Item No: 2 Reference: B/16/00397/OUT

Parish: & Ward Members: Cllrs Barry Gasper and Nick Ridley

Location: Land east of Lane Farm, Folly Lane, , IP8 3JQ

Proposal: Outline - Erection of 16 No. dwellings

Applicant: Mr Geelmuyden

Case Officer: Gemma Pannell Date for Determination: 23 June 2016

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse Planning Permission

This application is referred to Planning Committee as the proposal is of a scale that requires consideration by Members.

THE SITE

1. The site comprises former agricultural land, previously used in association with a neighbouring fruit farm and extends to 1.1ha. The site abuts the built up area boundary on its eastern edge. The site is opposite to a working farm, Lane Farm. To the north-east the site is bordered by an area of woodland, to the northwest and south-east by the gardens of neighbouring residential properties.

THE PROPOSAL

2. The application is outline, with all matters reserved, for 16 dwellings. The applicant has provided an indicative layout to demonstrate that the site could accommodate this scale of development, which represents 14.5 dwellings per hectare. The applicant has also confirmed that the site would include 5 affordable dwellings.

3. The application documents can be viewed on line via the planning pages on the District Council’s website.

RELEVANT HISTORY

4. Land east of Lane Farm, Folly Lane, Copdock And Washbrook

B/89/01106/OUT Outline - residential development (maximum 5 dwellings) Refused B/80/00029/ O/A Residential development Refused W/3866/ Erection of Bungalow (Wandelaar) Granted

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK

5. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) contains the Government’s planning policies for and sets out how these are expected to be applied. Planning law, and the NPPF, continues to require that applications for planning permission are determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The policies contained within the NPPF are a material consideration and should be taken into account for decision-making purposes.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 40

6. The NPPF is supported by the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG), which assists applicants and decision makers to interpret the NPPF. Both the NPPF and PPG are referred to within this report where relevant to the assessment.

PLANNING POLICIES

7. The Development Plan comprises the Babergh Core Strategy 2014 and saved policies in the Babergh Local Plan (Alteration No.2) adopted 2006. The following policies are applicable to the proposal:

Babergh Core Strategy 2014

 CS1 Applying the Presumption in favour of sustainable development in Babergh  CS2 Settlement Pattern Policy  CS3 Strategy for Growth and Development  CS11 Strategy for Development for Core and Hinterland Villages  CS15 Implementing Sustainable Development in Babergh  CS18 Mix and Types of Dwellings  CS16 Affordable Homes  CS21 Infrastructure Provision

Babergh Local Plan (Alteration No.2) 2006

 HS32 Public Open Space (New Dwellings and Sites up to 1.5ha)  CN01 Design Standards  CR07 Landscaping Schemes  TP15 Parking Standards – New Development

8. The relevant policies can be viewed on line. Please see the notes attached to the schedule.

CONSULTATIONS

9. Copdock and Washbrook Parish Council – No objection in principle to residential development of this site, however the following comments are made:

 Present proposals are an overdevelopment;  The layout is not in keeping with adjacent properties;  Folly Lane is considered too narrow to accommodate this level of traffic;  Houses were out of keeping with the existing residential properties and that either bungalows or chalet bungalows would be more in keeping;  The site access is sited in an unsuitable position;  Insufficient parking spaces for the type and number of dwellings proposed;  No amenity space provided in the scheme.

10. County Highway Authority - The Highway Authority has no objection to the principle of residential development on this site. However, the access route to the site, Folly Lane leading to London Road, is not adequate in its current form to adequately or safely serve residential development traffic, both pedestrians and vehicles.

11. The Applicant, via the Agent, has acknowledged the deficiencies of the access route and have accepted the need for highway improvements. The submitted Design and Access Statement and accompanying Site Layout drawing both indicate acceptance to provision of road and footway improvements along Folly Lane.

12. The required highway improvements can all be accommodated within the existing highway land (as researched by the Agents) and do not require third party land. The

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 41

improvements are listed as follows:  Widening and adjustment of the existing Folly Lane junction with London Road. The width of Folly Lane is only approx. 4.4 metres wide between the existing kerbs at the junction and this provides difficulty for 2 cars trying to pass each other. This means that any vehicle waiting to turn into Folly Lane is having to wait on London Road if a vehicle is leaving Folly Lane at the same time.  Provision of a footway along Folly Lane to link the application site with the existing footway and bus stops on London Road.  As there is currently only a footway on the north bound (or bound) side of London Road, there is a need for a short section of footway to be provided across the central reservation on London Road. This will allow residents to access the existing bus stop and shelter on the south bound (or Capel St Mary bound) side.  Folly Lane is not wide enough to allow two vehicles to pass each other so there will be a need to widen Folly Lane between London Road and the application site access. Widening of Folly Lane on the site frontage will require the repositioning of the existing drainage ditch.

13. All of the above improvements will be subject to appropriate design and can be accommodated either within the existing highway or the application site.

14. Environment Agency - The submitted application form does not include any information on how foul water from the development will be dealt with. Section 7.3 of the Design and Access Statement states that ‘This is an Outline Application, and any upgrades or provision for foul and surface water drainage will be included as part of the details of the proposal and will be agreed as Reserved Matters.’ However, without this information, we are unable to provide advice on any water quality concerns we may have. Even when establishing the principle of the development at the outline stage, the applicant must supply adequate information to demonstrate that the risks of pollution posed to water quality can be safely managed.

15. The first presumption should be to provide a system of foul drainage discharging into a public sewer to be treated at a public sewage treatment works. A private means of foul effluent disposal is only acceptable when foul mains drainage is unavailable. Information we hold shows that the site is served by public sewers and it is therefore assumed that the development will be connected to the main foul sewer, although you should ensure this is confirmed before you make your decision. Anglian Water Services should be consulted regarding the available capacity in the foul water infrastructure. If there is not sufficient capacity in the infrastructure then we must be consulted again with alternative methods of disposal.

16. County Archaeologist – No objection, subject to condition

17. Anglian Water – No objection: The foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Chantry Water Recycline Centre that will have available capacity for these fulls. The sewerage system at present has available capacity for these flows. The proposed method of surface water management does not relate to Anglian Water assets and therefore advice should be sought from the Lead Local Flood Authority.

18. Natural England – No comment

19. Wildlife Trust – Based on the available information, we are satisfied with the findings of the consultant and request that the recommendations made within the report are implemented in full, via a condition of planning consent, should permission be granted.

20. Planning Obligations Manager - I refer to the planning application consultation for the scheme in Babergh.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 42

 Proposed number of dwellings from outline proposal: 16  Approximate persons generated from proposal 38

21. The local catchment schools are Copdock Primary School, High and Suffolk One. We currently forecast to have no surplus places at the primary and secondary school, but do have surplus places at Suffolk One. Therefore we require CIL contributions for the pupils generated from the development.

School level Minimum pupil yield: Required: Cost per place £ (2016/17): Primary school age range, 5-11: 3 3 12,181 High school age range, 11-16: 2 2 18,355 Sixth school age range, 16+: 1 0 19,907 Total education contributions: £73,253.00

22. From this development proposal we would anticipate up to 2 pre-school pupils at a cost of £6,091 per place. There is 1 provider in this area with no surplus spaces available.

Minimum number of eligible children: Required: Cost per place £ (2016/17): Pre-School age range, 2-4: 2 2 6,091 Required pre-school contributions: £12,182.00

23. Using established methodology, the capital contribution towards libraries arising sought from this scheme is stated below and would be spent at the local catchment library and allows for improvements and enhancements to be made to library services and facilities.

Libraries contribution: £21,600.00

Summary Table:

Service Requirement Contribution per Capital Contribution dwelling Education - Primary £2,283.94 £36,543.00 Education – Secondary £2,294.38 £36,710.00 Education – Sixth Form £0.00 £ 0.00 Pre-School Provision £761.38 £12,182.00 Transport £0.0 £0.00 Libraries £1,350.00 £21,600.00 Waste £0.00 £0.00 Total £6,689.70 £107,035.00

24. The above will form the basis of a future bid to the District Council for CIL funds. This will be reviewed if a reserved matters application is submitted.

25. Suffolk County Council Flood & Water Team (inc Drainage) – Notice is hereby given that the County Council as Lead Local Flood Authority recommends that any permission which that Planning Authority may give should include the conditions requiring submission of surface water drainage details.

26. Arboricultural Officer – David Pizzey - I have no objection in principle to this application based upon the proposed layout and findings of the tree survey. Whilst 2 trees are proposed for removal these are of limited amenity value and their loss will have negligible impact on the appearance and character of the local area. However, Oak T1 is of high value and ideally should be given greater space as part of the design in order to help avoid future pressure for pruning and/or removal. If you are minded to approve the scheme we will require further information including a detailed

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 43

Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan in order to ensure implementation of appropriate protection measures.

