29 affordable homes at Land On The North Side Of Station Road, Haughley

What was proposed

The application sought to replace two approved one-bedroom bungalows with one building containing two one-bedroom maisonettes within a 29-home affordable scheme.

“The application seeks to vary Condition 2 (Approved Plans and Documents) of planning permission ref: DC/23/05721, involving removal of 2 no. 1 bedroom single-storey dwellings (Bungalows) previously approved, replacing them with 1 no. two-storey building, comprising 2 no. 1 bedroom Maisonettes (1no. at ground floor and 1 no. at first floor level).”

“Social Rent - 16 no. units 1 Bedroom Maisonettes 2 Units (Plots 9 and 10) 1 Bedroom Semi-detached Bungalow 2 Units (Plots 1 and 2) 1 Bedroom Semi-detached Two-storey 2 Units (Plots 28 and 29) 2 Bedroom Semi-detached Two-storey 2 Units (Plots 19 and 20) 2 Bedroom Terrace Two-storey 3 Units (Plots 21, 22 and 23) 3 Bedroom Terrace Two-storey 3 Units (Plots 11, 12 and 13) 4 Bedroom Semi-detached Two-storey 2 Units (Plots 3 and 4)”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 1.28-hectare site is agricultural land within Haughley’s settlement boundary and housing allocation, beside existing housing, countryside and mature hedgerows.

“The site lies within Environment Agency (EA) Flood Zone 1, with land set higher than the fronting highway, and is not shown to be at significant risk of flood risk from other sources. The nearest EA Flood Zone 2 and 3 are shown to be located approximately 530 metres to the south of the site, within the Gipping Valley, to the south of the village.”

“The site lies within a development plan settlement boundary, as shown on the 'Proposals Map PM2' on page 59 of the adopted Haughley neighbourhood plan. The site is also allocated for new housing development at policy HAU4 of the adopted neighbourhood plan, which also forms part of the development plan.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and applications

Earlier permissions established the 29-home scheme, while later applications discharged conditions and approved non-material changes to the development.

“REF: DC/25/01849 Discharge of Conditions Application for DC/23/05721 - Condition 3 (Landscaping Scheme), Condition 6 (Biodiversity Enhancement Measures), Condition 7 (Construction Management Plan), Condition 8 (Noisy Plant) and Condition 16 (Highways - Cycle Storage) DECISION: GTD 11.07.2025”

“REF: DC/25/02541 Application for Non material amendment relating to DC/23/05721 - Changes to all properties to reflect our new house type range, with 50% M4(2) compliance; movement of pedestrian walkway to plot 21-23 following Suffolk Highways consultation, and walkways being outside property fronts on adopted roads; Changes to indicative solar panels (quantity and positioning) based upon design stage SAP schedule;Pumping Station in bottom right corner moved back from road…”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the proposal was sustainable and its public benefits outweighed limited heritage harm, subject to obligations and conditions.

“Although heritage consultees have previously identified that the proposal would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of heritage assets, the public benefits associated with the proposal are considered to outweigh this harm;”

“1) That Members resolve to delegate authority to the Chief Planning Officer to GRANT planning permission subject to the following obligations, conditions and informatives and/or those as may be deemed necessary by the Chief Planning Officer:”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection, housing officers accepted the replacement as reasonable, and the parish council and Natural England made no comments.

“SCC - Highways - Comments Received - 11/12/2025 Notice is hereby given that the County Council as Highways Authority does not wish to restrict the variation of the listed condition as the updated details are still considered acceptable.”

“BMSDC - Strategic Housing - Comments Received - 23/12/2025 No objection: - The loss of two of the bungalows is disappointing, but the replacement proposal (maisonettes) still allows for 1 x unit of single storey ground floor living which would mean a net loss of only one ground floor single storey unit; - The upstairs maisonette would allow for single storey living, but this is restricted by the stairs required for access.”

Officer report

Objections received

One objection questioned the limited information, the change to maisonettes, the effect on views and the distance of built properties from neighbouring boundaries.

“At the time of writing this report 1 no. letter/email/online comment has been received. It is the officer opinion that this represents 1 no. objection, 0 no. neutral comments and 0 no. support comments. An update shall be provided as necessary either via Tabled Papers or verbally at the meeting.”

“Objection comments summarised as follows: - Consider only variation relates to the change of design of plots 9 and 10 to maisonettes; - No information provided to give and indication of what the variation request is; - Consider proposed change would have little impact compared to the already intrusive nature of the development and the spoiling of any view presently; - Consider properties that have already been built seem much closer to neighbouring boundaries than…”

Officer report

Who spoke

The case officer introduced the proposal, officers answered members’ questions, and the Chair read a statement from an absent ward member.

Members’ debate

Members discussed solar panels, housing need, garden arrangements and the adequacy of waste storage plans before a proposal to approve was made and seconded.

“Members debated the application on issues including: the solar panel provision including the size of the proposed inverter, the housing need for the type of buildings, the proposed garden provision and layout, and the adequacy of the waste storage plans.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The application was approved by six votes to one.

“Councillor Hadingham proposed that the application be approved as detailed in the Officer recommendation.”

Minutes

Conditions and obligations

Permission was delegated subject to affordable housing, open space, education and monitoring obligations, detailed conditions and informatives.

“1) That authority be delegated to the Chief Planning Officer to GRANT planning permission subject to the following obligations, conditions and informatives and/or those as may be deemed necessary by the Chief Planning Officer…”

“Obligations • Provision of the proposed on-site public open space and play equipment, and transfer to the appropriate body, for the long-term maintenance thereof, at the appropriate time; • A financial contribution towards improvements of existing public open space and play equipment elsewhere in the village (to make up for the shortfall of proposed on-site provision); • On-site provision of affordable housing, of a type and tenure as agreed, in phased delivery as agreed; • …”

Minutes