Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting and took Members through some general housekeeping issues together with the etiquette for the meeting. He then asked  Officers present to introduce themselves.

This was followed by a roll call of all Members present.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors V J Bell and R P F Dewick.

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 June 2020, (copy enclosed).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 10 June 2020 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).

All Committee Members declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 5. 20/00345/FUL, Land Adjacent Orchard House, Nipsells Chase, Mayland and Agenda Item 10. 20/00463/WTPO, Land north west of Riversleigh, Nipsells Chase, Mayland, Essex, as they knew the applicant. With the exception of Councillor Fluker all Members declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 9. 20/00502/HOUSE & 20/00503/LBC, The Wheat Barn, Dengie, Essex, as they knew the applicant.

Councillor A S Fluker declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 8. 20/00415/HOUSE, 17 Brook Road, Tillingham Essex, CM0 7SG, as he knew the applicant. He further declared a pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 9. 20/00502/HOUSE & 20/00503/LBC, The Wheat Barn, Dengie, Essex, as the applicant and advised the Committee he would leave the meeting for this item of business. 

Councillor Mrs P A Channer, CC, declared a non-pecuniary interest in all items on the agenda as a member of Essex County Council, a consultee on highways, access, education and all planning related matters

Councillor Mrs A L Hull declared a pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 6. 20/00360/FUL, The Bank House, 10 Station Road, Southminster, as the applicant was her son-in-law. She advised the Committee she would leave the meeting for this item of business.

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

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed a public participation submission from the applicants Mr and Mrs K Paton.

The Chairman then moved the recommendation as set out in the report and this was seconded by Councillor Stamp.

There being no further discussion the Chairman put the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application to the Committee, upon a vote being taken it was unanimously approved.

RESOLVED that the 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 the original permission 18/00839/FUL, as approved on 20.06.2019.

REASON  To comply with Section 91(1) of The Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2.         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in complete accordance with approved drawings: 1142/01 A - Location Plan, 1142/03 A - Proposed Floor Plan, 1142/02 B - Proposed Site Plan, 1142/04 A - Elevations Sheet 1 of 2, 1142/05 A - Elevations Sheet 2 of 2.

REASON  To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the details as approved.

3.         Prior to their use in the development hereby approved, details or samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces, including windows and doors, of the development hereby approved shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON  To ensure the external appearance of the development is appropriate to the locality in accordance with policy D1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the guidance contained in the Maldon District Design Guide SPD.

4.         Prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved details of the boundary treatment of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The boundary treatment shall be provided prior to the use of the site and building hereby approved in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such in perpetuity.

REASON  To ensure the external appearance of the development is appropriate to the locality and that the development would protect the amenities of the neighbouring occupiers in accordance with policy D1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the guidance contained in the Maldon District Design Guide SPD.

5.         The stables hereby permitted shall be used solely for the private stabling of horses and no business or commercial use including for the purposes of livery or any riding  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1053.

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

A Members’ Update was submitted detailing the correct site plan, confirmation that the applicant was prepared to enter into a s106 agreement and comments from a Tree Consultant.

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed the public participation submission received from Mr Ellis Wiseman, the Applicant. He then moved the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application and this was not seconded.

A debate ensued around the lack of amenity space on this additional development. Councillor Fluker, a Ward Member, felt that the nearby playing fields mitigated the lack of amenity space and complied with policy CO7 of the Maldon District Design Guide (MDDG). In addition, he felt that this would be an improvement to the area as, since the closure of the bank, it had become somewhat of an eyesore that the development would address whilst at the same time provide much needed flat accommodation.

He proposed that the application be approved, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and subject to a signed s106 agreement for RAMS. This was seconded by Councillor Beale, who echoed Councillor Fluker’s remarks about the existing buildings falling into disrepair.

Councillor Stamp, having reviewed the plans concurred with the Officer’s recommendation . The Lead Specialist Place advised that given the flats were family accommodation the lack of amenity space would have an unacceptable impact on future residents and that appeals had been won in similar circumstances. Councillor Fluker reiterated that the proposal complied with policy CO7 of the MDDG given the proximity of the playing fields and asked that the recommendation be moved.

The Lead Specialist Place asked that should the application be approved the conditions for approval be delegated to Officers in consultation with the Chairman and subject to a signed s106 agreement. Councillor Fluker added that the Conservation Officer be consulted on materials to be used.

The Chairman put the proposal to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation to the committee. Upon a vote being taken it was approved.

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to conditions delegated to Officers, in consultation with the Chairman, together with a signed Unilateral Agreement in relation to RAMS.

Councillor Hull returned to the meeting.

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

A Members’ Update was submitted advising that the developer had signed a legal agreement to secure the required contribution of £125.58 per dwelling in relation to the RAMS. Therefore, the impact of the development in this respect was considered to be mitigated. It also detailed a supporting comment from County Highways.

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed the two public participation submissions received, one from an Objector, David Howes, and one from the Applicant, Chris Wragg. He then moved the recommendation as set out in the report and this was seconded by Councillor Fluker.

