Venue: Gipping Room, Grafton House
Contact: Linda Slowgrove 01473 432511
Apologies for Absence
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Lockington and Councillor Rudkin.
To consider the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 June 2019.
28.1. Re: Minute 17: Councillor Kreidewolf requested that his declaration of interest be amended with the following text added: “…., but clarified that this would not influence his decision in relation to this application.”, and this was agreed.
that, subject to the above amendment, the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 June 2019 be signed as a true record.
To Confirm or Vary the Order Of Business
that the Order of Business be confirmed as printed on the Agenda.
Declarations of Interest
Councillor Smart, having a family member employed by the East of England Cooperative Society on this site, declared an interest in Item 1 (IP/18/00948/OUTFL) and left the room during the consideration of this item.
Councillor Cook, being a Director of the East of England Cooperative Society, declared an interest in Item 1 (IP/18/00948/OUTFL) and left the room during the consideration of this item.
In considering the applications the Committee took into consideration representations where indicated by the words “(REPS)” after the individual planning reference number.
The applications were considered in the following order:
Item 1 – 22-31 and Dairy Crest, Boss Hall Road
Item 3 – Whitton Water Pumping Station, Thurleston Lane
Item 2 – 2-4 Russell Road
Item 4 – Land to the North of the A14 and to the West of the A12
22-31 and Dairy Crest, Boss Hall Road
Proposal: Hybrid (part full/part outline) application:
Full application for demolition of remaining buildings comprising the former dairy site and mixed-use re-development, including commercial (use class B1/B2), retail (use class A1/A3) and a single leisure unit (use class D2), together with associated car parking, landscaping and infrastructure. New site access from Sproughton Road.
Outline planning permission (with all matters reserved) for demolition of the existing forklift charging building and works to the existing distribution centre, including sub-division into 3 units for existing B8 and proposed new D2 use.
Address: 22-31 and Dairy Crest, Boss Hall Road
Applicant: East of England Cooperative Society
Agent: Miss Jenny Moor
The Senior Planning Officer presented the report illustrated by drawings and photographs.
The report was updated as follows:
The applicant had provided further information regarding potential occupiers of the Class D2 unit within the Distribution Centre in addition to that included in bold text within the report:
• An approach was made from a Cheerleading Academy and their details have been passed to Fenn Wright who would be responsible for marketing the unit following a resolution to grant planning permission. It was not realistic to market the unit until planning permission had been obtained. In addition, the East of England Co-operative Society have established contacts with gym operators at their site at Rose Hill, as well as sites in Stanway (Colchester Borough) and Witham (Braintree District), with the Boss Hall Business Park also considered a suitable location for such a use.
• It had not been feasible to market the Distribution Centre to date due to the ongoing employment consultation which did not formally finish until 21st July 2019; marketing the premises at the same time would have implications in terms of employment law.
In addition, it was highlighted by Officers that a property within Bath Street, considered in Fenn Wright’s letter dated 10 June 2019, had received an enquiry on the 27 June 2019 with head of terms issued on the 10 July 2019. That unit was noted to be smaller than the Distribution Centre with a greater eaves height.
Grant outline/full planning permission for the development subject to:-
1. The completion of a legal agreement under provisions of section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act (1990) securing the following contributions (index linked):-
A contribution of £10,000 (index linked) towards the County Council’s costs in making and implementing a Traffic Regulation Order to prohibit waiting along lengths of Sproughton Road. Any unspent balance to be repaid.
2. Grant full planning permission upon condition that (briefly):-
1. Development to be in accordance with the approved drawings.
2. Construction Management Plan prior to commencement, including surface water drainage management.
3. Details relating to materials prior to commencement of elevational works.
4. Conditions relating to programme of archaeological works and contaminated land with details submitted and approved before commencement.
5. Details of extraction systems before first use of any Class A3 use.
6. Plant noise shall not exceed existing ... view the full minutes text for item 32.
2-4 Russell Road
Proposal: Removal of Condition 4 of planning permission IP/93/00931/FUL to enable the sale of food goods. Site in floodzones 2 and 3.