27. Professional lead – Housing Enabling – The most recent information from the Babergh Council’s Housing Register shows 17 applicants registered who have a connection to Copdock and Washbrook.

28. Based on CS19 and requirements of CS11, 5 of the dwellings on the proposed development should be for affordable housing, 3 of these dwellings should be for Affordable Rent Tenancy; 2 for Shared Ownership.

These should take the form of:

 2 x 1-bedroom 2-person flats at 48 square metres for Affordable Rent Tenancy  1 x 2-bedroom 4-person houses at 76 square metres for Affordable Rent Tenancy  2 x 2-bedroom 4-person houses at 76 square metres for Shared Ownership

29. Environmental Health – Land Contamination Issues – No objection to the proposed development from a land contamination perspective.

30. Environmental Health – Sustainability Issues - Conditions are recommended in order to ensure compliance with the relevant energy/sustainability standards at both the Design and Post-Construction stages.

Environmental Health – Other Issues

31. Initial comments: The site is in close proximity to exiting residential dwellings and therefore there is considerable potential for loss of amenity during the site clearance and construction stages of the proposed development. For this reason I would strongly suggest that the following conditions are attached to any permission:

 No development shall commence until a Construction and Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), to cover both demolition/site clearance and construction phases of the development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP shall be undertaken in accordance with best practice guidelines and BS: 5228:2009 + A1:2014 (and any revisions thereof). The plan shall include details of operating hours, scheduled timing/phasing of development for the overall construction period, means of access, traffic routes, vehicle parking and manoeuvring areas (site operatives and visitors), loading and unloading of plant and materials, location and management of wheel washing facilities, external lighting, location and nature of compounds and storage areas (including maximum storage heights), waste removal, location and nature of temporary buildings and boundary treatments, dust management, noise management (both in terms of workers and local residents, and to include a noise limit at the nearest sensitive residential property, or agreed representative accessible monitoring point, details of plant selection, and operation in terms of best practice) and waste/litter management during the construction phases of the development. Thereafter, the approved construction plan shall be fully implemented and adhered to during the construction phases of the development hereby approved, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Note: if applicable, the Construction Management Plan shall be submitted in phases for each phase of construction so as to take account of protection measures for both newly constructed (and occupier) dwellings as well as those dwellings which existed prior to commencement/

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 44

 No burning shall take place on site during the site clearance/demolition or construction phases of the development.

 No site machinery or plant shall be operated, no noise intrusive process shall be carried out and no demolition or construction related deliveries received or dispatched from the site except between the hours of 08.00 – 18.00 Monday to Friday, 09.00 – 13.00 Saturday and at no time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.

32. It is unclear as to whether any external streetlighting is planned as part of the proposal. As part of the proposed access road is set back from existing properties, there was potential for light spillage into these properties and for this reason I would suggest that following condition be attached to any permission:

 Before the development commences a written scheme shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority that specifies the provisions to be made for the level of illumination of the site and to control light pollution. The scheme shall be implemented prior to beneficial use of the approved development and maintained for the lifetime of the approved development and shall not be altered without the prior written approval of the local planning authority. The scheme shall provide that each pole/wall counted light must be aligned to ensure that the upper limit of the main beam does not exceed 70 degrees from its downward vertical. All pole/wall mounted lighting shall be designed and operated to have full horizontal cut-off such that the Upward Waste Light Ratio does not exceed 2.5%. The submitted scheme shall include an isolux diagram showing the predicted luminance in the vertical plane (in lux) at critical locations on the boundary of the site and at adjacent sensitive properties (including those within the scheme where appropriate).

(note: The applicants attention is drawn to the Institution of Lighting Professionals Guidance Note for the reduction of obtrusive light 2011(or later versions).

33. Further comments (following receipt of objection from neighbouring farm): The application site is in close proximity to Lane Farm, which I understand is a working cattle and tillage farm. Livestock farms can be associated with loss of amenity at nearby residential dwellings due to both noise from animals/agricultural machinery (particularly in the early morning) and odour. For this reason I would have reservations about the placement of new dwellings in close proximity of working farms, as any valid complaints could fetter the operation of the farm.

34. I note that there are a number of existing dwellings in the vicinity although some of the proposed dwellings (especially units 1 – 8) will be closer to the road and thus in slightly closer proximity to the Farm and I would therefore anticipate that there would be a degree of loss of amenity at the proposed dwellings. I regret that I am unable to offer any detailed comment on the likely degree of this as the Environmental Protection team has no records of any complaints relating to odour or noise from this farm from any of the existing dwellings. However, it is of note that the proposed dwellings would be in line with the prevailing wind from the cattle farm and thus the likelihood of loss of amenity might be higher.

35. I am also aware that Appletree Farm, at the end of Folly Lane, operates a number of industrial/commercial units which can be associated with increased passenger car movements at key times as well as HGV and other goods vehicles servicing the units. I am aware that the movement of HGVs and delivery vehicles are controlled by means of planning condition, however you may wish to consider the number of passenger (staff) vehicles likely to be passing over a limited and concentrated timespan (e.g. arriving at the same time in order to begin work at a set time) which could result in loss of amenity at houses close to the road. Environmental Protection are unable to respond to noise

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 45

complaints relating to vehicles on the highway and for this reason you may wish to consult with the Suffolk County Council Noise and Air Quality Manager for further comments.

36. Suffolk Fire and Rescue – Fire hydrants will be required as part of this development, it is not possible at this stage to determine the number.

37. National Farmers Union – Lane Farm is a cattle farming operation which is directly opposite the planning application site. Indeed the main cattle buildings, used to house cattle over the winter months, are immediately adjacent to Folly Lane and therefore within a few metres of the proposed development. As such the disruption and distress to the cattle of major building development would be substantial, potential impacting on the performance of the stock.

38. Longer term the introduction of residential development so close to cattle production and housing could lead to spurious nuisance claims that could affect the viability of the business. For these farming business related reasons the NFU objects to the planning application.

REPRESENTATIONS

39. 11 representation(s) objecting to the application have been received and the comments are summarised as follows:

 There are a maximum of 250 cattle at Lane Farm, directly opposite the site, at any one time and there is concern that the applicant has not given due regard to the proximity of the business and attendant noise, odours and farm related traffic that future residents of new housing may find objectionable. This could potentially put the farm business at risk of action arising from nuisance complaints and compromise the future viability of the farm.  The field is very productive being rotated annually with barley, oats and wheat. It and it is connected with the operation of the livestock farm business.  Lack of information pertaining to traffic and access  Unsuitability of the site in respect of the criteria of policy CS11 of the Core Strategy.  The site is isolated from services and is not suitable for the level of growth proposed.  A development of the nature proposed would be out of character for the area  Poor connectivity with facilities in the village  Density – the area is rural and most properties have large gardens. The indicative layout is urban in design.  Road Width – Folly Lane is single vehicle width with no footpath for pedestrians.  Sewerage – Existing problems with sewer in Folly Lane. A new sewer should be constructed to serve these properties.  A scheme of half the number would be acceptable.  People nearby would be distressed by the large number of properties and the number of people likely to occupy them.  The development is next to an established cattery – which will be disturbed by the development  Permission has been refused previously for development on this site  Para 55 of the NPPF states that new houses in the countryside should be avoided unless there are special circumstances  The advantage of this development would not outweigh the social and environmental disadvantages of allowing 16 houses to be built in this rural area.  Planning permission was refused for 7 houses backing onto London Road. Many of the reasons for refusal apply to this planning application and should be taken into account.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 46

 Loss of privacy, more noise and loss of light.  Major disruption to Folly Lane.

(One letter received written on behalf of a cat residing next to the site has not been summarised – but is available to view on the public file)

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS

40. From an assessment of planning policies, public representations and other material considerations, the main considerations it is appropriate to evaluate the following key aspects in relation to this development in a hinterland village:

 Principle of Development  Consideration against policy CS11 and SPD  Impact on landscape  Impact on environmental characteristics  Impact on heritage assets  Connectivity and Highway safety  Biodiversity and Protected Species  Land Contamination  Surface Water Drainage  Loss of agricultural land  Planning Obligations and CIL  Planning Balance

Principle of Development

41. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published on 27th March 2012. It provides that the NPPF "does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved, and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise".

42. The NPPF also provides (para 187) that “Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-takers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.”

43. Copdock and Washbrook is defined as a hinterland village under policy CS2, which states that hinterland villages will accommodate some development to help meet the needs within their functional cluster. Copdock and Washbrook falls within both the Ipswich Cluster and the Capel St Mary Cluster. Ipswich comprises the villages of , Burstall, , , Pinewood, and , in addition to Copdock and Washbrook. The Capel St Mary cluster also includes Bentley, Holton St Mary, , , and . Therefore policy CS11, which provides greater flexibility for appropriate development beyond the BUAB for identified hinterland villages, would apply.

