Meeting Details

Planning Committee North
19 May 2020 - 14:00 to 16:11
Occurred
  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Visitors
  • Declarations of Interests

Documents

Agenda

Meeting Details
Meetingdetails
MeetingDetailsCOVID19

Members are invited to a Meeting of the Planning Committee North

to be held on Tuesday, 19 May 2020 at 2.00pm

 

This meeting will be conducted remotely, pursuant to the Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panel Meetings) (England and Wales) Regulations 2020.

 

The meeting will be facilitated using the Zoom video conferencing system and broadcast via the East Suffolk Council YouTube channel at https://youtu.be/xSdEsVTD1Js.

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

Members and Officers are invited to make any declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary or Local Non-Pecuniary Interests 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 Ashdown declared a Local Non-Pecuniary Interest in Item 6 - DC/19/4368/FUL - Rugby Club House, Old Lane, Corton, as being Ward Member.
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

Councillor Ashdown declared that he had been lobbied on Agenda Item 6 - DC/19/4368/FUL - Rugby Club House, Old Lane, Corton.

 

All Members of the Committee declared that they had been lobbied on Agenda Item 7 - DC/18/4429/ARM - Part Lane surrounding Waveney Valley Pool, St Johns Road, Bungay and Item 8 - DC/18/5082/FUL - Part Land East of Dukes Farm, St John's Hill, Bungay.

4 pdf Minutes (258Kb)
To confirm as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 10 March 2020.
4

RESOLVED

 

That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 10 March 2020 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Report of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management
5

The Committee received report ES/0371 which summarised the outstanding enforcement cases sanctioned under delegated powers or though the Committee up to 27 April 2020.  There were currently 18 such cases.

 

The Assistant Enforcement Officer updated Members in that an application for amended materials to the roof had been approved for 20 Beverley Close, Lowestoft.  Once completed, that case would be closed.

 

In response to a question relating to progress with regard to changes to the Section 106 Agreement and resolution of outstanding matters with regard to Woods Meadow Phase 2, the Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that an update could be provided to the Committee, either at its next meeting or directly by email.

 

The Chairman requested an update report come to the next meeting of the Committee.

 

RESOLVED

 

That the report concerning Outstanding Enforcement Matters up to 27 April 2020 be received and noted.

Report of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management
6

The Committee considered report ES/0372 which gave details of the application to change access arrangements to the entrance to Gunton Park.  The application sought alterations to an existing vehicular access from the Lowestoft and Great Yarmouth Rugby Club site to Old Lane/The Woodlands.  The application was before Committee because of the significant level of local interest and the implications for the future relocation of the rugby club, a policy in the Local Plan that would be funded by a housing development on the current site.

 

Members were shown location plans of the site including aerial views and photographs of the existing access and along Old Lane.  The garage on the corner of the access was to be retained.  The proposal would improve visibility for those using the cycle lane and any issues relating to the rights of way were not a planning matter, civil only.

 

The Planner reminded the Committee that the application before Members was for the change of access arrangements to the entrance to Gunton Park.  The significant neighbour concerns over future residential development and whether access for residential had been properly considered during site allocation was not part of this application.  The proposal was to improve the existing access and was recommended for approval.

 

The Chairman invited questions.

 

Members sought clarification on when the Rugby Club had been built, before or after the existing housing development, and the status of the footpath.  The Planner advised that she understood the Rugby Club had been in existence for some 50 years.  Woodlands and Gunton Mews were built after the Rugby Club; part of Old Lane was potentially there before the club.  The footpath was commonly used as a shared route with cyclists and the proposals would be beneficial to both cyclists and pedestrians.  County Highways had raised no issues.

 

The Chairman invited public speakers to address the Committee.

 

As an objector, Mr J Hemming explained that it seemed inappropriate for the entrance to the Rugby Club to be looked at separately.  Any new entrance should look at the future use of the site and the building of properties.  The new entrance might need to cope with 80 in the car park and major events but it should also consider the future development of 65 dwellings.  This residential development was not forming part of the application even though the notices that had been posted on site stated the change of access was to allow for future development.  Was that to avoid public scrutiny of the application.  It was not clear if the evidence of increased traffic movements had been captured or not.  And why change the road priorities?  In 2002 the Rugby Club asked for our support to build and they would stay on site.  Was that no longer the case?

