Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed everyone present and went through some general housekeeping arrangements for the meeting.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor M S Heard.

It was noted that apologies had also been given by Councillor M R Edwards.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 October 2022 (copy enclosed).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 19 October 2022 be approved and confirmed.

To disclose the existence and nature of any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, Other Registrable interests and Non-Registrable Interests relating to items of business on the agenda having regard to paragraph 9 and Appendix B 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).

There were none.

To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted that this application had been deferred by the Committee at its last meeting to provide opportunity for the applicant to submit further information regarding the proposal.  The report highlighted an additional consultation response from Essex County Council Ecology along with further information in support of the application which had been received.  The original Officer report and associated Members’ Update were attached at Appendix 1 to the report.  Some Members commented that they felt the reasons for deferral had not been addressed.

Following the Officers’ presentation, Mr Butcher on behalf of the applicant addressed the Committee.

During the lengthy debate that followed Officers provided clarification on a number of issues raised by Members, including:

·                 The application was seeking temporary permission and the site would be restored to its original condition within three years. 

·                 Condition 7 would ensure that of the seven locations identified only a maximum of four would be used at any one time.

·                  Some concern was raised regarding the lack of a Promenade Park Management Plan, but it was noted that if a further application were to be submitted at the end of the temporary permission, the proposal could be reassessed in light of any Management Plan which may then be in place. 

·                 Examples of the type of structures had been provided however if Members considered it was necessary, a condition could be imposed to require approval of the structures before they were put in place.

·                 It was confirmed that the Committee could grant planning permission for a shorter period than the three years recommended, if considered necessary.

Councillor K M H Lagan highlighted his concerns and proposed that the application be refused for reasons relating to bulk and overdevelopment.  In response to a comment regarding when an application could be resubmitted following refusal Members were advised that there was no time restriction.  The Chairman clarified the reasons for refusal as relating to the design, scale, bulk and the development being detrimental to the overall enjoyment of the park.  The Lead Specialist: Development Management advised the Committee these reasons would be difficult to substantiate given the temporary nature of the structures proposed and a condition could be imposed to require further details.  The proposal was not supported.

In response to a question, the Specialist: Development Management advised that the block  ...  view the full minutes text for item 405.

To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

In response to a question regarding consent approval recently given for the same sign in a different location and whether that approval would still exist if this application was approved, the Specialist: Development Manager advised that it would still exist but should Members have concerns a condition could be imposed so that the developer had the choice of either approved position for the sign but not both.

It was noted that this application was retrospective, and a Member commented that the sign should refer to Heybridge and not Maldon.  The Officer explained this was not a material consideration but the applicant may take this on board for the future.

Councillors Miss A M Beale, B B Heubner and P L Spenceley declared non-pecuniary interests in this application as they were Members of the North Heybridge Garden Suburb Community Liaison Panel.

Councillor K M H Lagan declared a non-pecuniary interest as he had received an email from a resident regarding this application.  He referred to a number of points raised in the email.  In response the Specialist: Development Management reminded the Committee that the same sign had consent albeit in a different location and therefore, there was little scope to reassess its visual impact, especially as the sign’s revised position would be less visually prominent.

It was noted that the previous application had been supported by Essex County Council Highways, but no consultation response had been received from them on this application.

Councillor Mrs J C Stilts proposed that the application be approved as per the report on condition that the developer could not display two signs.  This proposal was duly seconded and upon a vote being taken was agreed.

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

1.         The development herby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 2085/010 Rev Q; WP-Loc1; Site Plan - Langford Road; Site Plan - Maypole Road; Site Plan - Broad Street Green Road; Billboards - Colours, materials & overall dimensions; Billboards - Individual sizes of text, logos and features; Billboards - Framework structure and foundation details and the details included in the accompanied application form.

2.         The express consent hereby granted shall be for a period of 5 years beginning from the date of permission 21/00945/ADV.

3.         No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

4.         No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to:

a)         endanger persons using any highway, railway, waterway, dock, harbour or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 406.