44. Policy CS3 of the Core Strategy identities 1050 homes for rural areas, this quantum of development is unallocated at present (in either district development plan documents or Neighbourhood Plans) so there is a reliance at present on windfall sites to deliver this growth.

45. Development in hinterland villages will be approved where proposals are able to demonstrate a close functional relationship to the existing settlement where the criteria related to core villages in CS11 are addressed to the satisfaction of the local planning

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 47

authority and the additional criteria related to hinterland villages is also met.

Consideration against policy CS11 and SPD  the landscape, environmental and heritage characteristics of the village;  the locational context of the village and the proposed development (particularly the AONBs, Conservation Areas, and heritage assets);  site location and sequential approach to site selection;  locally identified need - housing and employment, and specific local needs such as affordable housing;  locally identified community needs; and  cumulative impact of development in the area in respect of social, physical and environmental Impacts.

46. Policy CS11 sets out the Local Plan 'Strategy for Development in Core and Hinterland Villages' and (so far as relevant) states that: "Proposals for development for Core Villages will be approved where proposals score positively when assessed against Policy CS15 and the following matters are addressed to the satisfaction of the local planning authority … where relevant and appropriate to the scale and location of the proposal: i) the landscape, environmental and heritage characteristics of the village; ii) the locational context of the village and the proposed development (particularly the AONBs, Conservation Areas, and heritage assets); iii) site location and sequential approach to site selection; iv) locally identified need - housing and employment, and specific local needs such as affordable housing; v) locally identified community needs; and vi) cumulative impact of development in the area in respect of social, physical and environmental Impacts. 47. The general purpose of the Policy CS11 is to provide greater flexibility in the location of new housing development in the Core and Hinterland Villages. Considered together, Policy CS2 (Settlement Pattern Policy) and Policy CS3 (Strategy for Development and Growth) and Policy CS11 provide for a minimum of 1,050 dwellings to be delivered in Core and Hinterland Villages for the period between 2011 and 2031. Subject to specified criteria, Policy CS11 intentionally provides greater flexibility for appropriate development beyond the existing Built Up Area Boundaries (BUAB) for each Core Village, as identified in the 2006 Local Plan Saved Policies. 48. The accompanying 'Rural Development & Core Strategy Policy CS11 Supplementary Planning 49. Document ("the SPD") was adopted by the Council on 8 August 2014. The Council produced the SPD to provide guidance on the interpretation and application of Policy CS11, acknowledging that the Site Allocations Document foreshadowed in Policy CS11 may not be prepared for some time. Although the SPD is not part of the statutory development plan, its preparation included a process of community consultation before it was adopted by the Council, means that it is a material consideration when planning applications are determined. 50. The proper interpretation of development plan policy is a matter of law and, in principle, policy statements should be interpreted objectively in accordance with the language used, read as always in its proper context; however, statements of policy should not be construed as if they were statutory or contractual provisions (see Tesco Stores Ltd v Dundee City Council [2012] UKSC 13).

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 48

51. Accordingly, the correct meaning of Policy CS11 requires an objective interpretation of the policy text considered in the context of relevant development plan policies and the wider context of national planning policy in force when the Core Strategy was adopted in February 2014. As the SPD was not adopted until August 2014, the proper interpretation of Policy CS11 cannot be influenced by the guidance within the SPD. 52. However, to the extent that it is consistent with the proper interpretation of Policy CS11, the planning guidance within the SPD will be relevant to the Council's application of Policy CS11 when determining planning applications. In this respect, under the subheading 'Scale of Proposal in Relation to Existing Settlement', paragraph 12 of the SPD states (so far as relevant) that: "12. … The size and scale of any proposal should be proportionate to the settlement in which it is located. Because each village is different it is not possible to prescribe standard proportions of development that would be acceptable. A judgment will need to be made on the basis of the size and character of the village, the services and facilities that are available and their capacity to accommodate further development

…Proposals for both core and hinterland villages will need to demonstrate that the development can be accommodated without adversely affecting the character of the village and that the services, facilities and infrastructure have the capacity to accommodate it or will be enhanced to accommodate it." 53. The matters listed in Policy CS11, which proposal for development for Hinterland villages must address, are now considered in turn, these include all of the criteria for Core Villages and additional matters also. 1. The landscape, environmental and heritage characteristics of the village 54. Folly Lane retains a rural appearance, defined by wide grass verges, a variable width to the carriageway and an absence of raised concrete kerbs. The site itself is bordered by a deep ditch and verge alongside Folly Lane, there is no hedgerow remaining. The site is well contained by vegetation and buildings on neighbouring land and views toward the site from the surrounding landscape are extremely limited. 55. It is considered that the loss of the arable field in this context will not have a significant adverse impact on the character of the wider landscape. The ditch may need to be modified to accommodate access but it is indicated that this will remain and be bordered by a mixed native hedgerow to maintain the rural appearance of Folly Lane, however noting the comments of the highway authority with regard to the need for carriageway widening, it would need to be carefully considered as part of the design and layout of the scheme. The existing mature oak is indicated to be retained, with space to be provided around it to ensure it is adequately protected. 56. The residential development of the site itself is not considered to have a significant adverse impact on the local landscape character, which is punctuated by residential development in this location. However, consideration of the impact of the suggested layout on the character and appearance of the settlement as a whole and the impacts of the suggested highway improvements are both considered later in the report. 2. The locational context of the village and the proposed development This matter requires an assessment of the context in which the application site is located by reference to the village, its facilities and applicable planning designations. Paragraph 10 of the SPD states that: "To be considered under CS11 proposals must be in or adjacent to a Core Village or a Hinterland Village. Proposals should be well related to the existing settlement. It is suggested that the starting point for assessing this is whether

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 49

or not the site adjoins the Built Up Area Boundary (BUAB) of the village. Some sites, even though they adjoin a BUAB may not be well related to the village and a judgement will need to be made taking in account issues such as:  Whether the proposal would constitute ribbon development on the edge of the village  How the site is connected to the exiting settlement, jobs, facilities and services including location of site access and availability of sustainable transport links  The scale, character and density of the proposal in relation to the existing adjoining development  Whether the proposal constituted a logical extension of the built up area of the village  Whether the proposal is self-contained and has logical natural boundaries" 57. The site abuts the built up area boundary, which encompasses properties along London Road. The site at Folly Lane is located at the southern must end of the built up area boundary. The site is located 0.1 miles from the nearest bust stop – which is situated at the junction between Folly Lane and London Road. The 93 and 93c bus serve this stop with a service which runs between and Ipswich. There is a bus every hour between 6 – 9am and the bus takes between 16 – 22mins to reach Ipswich train station. The site is approximately 1.8km from the petrol filling station at Capel St Mary, whilst there is a footpath along part of this route, it is not hard surfaced for its entire length, and part of the footpath runs alongside the A12; therefore it would not readily encourage pedestrian access to the services in Capel St Mary.

58. In February 2016, an appeal was dismissed for the erection of 7 no. dwellings and associated external works tied to engineering business at land adjacent to Krendall Cottage, Old London Road, Copdock (B/15/00453/OUT). The main issues were whether the proposal would comprise sustainable development and whether the site would provide suitable ground conditions.

59. The relevance to the current application is the consideration with regard to how well related to the existing settlement the proposed site is.

60. The site, which was subject to the appeal, is 1.4km to the north of Folly Lane and is located on the opposite side of Old London Road. The appeal decision makes a number of points with regard the location of the site in relation to the main built up part of Copdock. This strengthens officers opinion that the site is remote from the main part of the village.

“The main part of Copdock and Washbrook village is located just over a half mile north of the appeal site, to the north west of the main road.

61. Whilst noting the various business and dwellings spread out along Old London Road in either direction of the appeal site, and accepting that the 7 dwellings would reflect that dispersed development pattern, I nonetheless consider this appeal site to be clearly outside of, and separate from, the main built-part of the nearest village of Copdock and Washbrook to the north.

62. Policy CS11 might support a housing development adjacent or well related to the existing pattern of development for that settlement…the intention of the policy is not considered to support the consolidation of the small clusters of development here.

63. It is considered that this classification of countryside would apply to the rather small amount of sporadic housing around the appeal site.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 50

64. The Council notes that Copdock and Washbrook provide little in terms of daily required services and those that are present such as the primary school, are of a 1.1km distance, and involve crossing the dual carriageway, such as to discourage access by means other than by private car

65. Notwithstanding the bus service that is available, the nature, distances and dispersed arrangements of the nearby services along this road do not lend strong support to this proposal offering a sustainable location for housing development in terms of convenient access to daily required services by means other than by private car.”