 

On behalf of the Rugby Club, Mr R Smith expressed thanks for providing the Rugby Club with the opportunity to comment.  As a community-based club, it was disappointing to see a number of objections and he was of the opinion that they had been adequately addressed in the officer’s report.  He believed that the access would be suitable for all future uses of the Gunton Park area and the existing rights of way in the immediate vicinity would be respected.  To clarify the position with regard to Mr Hemming’s statement regarding support in 2002, that statement had been made by the Club’s President in good faith and according to the circumstances at that time.  Mr Smith requested that the Committee approved the application as recommended by the planning officers.

 

Councillor M Rudd addressed the Committee to inform them of views from the Ward.  The application was for a new access but it would not be altered in the future if housing was developed on the site.  How many Committee Members had visited the site to see the problems?  Gunton Park was inadequate for the amount of traffic, there would be additional highway dangers and the roads were sub-standard.  Corton Lane was an unlit road and the Road Safety Partnership had visited the site as there had already been fatalities in the area.  The traffic and road parking, including that related to the kindergarten, resulted in the road becoming a single lane and Old Lane was also narrow creating health and safety hazards.  The proposals were a dangerous mix with the potential for a disaster.  Road safety was a main concern and the issues had not been properly looked at, particularly if property was built on the site.

 

The Chairman invited questions prior to debate.

 

Members sought to clarify if the improved access was for the Rugby Club only and whether the access/junction would be looked at again if a development proposal came forward.  The Planner explained that the application before Members was for access for the Rugby Club only.  Future residential development might or might not come forward and any future application would include access at the time it was submitted and would have to be considered.

 

A Member commented that he had known the junction for a number of years and the confers had made it dangerous.  However, it seemed somewhat odd that a junction should be reprioritised in favour of the Rugby Club.  It was acknowledged that it might be quite an unpleasant experience for some residents in Old Lane as a result of extra traffic in future developments and it might have been better to look at the A47 for access.  However, as the application was presented, there appeared to be no material considerations to refuse the application; it was an improvement.  Whilst having sympathy with residents, comment was made that there was a failure in the planning system for Members not to be able to look beyond the current application.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management referred to policy WLP2.20 in the Local Plan which set down the relevant site specific criteria, including transport and highway safety, which would be considered when any future applications for residential development came forward.

 

Following a proposal that was duly seconded, it was

 

RESOLVED

 

That permission be granted, subject to the following 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 amended access layout shall be laid out and completed in all respects in accordance with Drawing No. 1939/100/P3. Thereafter the access shall be retained in the specified form.

 

Reason: To ensure that the access is designed and constructed to an appropriate specification and made available for use at an appropriate time in the interests of highway safety.

 

3. Before the permitted works are commenced, details of the roads and footpaths, (including layout, levels, gradients, surfacing and means of surface water drainage), shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

 

Reason: To ensure that roads/footways are constructed to an acceptable standard.

 

Note:  The meeting was adjourned at 2.41pm for a comfort break and reconvened at 2.49pm.

Report of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management
7

The Chairman advised that the officer’s presentation would cover both Items 7 and 8 on the Agenda and invited an update from the Head of Planning and Coastal Management.

 

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management reminded the Committee that the application has been deferred at its meeting in February and was considered at the Planning Advisory Panel on 21 April 2020.  He had deferred making a determination of the applications in order to get a better understanding of the views of the Bungay Town Council and its Local Plan Group as well as seeking further clarification on a secondary access during construction.  He referred to the update sheet that had been circulated and particularly drew attention to the information provided by the Applicant and the further comments from Bungay Town Council in that they supported the principle but considered it a missed opportunity for the larger growth of Bungay.  Both he and the Principal Planner had met with the Town Council and Neighbourhood Plan Group earlier in the month; a very positive meeting which gave support to enabling Bungay to deliver its ambitions to deliver development for the next 20 years as part of their emerging Neighbourhood Plan, which would support the future wellbeing of the town.

 

In response to a Member’s question suggesting that the applications should be deferred until the new Housing Enabling Strategy considered by Cabinet had been adopted by the Council, the Head of Planning and Coastal Management explained that there was an extant outline planning consent on the site granted in 2016, as well as policy support, and therefore the Applicant had a reasonable expectation of a timely decision.

 

The Planner gave a presentation of the applications which were contained in report ES/0373 For approval of reserved matters, outline application with all matters reserved apart from access for up to 150 new dwellings (including affordable housing), associated infrastructure, open space and up to 3HA of employment land on Part Land surrounding Waveney Valley Pool and report ES/0374  Surface water storage basin on Part Land East of Dukes Farm, Bungay.  The Planner explained that the attenuation basin was a secondary option.

