6
Clerk’s Note – The Chair advised that Mr Eburne wished to speak on agenda items 6 and 7, however he had technical difficulties registering to speak by the 5pm 22nd July 2024 deadline. In these circumstances the Chair was minded to exercise his discretion to allow Mr Eburne to speak, unless there were any objections. There were no objections from the Committee, therefore Mr Eburne was registered to speak against agenda items 6 and 7.
The Committee received report ES/2058 of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management which related to application DC/22/4775/FUL for planning permission for the construction of 65 dwellings, a change of use of agricultural land to provide for the expansion of the adjacent Eyke Primary School, the provision of a new vehicular and pedestrian access from The Street, an extension to the village car park and associated works.
The application was before the Committee for determination at the request of the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management due to its public interest from Eyke Parish Council and objections from neighbouring Parish Councils. Furthermore, the application was for a major housing development on an allocated site and thus warranted consideration by the Planning Committee.
The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management told the Committee that there were two items on the agenda for identical planning applications and Planning Legislation allowed for applicants to apply at the same time for duplicate submissions, he confirmed that they were identical applications that had reached the agenda together and were both up for consideration at the same time.
The Committee received a presentation on the first application from the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management, on behalf of the Principal Planner (Major Sites), who was on annual leave.
The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management displayed an aerial view of the application site, confirming that the opportunity for additional housing was recognised in the Local Plan, particularly due to the school facilities in the village, adjacent to the site. He told the Committee that this was a Plan led site, allocated through the 2020 local plan examination process and the application received was consistent with the allocation.
Google Earth images were displayed showing the context of the site within the village, with the bulk of the residential development to the north, the school on the northern edge, the playing field and the school village car park which was predominantly for school use. The frontage was shown along the A1152, where the access point would lead in. Further aerial images were shown displaying the view from the southern end of the site and the general village arrangement, noting it was quite linear, with small closes leading off, and in the centre of the village there was an active farm. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management pointed out the edge of the Sandlings, part of Rendlesham Forest in the top right of the image, this had special protection area status. The Greenfield recreation ground and PROW was also shown.
The Site’s location plan was shown, demonstrating the relationship with some of the residential properties to the north on Church Lane and the School playing field.
The definitive map from the Local Plan was displayed, with the Settlement Boundary highlighted. The AONB now known as Suffolk and Essex Coast and Heath National Landscape was shown.
The Allocation Policy and Plan was displayed, with the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management stating that the Policy was prescriptive as to what the site should achieve and the site area was consistent with the points listed from the policy SCLP 12.50, it was all met and covered in the report.
Photographs were shown demonstrating views of:
• The agricultural context of the site.
• The frontage of the site, Into the street and back towards the frontage of the site.
• South heading towards Bromswell, noting the points at which the speed limits change leading out of the village.
• Grade 2 listed building Eyke House opposite the site.
• Views from frontage of school and from the front of Eyke House looking back to the car park area and school.
• Moving around the village, layby pull in area, village car park.
• All Saints Church and its relative proximity as a central part of the character of village.
• Views of Church lane, off Church Lane there is small cul-de-sac bungalows, some of which have side boundaries edged onto site. There are no connections proposed through from development site into church lane.
The proposed block plan was shared, noting that the applicants had sought to include the full 65 dwellings available to them through the allocation policy whilst also integrating necessary open spaces and other land uses required. Going through the proposed block plan, the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management noted the following:
• Central access point proposed onto street, footways on both sides of it.
• Public space and LEAP.
• Pathway leading on internally into the school and public car park area.
• Landscaped open space area on the right hand side as you come into the entrance.
• Street arrangement, site will have full pedestrian provision and tree planting provision on main street route.
• Terminating central street there is a feature curved terrace.
• Small cul-de-sacs and private drives leading off around the edge of the site.
• Top corner- Public open space, drainage basin, fully landscaped and accessible.
• The site would incorporate properties that generally faced outwards. Perimeter walking space for residents leading through to open space and connecting the site.
• Southern buffer landscaped tree planted area.
The Boundary Treatments and Housing Tenure Plan was shared, the site provided the full provision of affordable housing and 44 open market properties, a mix between 2, 3, 4 and 5 bed properties. There were 5 shared ownership properties and 5 plots of first homes properties.
The materials plan was shared, noting that Denbury were a builder who focused on traditional design and materials. A tenure blind was designed, with no difference between affordable and open market properties being identified.
The existing car park was displayed, noting it was not properly surfaced with no marked car parking spaces. The proposal would square off the car park, add new surfacing and formalise arrangements to achieve 39 car parking spaces. A footpath link from the development through to the pedestrian link into the school would be created along with the footway from the frontage of the cycle pass.
Proposed highways improvements were shared with the Committee, noting the 2m wide pavement. An error was noted in paragraph 10 of the report and the amendment shared with the Committee which proposed that the developer would be required to provide the pavement prior to any first occupations on the site.
The wider highway network was shared with the Committee with the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management, noting the collaborative working that was ongoing between East Suffolk Council and the Parish Councils in the area as part of the Joint Parish Transport Initiative.
An updated traffic assessment was shared with the Committee giving confidence that the modest level of traffic generated by 65 homes would not be a considerable impact on the Highways Network. It was noted that the application included some speed reduction measures.
The site landscape plan was shared showing the arrangements of open space and tree and hedge planting throughout the site. Also detailed was the proposed play equipment for the Local Area of Play.