66. The Folly Lane site is located 2.5km from the services within the village and is therefore, taking into account the considerations taken by the Planning Inspector, considered unsustainable in terms of its location when considered under the criteria of CS2, with regard to the consideration of development within the countryside and as supported by the criteria set out in policy CS15, notably in respect of benefitting from an appropriate level of services, facilities and infrastructure and minimising the need to travel by car. Therefore in addition to be being contrary to policy CS11, the development is also considered to be contrary to policy CS2 and CS15 of the core strategy. 67. Site location and sequential approach to site selection 68. The applicant has undertaken an assessment of a number of sites within Copdock and Washbrook and concluded that there are no sites which are sequentially preferable to their own application. Consideration has been given to the other sites identified by the applicant and it is not considered that any of those would be sequentially preferable to the application site, with the exception of “Site B” as referred to by the applicant – land NE of Back Lane and NW of Elm Lane (Football Ground), which is currently subject to an application for planning permission and is considered in the officers assessment below.

69. Paragraph 47 of the NPPF states that in order for housing sites to be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that development of the site is viable.

70. The SHLAA identifies 4 potential sites in Copdock and Washbrook (WAS01; COP3, 4 & 5), which could give an estimated yield of 1,120 dwellings, within the functional cluster of Ipswich this rises to 2,030 and in Capel St Mary, 1,940. The application site is not identified within the 2016 SHLAA. 71. Whether or not any of these sites are sequentially preferable involves the exercise of planning judgement. The considerations relevant to that judgement will be whether those sites are developable and deliverable. The terms "developable" and "deliverable" should be considered in the context of the NPPF, specifically, the policy within Section 6 'Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes' The meaning of the term "developable" is provided by in footnote 12 to paragraph 47 of the NPPF, which states: "12. To be considered developable, sites should be in a suitable location for housing development and there should be a reasonable prospect that the site is available and could be viably developed at the point envisaged." Footnote 11 addresses the meaning of "deliverable" to paragraph 47 states that, "11. To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that development of the site is viable. Sites with planning permission should be considered deliverable until permission expires.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 51

72. (COP05) is not considered to be sequentially preferable to the application site as no information is given within the SHLAA as to whether the sites are available and therefore there is no indication as to the timescales for delivery. (COP3 & COP4) have been estimated for delivery in the next 5 – 10 years and are therefore not sequentially preferable as there is no clear indication that there is a reasonable prospect that housing would be delivered on the site within five years. WAS01 is identified in the SHLAA as suitable for development within the next 1 – 5 years; however the site is in multiple ownership and also forms part of the larger site COP05. Whilst the Local Planning Authority is aware of discussions on this site, it is not possible to consider the site deliverable due to the uncertainty as to whether the site will be delivered in part or as part of a larger scheme; which is likely to need to be considered as part of a formal allocation document.

73. Therefore, whilst the sites identified within the SHLAA have a much closer functional relationship in terms of their proximity to the services within the village of Copdock and Washbrook (school, open space); the lack of certainty over the availability and timescales for deliverability suggest that they are not, on balance, sequentially preferable

74. Nonetheless, an application has been submitted and is currently under consideration on the former Football Ground, Back Lane, Copdock. This is a full application for the provision of 15 dwellings (including the provision of 5 affordable dwellings) and therefore is directly comparable with the site at Folly Lane.

75. The application site, whilst located in proximity to an existing bus stop is functionally isolated from the main settlement of Copdock and Washbrook. The village itself contains the school, pre-school and public house as well as slightly away from the centre of the village, the village hall and sports fields. The Football Ground site whilst still separate from the centre of the village is within a short walk from the network of public footpaths which give access to the village centre, in addition there is a bus stop directly outside of the site. Furthermore, development of this site would be closely linked to sites identified within the SHLAA which may come forward for development in the future.

76. It is considered that the Football Ground site under consideration is sequentially preferable to the application site at Folly Lane, Copdock Locally identified need - housing and employment, and specific local needs such as affordable housing 77. Members will be aware that the Planning Court will consider two claims for judicial review challenging the Council's decision to grant planning permission for development proposed for the Core Villages of and East Bergholt. Both clams include grounds of challenge concerning the proper interpretation of Policy CS11; specifically, the meaning of "locally identified need" as one of the matters that a proposal for development for a Core Village must address to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 78. The Council defends both claims for judicial review on the basis that the decisions to grant planning permission proceeded upon a proper interpretation of Policy CS11, as it relates to "locally identified needs" and a lawful application of relevant development plan policies, including Policy CS11, having regard to the particular facts and circumstances relevant to each decision. 79. The Council contends that "locally identified needs" must be construed having regard to Policy CS2 (Settlement Pattern Policy), Policy CS3 (Strategy for Growth and Development) and Policy CS11 (Strategy for Development for Core and Hinterland Villages), which require Core and Hinterland Villages to make a contribution towards meeting the District's housing needs. As stated above, these policies provide for a

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 52

minimum of 1,050 dwellings to be delivered in Core and Hinterland Villages for the period between 2011 and 2031. 80. Paragraph 2.8.5.4 of the Core Strategy notes that the total requirement of 1,050 new dwellings to be accommodated in Core and Hinterland Villages should not be viewed as a sum simply to be divided equally or randomly between the number of villages listed. The approach to the distribution of new dwellings within Policy CS3 is to be driven by the function of the villages, their role in the community, and the capacity for a particular level of growth which will be guided by many factors and which will result in a different level of development being identified as "appropriate" in different settlements, even those within the same category. The approach will also provide for a degree of in-built flexibility within the catchment area. 81. The Core Villages are very varied and their needs and factors which influence what is an "appropriate level of development" will vary from village to village, especially where villages are situated within environmentally and visually sensitive landscapes, particularly the AONBs, and/or where villages include conservation areas and heritage assets. These landscapes and heritage assets will be key considerations when considering planning applications. 82. Without prejudice to the Council's defence to the two extant claims for judicial review, until such time as the Planning Court delivers judgment, it would be prudent for the Council to adopt a cautious approach to the determination of planning applications involving proposals for development for Core Villages. Accordingly, "locally identified need" or "local need" should be construed as the development to meet the needs of the Hinterland Village identified in the application, namely Copdock and how it relates to the core villages and the cluster it is within. 83. It is important to note that this interpretation of Policy CS11 should not be misconstrued as a justification to restrict proposals for new development in and around Core Villages to meet the needs of that Core Village alone. The Core Strategy expressly contemplates that Core Villages will accommodate the majority of new housing development to meet the needs described in Policy CS3 as "rural growth", including the development needs of the "functional cluster" served by that Core Village. Where appropriate, the development needs of a wider catchment area may also be relevant, subject to the particular needs of local rural communities and significant constraints on development in nearby Core and Hinterland Villages (see Core Strategy, paragraph 2.8.5.4) 84. Policy CS11 allows flexibility for developments of appropriate scale and form to come forward for Core Villages. The Growth and Development Strategy therefore allows for some rural growth, which has been identified locally as important to sustain the existing rural settlement pattern and existing rural communities in the catchment area. The sequential approach of the Strategy for Growth and Development requires new development for "rural growth", first, to be directed to Core and Hinterland Villages, which are expected to accommodate new development in locations beyond existing BUAB, where appropriate. 85. In respect of affordable housing need, paragraph 2.8.5 of the Core Strategy advises that Policy CS11 will lead to greater flexibility in the provision of affordable housing, related to need which has to be considered more widely than just within the context of individual settlement but also the other villages within that cluster and in some cases adjoining clusters. This is consistent with the requirements of the NPPF that aim to ensure that the local plan meets the needs for affordable housing in the housing market area. 86. The SPD identifies that proposals should be accompanied by a statement that analyses the local housing needs of the Village and how they have been taken into account in the proposal. For the reasons explained, the local housing needs of the Village must be construed as the needs of the Village itself and the needs of the function cluster of smaller rural settlements it serves. In this case the Applicant has not submitted a housing needs assessment.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 53

87. The most recent information from the Babergh Council’s Housing Register shows 17 applicants registered who have a connection to Copdock and Washbrook.

88. The Balancing Housing Markets – Housing Stock Analysis of 2008 identified a shortfall of 130 1 bed market houses in the Babergh East Area. Advice from Strategic Housing was that there is a significant lack of 1 – 2 bedroom properties in the locality.

89. Based on CS19 and requirements of CS11, 5 of the dwellings on the proposed development should be for affordable housing, 3 of these dwellings should be for Affordable Rent Tenancy; 2 for Shared Ownership. The requirements are for 1 and 2 bed units as set out in the consultation response from the Professional Lead - Housing Enabling.

90. As the application is in outline the layout and design of the housing is yet to be determined, however the indicative layout indicates a mix of 3 no. 1 bed bungalow, 2 no. 1 or 2 bed bungalows, 6 no. 3 bedroom dwellings and 5 no. 4 bedroom dwellings.

91. The development will need to include a mix of dwellings which meet the identified local need for smaller dwellings in order to improve the mix of housing stock in the village The applicants stated mix provides for the majority of the dwellings to be 3 & 4 bed (11/16) and it is considered that this should be justified as part of any reserved matters application as the local needs as set out above identifies smaller properties, so a range of 1 – 2 bedroom properties should be considered a priority, as Copdock already has a high proportion of 3 & 4 bed dwellings.

