A day on Development

From time to time we councillors substitute for others on different committees. On Wednesday, for the first time, I was asked to act as a substitute on the Development Committee, which as I am sure you are all aware is the place where planning applications are decided.

The atmosphere at Development is rather different from that at some of the other committees at Babergh. For one thing the Chamber is always full of members of the public, all waiting, often in a state of some anxiety, for the application in which they are interested. Members of the public have the right to speak for three minutes in support or to object to planning applications, as do representatives from Parish and Town Councils.

Another difference is the sense that actual decisions are being made NOW which impact on people’s everyday lives. This is rather different from the more leisurely and reflective pace of other Council proceedings. I’m not saying that this immediacy alters the general sense of responsibility that one feels as a councillor, but it certainly concentrates the mind and makes one keen to do the right thing. There are officers on hand to guide proceedings, but at the end of the day the councillors have the last word and it is not unusual for them to ignore the officers’ recommendations. Of course, by definition the applications that find their way to the Committee are the ones that are more complex or controversial.

It is particularly difficult when a case engages your sympathies, but you know to give permission would be contrary to previous decisions and would set an unfortunate precedent.

It is sometimes the case for example that a farming family owning land in the countryside would like to build a house so that a son or daughter can come to live nearby to keep an eye on ageing relatives. A case like this was on the agenda on Wednesday and it was with a great sense of regret that I was obliged to vote to refuse permission. The problem is that there are strict restrictions on building on ‘greenfield’ sites that lie outside the boundary of villages. This, on the whole, seems right if we are to protect our lovely Suffolk countryside. Moreover, unlike affordable housing schemes for local people that can in certain circumstances be on greenfield land, there is no official mechanism for ensuring that one off small houses are not subsequently developed and/or sold on to third parties, effectively negating the reason that they were given planning permission in the first place. Nonetheless one cannot escape the fact that refusing permission in these circumstances leads to hardship in individual cases.

Despite being confronted by a number of difficult choices, I enjoyed my day on Development, and am happy to say that I will be continuing to act as a substitute on the Committee in the coming year at Babergh.