Agenda and minutes

South Eastern Area Planning Committee - Wednesday 2nd September 2020 1.00 pm

Venue: Members to access the meeting via Teams. Members of the press & public may listen to the live stream on the Council's website:https://democracy.maldon.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=151&MId=2152

Contact: Committee Services 

Media

Items
No. Item

1162.

Chairman's notices

Minutes:

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the remote meeting, held under new regulations which came into effect on 4 April 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Hetook Members through some generalhousekeepingissues,togetherwiththe etiquettefor the meeting and then asked Officers present tointroducethemselves.

 

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

 

 

1163.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Councillor R P F Dewick.

1164.

Minutes of the last meeting pdf icon PDF 154 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5 August 2020, (copy enclosed).

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5 August 2020 be approved and confirmed.

 

1165.

Disclosure of Interest

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).

 

Minutes:

Councillor Mrs P A Channer, CC, disclosed a non-pecuniary interest in all items on the agenda as a member of Essex County Council, a consultee on highways, access, waste, education and all planning related matters. She further declared on Agenda Items 7 20/00459/FUL- Abaco House, Foxhall Road, Southminster, Essex and 8 20/00549/OUT – Land Adjacent to 64 Southminster Road, Tillingham, as she knew the agent.

 

Councillor A S Fluker declared in the interest of openness and transparency on Agenda Item 7 20/00459/FUL- Abaco House, Foxhall Road, Southminster, Essex, as he knew the agent and Item 8 20/00549/OUT – Land Adjacent to 64 Southminster Road, Tillingham, as he knew both the applicant and the agent. Following an enquiry from Councillor Bassenger he clarified that both were non- pecuniary declarations.

 

 

1166.

20/00411/FUL - Land South of Red Lyons Lodge, Burnham Road, Latchingdon, Essex pdf icon PDF 664 KB

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

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Application Number

20/00411/FUL

Location

Land South Of Red Lyons Lodge, Burnham Road, Latchingdon Essex

Proposal

New dwelling with cart lodge garage

Applicant

Mr Baldock

Agent

Mr Sebastian Walsh - Hibbs And Walsh Associates Ltd

Target Decision Date

EOT 07.08.2020

Case Officer

Annie Keen

Parish

LATCHINGDON

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Departure from Local Plan

 

A Members’ Update was submitted detailing an additional letter of support.

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman moved the recommendation that planning application 20/00411/FUL, Land South of Red Lyons Lodge, Burnham Road, Latchingdon be approved subject to the conditions as detailed in Section 8 of the report. This was seconded by Councillor Boyce.

 

Both Ward Members agreed that this was a previously agreed site with no valid planning reasons to refuse.

 

Councillor Channer expressed grave concerns regarding the previous approval in 2016 approved under the old Local Development Plan (LDP) requiring no Unilateral Agreement in relation to the Essex Coast RAMS. She felt it contravened the adopted LDP, there had been no technical start therefore previous approval had expired and should now be treated as  a new application.

 

The Lead Specialist Place, noting that to a certain extent this was correct, reminded the Committee that each application had to be considered on its own merits. In this instance the planning permission was granted in 2016 therefore the principle had been established and accepted. Officers considered that the previous decision of approval was substantial and should be a material consideration in this application. Furthermore, the decision to grant planning permission now would cause no additional harm than when last granted in 2016 when it was found to be acceptable by the Inspector.

 

There being no further discussion the Chairman put the Officer’s recommendation of approval to the Committee.  Upon a vote being taken and there being an equality of votes the Chairman exercised his casting vote and the application was 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 this permission.

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

2.               The development shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents: 20/26/01, 20/26/02 Rev A, 20/26/03 Rev C, 20/26/04 Rev A, 20/26/05 Rev A, 20/26/06 Rev A, 20/26/07, 20/26/08, 20/26/09.

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

3.               No development works above ground level shall take place until written details or annotated high-quality photographs of samples of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out using the materials and details as approved.

REASON: To ensure the external appearance of the development is appropriate to the locality in accordance with policy D1 of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1166.

1167.