Address: 2-4 Russell Road
Applicant: K/S Ipswich c/o Nectar Asset Management Ltd
Agent: Mr Hewett
The Senior Planning Officer presented the report illustrated by drawings and photographs.
Councillor Jones proposed that an informative be added in relation to the maintenance of the existing landscaping and boundary treatment, and this was agreed.
Grant permission upon condition that (briefly):-
1. Before first use, details of signage/markings, disability parking, cycle parking, PTW parking, electric vehicle charging and delivery times.
2. Conditions relating to visibility splays and continued provision of parking and servicing areas.
3. Restrictions upon retail sales to food, DIY, building materials, garden centre products, furniture, carpets, electrical goods, car and caravans inc accessories only, other than ancillary sales not exceeding 180 sq.m.
4. No additional floorspace and no subdivision to units of less than 929 sq.m.
1. Ipswich Borough Council supports the use of automatic sprinkler systems.
2. The Local Planning Authority recommends that the development achieve BREEAM Very Good standard or equivalent.
3. The existing landscaping and boundary treatment within the control of the applicant should be maintained and improved.
Whitton Water Pumping Station, Thurleston Lane
Proposal: Conversion of former pumping station to 3 dwellings, triple garage and landscaping.
Address: Whitton Pumping Station, Thurleston Lane
Applicant: D & K Properties Ltd
Agent: Mr Ben Willis
The Senior Planning Officer presented the report illustrated by drawings and photographs. The report was updated as follows:
‘Late late’ representation received from Ms J Zenzer, received 22.7.19; issues raised:
1. Committee process unclear.
2. Waterworks Cottage was two storey and proposed conversion was three storey. Concern regarding inadequate spacing standards.
3. Request that electric gates be included.
4. Concern regarding inadequate visibility splays and increase in traffic.
5. Lack of information regarding septic or oil tanks.
‘Late late’ representation from applicant received 22.7.19; points raised:
1. Amended plans submitted showing minor change to boundary in response to representation from Waterworks Cottage.
2. Development was not within Green Belt.
3. Proposal would restore the character of the area.
4. Proposal would not create a precedent.
5. Other conversions have been permitted nearby.
6. Not unacceptable having regard to flood risk or noise impact.
7. Will seek permit from the Environment Agency for private drainage.
8. Sufficient parking and amenity provided.
9. No objection from SCC Highways regarding highway safety. Applicant followed advice from SCC Highways regarding survey.
10. Fire engines could access the site.
11. Will apply to Natural England for European Protected Species Mitigation Licence for both bats and Great Crested Newts.
12. Significant separation to Waterworks Cottage.
13. Will install SuDs based drainage system.
Ms Kate Cashman, applicant, spoke in support of the application:
- Proposal involved the provision of unique homes by restoring, converting and saving the building.
- Presumption in favour of conversion.
- Have worked with Officers and there were no objections from consultees.
- Building made a positive impact but was now in disrepair.
- Conversion would reinstate character.
- Not a new build development; other refusals nearby related to new build.
- Numerous detached and terraced houses along Thurleston Lane.
- Fewer than 3 dwellings would not be viable.
- Revised site plan had been submitted to address boundary inaccuracy. There was no boundary dispute.
- Would not need to cut back trees other than where they were overhanging.
- Would provide habitat, including for newts and bats.
Mrs Josefina Wyatt, Waterworks Cottage, Thurleston Lane, spoke against the proposals:
- Thurleston Lane was single width road and not a safe location for multiple houses.
- Anglian Water Pumping Station would also continue to use road.
- Would introduce traffic close to Waterworks Cottage.
- Would result in significant adverse impact upon Waterworks Cottage.
- Would increase traffic on a dangerous road.
- Single house over a single storey would be preferable.
- Concern regarding biodiversity impact and request that restrictive covenant be placed upon the mitigation area to protect against further development.
- Highway Authority request for electric gates ignored.