92. The development has not been proven to be for affordable housing or targeted market housing in its entirety.

93. Locally Identified Community Needs 94. Policy CS11 requires a similar approach to the determination of proposals for development to meet locally identified community needs, recognising the role of Core Villages and the "functional clusters" they serve. Paragraph 2.8.5.2 of the Core Strategy notes that the "approach advocated for the management of growth in Core Villages and their hinterlands, has many benefits for the communities". The benefits that the application of Policy CS11 and other relevant policies should secure include "Flexibility in the provision of and location of facilities" … "to reflect a catchment area pattern which relates to the day to day practice of the people living in the villages" (see item iii) in paragraph 2.8.5.2). 95. The SPD identifies that proposals should be accompanied by a statement that analyses the community needs of the Village and how they have been taken into account in the proposal. In this case the Applicant submitted a community needs statement 96. The applicant’s supporting statement considers that in supporting rural communities, local services and facilities the proposed development will generate contributions towards community infrastructure, to be spent on local services and infrastructure.

97. It does not appear that the applicant has identified any specific community needs that could benefit from the development. 98. Cumulative impact of development in the area in respect of social, physical and environmental impacts 99. The SPD identifies, at paragraph 13, that "cumulative impact should include existing commitments and other proposals in the same village and existing commitments and other proposals in the cluster where they are likely to have a wider impact for example in terms of traffic generation, capacity of schools and health services. The impact on other neighbouring villages and neighbouring local authority areas should also be taken into account".

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 54

100. In terms of existing commitments and other proposals in the relevant cluster 1, as defined in Map 4 of the Core Strategy, which are considered likely to have a wider impact for example in terms of traffic generation, capacity of schools and health services, the following applications have been either delivered or have planning permission. As Copdock sits within both the clusters of Capel St Mary and Ipswich the applications are as set out in Appendices A and B. 101. Policy CS11 requires the cumulative impact of development both within the Hinterland Village in which the development is proposed and the functional cluster of villages in which it is located, to be a material consideration when assessing proposals under the policy.

102. In the functional cluster of Capel St Mary, there have only been 40 residential completions in the last 5 years and there are an additional 58 dwellings committed in the cluster, including 5 in Copdock and Washbrook itself. It is therefore considered that given the responses from statutory consultees and the scale of development proposed, the cumulative impact of the development will be easily accommodated within the existing infrastructure of the village and will not lead to a detrimental impact on the social, physical and environmental wellbeing of the village nor the wider cluster on the basis that the level of growth proposed remains similar to that already experienced in the cluster over the last five years.

103. In the functional cluster of Ipswich 295 dwellings have been approved, however of these 175 are in Pinewood and 87 are within Sproughton. In addition to these there is an outstanding application, with a resolution to approve, for 620 dwellings in Sproughton. Pinewood and Sproughton are identified as being part of the Ipswich Urban area for the purposes of planning policy. As such the cumulative impact of these developments will be absorbed by the infrastructure of Ipswich. Outside of these villages, only 33 other dwellings have been approved in the cluster.

104. The applicant’s design and access statement includes a capacity appraisal which focuses on the primary school, doctors surgery, foul and surface water drainage and the highway network.

105. It is acknowledged that there is a capacity issue at the local primary school and Suffolk County Council have indicated that they will be make a bid for CIL monies for the provision of additional primary school and secondary school places arising from the proposed development.

106. The Local GPs practice is indicated to have capacity for new patients.

107. Anglian Water has confirmed that the foul drainage from this development is in the catchment of Chantry Water Recycling Centre that will have available capacity for these flows and that the sewerage system at present has available capacity for these flows.

108. The information regarding the capacity of the site to deal with additional surface water drainage has yet to be submitted and therefore this matter remains to be adequately resolved. This will be addressed further within the report.

109. The Highway Authority is happy that the road network has sufficient capacity to deal with the scale of development proposed.

110. Is well designed and appropriate in size, scale, layout and character to its setting and to the village

1 Paragraph 13 of the SPD refers to cumulative impact in the village and in the cluster in the circumstances above

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 55

111. The size and scale of the development should be proportionate to the settlement in which it is located. Copdock has approximately 475 houses and the proposal for 16 dwellings would represent an increase of 3% which is considered an acceptable scale of development for the village.

112. The technical advice received from highways and Anglian Water demonstrate that the development can be accommodated within the village and that the services, facilities and infrastructure have the capacity to accommodate the level of development proposed.

113. Folly Lane is characterised by single detached dwellings, predominately single storey or chalet bungalows, within long plots which are fairly closely related, with the exception of the application site which provides an open space between the most dense part of Folly Lane (within the built up area boundary) and the slightly less closely knit pattern which extends beyond the housing settlement boundary as it leads onto the existing group of barns and commercial units at the end of Folly Lane.

114. The proposal for 16 dwellings is in outline, however the indicative layout demonstrates how the site could accommodate this level of development and shows two rows of development with a central access point and internal road layout behind the front row of dwellings. This level of development is considered to represent an urban form of development, at a scale and density which is contrary to the character and appearance of the existing settlement. Whilst the layout is not for consideration at this stage it is difficult to see how the site could accommodate the scale of development proposed in a manner which would more accurately reflect the scale and density of development in Folly Lane.

115. Therefore the development is considered to be contrary to policy CS11 on the basis that it fails to address to the satisfaction of the local planning authority that the development is well designed and appropriate in size/scale, layout and character to its setting and to the village. In addition the proposal is not well related to the existing pattern of development for that settlement and there are other sequentially preferable sites which the Local Planning Authority considers is in a more favourable location, in terms of its relationship to the main part of the village and the services upon which it relies. Summary 116. For the reasons explained, the development proposal has not addressed each of the six matters identified in Policy CS11 to the satisfaction of the local planning authority. 117. The application has failed to demonstrate that the locational context of the proposed development would be well related to the existing settlement; that the site would be sequentially preferable to other sites which are currently under consideration; that the development meets a locally identified need and that the development is appropriate in size and scale to its setting. 118. Overall it is considered that the proposal does not accord with Policy CS11. 119. Your Officers conclude that the site is locationally remote from the main settlement of Copdock and Washbrook. Bearing in mind the planning appeal dismissal referenced above particularly considered locational issues in Copdock it is considered that the failure to comply with CS11, in addition to the failure to comply with policies CS2 and CS15, should be accorded significant weight in the present application circumstances. Impact on environmental characteristics

120. The site is opposite to a working cattle farm and concerns have been raised with regard to the impact of this existing operation upon residents residing in the proposed development. Livestock farms can be associated with loss of amenity at nearby residential dwellings due to both noise from animals/agricultural machinery (particularly in the early morning) and odour. For this reason Environmental Health have

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 56

reservations about the placement of new dwellings in close proximity of working farm, as any valid complaints could fetter the operation of the farm and the potential loss of amenity. The Town and Country General Permitted Development Order (2015) also restricts agricultural permitted development for livestock housing within 400m of a protected building. The definition of a protected building includes any permanent building which is normally occupied by people. All of the application site would be within 400m of the existing livestock building and therefore it is reasonable to assume that there will be an impact on both the existing business and for potential nuisance to residential properties.

121. It is considered that the site could not accommodate the level of development proposed, without needing to site the dwellings in relatively close proximity to the cattle housing and therefore it is contrary to the provisions of policy CS15, which requires development to retain, protect or enhance rural communities, of which the farming community plays an important role. The introduction of housing in close proximity to Lane Farm could result in the loss of a working farm, detrimental to the rural economy. Paragraph 28 of the NPPF directs planning to promote the development of agricultural and it is considered the application would be contrary to this objective.

122. Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by preventing both new and existing development from contributing to or being put at unacceptable risk from, or being adversely affected by unacceptable levels of soil, air, water or noise pollution or land instability; in this instance it is considered that the new development would be adversely affected by noise to a degree which may result in an adverse impact to a rural business.

123. Paragraph 123 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should aim to recognise that development will often create some noise and existing businesses wanting to develop in continuance of their business should not have unreasonable restrictions put on them because of changes in nearby land uses since they were established. The development of further residential development, directly opposite a working farm, where livestock are housed, is considered to place unreasonable burden on the existing business.

Impact on Heritage Assets

124. The site is not considered to have any impact on designated or non-designated heritage assets.

Connectivity and Highway Safety

125. The highway authority have no objection to the principle of development, however they acknowledge that the access route to the site, Folly Lane, is not adequate in its current form to adequately or safely serve residential development traffic, both pedestrians and vehicles. The required highway improvements, which can be accommodated within the existing highway land are listed below – for ease of reference:

126. Widening and adjustment of the existing Folly Lane junction with London Road. The width of Folly Lane is only approx. 4.4 metres wide between the existing kerbs at the junction and this provides difficulty for 2 cars trying to pass each other. This means that any vehicle waiting to turn into Folly Lane is having to wait on London Road if a vehicle is leaving Folly Lane at the same time.