20/00452/FUL - Millfields Caravan Park, Millfields, Burnham-on-Crouch pdf icon PDF 547 KB

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

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Application Number

20/00452/FUL

Location

Millfields Caravan Park, Millfields, Burnham-on-Crouch

Proposal

Removal of condition 6 (wintering bird period) on approved planning permission FUL/MAL/18/00381 (Erection of building to be used as offices, shop, shower/toilet facilities, spa, pool facilities and gym, formation of hardstanding to be used as road and parking and enhanced landscaping, in association with an existing caravan site

Applicant

Birch’s Leisure Parks Ltd

Agent

Mr Philip Kratz – GSC Solicitors LLP

Target Decision Date

09.09.2020

Case Officer

Devan Hearnah

Parish

BURNHAM SOUTH

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Council owned land 

 

A Members’ Update was submitted that detailed a letter of objection.

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman moved the recommendation that planning application 20/00452/FUL, Millfields Caravan Park, Millfields, Burnham-on-Crouchbe approved subject to the conditions as detailed in Section 8 of the report. This was seconded by Councillor Bell.

 

A brief discussion ensued around the ecology of Burnham-on-Crouch, the need to protect both over wintering birds and spring and summer nesting birds together with concerns that the application site had not been visited by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB). However, it was noted that the Conservation Officer had offered no objections to the application.

 

There being no further discussion the Chairman put the Officer’s recommendation of approval to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken the application was 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 13 September 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: ATS/537/03; 10955-0020-002; 10955-0001-007; RCEF64080-SK002 REV B and RCEF64080-SK003 REV A.

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

3                 The development hereby permitted shall only be used ancillary to the caravan park proposed as shown on approved drawing 10955-0001-007 and for no other purpose, including any type of residential accommodation, at any time.

REASON To ensure that the development would only provide facilities ancillary to the existing lawful use of the site in the interests of the character and appearance of the area, the adjoining designated nature conservation site and minimising flood risk in accord with policies S1, S8, E5, D1, D2, D5 and N2 of the approved Local Development Plan, policies EC.6, EN.1 and EN.3 of the Burnham-on-Crouch Neighbourhood Plan and the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

4                 The proposed development shall be implemented in accordance with the forms of mitigation included in Ecology Survey Report (dated November 2018) and be retained as such in perpetuity.

REASON In order to ensure that there is no adverse effect to the adjoining designated nature conservation site in line with policies S1, S8, E5, D1, D2 and N2 of the approved Local Development Plan, policy EN.3 of the Burnham-on-Crouch Neighbourhood Plan and the guidance contained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1167.

1168.

20/00459/FUL - Abaco House, Foxhall Road, Southminster, Essex pdf icon PDF 525 KB

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

 

Minutes:

Application Number

20/00459/FUL

Location

Abaco House, Foxhall Road, Southminster, Essex

Proposal

Change of use of land from agriculture to B8 storage and distribution and construction of storage building

Applicant

Mr Peter Herrington

Agent

Mr Anthony Cussen - Cussen Construction Consultants

Target Decision Date

08.09.2020

Case Officer

Annie Keen

Parish

SOUTHMINSTER

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Departure from Local Plan

Member Call In – Councillor A S Fluker

Reason – Policies S1, E1 and E4

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/00459/FUL, Abaco House, Foxhall Road, Southminster, Essex be refused for the reasons as detailed in Section 8 of the report. This was seconded by Councillor Channer.

 

Councillor Fluker, a Ward Member, opened the discussion by saying that the Parish Council supported the application and he knew the site well which was surrounded by commercial buildings. He pointed out that the area had been used for industrial purposes for some time and under Policies E1 and E4 converting agriculture to commercial, where applicable, would regenerate, regularise, modernise and expand an existing employment site. He proposed that the application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and to support local business. Councillor Beale, a Ward Member, said he would support this view as the site was not large enough for agriculture therefore better served for industrial purposes. 

 

Councillor Channer disagreed as she felt there was no evidence to determine what the planned use was and that however small the piece of land it should be retained as agricultural.  She noted that Environmental Health had concerns regarding noise issues resulting in loss of residential amenity which was a serious issue.