The Open Space Plan was shared elaborating on the landscaping and showing the nature of the open spaces as well as covering the school expansion area.
The Surface Water Details plan was shared, recognising that some of the usual options for drainage basins and swales would not be the most compatible option for surface water drainage, therefore the site would incorporate deeper trench drainage.
The Foul Drainage Plan was shared along with Anglian Water’s acceptable response.
The close proximity to Rendlesham Forest Sandlings special protection area meant that consideration on the habitat regulations arising from the recreational effects of the development had to be considered. In this case the available open space routes and wider networks of quiet lanes, PROW, meant that the dog walking pressure would not be significant and the appropriate assessment could be passed, along with the contributions to the recreation avoidance mitigation strategy funding on a per dwelling basis.
The Street Scene was shared with the Committee, highlighting that the majority of the properties on the edge of site faced out onto the countryside rather than backing on. Examples of all property designs were shown, highlighting the same standard of detailing, materials, quality and character between all.
The material planning considerations and key issues were summarised as:
• Principle of development
• Housing mix
• Design and layout
• Amenity
• Heritage
• Highway Considerations
The recommendation to approve the application, subject to the conditions set out in the report, was outlined to the Committee.
The Chair invited questions.
Councillor Hedgley asked for a resume of the car parking facilities, checking if there was capacity for visitors. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management replied that the parking standards were all fully met. There was the provision of car parking within the garage space and each property had the necessary off road parking. He added amongst the layout some locations had visitor parking and a general layby layout would accommodate extra visitors and deliveries etc. In response to Councillor Hedgley regarding the Foxhall Waste Recycling Centre and funds to expand as it was over-capacity, the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that the CIL money that went into the Centre took into account proposed growth from future developments.
Councillor Deacon viewed the map showing the proximity of the Parish Church to the site.
Councillor Daly referred to Natural England’s comments and asked for more information regarding the mitigations required. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that Natural England didn’t object to the application and were often informed by East Suffolk’s own ecologists review, adding once they had secured all proposals they would finally consult with them to confirm that the appropriate assessment has been passed. There would be a financial contribution from the residential development to the recreational avoidance mitigation strategy, a programme that was already underway and about to be publicly launched which implemented rangers and mitigation measures directly within the site. There would be onsite and local walking networks available, both in and from the site into the wider walking network, and mitigation has been secured to avoid any impacts that Natural England have mentioned from occurring.
Councillor Bennett asked the following questions:
How would the houses would be heated? The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management referred to paragraph 6.21 of the Update Sheet, noting that the Council’s Policy was to achieve a 20% reduction in CO2 emissions, and this would be achieved via enhanced building fabric, air source heat pump, no gas connection, solar photovoltaic panels. The applicant was looking to improve the reduction beyond 20% and would be adding a dedicated EV charging point to each property.
Was there any retail provision? The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that for this scale of development there would not be an expected retail development.
Would the new parking facility be East Suffolk parking? In reply, it was noted that the section 106 arrangement would be for the car parking land to be transferred to the Parish Council and Denbury would either undertake the improvements themselves or provide funding to the Parish Council for them to carry out the improvements. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that he would expect this to be achieved very early in the development to minimise disruption to school use.
Asking about the footway into the village, Councillor Bennett questioned was that dual use, with cycling and wheeling options? The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed this was restricted as a result of the amount of highways land available - only 2 metres wide available, therefore the provision of cycling connectivity wasn’t included, however the provision of cycling infrastructure around the rest of the village was non-existent as well, therefore it did not provide the wider connection to other cycling routes.
Councillor Hedgley referred to the map presented regarding consultation, noting that 16 of the closest neighbours were notified and no comments were received, he sought assurance that no neighbours had made any comments. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that report section 4.1 noted that 5 addresses had objected and 1 letter of representation had been received. It was noted that these were not necessarily defined as neighbours to the site, but most likely addresses within the village. He confirmed that the same process had been followed as with all planning applications, where letters were sent out as well as wide reaching publicity taking place.
Councillor Ninnmey asked how many existing buildings were already in the village and how much the development would expand that community. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed from the Parish Profile (2019) that there was a population of 362 and 166 dwellings, therefore a further 65 would be an increase of a third.
Referring to whether there were appropriate buildings or dwellings for older people in the development, the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that the development included 3 bungalows and meets Building Regulations M42 standards to make homes adaptable and accessible, with wider doorways and ability to provide stairlifts etc.
Referring to the Transport assessment, Councillor Ninnmey questioned the report and the figures quoted, seeking assurance that the figures were realistic and asking if the reduction in traffic quoted was as a result of Covid. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that the traffic assessment was based upon both actual traffic counts and on model data all verified by the Highways Authority and further verified by the actual traffic counts carried out earlier in the year. He added anecdotally there had been discussion around the result of Covid and the analysis of traffic movement, due to the way people moved around and worked.
Councillor Hedgley asked about the local school situation, noting the primary school was full up and going to be expanded by CIL money, Farlingaye was over capacity and there was talk of taking children to Brightwell Lakes meaning it would need to be expanded before it was built. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed that when assessing primary school capacity, existing primary schools could accommodate without the need for expansion and the area had been safeguarded for future potential expansion by not being landlocked. Regarding the secondary schools, it was acknowledged that Farlingaye was full but there was a brand new much bigger secondary school coming to Brightwell Lakes.