127. Provision of a footway along Folly Lane to link the application site with the existing footway and bus stops on London Road. 128. As there is currently only a footway on the north bound (or Ipswich bound) side of London Road, there is a need for a short section of footway to be provided across the central reservation on London Road. This will allow residents to access the existing bus

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 57

stop and shelter on the south bound (or Capel St Mary bound) side.

129. Folly Lane is not wide enough to allow two vehicles to pass each other so there will be a need to widen Folly Lane between London Road and the application site access. Widening of Folly Lane on the site frontage will require the repositioning of the existing drainage ditch.

130. Whilst details of these improvements have not been included for consideration within the application, it is considered that these highway improvements as set out above will result in a significant change to the character and appearance of Folly Lane, from a narrow rural lane to an urbanised environment with footways. In addition to the widening of the road, which will result in changes to the existing ditch and potential loss of established hedgerow which characterises a large extent of Folly Lane. This adds to the conclusion that the development will not respect the landscape, landscape features of the area nor make a positive contribution to the local character, shape and scale of the area, as required by policy CS15 of the Core Strategy.

Biodiversity and Protected Species

131. In assessing this application due regard has been given to the provisions of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006, is so far as it is applicable to the proposal and the provisions of Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations, 2010 in relation to protected species.

Land Contamination

132. The application is accompanied by a land contamination assessment and this has been considered by the Senior Environmental Management Officer, who concludes they have no objection to the proposed development from the perspective of land contamination. They request that they are contacted in the event that of unexpected land contamination.

Surface Water Drainage

133. Policy CS15 requires development to minimise the exposure of people and property to all sources of flooding and to minimise surface water run-off and incorporate sustainable drainage systems (SUDS), where appropriate. The applicant has provided evidence of a viable surface water drainage strategy for the proposed development and therefore the development is able to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of both policy CS15 and the NPPF.

Loss of agricultural land

134. The farmland is classified as Grade 2 (Very Good) and therefore the loss of this land for agricultural is a consideration.

135. The National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 112) expects local planning authorities to take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. This is particularly important in plan making when decisions are made on which land should be allocated for development. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of a higher quality. The Agricultural Land Classification provides a method for assessing the quality of farmland to enable informed choices to be made about its future use within the planning system.

136. Natural England provides further information on Agricultural Land Classification. The Agricultural Land Classification system classifies land into five grades, with Grade 3

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 58

subdivided into Sub-grades 3a and 3b. The best and most versatile land is defined as Grades 1, 2 and 3a and is the land which is most flexible, productive and efficient in response to inputs and which can best deliver food and non food crops for future generations. Natural England has a statutory role in advising local planning authorities about land quality issues. They have made no comment on the application, with regard to the loss of Grade 2 land.

Planning Obligations and CIL

137. The application is liable to CIL and therefore Suffolk County Council have outlined the monies that they would be making a bid for to mitigate the impact of the development on education and libraries.

138. The application, if approved, would require the completion of a S106 agreement to secure the required number of affordable dwellings as set out previously in the report.

139. In accordance with the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations, 2010, the obligations recommended to be secured by way of a planning obligation deed are (a) necessary to make the Development acceptable in planning terms (b) directly related to the Development and (c) fairly and reasonably relate in scale and kind to the Development.

Crime and Disorder

140. Consideration has been given to the provisions of Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act, 1998, in the assessment of this application but the proposal does not raise any significant issues.

CONCLUSION - PLANNING BALANCE

141. When taken as a whole and as a matter of planning judgement, the proposal is not considered to adhere to the development plan and NPPF and therefore cannot be considered sustainable development. The NPPF states that development that conflicts with an up to date development plan should be refused unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case there are no material considerations that would justify an approval. The application is therefore recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

That Planning Permission be refused for the following reasons:

 The development is considered contrary to policy CS2 and policy CS15, in that it proposes development within the countryside, remote from services, facilities and infrastructure in an unsustainable location, some distance from the main built up part of Copdock and Washbrook.

 The development is considered to be contrary to policy CS11 on the basis that it fails to address to the satisfaction of the local planning authority that the development is well designed and appropriate in size/scale, layout and character to its setting and to the village. In addition the proposal is not well related to the existing pattern of development for that settlement and there are other sequentially preferable sites which the Local Planning Authority considers is in a more favourable location, in terms of its relationship to the main part of the village and the services upon which it relies.

 The required highway improvements required as part of the proposed development would lead to a loss of rural character to the detriment of the rural

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 59

 it is considered that the site could not accommodate the level of development proposed, without needing to site dwellings in relatively close proximity to the adjacent cattle housing and therefore is contrary to the provisions of policy CS15 and paragraphs 109 and 123 of the NPPF, which requires development to retain, protect or enhance rural communities, of which the farming community plays an important role and to protect noise sensitive development from existing noise sources and to not place unacceptable burdens on existing businesses. The introduction of housing in close proximity to Lane Farm could result in the loss of a working farm, detrimental to the community as a whole.

Planning Committee 7 September 2016 60

Appendix A Capel St Mary Cluster Report

Application Total: 31

CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/00300 Martins Hill Cottage, Bergholt Road, Bentley, Erection 1 No. detached dwelling & triple FUL Q13 GRA 04/07/2014 Bentley IPSWICH, IP9 2DQ garage following demolition of existing house Capel St Mary & outbuildings.

B/14/01330 Land south of Wayside, Capel Road, Bentley, Policy CS11 - Erection of 1 no. two-storey OUT Q13 GRA 02/02/2015 Bentley IPSWICH, IP9 2DL detached dwelling and garage. Construction Capel St Mary of new vehicular access.

B/15/00483 Land east of 41 Highfields, Station Road, Outline - Erection of 1 No. single-storey OUT Q13 GRA 10/07/2015 Bentley Bentley detached dwelling Capel St Mary

B/15/00511 Southern Elms, Link Lane, Bentley, IPSWICH, Erection of 1 no. detached 1 and ½ storey FUL Q13 GRA 16/06/2015 Bentley IP9 2DP dwelling, and construction of new vehicular Capel St Mary access.

1 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/15/00530 Dodnash Fruit Farm, Hazel Shrub, Bentley, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 GRA 30/06/2015 Bentley IPSWICH, IP9 2DF Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Development) (England) Order 2015 - Prior Approval Under Class Q(a) Change of use from Agricultural Building to 3 no. Dwellinghouses (C3), and Prior Approval Under Class Q(b) building operations necessary to convert the building.

B/16/00021 Rowan Acres, Capel Road, Bentley, Outline - Erection of two storey dwelling and OUT Q13 GRA 31/03/2016 Bentley IPSWICH, IP9 2DL construction of new vehicular access Capel St Mary

B/16/00153 Land east of 41 Highfields, Station Road, Erection of 1 no. detached two-storey dwelling FUL Q13 GRA 06/04/2016 Bentley Bentley Capel St Mary

B/13/01434 The White House, Mill Hill, Capel St Mary, Erection of 2 No. two-storey dwellings, 2 No. FUL Q13 GRA 07/03/2014 Capel St Mary IPSWICH, IP9 2JE garages; creation of new vehicular access Capel St Mary and alterations to existing access.

2 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/00100 Land west of Pine Dell & Ashcroft, London Outline - Erection of up to 24 No. dwellings, OUT Q07 GRA 01/06/2015 Capel St Mary Road, Capel St Mary, IPSWICH incorporating new access road, as amplified Capel St Mary by Reptile & Bat Survey dated May 2014, received 14 May 2014 and Phase 1 Contaminated Land Assessment dated 16 January 2014, received 5 August 2014.

B/14/00942 107 The Street, Capel St Mary, IPSWICH, IP9 Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 08/10/2014 Capel St Mary 2EH Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use of office B1(a) to dwelling C3.

B/14/01456 The White Horse, London Road, Capel St Erection of 1 No. detached two-storey FUL Q13 GRA 20/03/2015 Capel St Mary Mary, IPSWICH, IP9 2JR dwelling and detached single garage. Capel St Mary Alterations to vehicular access. Re-configuration of public house amenity space and car park arrangement, and erection of associated boundary treatment.

B/14/01488 St Marys Cottage, 120 The Street, Capel St Erection of 1 No 1½ storey detached dwelling. FUL Q13 GRA 24/03/2015 Capel St Mary Mary, IPSWICH, IP9 2EH Construction of new vehicular access, to be Capel St Mary shared with 120 The Street (following stopping up of existing access).

