Agenda and minutes

The Chairman drew attention to the list of notices published on the back of the agenda.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Miss A M Beale, Mrs P A Channer CC and Rev. A E J Shrimpton.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 20 September 2017 (copy enclosed).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 20 September 2017 be approved and confirmed.

To disclose the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, other Pecuniary Interests or Non-Pecuniary Interests relating to items of business on the agenda having regard to paragraphs 6-8 inclusive of the Code of Conduct for Members.

(Members are reminded that they are also required to disclose any such interests as soon as they become aware should the need arise throughout the meeting).

In respect of Agenda Item 5 – HOUSE/MAL/17/01101 37 Fambridge Road, Maldon, the following declarations of interest were made:

·               Councillors A T Cain, Mrs B D Harker, M S Heard and S J Savage declared non-pecuniary interests at the applicant and supporters were known to them.

·               Councillors B E Harker and Mrs N G F Shaughnessy declared non-pecuniary interests, as they knew the applicant.

Councillor I E Dobson declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 6 – HOUSE/MAL/17/01119 8 St. Pauls Mews, Heybridge as he knew the applicant.

The Committee received the reports of the Chief Executive and determined the following planning applications, having taken into account all representations and consultation replies received, including those listed on the Members’ Update circulated at the meeting.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Chief Executive (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Following the Officers’ presentation a supporter, Mr Roy Pipe and the applicant, Mr Gary Pipe addressed the Committee.

Councillor S J Savage, the Ward Member, supported the application, highlighted a number of reasons for his support and noted that there had not been any letters of objection received.  In response to a comment made by the applicant regarding letters of support not being shown on the Council’s website, Councillor Savage asked the Chairman to investigate this matter.  Councillor Savage proposed that the application be approved, contrary to Officers’ recommendation subject to conditions.  This was duly seconded.

The Group Manager for Planning Services advised the Committee that neighbour consultation responses had been removed from the Council’s website due to technical issues.  The removal of third party representations was not specific to this application and that in any case the Council had no legal requirement to display such letters.  Moreover, it was the matters raised by third party representations that should be considered and not the number.  Members were reminded that comments made in the past from previous Officers were not before the Committee and could not be taken into account.  Furthermore, those comments could not bind the Council, as they were only the Officer’s opinion.  He clarified that a stairwell was classed as non-habitable accommodation and it was not unusual for stairwells not to have natural light.

A debate ensued.  In response to a number of comments the Group Manager for Planning Services reminded Members that the site was in a conservation area and how conservation areas were agreed by the Council and normally were put in place to retain traditional styles etc. and protect them from being eroded.  Velux windows would not normally be found on a listed building of this time.

The Chairman put the Officers’ recommendation of refusal as set out in the report and upon a vote being taken this motion was declared lost.  He then reminded the Committee of the earlier proposition by Councillor Savage to approve the application subject to conditions and the Chairman sought the conditions from the Committee.  The Group Manager - Planning Services advised that standard conditions would not apply as this was a retrospective application.  The Chairman then put the proposal of approval (with no conditions) and upon a vote being taken this was duly agreed.

RESOLVED that this application be APPROVED.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Chief Executive (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Members noted amendments to paragraphs 3.1.1 and 5.3.3 of the report as detailed in the Members’ Update.

Following the Officers’ presentation the Agent, Mr Cumbers addressed the Committee.

RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED for the following reason:

1          The proposed dormer due to its scale, design and siting would result in a dominant, unbalanced and incongruous form of development which would be detrimental to the character and appearance of the original dwelling.  Consequently due to its prominent position within the streetscence, the proposal would create an unsympathetic addition to the public realm.  Therefore, the proposal is considered to be detrimental to the dwelling and the character and appearance of the area contrary to approved policies D1 and H4 of the Local Development Plan and Government guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Chief Executive (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

It was noted from the Members’ Update that a consultation response had been received from Heybridge Parish Council.

The Chairman advised that he had declared a non-pecuniary interest in this application at the last meeting because he knew the applicant and supporters.  There were no supporters on this application and therefore no need for him to declare an interest.

RESOLVED that this application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

1          The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

2          The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with the approved drawings: G/3937/17/PL-20.

3          The rooflights shown on approved drawing number G/3937/17/PL-20 shall be of a conservation style, black painted, cast metal type, shall not protrude above the tile line or the roof plane and shall be retained as such thereafter.

To receive the notification from the Planning Inspectorate of the following:

(i)        Appeals Lodged - None

(ii)       Appeal Decisions - None

(i)              Appeals Lodged – None.

(ii)            Appeal Decisions

It was noted from the Members’ Update that the following appeal decisions had been received from the Planning Inspectorate:

HOUSE/MAL/17/00153 (Appeal Ref: APP/X1545/D/17/3179755)

Proposal: Proposed alterations to existing window openings to front elevation and replacement of existing windows with new patio doors.

Address: The Lake House - 33 Battle Rise - Heybridge

APPEAL ALLOWED – 9 November 2017

DECISION LEVEL: Delegated

HOUSE/MAL/17/00347 (Appeal Ref: APP/X1545/D/17/3179596)

Proposal: Two storey side and single storey rear extension to existing dwelling

Address: 2 New Rose Cottages, London Road, Maldon, Essex, CM9 6LH

APPEAL DISMISSED – 13 November 2017

DECISION LEVEL: Delegated