There being no further questions, the Chair invited the Objector Mrs Hejleh to speak.
Mrs Hejleh confirmed that she was a neighbour of the site and had written 2 letters of objection. She stated that firstly the site was in an AONB and secondly breathing new life into the village was a nice idea but 65 new houses would alter Eyke’s character completely, and effect the ambiance of the listed building, Eyke House. She told the Committee that the people of Church Lane were fed up that they were going to be overlooked and would no longer see the deer in the morning. Eyke has approximately 170 houses at the moment and no shop or pub, a new development would be totally out of proportion. Her main objection was traffic, the infrastructure was totally inadequate and Eyke Street was already not fit for purpose. More cars together with the HGVs and large farm vehicles would make the street even more dangerous at school drop off and pick up times. The proposed car park was not really big enough with the added car movements of 65 houses, adding the ongoing development Honours Meadow in Rendlesham, it was bad news for Eyke and the wider area. During the local plan development, Suffolk County Council sent a letter to East Suffolk Council saying Melton crossroads was at capacity and even modest increases may result in severe congestion. A further letter stated in Melton during the two daily rush hours, traffic tailback reached Bromeswell roundabout and beyond. Mrs Hejleh said creating even more traffic was madness, asking how would they control speeding and stating specific speeding cameras were needed. Sleeping policeman were not an option as they cause Eyke House to shake violently every time a vehicle passed - the application should be refused.
The Chair invited questions to the Objector.
Councillor Ninnmey was concerned about 65 new dwellings and the increased population with no pub, shop, and asked how Mrs Hejlah saw the isolated development bedding itself into the village community. Mrs Hejlah replied that some people would get involved in the village and others wouldn’t, her personal opinion was that the development should be much smaller, it was originally planned to be 45 dwellings and Eyke Parish Council objected. She added the shop and pub had closed since the land was allocated in the local plan.
Councillor Bennettt suggested that increasing the village could bring the pub and shop back to life, and asked if a lesser size development would be something she was in favour of or was anything at all unacceptable? Mrs Hejlah replied that a smaller development would be much more favourable and she was worried about the car movements.
Referring to Mrs Hejlah’s objection, the Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management clarified that it was logged on the system and set out in the writing of the report. He added that all objections were clearly in the report and on Public Access.
There being no further questions, the Chair invited Mr Weavers of Eyke Parish Council to speak.
Mr Weavers stated that the application had been controversial with the Parish Council divided. The Chairman and other Parish Councillors accept the need for the proposal that is on the table, and raised two additional points that they were concerned about. Car Park and traffic mitigation measures. The Parish Council referred to the sometime contradictory information about the carpark which gave them concern that long term the Parish Council would have to maintain a car park that’s not sustainable in terms of the surface and the finish. He said there weren’t any detailed plans at this stage and councillors were disappointed with the level of consultation to date about the design and construction. Therefore they would request an additional condition or that one of the conditions 1-13 regarding preparatory works take into account the car park should be designed, agreed and constructed before major works get underway. Regarding Traffic Calming measures, they understood it was a matter for highways but feel there should be conditions attached to the application so that the speed limit of 30mph is extended to caravan site and slow signs moved and appropriate measures put in place.
The Chair invited questions to the Parish Council.
Councillor Bennettt asked what they thought about restricting the width of the carriageway to permit walking/cycling on the accompanying footway. Mr Weavers said through meeting with the Joint Transport Passenger Initiative (JTPI) he knew it was a measure that could be considered and they would be open to that and could consider restricting the size of the carriageway at key points. He noted that they had tried a large traffic hump but that had created a lot of vibration in the grade II listed building, Eyke House.
Councillor Deacon, referred to the village store and pub, asking would the additional housing improve the chances of them being managed successfully. Mr Weavers said that over the past 3 years they had invested £100k into the village hall to make that the village hub, with the intention being to run a pop up pub/shop in the village hall which is adjacent to the church. He added they already had interest and a pre-application site meeting for the pub. Regarding the shop he felt it was very difficult as people were travelling to Rendlesham or into Woodbridge, the hope would be that the school, village hall, pub or shop could be supported in the longer term.
There being no further questions, the Chair invited the applicant to speak.
Mr Eburne of Denbury Homes told the Committee that the site was first identified and technically assessed as appropriate for residential development in 2017 and allocated in the Local Plan in September 2020 as Policy SCLP 12.50. The application delivers a comprehensive development in full accord with the Local Plan. They have worked closely with officers and statutory consultees through the pre-application/application process and have made all of the required amendments to the development to recommend for approval. Mr Eburne said they had prepared a draft Section 106 planning obligation which captured all of the key points of the report and they committed to provide the first affordable homes, the expanded school site and expanded community car park early in the development programme. All of the key benefits would be delivered at the developers expense with no cost to the public purse. The highway improvements would be delivered upon the completion of the access to the development, before the first homes were occupied. There will be over £1.4 million CIL and the Parish will receive 15% of this amount. The affordable homes would be provided based upon local connections and local people with housing need will be the given the first opportunity to be residents. To provide reassurance, the Highway assessment has been redoubled and the transport assessment was reassessed earlier in the year, showing a slight reduction in the traffic volume on the A1152 over the past 3 years, and more significantly a flattening of peak traffic flows as people spread their trips throughout the day. It was also proposed that this would be a dark skies development, so no need for street lighting. It was expected to commence in November, with the first homes ready by 2025 and they were looking forward to working with the community.