3 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/15/01557 Land adjacent to No 1, Playfield Road, Capel Erection of a dwelling and associated works. FUL Q13 GRA 24/03/2016 Capel St Mary St Mary Capel St Mary

B/15/01741 Land at the rear of Boynton Hall, Old London Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 GRA 12/02/2016 Capel St Mary Road, Capel St Mary Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Development) (Amendment and Consequential Provisions) (England) Order 2015 - Prior Approval Under Class Q(a) change of use of two agricultural buildings to dwellinghouses (class C3), and for associated operational development

B/16/00273 Land at the rear of Boynton Hall, Old London Change of use of 2 no. agricultural buildings FUL Q13 GRA 16/06/2016 Capel St Mary Road, Capel St Mary to residential use, including part demolition of Capel St Mary each building to facilitate conversion, removal of an additional barn and installation of external insulation and cladding; Erection of single storey side and front extensions and erection of detached cartlodge and store.

B/13/00803 Units 1 & 2 , West Hill Farm, Wenham Road, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 10/10/2013 Copdock & Washbrook Copdock And Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary 3EY Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use from Class B1(a) (offices) to Class C3 (dwellinghouse).

4 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/13/01355 Amor Lodge, The Street, Copdock And Erection of two-storey dwelling and formation FUL Q13 GRA 31/01/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3HX of vehicular access into Amor Lodge. Capel St Mary

B/13/01433 Oak Barn, London Road, Copdock And Conversion of existing barn to 1 No. new FUL Q13 GRA 11/11/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JW dwelling. Erection of 2 No. single-storey Capel St Mary extensions to north-west elevation, and insertion of 2 no. windows to south west elevation and 2 no. doors to north-west elevation.

B/13/01524 Middle Barn and Annex, Longlands Business Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 RNO 13/02/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Units, Wenham Road, Copdock And Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3EZ Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use from Class B1 (a) (offices) to Class C3 (dwelling houses)

B/14/00853 Amor Lodge, The Street, Copdock And Erection of a two-storey dwelling with FUL Q13 GRA 08/12/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3HX vehicular access into Amor Lodge. (Amended Capel St Mary design to that approved under application B/13/01355/FUL/AS).

5 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/15/00112 Orchard House, Folly Lane, Copdock And Erection of replacement two-storey dwelling FUL Q13 GRA 16/04/2015 Copdock & Washbrook Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JQ and conversion of existing barn into garage Capel St Mary (Following demolition of existing dwelling).

B/15/00675 Oak Barn, Old London Road, Copdock And Conversion of existing barn to 1 No. new FUL Q13 GRA 19/08/2015 Copdock & Washbrook Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JW dwelling. Erection of 2 No. single-storey Capel St Mary extensions and porch canopy to north-west elevation, and insertion of chimney flue to north-west roofslope. Erection of detached three-bay, single-storey garage/carport/workshop building (variation to planning permission B/13/01433/FUL).

B/16/00070 Grange Farm Barn, Wenham Road, Copdock Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 GRA 08/03/2016 Copdock & Washbrook And Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3EZ Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Development) (England) Order 2015 - Prior Approval Under Class Q(a) Change of use from Agricultural Building to Dwellinghouse (C3).

B/13/01312 Land West of Old Post Office, Hadleigh Road, Erection of 2 No. 1½ storey dwellings and FUL Q13 GRA 05/02/2014 Holton St Mary Holton St Mary construction of new vehicle accesses (an Capel St Mary amended scheme to that approved under B/12/00304/FUL).

6 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/00594 Land west of Old Post Office, Hadleigh Road, Erection of 2 no. 1 1/2 storey dwellings and FUL Q13 GRA 06/08/2014 Holton St Mary Holton St Mary, COLCHESTER construction of new vehicle accesses (an Capel St Mary amended scheme to that approved under B/13/01312/FUL/AK)

B/15/00964 Rogers Field, Hadleigh Road, Holton St Mary, Erection of 2 no. three bed and 3 no. two bed FUL Q13 GRA 02/10/2015 Holton St Mary COLCHESTER, CO7 6NS dwellings, garaging and parking (demolition of Capel St Mary former agricultural buildings).

B/16/00336 Melbourne House, Hadleigh Road, Holton St Erection of 1 no. two-storey dwelling, existing FUL Q13 GRA 02/06/2016 Holton St Mary Mary, COLCHESTER, CO7 6NS outbuildings and tree house to be demolished. Capel St Mary Construction of new vehicular access. As amended by agent's email dated 13 May 2016 and amended plan 2215/02A

B/14/00912 10 Sulleys Hill, Raydon, IPSWICH, IP7 5QQ Erection of 1 No. detached dwelling and FUL Q13 GRA 17/09/2014 Raydon detached garage/store building (following Capel St Mary demolition of existing dwelling), as amended by drawing numbers 0214.03 Rev A, 0214.04 Rev B, 0214.05 Rev A, 0214.06 Rev A and 0214.07 Rev A received on 2 September 2014.

7 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/13/01256 Dirleton Cottage, The Heath, Tattingstone, Erection of 1 No. detached two-storey FUL Q13 GRA 13/12/2013 Tattingstone IPSWICH, IP9 2LX dwelling to north side of existing dwelling. Capel St Mary Erection of two-storey rear extension to existing dwelling. Construction of new vehicular access (following demolition of single-storey side element of existing dwelling and stopping up of existing vehicular access). Erection of single-storey detached 4 bay cartlodge in rear garden, (as amplified by email from Roger Balmer Design Ltd dated 10/12/13). B/15/01085 Homeleigh, The Heath, Tattingstone, Erection of 2 No. new two-storey detached FUL Q13 GRA 09/10/2015 Tattingstone IPSWICH, IP9 2LX dwellings (following demolition of existing Capel St Mary dwelling and out house) and construction of new shared vehicular access onto A137 (following stopping up of existing access onto back lane).

B/14/00855 Land north of Birchwood (formerly Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 RNO 16/09/2014 Wenham Magna Rhodelands), Wenham Lane, Wenham Country Planning (General Permitted Capel St Mary Magna Development) (Amendment and Consequential Provisions) (England) Order 2014 - Prior approval under class MB(a) Change of Use from agricultural building to dwellinghouse (C3) and Prior approval under class MB(b) regarding the design and external appearance of the building following conversion.

8 Ipswich Cluster Report Appendix B

Application Total: 33

CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/09/00901 Land south of, Grove Hill, Belstead Erection of 9 No. detached dwellings. Change OUT Q13 GRA 04/08/2015 Belstead Ipswich of use of land for the provision of a Local Nature Reserve.

B/15/00358 Hill Farm House, Burstall Hill, Burstall, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 GRA 03/06/2015 Burstall Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3EB Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 - Prior Approval Under Class Q(a) Change of use from Agricultural Building to Dwellinghouse (C3), and Prior Approval Under Class Q(b) building operations necessary to convert the building.

B/14/00762 Hall Farm, Mill Lane, Chattisham, IPSWICH, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 03/10/2014 Chattisham Ipswich IP8 3PX Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of Use from Offices (Class B1a) to Dwellinghouse (Class C3).

B/15/00869 West View, The Street, Chattisham, Erection of 1 No. one and a half storey FUL Q13 GRA 12/08/2015 Chattisham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3QF dwelling (following the demolition of existing bungalow).

1 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/16/00454 West View, The Street, Chattisham, Erection of 1 no. one and a half storey FUL Q13 GRA 24/06/2016 Chattisham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3QF dwelling and associated works (following demolition of existing bungalow).

B/13/00803 Units 1 & 2 , West Hill Farm, Wenham Road, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 10/10/2013 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Copdock And Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 Country Planning (General Permitted 3EY Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use from Class B1(a) (offices) to Class C3 (dwellinghouse).

B/13/01355 Amor Lodge, The Street, Copdock And Erection of two-storey dwelling and formation FUL Q13 GRA 31/01/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3HX of vehicular access into Amor Lodge.

B/13/01433 Oak Barn, London Road, Copdock And Conversion of existing barn to 1 No. new FUL Q13 GRA 11/11/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JW dwelling. Erection of 2 No. single-storey extensions to north-west elevation, and insertion of 2 no. windows to south west elevation and 2 no. doors to north-west elevation.

2 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/13/01524 Middle Barn and Annex, Longlands Business Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 RNO 13/02/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Units, Wenham Road, Copdock And Country Planning (General Permitted Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3EZ Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use from Class B1 (a) (offices) to Class C3 (dwelling houses)

B/14/00853 Amor Lodge, The Street, Copdock And Erection of a two-storey dwelling with FUL Q13 GRA 08/12/2014 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3HX vehicular access into Amor Lodge. (Amended design to that approved under application B/13/01355/FUL/AS).

B/15/00112 Orchard House, Folly Lane, Copdock And Erection of replacement two-storey dwelling FUL Q13 GRA 16/04/2015 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JQ and conversion of existing barn into garage (Following demolition of existing dwelling).

