate record of the building is available for future interest in a public accessible location. 

Exempt/Confidential
There are no Exempt or Confidential items for this Agenda.

 

11

Attendance

Attended - Other Members
Name
No other member attendance information has been recorded for the meeting.
Apologies
NameReason for Sending ApologySubstituted By
No apology information has been recorded for the meeting.
Absent
NameReason for AbsenceSubstituted By
No absentee information has been recorded for the meeting.

Declarations of Interests

Member NameItem Ref.DetailsNature of DeclarationAction
No declarations of interest have been entered for this meeting.

Visitors

Officers present:  Jamie Behling (Planner), Matthew Gee (Senior Planner), Mia Glass (Enforcement Planner), Agnes Ogundiran (Conservative Political Group Support Officer), Iain Robertson (Senior Planner), Alli Stone (Democratic Services Officer), Ben Woolnough (Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management)