The Chair invited questions for Mr Eburne.
Councillor Daly commented it appeared to be a high quality design and noted the update regarding energy and the measures implemented, asking if this would be for all properties on the site? Mr Eburne confirmed they looked at the whole development, and they would “hammer down” on carbon, and the technical detail of how that would be approached was still to come. They have made a promise which accords with the Policy and on other sites they have found they could improve on that further. Each property won’t necessarily have an air source heat pump, and some may not have photovoltaic, depending on how they appear, and some might not be suitable for roof panels. However they look at the development as a whole.
Councillor Bennettt referred to the original application being 45 dwellings and asked if that was viable. In response Mr Eburne confirmed they had only been working in line with the Local Plan which allocated 65 dwellings and that proposal was justified.
Councillor Bennettt asked if it was no street lighting or just not late at night. Mr Eburne confirmed it was in line with the Parish Council requirements who were not keen to see street lighting and preferred a dark skies environment. There will be a lighting plan with home to home lighting that switch on when you walk past so not completely dark.
Councillor Ninnmey was encouraged by the energy measures implemented and noted concerns about the number of vehicles. Mr Eburne explained the methods used to carry out the traffic assessments and how it was ratified through Suffolk County Council and the Highways Authority.
Councillor Ninnmey asked about the provision for older residents, in response Mr Eburne noted the Local Plan which had an objective to improve planning for older people. Condition N42 was used, with lifetime homes and a small number of bungalows. The houses have standards and dimensions that are adaptable across the development and have a dementia friendly internal design.
There being no further questions, the Chair invited the Committee to debate the application.
Councillor Hedgley commented that this had been in the Local Plan since 2020, he acknowledged the reduced village facilities and recognised the opportunity to reverse this, he would be voting in favour of the development.
Councillor Smithson stated compared to lots of development, it was one of the most well thought out developments in terms of infrastructure and accessibility, recognising the facilities in terms of pubs and shops were not there yet but with an expansion it would enable the primary school to be viable, and she would be supporting it.
Councillor Daly commented it was a high-quality application and they should be encouraging it, on arable field, with BNG improvements even before demands were made on it, and leads to the possibility of a pop up pub/shop.
Councillor Bennett noted it was an out-of-town car dependent development which they were trying to get away from. If people want to live there, they would need their own vehicle. As a minimum the Council is actively seeking cycling, wheeling and walking, and as a caveat to probable acceptance, CIL money should support this so that mobility scooters and cycles could be accommodated.
The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management shared the desire for a less car dependent future and that was one of the reasons for the Cycling, Wheeling and Walking Strategy. He added that Local Plans have communities that are car dependent developments, and it will be a lot of years before rural communities can balance being less car dependent, a suite of measures would need to be looked at such as safety measures for walking, cycling and how CIL could be used. Councillor Bennett referred to the distance required for a walk way of 3 metres, noting that was best case scenario, and suggested 2 metres could be looked at and the Parish Council may be amenable to that too.
Councillor Deacon added if the road was narrower, it would provide speed restraint. He saw it as one of the best standard developments, and noted extra housing would be an asset, possibly breathing life into the village. Referring to the Local Plan, he commented if it was not built here it would be built elsewhere, it would enhance the community in Eyke.
Councillor Ninnmey had concerns around the increase of the community by a third, and hoped that the Parish CIL would help. He reluctantly supported the application.
Councillor Fisher agreed with most of the supporters, asking if there could be a condition so that the car park doesn’t become a Parish liability in future years. The Head of Planning, Building Control and Coastal Management confirmed the car park was owned by the Parish and improvements would either by carried out by Denbury or paid for by Denbury. Once the improvements were made it would be up to the Parish about how they make it available at any time and encouraged future conversations between Denbury and the Parish council.
On the proposition of Councillor Hedgley, seconded by Councillor Packard it was by a unanimous vote
RESOLVED
that AUTHORITY TO APPROVE be granted with conditions (including but not limited to those summarised in section 9 of this report); and subject to the completion of a S106 Legal Agreement to secure obligations (including but not limited to):
• Provision of affordable housing;
• Per dwelling contribution to the Suffolk RAMS
• Provision and long term management of public open space
• Financial contribution towards Secondary School Transport
• Provision of land and surfacing/contribution for the village car park
• Provision of an option for the school expansion land
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 completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the following plans:
Drawings:
EYK1-001 – Site Location Plan
002 REV E - PLANNING LAYOUT
003 REV E - EXTERNAL WORKS LAYOUT
004 REV C – Materials Plan
005 A - Potential Car Park Layout
027 A - ROAD CONSTRUCTION DETAILS - SHEET 2
SK005 - REFUSE VEHICLE TRACKING - SHEET 1
SK006 - REFUSE VEHICLE TRACKING - SHEET 2
LA5518 001 E - LANDSCAPE STRATEGY
001 D – Landscape Strategy
9470-D-AIA Rev A - TS & AIA
216495-CCL-XX-00-DR-C-5000 P05 - OFF SITE WORKS: CAR PARK ACCESS GENERAL ARRANGEMENT
2699/SS-02 - LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF VACUUM SEWER A-0 - A-8
2699/SS-01 - LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF VACUUM SEWER A-0 - A-8