Councillor Jones proposed that conditions 4 and 7 be amended to also request a long-term management and maintenance ... view the full minutes text for item 34.
Land to the North of the A14 and to the West of the A12
Ward: OUTSIDE BOROUGH
Proposal: Outline application to East Suffolk Council for erection of up to 2,700 dwellings (33% affordable), apartments with C2 accommodation, vehicular access from A12, road improvements, neighbourhood centres, schools, green infrastructure, sports facilities and community facilities.
Address: Land to the North of the A14 and to the West of the A12
Applicant: East Suffolk Council
The Senior Planning Policy Officer presented the report illustrated by drawings and photographs.
That the Head of Development be authorised to write to East Suffolk Council, stating that Ipswich Borough Council objects to the planning application for the following reasons:
The proposed development is on land identified as Countryside in the Suffolk Coastal District Local Plan. Suffolk Coastal Local Plan policies SP29 (The Countryside) and DM3 (Housing in the Countryside) where new housing will only be allowed in exceptional circumstances. The agreed vision for the Ipswich Strategic Planning Area (ISPA) Board (March 2019) states that there shall be ‘distinctive urban and rural environments that contribute towards high quality of life’. The land in question is isolated from the surrounding key settlements and forms an attractive countryside setting around the Ipswich urban area which would be significantly harmed by inappropriate development in the countryside. In addition, East Suffolk Council are able to demonstrate that they have a 9.3 year Housing Land Supply and there is therefore no requirement or need to consider areas of unallocated land in open countryside for residential development.
The Transport Statement anticipates that there would be 18,243 daily trips by car or van. The additional vehicle movements would have a harmful impact on traffic and air quality inside and outside IBC. This growth in vehicle trips has not been accounted for in either the transport or air quality modelling work that the ISPA authorities are currently working on. If approved, this development would compromise the ability of the ISPA authorities to deliver the agreed vision.
The outcomes of the Transport Statement rely upon the delivery of traffic regulation order (TRO) proposals to introduce a combination of new 40mph and 50mph speed limits on parts of the A12, that were formulated alongside the approved application for Brightwell Lakes. It is important to note that at the Suffolk County Council Development and Regulation Committee (11 June 2019) the TRO was rejected by the Committee. Therefore, it would be premature and unacceptable to rely on a TRO that has not been agreed by the Highway Authority. As the measures for the strategic allocation of Brightwell Lakes have not been fully agreed, the proposed Garden Village, if approved, would seriously undermine the ability to deliver Brightwell Lakes and have an unacceptable impact on highway safety. Furthermore, the residual cumulative impacts on the road network in the ISPA would be severe and impacts on air quality harmful, contrary to NPPF paragraphs 103,108, 109 and 181.
Through the preparation of aligned Local Plans, the authorities of the ISPA are progressing Infrastructure Delivery Plans to ensure that each authority can facilitate the anticipated level of ... view the full minutes text for item 35.
Councillor Jones congratulated Officers from the Planning
Department on their comprehensive presentations to Committee, the
enforcement work undertaken in relation to unlawful HMO
developments, and recognition of the professional input from Mr
Collins, Development Management Team Leader and Mr Taylor, Senior
Conservation and Urban Design Officer, as mentioned at the recent
opening of The Maltings redevelopment.
Re: Steam Boat Tavern: Councillor P Smart queried whether the
adjoining land was in different ownership to the building
itself. The Planning & Development
Operations Manager confirmed that the building and adjoining land
were in different ownership, and therefore the Enforcement Officers
had been engaging with the landowner, not the landlord.
36.3. Re: 6 Silent Street: The Planning & Development Operations Manager reported that the property owner of 6 Silent Street had attended the Magistrates’ Court on 23 July 2019, and whilst some of the works had been undertaken, this was not to the satisfaction of Court and the owner was fined £2,500 for each breach, totalling £20,000, plus full costs of £19,795.50 were awarded to the Council. The Planning & Development Operations Manager confirmed that the costs awarded covered the costs of the Solicitor and the Council’s Planning Officers.
that the information for Councillors be noted.