7th December 2005 - Minutes

Planning Application No.   B/05/01892	Representations From   Mrs Gosling (Applicant)
B/05/01679	Mr Connor (Applicant)
B/05/01706	Mrs Tolputt (Applicant)
B/05/01408	Mrs Quare ( Objector) Mr Scarff (Agent for the Applicant)
B/04/01176	Mr Cicconi (Objector) Mr Holroyd (Applicant)

RESOLVED

That subject to the imposition of conditions or reasons for refusal (whether additional or otherwise), in accordance with the delegated powers under Council Minute No. 63 (d) dated 27 April 1999, decisions on the items referred to in Paper E222 be made as follows:-

(a)	HADLEIGH   Application No. B/05/01892 Paper E222 – Item 1	Full Application – Erection of single storey rear extension (amended scheme to that approved under PPB/05/00579/FHA) 3 Cottesford Close.
	Members considered that the exceptional personal circumstances of the Applicant outweighed any objections to the application.   RESOLVED   That planning permission be granted.
(b)	TATTINGSTONE   Application No. B/05/01679 Paper E222 – Item 2		Full Application – Erection of Part two-storey and part single storey extension, Rubecon, 10 The Close.
	RESOLVED   That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:   §                     Failure to respect the proportions and scale of the house dwelling and the character of the surrounding development contrary to Policies LP20, HS70 and CN01.
(c)	SUDBURY   Application No. B/05/01706 Paper E222 – Item 5		Full Application – erection of detached two storey dwelling with double garage, land adjacent to Ballingdon Grove, Middleton Road.
	Notwithstanding the recommendation of the Head of Planning (Control) to refuse planning permission, a motion to grant planning permission was moved because Members did not consider the application to be contrary to Policies LP93 and CR01 as the area surrounding the site was built-up and not considered to be countryside.  Upon being put to the vote this motion was lost.    RESOLVED   That planning permission be refused for the following reasons:   §                 Contrary to Policies LP3, LP93, HSO1, HS04, CR01, ENV4 and ENV6.
(d)	COCKFIELD   Application No. B/05/01453 Paper E222 – Item 6		Full Application – Erection of two-storey front and side extension and single-storey side extension.  Alterations to vehicular access and erection of post and rail fence and gates, Clovelly, Howe Lane.
	Notwithstanding the recommendation of the Head of Planning (Control) to grant planning permission, a motion to refuse planning permission was moved because Members were concerned that the application may have a detrimental impact on the surrounding area and the character of the existing dwellings.  Upon being put to the vote this motion was lost.   RESOLVED   That planning permission be granted.
(e)	HOLTON ST MARY   Application No. B/05/01408  Paper E222 – Item 9		Full Application – conversion and change of use of agricultural building to class B1 business use, Holton Place, Sandpits Lane.
	Members noted that comments had now been received from the County Highway Authority who recommended refusal of the amended application because they considered there to be insufficient possibility to improve junction visibility and  road safety.   RESOLVED   That planning permission be refused for the following reason:-   §                    As recommended by the County Highway Authority
(f)	SUDBURY   Application No. B/04/01176 Paper E222 – Item 11		Outline Application – Residential development, Armes Trading Estate, Cornard Road.
	Members considered the request from the applicant that although the Heads of Terms for the Section 106 had been agreed to include 30% affordable housing it should now be reduced to 20% to ensure the viability of the scheme to deliver sufficient funds to allow the new factory to be built.  It was proposed that recommendation (A) be amended to state that the obligation under the Section 106 in respect of affordable housing should be not less than 20%, but when put to the vote it was subsequently lost.
	RESOLVED
	(1)        That the Solicitor to the Council be authorised to secure a planning     obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, in respect of :-   §               Affordable housing §               An education contribution §               A commuted sum for the maintenance of a LAP on site §               A contribution to be made towards sports provision in the town centre §               Suitable scheme of management for the bio-diversity area
	(2)        That subject to the planning obligation referred to in resolution (1) above being secured the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to grant outline planning permission subject to the following conditions:-   §                 No development to commence until a contract has been let for the construction of the new purpose built development for the firm on Churchfield Road §                 As recommended by County Highway Authority §                 As recommended by Environment Agency §                 As recommended by archaeologist §                 Suitable scheme of construction and management of slope stability §                 Landscaping §                 Details of the LAP to be provided §                 20% 1 and 2 bedroom dwellings §                 Decontamination
	(3)        That in the event of the planning obligation referred to in (1) above not being completed, the Head of Planning (Control) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the following reasons (as may be appropriate) :-   §                 inadequate/no affordable housing §                 Inadequate/no provision of public open space and play equipment (on site) §                 Inadequate/no education contribution §                 Inadequate/no scheme for the management of the bio-diversity area
(g)	WHERSTEAD   Application No. B/05/01685 Paper E222 – Item 12	Full Application – Conversion and change of use of former agricultural building to farm retail outlet, with ancillary café and children’s play facility, plus a plant nursery and office.  Alterations to vehicular highway and construction of parking bays, parking and servicing areas, farm building at Wherstead Hall, Peppers Lane.
	Mr Jones, Ward Member for Brook requested a site inspection to enable Members to assess the application in the light of recent introductions in the Local Plan and also to assess the potential environmental impact.   RESOLVED   (1)           That consideration of the recommendations of the Head of Planning (Control) contained in (g) above be deferred.   (2)           That a site inspection be held on Wednesday 14 December 2005, that the Panel of Members appointed under Minute 74 above inspect the site and that a report thereon be submitted to the next meeting of the Committee, if appropriate.