2699/LP-01 - VACUUM SEWER LAYOUT PLAN
401 Substation
402 External Works Details.
2302-791-ST007 – Construction Surface Water Management Plan – Phase 1
2302-791-ST008 – Construction Surface Water Management Plan – Phase 2
2302-791-026A – Road Construction Details – Sheet 1
2302-791-027A – Road Construction Details – Sheet 2
House Type:
101 - 755 Floor Plans - Plots 1-3
102 A - 755 Elevations - Plots 1-3
103 A - 1550 Floor Plans - Plot 30
104 A -1550 Elevations - Plot 30
105 - 882 Floor Plans - Plots 26-27
106 A - 882 Elevations - Plots 26-27
111 - 1197 Floor Plan - Plots 31,32
112 - 1197 Elevations - Plots 31,32
113 - 800 Floor Plan & Elevations - Plot 3
114 - 2774 Floor Plans - Plots 34,47,60
115 - 2774 Elevations 1 - Plots 34,47,60
116 - 2774 Elevations 2 - Plots 34,47,60
117 - 2048 Floor Plans - Plots 35,59
118A - 2048 Elevations - Plots 35-59
119C - 1317 Floor Plans - Plots 37,52,57
120C - 1317 Elevations - Plots 37,52,57
121A - 999 Floor Plans - Plots 38-39
121A - 999 Elevations - Plots 38-39
123 - 755 Floor Plans - Plots 40-41
124 - 755 Elevations - Plots 40-41
125 - 999sp1,999sp2 Floor Plans - Plots 42-45
126 - 999sp1,999sp2 Elevations 1 - Plots 42-45
127 - 999sp1, 999sp2 Elevations 2 - Plots 42-45
130 - 1021 Floor Plans - Plots 48-49
131 - 1021 Elevations - Plots 48-49
132 - 1764 Floor Plans - Plots 50,65
133A - 1764 Elevations - Plots 50,65
138 - 1021 Floor Plans - Plots 62-63
139A - 1021 Elevations - Plots 62-63
140A - 1550 Floor Plans - Plots 28
141A - 1550 Elevations - Plots 28
142 - 1550 Floor Plans - Plot 29
143 - 1550 Elevations - Plot 29
144 - 1550 Floor Plans - Plot 51
145A – 1550 Elevations - Plot 51
146 - 1687 Floor Plans - Plot 46
147 - 1687 Elevations - Plot 46
148 - 1687 Floor Plans - Plot 56
149 - 1687 Elevations - Plot 56
150 - 1687 Floor Plans - Plot 64
151 - 1687 Elevations - Plot 64
152 - 1021,882 Floor Plans - Plots 53-55
153A - 1021,882 Elevations 1 - Plots 53-55
154A - 1021,882 Elevations 2 - Plots 53-55
155 - 1317 Floor Plans - Plots 36,58,61
156 - 1317 Elevations - Plots 36,58,61
157 - 1550 Floor Plans - Plot 4
158A - 1550 Elevations - Plot 4
201 - 859 Floor Plans - Plots 5-6
202A - 859 Elevations - Plots 5-6
203 - 631 Floor Plans - Plots 7-8
204 - 631 Elevations - Plots 7-8
205 - 859 Floor Plans - Plots 9-11
206 - 859 Elevations - Plots 9-11
207 - 1009 Floor Plans - Plots 12-13
208 - 1009 Elevations - Plots 12-13
209 - 878,1009 Floor Plans - Plots 14-16
210 - 878,1009 Elevations 1 - Plots 14-16
211 - 878,1009 Elevations 2 - Plots 14-16
212 - 631 Floor Plans - Plots 17-19,21-23
213 - 631 Elevations - Plots 17-19,21-23
214 - 788 Floor Plan & Elevations - Plot 20
215 - 859 Floor Plans - Plots 24-25
216 - 859 Elevations - Plots 24-25
301A - Garage 1
302 - Garage 2
303A – Garage 3
304 – Garage 4
Redivac Vacuum Sewer Layout Plan 2699/Lp01
Longitudinal Section Of Vacuum Sewer A-0 - A-8 2699/Ss-01 And 2699/Ss-02.
Reports:
Habitats Regulations Assessment (Nov 2022)
Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) (Southern Ecological Solutions, November 2022)
Bat Activity Survey (Carter Sustainability, November 2022, Rev 2)
Tree Survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment Preliminary Arboricultural Method Statement & Tree Protection Plan
Flood Risk Assessment parts 1; 2; 3 and 4
Landscape & Visual Impact Assessment (June 2022)
Archaeological Evaluation Cotswold Archaeology (April 2022)
Site Appraisal Report (Jun 2021)
Heritage Statement
Design and Access Statement
Sustainability Statement December 2022
Flood Risk Assessment Erratum Letter Dated: Mar 2024 No Ref
Covering Letter Dated: Mar 2024 Ref: DC/22/4775/FUL, DC/23/0203/FUL
Technical Drainage note Dated: Mar 2024 Ref: IP-230 2-791/TN01-Rev A
Technical Drainage Policy note Dated: 15th March 2024 Ref: LPA Policy SCLP9.6 Report on Compliance
Transport Assessment Addendum Dated: 22nd March 2024 Ref: 216495-CCl-XX-00-RP-01000
Technical Report on Refuse Compliance Dated: 15th March 2024 Ref: Suffolk Waste Collection Guidance Letter on Compliance for which permission is hereby granted or which are subsequently submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and in compliance with any conditions imposed by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt as to what has been considered and approved.