 

The Lead Specialist Place addressing a number of points raised clarified that this was not an expansion of an existing site therefore Policy E4 was not entirely relevant. There was no loss of employment as the use of the site hadn’t commenced. He said that there was no evidence in the application of planned use and that as the decision-makers, whilst statutory consultees were an integral part of the process, the Committee must ensure that decisions were based on policies and caselaw. He reminded members of the demonstrable harm incurred by noise nuisance.

 

The Lead Specialist Development Management said that this area demonstrated an encroachment by employment sites into the countryside. There was a need to have regard to planning history, the lawful use of sites and protecting those sites.

 

The Chairman then put the Officer’s recommendation of refusal to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken and there being an equality of votes the Chairman exercised his casting vote and the Officer’s recommendation was lost.

 

The Chairman then reverted to Councillor Fluker’s proposal to approve the application contrary to the Officer’s recommendation for the reasons that given its location it would not cause demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the site and it was not contrary to policies S1, S8, D1 and E1 of the Design Guide.

 

The Lead  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1168.

1169.

20/00549/OUT - Land Adjacent to 64 Southminster Road, Tillingham pdf icon PDF 431 KB

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

 

Minutes:

Application Number

20/00549/OUT

Location

Land Adjacent to 64 Southminster Road, Tillingham

Proposal

Outline application with all matters reserved for a proposed construction of a detached 3 bedroom bungalow.

Applicant

Mr Richard Embling

Agent

Mr Anthony Cussen – Cussen Construction Consultants

Target Decision Date

4.09.2020

Case Officer

Louise Staplehurst

Parish

TILLINGHAM

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Member Call In by Councillor A S Fluker

Reason: In relation to policies D1, S1, H2, H4 and S8

 

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman moved the recommendation that  planning application 20/00549/OUT, Land Adjacent to 64 Southminster Road, Tillingham be refused for the reasons as detailed in Section 8 of the Officer’s report. This was seconded by Councillor Boyce.

 

Councillor Fluker opened the discussion by saying that the Parish Council had no objections, no other letters of objection had been received, the intrinsic character of the countryside was not adversely impacted, and it was in a sustainable location supported by local services.

 

Councillor Stamp supported the Officer’s recommendation and warned of establishing a dangerous precedent by not heeding the advice of professional Planning Officers who had fought long and hard to impede over development in the Tillingham area.

 

The Lead Specialist Place, taking into consideration other comments regarding Parish Council support, reminded Members that the Committee as the decision-maker could not delegate to parishes. Planning caselaw and legislation had regard to policies and this site contravened those policies. The site was not sustainable, outside the development area with no adequate street lighting and not close to facilities. The key material consideration here was Planning History, and this had been refused on two previous occasions. He said this would set a very dangerous precedent for future applicants as how can these types of developments be stopped if the first of its kind is accepted.

 

Councillor Stamp echoed these sentiments and said she supported the Officer’s recommendation of refusal.

 

The Chairman put the Officer’s recommendation of refusal to the Committee and upon a vote being taken is was duly refused.

 

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

 

1.               The application site lies outside of the defined settlement boundary of Tillingham where policies of restraint apply. The Council can demonstrate a five-year housing land supply to accord with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. The site has not been identified by the council for development to meet future needs for the district and does not fall within either a garden suburb or strategic allocation for growth identified within the Maldon District Local Development Plan to meet the objectively assessed needs for housing in the district. The proposal would therefore, represent the unjustified encroachment of built form onto undeveloped land, with associated visual impacts. Furthermore, the proposed development, by reason of the unavoidable implications of the siting of the development, would result in a development being proposed that is further north of the existing building line and out of keeping with the prevailing pattern of development in the area, to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1169.

1170.

20/00552/FUL - 1 Stones Park, Stoney Hills, Burnham-on-Crouch pdf icon PDF 543 KB

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

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

 

Application Number

20/00552/FUL

Location

1 Stones Park, Stoney Hills, Burnham-On-Crouch

Proposal

S73A application for alterations to rear elevation of plot 1 and 2 for planning permission ful/mal/16/00408 including hip to gable on plot 1 and window to bedroom and second storey extension to plot 2. Change of roof on garages from hip to gable and internal layouts generally.