 

Members were shown location plans of the site including aerial views and photographs of the access and views across the site.  The presentation displayed the site location of WLP5.1 and WLP5.2 allocations and housing area of outline permission with B1 units in the corner of the whole site.  The Planner confirmed that the new commercial access and B1 unit footings would be included in the Section 106 Agreement.  The proposed layout included 19 bungalows and two areas of open space.  Parking met County Highways’ standards and the Housing Mix was in accordance with policy WLP8.1.  Members also viewed impressions of the proposed development from difference perspectives giving an idea of the appearance with house types which included chimneys and bay windows.  The landscaping plan included mitigation features, there was a vision for cycle and pathways and the sketch masterplan included the provision of a major access road which would join the road through the employment site.  County Highways had no objection to the proposal.

 

The Planner further explained details of the attenuation pond and drainage strategy.  Agenda Item 8 gave details of option 2 attenuation pond which was acceptable to the Floods Authority.  Comment had been made that the drainage strategy did not take into account future allocation but it was considered that any further development would have to take its own action.  The material planning considerations and key issues had been satisfactorily addressed and the application was recommended for approval.

 

The Chairman invited questions.

 

Members questioned the phasing plan and construction management plan and the insignificant employment land compared to the whole plan.  The proposal also seemed to provide temporary access which fed into a later development.  It was noted that the Section 106 Agreement commercial access was to be provided after the first 100 properties were occupied but with land up for sale, would that mean only half of the affordable housing would be delivered. 

 

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management explained that concerns had been raised over any possible conflict between users of the leisure centre and construction traffic associated with the development of the properties.  That would be looked at in detail and also address the concerns of the Planning Advisory Panel, at its meeting on 21 April 2020, by discussions with the developers and County Highways.  The low provision of 5% of affordable housing had been negotiated to allow for employment land and was embedded in the extant outline consent.

 

Members further questioned the housing mix of 35% of one and two bedroomed properties and the actual number of affordable properties being provided.  The Planner confirmed that the housing mix was in accordance with policy WLP8.1 and eight affordable units were being provided out of a total of 150 dwellings.  A Member commented that assurance was needed that the employment land would be delivered; this had now been identified in the last three Local Plans and it had still not come forward.  Members sought reassurance that the proposals would come to fruition.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management suggested that might be a question for the Applicant.  He reminded the Committee that any planning permission went with the land; the market was challenging at this time but, as Planning Authority, the Council was committed to working with landowners to ensure developments proceeded.

 

The Chairman invited public speakers to address the Committee.

 

Mrs K Lodge advised that she was speaking on behalf of Bungay Neighbourhood Development Planning Group and as a resident.  Many residents were in favour of development but had serious concerns relating to the housing mix, open space and drainage.  The proposal did not reflect housing needs and the current plans indicated a disproportion of housing allocation.  More open space would be needed, hedges and trees were essential for residents, wildlife and for reducing climate change.  Effects of surface water run off were not taken seriously by the planners or the developers and there was no evidence showing that all would be well.  The Tin River already flooded and any attenuation must take that into account for all future development along St John’s Road.  The development of housing in the area was wanted but plans must reach high standards now and in the future to ensure the town’s needs were fully reflected.

 

Mrs S Collins spoke on behalf of the Town Council and as Mayor representing the people of Bungay.  She pointed out that the application was first conceived in 2014 and now, six years later, the development had been deferred twice and with further time extensions, things were not quite right.  Whilst supporting development in Bungay, there were fundamental concerns relating to the application including the layout and impact of the proposal.  The sketch masterplan seemed to be a box ticking exercise, providing no benefits to the community and buses not taking the logical direct route to school.  It was essential to have a co-ordinated approach to the significant development in Bungay, delivering housing but not prejudicing future development.  The advice from Bidwells was that the proposed layout would potentially undermine the ability for the remainder of the site to be delivered.

The Local Plan appeared to be undermined only one year after its adoption and the scheme was a standard development by a housebuilder ignoring the locality.  In order to satisfy the Local Plan, development proposals should enhance local distinctiveness and such concerns had still not been addressed.  That would warrant refusal.

