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 E L Bamford and A K M St. Joseph.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 January 2018 (copy enclosed).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 8 January 2018 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).

Councillor Mrs M L Thompson declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to the following applications, as she was a Member of Tolleshunt Knights Parish Council:

·         Agenda Item 9 – FUL/MAL/17/01230 – Rosemead, D'Arcy Road, Tolleshunt Knights

·         Agenda Item 11 - TPO12/17 – Beatbush Wood, Park Lane, Tolleshunt Knights.

Councillor M F L Durham CC declared that he was also a Member of Essex County Council and that he had a non-pecuniary interest in relation to any matter pertaining to that organisation.

Councillor Mrs P A Channer CC declared that she was also a Member of Essex County Council and had a non-pecuniary interest in relation to any matter pertaining to that authority in relation to highways, access, education etc.

Councillor J V Keyes declared a non-pecuniary interest as he was also a Member of Great Totham Parish Council.

The Committee received the reports of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services 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 recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

The Committee discussed this matter prior to the report being presented and decided that the report would be presented, followed by any public speaking and then the decision would be made whether it was necessary to consider the report in private session.

The Development Management Team Leader presented the report to the Committee and this was followed by Mr R P Garrod of 42 Seagers, Great Totham, an Objector and Mr R Forde, the Applicant’s Agent, addressing the Committee.

The Chairman proposed that the Committee resolved under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972 that the public be excluded from the meeting for this item of business on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act and that this satisfied the public interest test.

The proposal was duly seconded and the resolution was carried.

The Chairman then adjourned the meeting for a short time to enable the members of the public to leave the Council Chamber.

There followed a lengthy debate about this application and the difficulties involved in determining it due to changes in legislation since the original planning application was made.

Councillor M F L Durham CC proposed that this application (together with Agenda Item 14 – MAL/MAL/17/00582 – Land Opposite 34 Hall Road, Great Totham) be deferred pending Counsel’s opinion.

This was duly seconded and upon a vote the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that this application be deferred so that Counsel’s opinion be sought and considered.

The Chairman adjourned the meeting to enable members of the public to return to the Council Chamber.

The meeting reconvened at 8.25pm and the Chairman advised the members of the public that this item had been deferred so that legal advice could be sought.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Following the Officer’s presentation of the report, Mr Boden of Langmeil, The Avenue, North Fambridge, an Objector, Mrs S Nunn from North Fambridge Parish Council and Mr S Martin of David Wilson Homes, the Applicant, all addressed the Committee.

In response to a question, the Development Management Team Leader advised that the application before the Committee was for reserved matters only.  The discharge of conditions matters of sewerage and foul water would be dealt with under delegated powers. 

Several questions were raised by Members and the Development Management Team Leader advised as follows:

·         The viability and affordable housing was agreed at the outline planning permission stage;

·         The housing mix – this was not a matter for the Council to refuse this application on as there were no such conditions;

·         The access at Church Lane – there was a construction management plan that required access to be agreed;

·         The access to the site – the main access to the east of the site was shown on the map;

·         The flood risk – this was on part of the site that was not being developed;

·         The discharge of condition application – the Environment Agency (EA), Anglian Water and the Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs) team had been consulted and this was being dealt with separately.

Members raised serious concerns regarding flooding and drainage and were of the opinion that a completely new system was necessary to alleviate the problems in North Fambridge.  The Development Management Team Leader advised that the surface water scheme contained a variety of measures to deal with the water.  There were cells, ponds and other measures within the development.  Neither the EA nor the SUDs teams had objected to this application and they would have done if there was an increase in water flow.

Members requested that officers considered the feedback given by Members on the flooding and sewerage issues and that stringent conditions would be imposed should this application be approved.

A question was raised about access and roads and the comments made by Essex Fire and Rescue which were summarised in the report.  In response the Development Management Team Leader advised that conversations were ongoing regarding conditions and matters were progressing.  Moreover, the fire turning circle would be dealt with under building regulations rather than planning.

Members further raised concerns regarding the discharge of conditions and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 791.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Following the Officer’s presentation of the report, Ms E Padfield, the Applicant, addressed the Committee.