Applicant

Mr Darren Daniel - Cosy New Homes

Agent

Mr Neil Cooper – Signature Group TM Ltd

Target Decision Date

20.08.2020

Case Officer

Louise Staplehurst

Parish

BURNHAM NORTH

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Departure from Local Plan 2017

 

A Members’ Update was submitted that detailed representation from Burnham Town Council and a further letter of objection.

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed a public participation submission from the Agent, Neil Cooper. He then moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/00552/FUL, 1 Stones Park, Stoney Hills, Burnham-on-Crouch be approved subject to the conditions set out in the report at Section 8. This was seconded by Councillor Boyce.

 

The Lead Specialist Place in response to a question about lawful development and planning permission, advised that the previous application 16/00408/FUL was allowed on appeal in May 2017 which was prior to the LDP being adopted, however it was not considered that the main  policies within the emerging LDP and adopted LDP had materially altered in a way that would mean the proposed development should be viewed differently.  Furthermore, it should be noted that the Inspector for application 16/00408/FUL considered that the development did comply with policy D1 of the LDP in terms of its impact on the character of the area. In addition, having regard to the development being undertaken within the Stoney Hills area, and given that the principle of erecting two dwellings on the site had been established, it was considered unreasonable for the application to be recommended for refusal on principle.

 

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

 

It was noted that Councillor Fluker had experienced some technical difficulties and in

accordance with Section 4, paragraph 4.7 of the Remote Meeting Protocol (May 2020)

did not vote on this item of business.

 

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

1.               The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: SK03012015.1, PLOT 1 SK/170117/.1, PLOT 1 SK/170116/.1, PLOT 1 Sk/170116/.2, Surface Water Strategy Report, Specification of materials on plot 1 and 2, Plot 1 SK/170116/.2 Landscaping

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

2.               The external surfaces of the buildings hereby approved shall be constructed of the materials specified on plan ‘Plot 1 – SK/170116/.2 Block Plan and the Specification of materials on plot 1 and 2, and shall be retained as such thereafter.

REASON:In the interest of the character and appearance of the area in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1170.

1171.

20/00577/FUL- Land Adjacent 20 Chapel Lane, Tillingham pdf icon PDF 656 KB

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

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Application Number

20/00577/FUL

Location

Land Adjacent 20 Chapel Lane, Tillingham

Proposal

Two new dwellings and associated works.

Applicant

Mr Mike Otter – GPO Designs Ltd

Agent

N/A

Target Decision Date

04.09.2020

Case Officer

Louise Staplehurst

Parish

TILLINGHAM

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Member Call In by Councillor A S Fluker

Reason: policies D1, D3, H4- Backland and Infill Development

 

A Members’ Update was submitted that detailed the submission of a signed Unilateral Agreement, comments from consultees and a further letter of objection.

 

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed two public participation submissions, the first from Objectors Janet and David Beard and the second from the Agent, Mike Otter.

 

The Chairman then moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/00577/FUL, Land Adjacent 20 Chapel Lane, Tillingham be to approved subject to a signed Unilateral Undertaking to confirm that the developer will contribute to Essex Coast RAMS and the conditions (as detailed in Section 9 of the report). This was seconded by Councillor Stamp.

 

Councillor Fluker opened the discussion by acknowledging the hard work of the agent. However, he said that this was not supported by the parish council and given this was a conservation area could create a dangerous precedent allowing pairs of semi-detached houses in this type of streetscene. He proposed that the application be refused under Policy D1as it did not enhance the character of the local context or make a valuable contribution in terms of architectural style. This was supported by Councillor Skeens.

 

It was noted that Councillors Bell and Boyce had left the meeting.

 

The Chairman then put the Officer’s recommendation of approval to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken this was lost.

 

Councillor Hull had experienced some technical difficulties during the discussion and in accordance with Section 4, paragraph 4.7 of the Remote Meeting Protocol (May 2020) did not vote on this item of business.

 

The Chairman then put Councillor Fluker’s proposal to refuse the application for the reasons previously outlined to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken it was refused.

 

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the reasons as previously outlined.