B/15/00675 Oak Barn, Old London Road, Copdock And Conversion of existing barn to 1 No. new FUL Q13 GRA 19/08/2015 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3JW dwelling. Erection of 2 No. single-storey extensions and porch canopy to north-west elevation, and insertion of chimney flue to north-west roofslope. Erection of detached three-bay, single-storey garage/carport/workshop building (variation to planning permission B/13/01433/FUL).

3 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/16/00070 Grange Farm Barn, Wenham Road, Copdock Notification under Part 3 of the Town and AGDW Q27 GRA 08/03/2016 Copdock & Washbrook Ipswich And Washbrook, IPSWICH, IP8 3EZ Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 - Prior Approval Under Class Q(a) Change of use from Agricultural Building to Dwellinghouse (C3).

B/13/01301 Land West of Manor Farm, Duke Street, Erection of 1½ storey dwelling and associated FUL Q13 GRA 15/01/2014 Hintlesham Ipswich Hintlesham, IPSWICH, IP8 3QP outbuilding utilising altered existing vehicular access.

B/15/00083 Chapel Cottage, Duke Street, Hintlesham, Erection of 2 No. dwellings, associated FUL Q13 GRA 26/03/2015 Hintlesham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3PW cartlodges, with construction of new vehicular accesses. Change of use from agricultural land to residential, as amended by drawing numbers SK_03B, SK_07B and SK_08B received on 26 March 2015.

B/15/00755 The Old Builders Yard, Duke Street, Proposed new single-storey dwelling and two FUL Q13 GRA 14/08/2015 Hintlesham Ipswich Hintlesham bay cartlodge (following demolition of workshop and office buildings). With change of use from business to residential.

4 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/15/00872 Chapel Cottage, Duke Street, Hintlesham, Erection of 2 No. dwellings & associated FUL Q13 GRA 03/09/2015 Hintlesham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3PW cartlodges & construction of new vehicular accesses.

B/15/01109 Barn House, Duke Street, Hintlesham, Policy CS11 - Residential Development - FUL Q13 GRA 14/10/2015 Hintlesham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3PW Erection of 2 no. two-storey, semi-detached, three bedroom dwellings; construction of parking and manoeuvring area; and construction of new shared vehicular access.

B/15/01245 Three Mile Farm Cottage, Pond Hall Road, Erection of two-storey detached replacement FUL Q13 GRA 20/10/2015 Hintlesham Ipswich Hintlesham, IPSWICH, IP8 3QN dwelling (following demolition of existing dwelling).

B/15/01490 Land between 2 Victoria Cottages and Red Outline - Erection of 8 no. dwellings (means of OUT Q13 GRA 01/04/2016 Hintlesham Ipswich House Cottages, Duke Street, Hintlesham access and landscaping for consideration).

5 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/16/00318 Rowan Cottage, Duke Street, Hintlesham, Erection of 1 no. two-storey dwelling. FUL Q13 GRA 08/06/2016 Hintlesham Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3PN

B/16/00829 Hill House, Silver Hill, Hintlesham, IPSWICH, Erection of two-storey dwelling and garage, FUL Q13 GRA 17/08/2016 Hintlesham Ipswich IP8 3NJ (following demolition of existing dwelling and garage) creation of new driveway connecting to existing access.

6 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/01375 Belstead House, Sprites Lane, Pinewood, Change of use and conversion of Belstead FUL Q07 GRA 08/04/2016 Pinewood Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3NA house to provide 4 No. dwellings; Conversion of dining hall to form 1 No. dwelling; Conversion and extension of pottery building to a dwelling; Conversion and extension of thatched barn to dwelling; Demolition of prefabricated classroom building; Erection of 13 no. dwellings together with alterations to access, formation of parking areas and associated landscaping works.

As amplified/amended by Archaeological Geophysical Survey (prepared by Pre-Construct Geophysics), Environmental Noise Report (prepared by Sharps Redmore), Flood Risk Assessment (prepared by JMS Consulting Engineers) and Phase 1 Desk Study & Preliminary Risk Assessment (prepared by Geosphere Environmental), received 13th March 2015. Further amplified/amended by Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy Revision A (prepared by JMS Consulting Engineers, received 10th June 2015. Further amplified/amended by Transport Assessment plus accompanying Appendices A-H (prepared by GH Bullard and Associates) and Drawing nos. 027/2013/CD/01A & 027/2013/CD/02, received 10th June 2015. Further amplified/amended by Ecological Appraisal/Assessment (prepared by Mill House Ecology), received 20th August 2015. Further amplified/amended by amended Ecological Appraisal/Assessment (prepared by Mill House Ecology), received 1st October 2015. Further amended by Drawing no. PA 106A, received 09/11/15. Further amended/amplified by revised Transport Assessment (including amended Travel Plan), received 10/11/2015.

7 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/01377 Belstead House, Sprites Lane, Pinewood, Outline - Residential development for the OUT Q07 GRA 08/04/2016 Pinewood Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3NA provision of 155 no. dwellings, 65 no. bedroom carehome and cafe building.

As amplified/amended by Archaeological Geophysical Survey (prepared by Pre-Construct Geophysics), Environmental Noise Report (prepared by Sharps Redmore), Flood Risk Assessment (prepared by JMS Consulting Engineers) and Phase 1 Desk Study & Preliminary Risk Assessment (prepared by Geosphere Environmental), received 13th March 2015. Further amplified/amended by Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy Revision A (prepared by JMS Consulting Engineers, received 10th June 2015. Further amplified/amended by Transport Assessment plus accompanying Appendices A-H (prepared by GH Bullard and Associates) and Drawing nos. 027/2013/CD/01A & 027/2013/CD/02, received 10th June 2015. Further amplified/amended by Ecological Appraisal/Assessment (prepared by Mill House Ecology), received 20th August 2015. Further amplified/amended by amended Ecological Appraisal/Assessment (prepared by Mill House Ecology), received 1st October 2015. Further amended by Drawing no. PA 06A, received 4th November 2015. Further amended by Drawing no. PA 06B, received 09/11/15. Further amended/amplified by revised Transport Assessment (including amended Travel Plan), received 10/11/2015.

8 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/11/00745 Land south of Sproughton VC Primary School, Outline - Erection of 30 No. dwellings as OUT Q07 GRA 19/12/2014 Sproughton Ipswich Church Lane, Sproughton amended by Tree Survey and Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey received 31.01.2012, as amended by Archaeological Evaluation, Geophysical Survey Report, and Envirocheck Reports received on 18.01.2013 and as amplified by part site layout Plan and letter received on 18.01.2013.As further amended by revised Design and Access Statement extract (page No.10) received on 19.04.2013 and revised Surface Water Drainage Strategy and letter received 01.07.2013. B/13/00996 The Squirrels, Elton Park, Sproughton, Severance plot from 'The Squirrels' and FUL Q13 GRA 18/11/2013 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP2 0DG erection of new two-storey dwelling with integral double garage. New vehicular access on to Elton Park.

B/13/01406 Geest House, Hadleigh Road, Sproughton, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 26/02/2014 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3AS Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of Use of Class B1(a) offices to Class C3 dwelling houses comprising 15 dwellings. As amplified by details in agents email received 2nd February 2014.

B/14/00460 Land rear of Geest House, Hadleigh Road, Erection of 8 No. detached dwellings, as FUL Q13 GRA 03/08/2015 Sproughton Ipswich Sproughton, IPSWICH, IP8 3AS amended by plans 3385-60G, 3385-300A, 3385-302D, 3385-304A, 3385-305A, 3385-306A, 3385-307B, 3385-308A, 3385-309A, 3385-310 and Revised Planning Statement received 19th May 2015, and Desktop Contamination Assessment received 9th June 2015.

9 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/14/00636 Sproughton House, High Street, Sproughton, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 27/06/2014 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3AL Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of Use from office to 12 No. self contained flats.

B/14/00826 Geest House, Hadleigh Road, Sproughton, Notification under Part 3 of the Town and OFDW Q27 GRA 10/07/2015 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3AS Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment) (England) Order 2013 - Change of use from Office B1(a) to Dwelling C3.

B/15/00029 Russetts, Hadleigh Road, Sproughton, Outline - Demolition of existing dwelling & OUT Q07 GRA 11/12/2015 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP2 0BT erection of 14 No. dwellings with access from Ventris Close & erection of 2 No. dwellings with access from Hadleigh Road

B/16/00098 Third Mile, London Road, Sproughton, Erection of 2 no. pairs semi-detached FUL Q13 GRA 16/06/2016 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP8 3LE two-storey dwellings and 1 no. detached two-storey dwelling with associated garaging. Construction of vehicular access.

10 CaseRef Site Address Proposal AppType Code Dcn DcnMade Parish B/16/00157 Pine Trees, Elton Park, Sproughton, Erection of detached dwelling (following FUL Q13 GRA 05/04/2016 Sproughton Ipswich IPSWICH, IP2 0DG demolition of detached garage/workshop outbuilding)

11