RESOLVED that this application be APPROVED.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Following the Officer’s presentation Mr J Crisp of EJ Taylor & Sons Ltd, the Applicant, addressed the Committee.

Councillor M F L Durham CC, a Ward Member considered that this application would improve the appearance of the building and that the Applicant was both an important business to the District and a significant employer.   Councillor Durham then proposed that this application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.

This was duly seconded and adequate landscaping conditions were requested.

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

1        The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than three years from the date of this decision.

          REASON: To comply with Section 91(1) of The Town & Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2        The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: 17/03/01; 17/03/02; 17/03/05A; 17/03/03; 17/03/04; 17/03/06; 17/03/07A; 17/03/08

          REASON: For the avoidance of doubt as to the extent of this permission.

3        No development shall take place until samples of the facing material to be used, including glazing, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The works must then be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

          REASON: To ensure that the external material to be used in the construction of the development would be appropriate to the building and the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policy D1 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan; the Maldon District Design Guide; and Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework

4        Details of the siting, height, design and materials of the treatment of all boundaries including gates, fences, walls, railings and piers shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The boundary treatment as approved shall be constructed prior to the first use/occupation of the development to which it relates and be retained as such thereafter

          REASON: To ensure the boundary treatments are appropriate and to protect the visual amenity of the area in accordance with Policies S1 and D1 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan; the Maldon District Design Guide; and Government advice as contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

5        No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works to be carried out have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These details shall include the layout of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 793.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

The Officer presented the report and confirmed receipt of a letter of representation in support of the application which she summarised.  The Officer then drew attention to an error in the report at section 7.4.1 and read out the correct comment to the Committee.

Following this, Mr R Long MBE, a Supporter and Mr P Le Grys, the Applicant’s Agent both addressed the Committee.

Members debated this application and whilst some Members were of the opinion that the application was contrary to the Local Development Plan (LDP), others were of the contrary view that this was an unobtrusive development, was sustainable and that security would be improved by living on the site.

The Chairman advised that the inspector, when the previous application had gone to appeal, had stated that thefts did not carry significant weight in relation to granting planning permission.

Members were reminded that each application must be considered on its own merits and if there was demonstrable harm then an application should not be allowed.  Furthermore, the LDP must be adhered to.

Whilst Members had sympathy with the applicants, the application was substantially the same to the previous one and, therefore, Members of the Committee could not change their minds and approve this when it had previously been refused both by this Committee and on appeal.

Councillor J V Keyes then proposed that this application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and this was duly seconded.  Upon a vote the motion failed.

RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED for the following reason:

1.                  The proposed development, as a result of its design, siting, and location on an open parcel of land, would result in an incongruous, prominent form of new development that would have an unacceptable urbanising effect by way of visual intrusion and unacceptable encroachment into the rural landscape setting.  The poor sustainability credential as defined by the Framework would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal when assessed against the approved policies of the Local Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework as a whole.  The proposal would therefore fail to meet the requirements of policies S1, S8, D1 and H4 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the core planning principles and guidance as contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

Following the Officer’s presentation of the report, Mr A Brown, the Applicant, addressed the Committee.

Members were of the opinion that this application should be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.  They considered that there had now been evidence of marketing the property and that the Applicant had been unable to sell it.  Members had sympathy with the Applicant and the difficulties of making a living in farming which had changed over the years.  The purpose of an agricultural tie was to permit farm workers to live close to their place of work and this was no longer a significant requirement.

Councillor Miss S White proposed that this application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation.  This proposal was duly seconded.

RESOLVED that this application be APPROVED.

To consider the planning application and recommendation of the Director of Planning and Regulatory Services (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated).

The Officer presented the report and, in response to a question, confirmed that the related planning application was still within the time limit to be determined.

A Member raised a question regarding the timing of Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs) and the Development Management Team Leader advised that planning guidance suggested that this was the appropriate time to serve a TPO.  He agreed that in an ideal world Councils would survey all trees and decide which were suitable for a TPO.  However, for practical reasons it was a reactionary process.

RESOLVED that the Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 12/17with the following modification not be confirmed:

1.                  Removal of the large clearing to the north west of Beatbush Wood which was included in the TPO 12/17 when served.