 

Mr V Douglas explained that, as Architect/Agent, the scheme had been prepared on behalf of the Applicant.  The reserved matters application gave a layout following a pattern of development produced at the masterplan stage and which had been discussed with the planners in accordance with policy 5.2.  In addition to the emergency access agreed with the Highway Authority, there would be no conflict with construction traffic and the users of the leisure centre.  The proposed bungalows would be adjacent to the existing housing so as to minimise any effects on the amenity.  All relevant consultees had been consulted and the proposed design of the dwellings would go well with Bungay providing a pleasant place to live in and an area for children to play.  Mr Douglas asked that the recommendation for approval be supported. 

 

The Chairman invited questions.

 

Members acknowledged that the masterplan had now been provided but questioned the provision of the primary access to 250 dwelling being through an industrial site and that might also inhibit development to the west.  The employment land had still not come forward; the low number of affordable housing units had been agreed because of the provision of employment opportunities.

 

Mr Douglas explained that the access would be an attractive tree lined avenue through the commercial development.  He was of the opinion that they had proposed the right number of houses including eight affordable units and also access for the employment land was being provided.  That land had been on the market for some time and Mr Douglas was unable to clarify the amount of interest in the land at the present time.   

 

The Chairman invited questions prior to debate.

 

Whilst recognising what some considered to be an attractive design and with trees providing good screening, Members questioned the future maintenance of open spaces, conditions relating to drainage and the early provision of affordable housing.  The Planner advised that conditions covered the maintenance and acoustic barrier, and the affordable housing would be provided in the first phase of development.

 

The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that the Council would not agree to the open space land being transferred to the Council.  The future maintenance of the open space would be dealt with by a management company as set out in condition 10.

 

Members were of the opinion that the drainage conditions were in place for a purpose and needed to be adhered to.  Whilst the proposal was acceptable, it was not considered to be good in that housing would be delivered but with the employment land not being taken up, that might not be delivered.  Concern was expressed that the housing would be accessed via a road through an employment area which was not yet being delivered.

 

Councillor Burroughes addressed the Committee in his role as Cabinet Member responsible for facilities at Waveney Valley Pool and questioned what utility or service route would cross the land in the ownership of the Pool and therefore the Council.  The Head of Planning and Coastal Management advised that land ownership was not a determining factor in the consideration of the application.  The Applicant would need to work with the relevant utilities/services providers outside of the planning process. 

 

There being no further discussion, it was

 

RESOLVED

 

That permission on the reserved matters application be granted, subject to the following conditions:

 

1. The development hereby permitted shall be completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the listed plans and documents, 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.
5201 Rev Q: Site layout plan - Received 08 January 2020
MP01 Rev G: Materials Plan - Received 19 November 2019
2365 -18A and 18B Rev 3: Soft landscaping proposals - Received 01 November 2019
Noise control measures and areas of the site requiring good acoustic design as highlighted in Adrian James Acoustic limited Noise Assessment - Technical Report Ref: 11826 Report 1 Rev A received on 06 November 2019
(Plans received on 29 October 2019)
PL222 Rev A: Plots 5 - 8 - 533 F Flat type
PL221 Rev A: 777H/646H terrace house type
PL206 Rev A - 1130 H House type
PL205 Rev A - Plot 143 - 1302H House Type
PL204 Rev A - 132H House type
PL201 Rev A - 1539 H House type
Perspectives S02 Rev A, S03 Rev A & S04 Rev A
(Plans received on 01 October 2019)
RS01 Rev A: Refuse Plan
PL202: House Type - 1241H - Gable
PL203: House Type - 1241H - Hipped
PL207: House Type - 1087H
PL208: House Type - 999H
PL209: House Type - 900B
PL210: House Type - 894B
PL211: House Type - 953H Terrace
PL212: House Type - 997H Semi
PL213: House Type - 850H Terrace
PL214: House Type - 850H Terrace
PL215: House Type - 850H Semi
PL216: House Type - 822B
PL217: House Type - 710H
PL218: House Type - 710H
PL219: House Type - 710B
PL220: House Type - 777/646H Semi
PL223: House Type - 646H Terrace
PL224: Business Unit
PL225: House Type - 797H Terrace
PL226: House Type - 797H Terrace
PL227: House Type - 1122H
G01: Garages
G02: Garages
G03: Garages

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

 

2. The strategy for the disposal of surface water and the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) (dated December 2019, ref: 1353/JSH/FRAA-Option1/02-19 Rev A) shall be implemented as approved in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained.