Councillor Skeens opened the discussion by expressing concerns regarding two key issues. One was the introduction of a new proposed entrance way for the additional houses in an area already compromised by a blind bend and two other busy entrance ways, one being TESCO. The second concern was the roof heights and the fact that the proposed houses were much bigger than the surrounding buildings. He reminded the Committee once again that the area already had housing numbers way beyond that agreed in the Burnham Neighbourhood Plan which residents had agreed and voted for.

Councillor Stamp echoed Councillor Skeens’ comments. She said that yet again Burnham-on-Crouch was being asked to agree more proposals for family homes despite the infrastructure being overstretched. She stressed that she would not have issues with bungalow accommodation, but that the area could not sustain any more large family homes. If minded to approve she asked that the issue of Japanese Knotweed be conditioned and if possible condition the planting of trees for privacy purposes.

The Lead Specialist: Development Management referring to the plans advised that  the proposed buildings were in keeping with existing and that Essex Highways had not objected to the proposed entrance. In addition, the Inspector had already accepted the principle of development on the site, therefore, it would be very difficult to sustain a reason for refusal on the basis of development of additional houses. Screening could also prove difficult on both the eastern and western side, however, the only elevation that impacted was the flank elevation and it had no windows therefore overlooking was not an issue.

Councillor Skeens then proposed that the application be refused  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1055.

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

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed the public participation submission received from the Applicant, Mrs Krysta Collin. He then moved the recommendation as set out in the Officer’s report and this was not seconded.

Councillor Fluker opened the discussion by referring to Policy 5.28 of the Local Development Plan (LDP) in that the application was to adapt the existing building stock to meet the needs of a growing family. He noted that it was a very wide plot that could accommodate the changes, the design was in keeping with the location, the principle of development accorded with the LDP and there had been no objections from neighbours. He proposed that the application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and this was seconded by Councillor Stamp.

The Lead Specialist Place referring to the LDP advised Members that the policy did not object to extending the dwelling, however the design was an issue, doubling the size of the building. He reminded Members that personal circumstances would have to be very special to be taken into consideration and that these were not in that category and should not be a consideration above planning policies. He concluded by saying that this approach had been found unlawful in previous cases.

Councillor Fluker in response said that whilst he agreed with Mr Leigh’s comments, he noted that the Conservation Officer at paragraph 7.2 of the report, had no problem with the design, from a subjective point of view it worked, and he stood by his proposal to approve.

The Lead Specialist: Development Management expressed concerns regarding the  proximity of the external wall to the boundary of the neighbouring property to the east, the bulk and scale of the design and the fact that previous schemes had been refused for these reasons.

The Chairman addressing Councillor Fluker’s proposal asked for reasons for approval. Councillor Fluker said the development accorded with policy D1 of the LDP and the  design, scale and bulk were acceptable to the location. The Lead Specialist Place said that conditions would include time, plans and materials. The Lead Specialist: Development Management then suggested the removal of permitted development rights on the flank elevation to ensure no perception of overlooking.

The Chairman put the proposal to approve the application, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation, to the committee and upon a vote being taken it was approved.

RESOLVED that the application be APPROVED subject to conditions delegated to Officers in consultation with the Chairman 

Councillor Fluker left the meeting for this item of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1056.

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

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed the two public participation submissions, one from an Objector, Mr Andrew Snowdon, and one from Mr Tim Matthews, TMA Chartered Surveyors, the Agent.

The Chairman moved the recommendation as set out in the report and it was seconded by Councillor Boyce.

Councillor Stamp, referring to the Public Right of Way (PROW) shown on the Officer’s presentation asked for confirmation that this would not be adversely impacted by the development and the Officer confirmed it would not. In response to a query around the planning history it was confirmed this was correct and that in some cases it referred to existing outbuildings as opposed to new.

The Chairman put the Officers’ recommendation to the Committee and upon a vote being taken it was approved.

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

20/00502/HOUSE:

1          The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of

three years from the date of this permission.

REASON  To comply with Section 91(1) The Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2          The development herby permitted shall be carried out and retained in

accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Location Plan, TMA/861/1 rev3, TMA/861/2 Rev A

REASON  To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the details as approved.

3          The materials used in the construction of the development hereby approved

should be as set out in the application form and approved drawings.

REASON  In the interest of the character and appearance of the area in accordance with policy D1 and D3 of the approved Local Development Plan and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

20/00503/LBC:

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

REASON  To comply with Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

2          The development herby permitted shall be carried out and retained in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: Location Plan, TMA/861/1 rev3, TMA/861/2 Rev A

REASON  To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the details as approved.

3          The materials used in the construction of the development hereby approved should be as set out in the application form and approved drawings.

REASON  In the interest of the character and appearance of the area in accordance with policy D1 and D3 of the approved Local Development Plan and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Councillor Fluker returned to the meeting.

To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery (copy enclosed).

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman moved the recommendation as set out in the report and this was seconded by Councillor Fluker.

He then put the Officer’s recommendation to approve the application to the Committee and upon a vote being taken it was approved.

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

1          The works hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the British Standard Recommendations for Tree Works (BS3998:2010).

REASON In order to safeguard the health and appearance of the tree.

2.         The works hereby permitted shall be carried out within 2 years from the date of this permission.

REASON  To ensure that the works are carried out whilst they are still relevant to the condition of the tree.