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.