 

3. The development shall not be occupied until details of the 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 local planning authority. 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.

 

4. Prior to the 100th property being occupied, details of all Sustainable Drainage System components and piped networks will be submitted, in an approved form, to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for inclusion on the Lead Local Flood Authority's Flood Risk Asset Register.

 

Reason: 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 per 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-assetregister/

 

5. No development shall commence until details of a Construction Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP) 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 local planning authority. The CSWMP shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan for the duration of construction. The approved CSWMP and shall include:

a. 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.

 

6. The following pedestrian and cycle access and highway improvements shall be completed and made available for use in accordance with the relevant permitted drawings prior to occupation of the first dwelling:
Shared cycle way and footway connection from St. Johns Road into the site and the extension of the footway on the Northern side of swimming pool shown on drawing number. 7061-SL01 Revision Q .

 

Reason: To ensure that the accesses and walking/cycling routes are designed and constructed to an appropriate specification and brought into use before the development is occupied in the interests of highway safety and sustainability.

 

7. Before the development hereby permitted is occupied full details of the electric vehicle charging points to be installed in the development shall have been submitted to the Local Planning Authority and approved in writing.

 

Reason: To ensure that the development makes adequate provision for electric vehicle charging points to encourage the use of electric vehicles in accordance with the Suffolk Guidance for Parking and paragraph 110 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

8. No part of the development shall be commenced until details of the proposed shared use cycle track (with regard to where it passes through private driveways and crosses or enters roads) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved layout shall be laid out and constructed in its entirety prior to occupation of the dwellings that the cycle track serves.


Reason: To ensure that the cycle track is designed and constructed to an appropriate specification and made available for use at an appropriate time in the interests of highway safety.

 

9. 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:
- Acoustic barrier
- Boundary details of the railings, fences and brick walling (e.g. appearance, brick type and bond)
- Make and manufacturers details of mock slate tile
- Full details of hard surfacing throughout the site

 

Reason: In the interest of the visual appearance of the development 10. Prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority a detailed landscape maintenance and
management plan covering the management of the open spaces/play equipment and the acoustic barrier which forms part of one of the open spaces on the boundary of the swimming pool building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscape maintenance and management plan shall be implemented in full accordance with the agreed details.

 

10.  Prior to the occupation of any part of the development or in accordance with a programme agreed with the Local Planning Authority a detailed landscape maintenance and management plan covering the management of the open spaces/play equipment and the acoustic barrier which forms part of one of the open spaces on the boundary of the swimming pool building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The landscape maintenance and management plan shall be implemented in full in accordance with the agreed details.

 

Reason: To ensure the provision of effective amenity enhancement afforded by appropriate landscape design.

 

11. A landscape and ecological management plan (LEMP) shall be submitted to, and be approved in writing by, the local planning authority prior to the commencement 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 longterm 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.

 

12. No development shall take place until an Ecological Enhancement Strategy, addressing how ecological enhancements will be achieved on site, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.

 

Reason: To ensure that the development delivers ecological enhancements

 

13. Prior to the commencement of development details of a secondary access/haul road to provide access from St. Johns Road for all construction traffic associated with the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The access road shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details before any other part of the development is commenced and shall be operated in accordance with the accompanying Construction Management Plan.

 

Reason: In the interests of amenity and highway safety due to the potential conflict between construction traffic, new residents and the users of the leisure centre.

 

14. Prior to the commencement of development, a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved management plan shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Management Plan shall provide details of:
a. Loading and unloading of plant and materials;
b. Storage of plant and materials used in the construction of the development;
c. Materials/plant delivery times;
d. Construction times;
e. Parking for construction workers and visitors;
f. Wheel washing facilities; measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;
g. A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from construction works. 

 

Reason: In the interests of amenity and highway safety due to the potential conflict between construction traffic, new residents and the users of the leisure centre.

Report of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management
8

Under Agenda Item 7, full discussion had taken place on report ES/0374 Surface water storage basin on Part Land East of Dukes Farm, Bungay.  The Planner had explained that the attenuation basin was a secondary option.

 

The Chairman invited the public speakers to address the Committee on any issues specific to the attenuation.