3. The materials and finishes shall be as indicated within the submitted application and thereafter retained as such, unless otherwise agreed in writing with the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development in the interests of visual amenity
4. No part of the development shall be commenced until details of the proposed access (including the position of any gates to be erected and visibility splays to be provided) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved access shall be laid out and constructed in its entirety prior to any other part of the development taking place. Thereafter the access shall be retained in its approved form.
Reason: To ensure that the access is designed and constructed to an appropriate and acceptably safe specification and made available for use at an appropriate time. This needs to be a pre commencement condition because access for general construction traffic and other traffic is not otherwise achievable safely.
5. The use shall not commence until the area(s) within the site shown on drawing no. 002 E for the purposes of loading, unloading, manoeuvring and parking of vehicles has / have been provided and thereafter the area(s) 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.
6. No dwelling shall be occupied until details of the areas to be provided for the secure, covered and lit cycle storage including electric assisted cycles have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
The approved scheme shall be implemented for each dwelling prior to its first occupation and retained as such thereafter.
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).
7. No dwellings shall be occupied until details of the infrastructure to be provided for electric vehicle charging points have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before each relevant dwelling is brought into use and shall be retained thereafter and used for no other purpose.
Reason: In the interests of sustainable travel provision and compliance with Local Plan Sustainable Transport Policies. This needs to be a pre-commencement condition to avoid expensive remedial action which adversely impacts on the viability of the provision of electric vehicle infrastructure if a suitable scheme cannot be retrospectively designed and built.
8. No other part of the development shall be commenced until the vehicular access to the site has been constructed. Before the access is first used clear visibility at a height of 0.6 metres above the carriageway level shall be provided and thereafter permanently maintained in that area between the nearside edge of the metalled carriageway and a line 4.5 metres from the nearside edge of the metalled carriageway at the centre line of the access point (X dimension) and a distance of 90 metres in each direction along the edge of the metalled carriageway from the centre of the access (Y dimension).
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.
9. Before the development hereby permitted is commenced a Construction Management Plan shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Construction of the development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved plan.
The Construction Management Plan shall include the following matters:
a) parking and turning for vehicles of site personnel, operatives and visitors
b) loading and unloading of plant and materials
c) piling techniques (if applicable)
d) storage of plant and materials
e) provision and use of wheel washing facilities
f) programme of site and all associated works such as utilities including details of traffic management necessary to undertake these works
g) site working and delivery times
h) a communications plan to inform local residents of the program of works
i) provision of boundary hoarding and lighting
j) details of proposed means of dust suppression
k) details of measures to prevent mud from vehicles leaving the site during construction
l) haul routes for construction traffic on the highway network and
m) monitoring and review mechanisms.
n) Details of deliveries times to the site during construction phase.
o) Layout of facilities above to be included on a plan.
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 precommencement condition because an approved Construction Management Plan must be in place at the outset of the development
10. Before the development is commenced details of a new footway along the site frontage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The footway shall be laid out and constructed to base course before the development is first occupied and fully completed prior to the occupation of the 15 dwelling hereby approved in accordance with the approved scheme. The footway shall be retained thereafter in its approved form.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and sustainable development by providing a footway at an appropriate time where no provision may deter people from walking. This is a a pre-commencement condition because insufficient details have been submitted at planning stage.
11. 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. The approved scheme shall be carried out in its entirety before the access is first used and shall be retained thereafter in its approved form.
Reason: To prevent hazards caused by flowing water or ice on the highway. *This needs to be a precommencement condition to avoid expensive remedial action which adversely impacts on the viability of the development if, given the limitations on areas available, a suitable scheme cannot be retrospectively designed and built. This is a pre-commencement condition because insufficient details have been submitted at planning stage.
12. No part of the development shall be commenced until details of the proposed off-site highway improvements in the form of dragon’s teeth and “SLOW” road markings at the speed limit change have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be laid out and constructed in its entirety prior to occupation.
Reason: To ensure that the necessary highway improvements are designed and constructed to an appropriate specification and made available for use at an appropriate time in the interests of highway safety and sustainable travel. This is a pre-commencement condition because the required details relate to off site works that need to be agreed before the development can be said to be acceptable in terms of highway capacity/safety.
13. Prior to the occupation of the new development the local bus stop located opposite “The Stores” shall be improved to provide easy access for pedestrians & a RTPI screen, details of which previously shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority
Reason: To promote and facilitate access to sustainable transport modes and to provide safe and suitable access for all users in accordance with National Planning Policy Framework (Dec 2023) Para. 114 and Para. 116.
14. Details of the LEAP Equipment to be provided on the site and dog waste bins shall be submitted to and agreed by the local planning authority. The play equipment and bins shall be installed in accordance with the approved details prior to first occupation of the dwellings or in accordance with a programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure appropriate provision of play equipment and dog bins.
15. Prior to the commencement of development a detailed Tree Protection Plan (TPP) and Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS), in accordance with BS5837:2012 - Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The TPP shall show the extent of root protection areas, details of ground protection measures and fencing to be erected around retained trees, including the type and position of these. The protective measures contained within the scheme shall be implemented prior to commencement of any development, site works or clearance in accordance with the approved details and shall be maintained and retained until the development is completed. The AMS shall include details of all construction measures within the root protection areas of those trees on and adjacent to the application site which are to be retained specifying the position, depth, and method of construction/installation/excavation of any hard landscaping, service routes and drainage systems. The TPP and AMS shall include a schedule of monitoring and a programme of arboricultural supervision by a suitably qualified arboriculturalist. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved TPP and AMS unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: Required to avoid any irreversible damage to retained trees pursuant to section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and to protect and enhance the appearance and character of the site and locality, in accordance with Local Plan Policy SCLP10.4
16. No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (e.g. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines etc indicating lines, manholes, supports etc); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant. Soft landscape works shall include planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed number/densities where appropriate; implementation programme.
Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscape design.
17. All hard and soft landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. The works shall be carried out prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with the programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority; and any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from completion of the development, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation; all works shall be carried out in accordance with the relevant provisions of appropriate British Standards or other recognised Codes of Good Practice.
Reason: to ensure that the appearance of the development is satisfactory.
18. Hours of working shall be - Monday to Friday 07:30 until 18:00 hours Saturdays 07:00 until 12:00 hours (midday) Sundays & Bank Holidays none.
Reason: In the interests of amenity.
19. Site Investigation: No development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance or removal of underground tanks and relic structures) approved by this planning permission, shall take place until a site investigation consisting of the following components has been submitted to, reviewed by, and confirmed in writing by the local planning authority that these requirements has been met:
Further discussion on the ground gas risk posed to the site in the form of a technical addendum, updated report or similar format in writing to consolidate all previous survey results and justify a final conclusion in the context of the specific site risk.
All site investigations must be undertaken by a competent person (see Annex 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework) and conform to current guidance and best practice, including BS8485:2015+A1:2019, BS10175:2011+A2:2017 and Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM).
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. Remediation: No development (including any construction, demolition, site clearance or removal of underground tanks and relic structures) approved by this planning consent, shall take place until a detailed Remediation Strategy (RS) has been submitted to, reviewed by and confirmed in writing by the Local Planning Authority as likely to address the risks identified by the submitted assessments. The RS must include, but is not limited to: - details of all works to be undertaken including proposed methodologies, drawings and plans, materials, specifications and site management procedures; - an explanation, including justification, for the selection of the proposed remediation methodology(ies); - proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria; and - proposals for validating the remediation and, where appropriate, for future maintenance and monitoring. The RS must be prepared by a competent person (see Annex 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework) and conform to current guidance and best practice, including BS8485:2015+A1:2019 and Land Contamination Risk Management.
21. 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.
22. Implementation of remediation Prior to any occupation or use of the approved development, the Remediation Strategy agreed under the remediation condition must be completed in its entirety. The LPA must be given two weeks written notification prior to the commencement of the remedial works.
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. The Environmental Protection Team may want to observe works for example the effective installation of ground gas measures and geotextile membranes.
Verification A verification report must be submitted to, reviewed by and confirmed in writing by the Local Planning Authority as likely to have addressed the risks identified prior to any occupation or use of the approved development. The verification report must include, but is not limited to: - results of sampling and monitoring carried out to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met; - evidence that the RS agreed under the remediation condition has been carried out competently, effectively and in its entirety; and - evidence that remediation has been effective and that, as a minimum, the site will not qualify as contaminated land as defined by Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The verification report must be prepared by a competent person (see Annex 2 of the National Planning Policy Framework) and conform to current guidance and best practice, including BS8485:2015+A1:2019, CIRIA C735 and Land Contamination Risk Management.
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.
23. 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. 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 and conform with prevailing guidance (including BS10175:2011+A2:2017 and the Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM)) and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Where remediation is necessary a detailed remediation method statement (RMS) must be prepared, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The RMS must include detailed methodologies for all works to be undertaken, site management procedures, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria. The approved RMS 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 approved remediation scheme a validation report that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation must be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.
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.
24. No development shall take place until a scheme for the installation of fire hydrants throughout the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with the Fire and Rescue Service. The fire hydrants shall be installed prior to occupation of dwellings served by the relevant hydrant.
Reason: In the interests of fire safety.
25. 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 (2023).
26. No dwelling 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 23 and the provision made for analysis, publication and dissemination of results and archive deposition.
27. 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 (2023).
Development must be undertaken in accordance with the ecological avoidance, mitigation and enhancement measures identified within the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA) (Southern Ecological Solutions, November 2022) and Bat Activity Survey (Carter Sustainability, November 2022, Rev 2) 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.
28. No development shall take place (including demolition, ground works, vegetation clearance) until a construction environmental management plan (CEMP: Biodiversity) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following:
a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities.
b) Identification of "biodiversity protection zones".
c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction (may be provided as a set of method statements).
d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features.
e) The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works.
f) Responsible persons and lines of communication.
g) The role and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) or similarly competent person.
h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs. The approved CEMP shall be adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period strictly in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.
Reason: To ensure that ecological receptors are adequately protected as part of the development.
29. A landscape and ecological management plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to, and be approved in writing by, the local planning authority prior first occupation of the development. The content of the LEMP shall include the following:
a. Description and evaluation of features to be managed.
b. Ecological trends and constraints on site that might influence management.
c. Aims and objectives of management.
d. Appropriate management options for achieving aims and objectives.
e. Prescriptions for management actions.
f. Preparation of a work schedule (including an annual work plan capable of being rolled forward over a five-year period)
g. Details of the body or organisation responsible for implementation of the plan.
h. Ongoing monitoring and remedial measures.
The LEMP shall also include details of the legal and funding mechanism(s) by which the long-term implementation of the plan will be secured by the developer with the management body(ies) responsible for its delivery. The plan shall also set out (where the results from monitoring show that conservation aims and objectives of the LEMP are not being met) how contingencies and/or remedial action will be identified, agreed and implemented so that the development still delivers the fully functioning biodiversity objectives of the originally approved scheme. The approved plan will be implemented in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that the long-term ecological value of the site is maintained and enhanced.
30. Prior to commencement, an Ecological Enhancement Strategy, addressing how ecological enhancements will be achieved on site, will be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Ecological enhancement measures will be delivered and retained in accordance with the approved Strategy.
Reason: To ensure that the development delivers ecological enhancements.
31. Prior to first occupation, details of the contents the residents welcome pack and onsite signage relating to recreational disturbance mitigation measures as set out in the Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) (East Suffolk Council, 21st May 2024) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The new residents pack and onsite signage shall be provided in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure that adequate mitigation measures for identified recreational disturbance impacts on European designated sites are appropriately delivered.
32. No development shall commence until details of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority (LPA).
Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained
33. No development shall commence until details of the implementation, maintenance and management of the strategy for the disposal of surface water on the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The strategy shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure clear arrangements are in place for ongoing operation and maintenance of the disposal of surface water drainage.
34. Within 28 days of practical completion of the last dwelling or unit, surface water drainage verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority, detailing and verifying that the surface water drainage system has been inspected and has been built and functions in accordance with the approved designs and drawings. The report shall include details of all SuDS components and piped networks in an agreed form, for inclusion on the Lead Local Flood Authority's Flood Risk Asset Register.
Reason: To ensure that the surface water drainage system has been built in accordance with the approved drawings and is fit to be put into operation and to ensure that the Sustainable Drainage System has been implemented as permitted and that all flood risk assets and their owners are recorded onto the LLFA's statutory flood risk asset register as required under s21 of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 in order to enable the proper management of flood risk with the county of Suffolk
https://www.suffolk.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/flooding-and-drainage/flood-risk-asset-register
35. No development shall commence until details of a Construction Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP) based upon the submitted draft Construction Surface Water Management Planreference2302-791-ST007 detailing how surface water and storm water will be managed on the site during construction (including demolition and site clearance operations) is submitted to and agreed in writing by the LPA. The CSWMP shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan for the duration of construction. The approved CSWMP shall include:
36. Method statements, scaled and dimensioned plans and drawings detailing surface water management proposals to include:-
i. Temporary drainage systems
ii. Measures for managing pollution / water quality and protecting controlled waters and watercourses
iii. Measures for managing any on or offsite flood risk associated with construction
Reason: To ensure the development does not cause increased flood risk, or pollution of watercourses or groundwater https://www.suffolk.gov.uk/roads-and-transport/flooding-and-drainage/guidance-on-development-and-flood-risk/construction-surface-water-management-plan
No external lighting shall be installed without the prior submission and approval of an external lighting scheme (including position and height of mounting features, height and angle of lights including aiming points, light fixing type, size and appearance, and the luminance levels). There after only the approved lighting scheme shall be installed and maintained in that form.
Reason: In the interests of amenity, and protection of the local rural environment, including the ecological environment.
37. Prior to first occupation of the hereby approved development, the measures that have been set out in the Sustainability Statement (December 2022), shall be provided in accordance with the approved details.
Reason: To ensure the finished development implements the approved sustainable measures to comply with Policy SCLP9.2 of the East Suffolk Council - Suffolk Coastal Local Plan (2020).
38. Prior to determination of the application, an air quality assessment is required. The assessment shall be in accordance with the following document: 'EPUK & IAQM Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning For Air Quality January 2017'. The assessment should be proportionate to the nature and scale of development proposed and the level of concern about air quality. The scope and content of supporting information is therefore best discussed and agreed between the local planning authority and applicant before it is commissioned.
Reason: To accord to the requirements of 'EPUK & IAQM Land-Use Planning & Development Control: Planning For Air Quality January 2017' guidance.
Informatives:
1. The Local Planning Authority has assessed the proposal against all material considerations including planning policies and any comments that may have been received. The planning application has been approved in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework and local plan to promote the delivery of sustainable development and to approach decision taking in a positive way.
2. It is an OFFENCE to carry out works within the public highway, which includes a Public Right of Way, without the permission of the Highway Authority.
The works within the public highway will be required to be designed and constructed in accordance with the County Council's specification.
The applicant will also be required to enter into a legal agreement under the provisions of Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 relating to the construction and subsequent adoption of the highway improvements. Amongst other things the Agreement will cover the specification of the highway works, safety audit procedures, construction and supervision and inspection of the works, bonding arrangements, indemnity of the County Council regarding noise insulation and land compensation claims, commuted sums, and changes to the existing street lighting and signing. For further information please visit: https://www.suffolk.gov.uk/planning-waste-and-environment/planning-and-developmentadvice/application-for-works-licence
3. The submitted scheme of archaeological investigation shall be in accordance with a brief procured beforehand by the developer from Suffolk County Council Archaeological Service, Conservation Team.
4. Any works to a watercourse may require consent under section 23 of the Land Drainage Act 1991, Any discharge to a watercourse or groundwater needs to comply with the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017, Any works to lay new surface water drainage pipes underneath the public highway will need a licence under section 50 of the New Roads and Street Works Act.