 

Mrs Lodge advised that the proposed drainage was of great concern as it was considered inadequate for the number of houses being proposed.  No evidence had been shared with the residents that the plans were adequate and that the attenuation pond would cope with run off.  Further down the river, properties had already been flooded and the needs of the town should be fully reflected in any proposals.  It was accepted that one developer should not carry full cost of drainage but it was important that the correct drainage was provided for Bungay and that drainage schemes could be extended and linked together for future developments.

 

Mrs Collins advised that Bungay Town Council had considerable concerns as to whether the drainage would be adequate.  The proposal only applied to 150 houses.  The town was in a flood area and it was essential to ensure there was sufficient capacity for run off for the full allocation in the Local Plan. 

 

A Member questioned the lack of joined up thinking and any plans agreed today would have implications for future development.  Reference was made to WLP policies 5.1 and 5.2 and 209 in the Neighbourhood Plan.

 

The Committee was reminded that for each part of subsequent applications for development, a planning application would need to be accompanied by relevant proposals for drainage. 

 

There being no further debate, it was

 

RESOLVED

 

That permission be granted, subject to the following 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 Site location plan Ref: 1353/LOC/001 received 21 December 2018, and Attenuation Basin Outfall Option 2 Ref: 1353/DRA/106 Rev B received 10 December 2019, 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 strategy for the disposal of surface water and the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) (dated December 2019, ref: 1353/JSH/FRAA-Option2/02-19 Rev A) shall be implemented as approved in writing by the local planning authority. The strategy shall thereafter be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved strategy.


Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal, to ensure that the proposed development can be adequately drained.

 

4. The infrastructure hereby permitted shall not be used until details of all Sustainable Drainage System components and piped networks have been submitted, in an approved form, to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority for inclusion on the Lead Local Flood Authority's Flood Risk Asset Register.

 

 Reason: 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 per 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-assetregister/

 

5. No development shall commence until details of a Construction Surface Water Management Plan (CSWMP) 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 local planning authority. The CSWMP shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved plan for the duration of construction. The approved CSWMP and shall include:
a. 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.

 

6. 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 WLP40 "Archaeology" of Waveney Local Plan Area of the East Suffolk Council (Adopted March 2019) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

 

7. The attenuation pond shall not be brought into use 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 6 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 WLP40 "Archaeology" of Waveney Local Plan Area of the East Suffolk Council (Adopted March 2019) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

 

8. No development shall take place until full details of soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details 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.

 

9. The landscaping scheme shall be completed prior to the attenuation pond being brought into use, or such other date as may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Any trees or plants which die during the first 3 years shall be replaced during the next planting season.

 

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance within the landscaping and to provide optimal biodiversity benefit.

Report of the Head of Planning and Coastal Management
9

The Committee considered report ES/0375 which gave details of the planning application for the construction of a single storey side extension to provide a utility room and shower room.

 

The application was before Committee as the Applicant was an East Suffolk Councillor.

 

Members were shown photographs and location plans of the site including views along The Street, the property itself and both the existing and proposed elevations and the existing and proposed floor plans.  The extension itself would be obscured existing hedging.

 

The Planner advised that the main issues were design and heritage impact.  The property was a non-designated Heritage Asset in the Conservation Area; however, the extension was considered acceptable and there would be no impact on the heritage of the area.  The application was being recommended for approval.

 

Members noted that the extension was set back from the road and would provide good facilities for future use.  There being no further discussion, it was unanimously

 

RESOLVED

 

That permission be granted, subject to no material planning objections being received within the prescribed consultation period and the following 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 proposed Block Plan and drawing nos. AB1, AB2, AB3 and AB4; received 19 March 2020, 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.

Announcement
Prior to the commencement of formal business, the Chairman explained that, in order to satisfy the regulations that allowed the Council to hold meetings remotely during the coronavirus pandemic, the meeting was being broadcast live to the public via the East Suffolk Council YouTube channel.  The running of the meeting would be very similar to a normal meeting held in the Council's Conference Room.  The Chairman further explained how the meeting would operate. 
Part Two - Confidential

There are no Exempt or Confidential items on this Agenda.

Declarations of Interests

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

Visitors

Officers present:
Liz Beighton (Planning Manager - Development Management), Joe Blackmore (Principal Planner - Development Management), Sarah Carter (Democratic Services Officer), Mia Glass (Assistant Enforcement Officer), Matt Makin (Democratic Services Officer), Philip Ridley (Head of Planning and Coastal Management), Iain Robertson (Planner - Development Management), Melanie Seabrook (Planner - Policy and Delivery).