Agenda and draft minutes

The Chairman referred to the list of notices on the back of the agenda.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors R G Boyce MBE, R P F Dewick, Mrs H E Elliott, P G L Elliot, M W Helm, N R Pudney, D M Sismey and A K M St. Joseph.

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

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

Councillor J V Keyes disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Great Totham Parish Council.

Councillor R Pratt disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a Member of Essex County Council who were consultees on planning applications.

Councillor Mrs P A Channer disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a Member of Essex County Council who were consultees on matters such as highways, access and flooding.

Councillor M F L Durham disclosed a non-pecuniary interest as a Member of Essex County Council.

The Committee received the reports of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance and determined the following planning applications, having taken into account all representations and consultation replies received, including those listed on the Members’ Update circulated prior to the meeting.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Members’ Update that further information had been received from the Applicant and Officers had provided comments in respect of this.  In addition, an amendment to conditions 8, 16 and 49 and addition of a new condition 50 were suggested.

The Lead Specialist Place presented the application to the Council and highlighted that the site plan included with the Officers’ report was incorrect and the correct plan was made available on the screen for Members.  Members were reminded of Section 28(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) which referred to the development plan and how determination must be made in accordance with the plan unless material considerations indicated otherwise.  The Officer then went on and set out for Members what should be considered as a material consideration.

The Council was introduced to Mr Dave Chapman from Essex County Council (ECC) the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) who was in attendance to provide additional information, if required.

Following the Officers’ presentation, an objector, Mr Sargood (representing Heybridge Residents Association), Councillor Perry on behalf of Heybridge Parish Council and the Agent, Mr Coleman addressed the Committee.

Councillor A S Fluker, Leader of the Council, referred to the Local Development Plan and the disappointment that this scheme did not bring forward a Flood Alleviation Scheme (FAS), but how that the application was now policy compliant in terms of affordable housing.  Councillor Fluker proposed that the application be approved in accordance with the Officers’ recommendation.  This proposal was duly seconded.

Councillor Miss M R Lewis, a Heybridge Ward Member, addressed the Committee raising a number of concerns and highlighted how the application had been approved (subject to a Section 106 agreement) in 2016 by the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 911.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Members’ Update that the description of the proposal had been amended and in light of this a revised recommendation was detailed.  In addition, some amendments to sections 3, 6 and 7 of the report were detailed, a consultation response from the Countryside and Coast Officer had been received and an amendment to condition 1 and deletion of conditions 4 and 9 were detailed.

Following the Officers’ presentation, the Agent, Ms Williams addressed the Committee.

Councillor B E Harker proposed that the application be refused, contrary to Officers’ recommendation, as he felt the application failed to encourage a greater proportion of smaller 1 and 2 bed homes contrary to Policy H2 of the LDP and contrary to the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA).  This proposal was duly seconded.

As a point of clarification Members were advised that the related outline application had been determined before the Council had a five year housing land supply and Local Development Plan.  Housing mix had been accepted and was not therefore a matter for consideration at this stage.

A debate ensued, during which some Members expressed concern regarding the style of houses being presented, in particular the proposed flats and flat rooves. 

Councillor S J Savage then proposed the that Officers recommendation (as set out in the Members’ Update) be approved.  This was duly seconded.

The Chairman sought clarification from Councillor Harker regarding his earlier proposition.  Councillor Harker advised that he wished to withdraw his proposition.

At this point Councillor M R Pearlman left the meeting for a short while and then returned.

In response to questions raised particularly in relation to the information detailed in the Members’ Update, the Principle Planning Officer clarified a number of points, including:

·                 the table in paragraph 3.1.10 of the report had been updated in the Members’ Update and related only to market housing residential mix.  The Officer went through the changes and it was noted that although the figures had changed the proposal still complied with the outline permission granted.

·                 reference in the main report to elderly bungalows and flats related to the affordable housing mix which remained the same.

The Chairman commented that it was not acceptable for Members’ Updates to be sent out late and this was causing great difficulty.  He questioned whether the changes outlined were a material amendment.

Councillor I E Dobson proposed that that the application be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 912.

To consider the planning application and recommendations of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Members’ Update that an update to paragraph 7.9 of the report had been provided and consultation responses had been received from Environmental Health and the Countryside and Coast Officer.

Following the Officers’ presentation, the Agent, Ms Williams addressed the Committee.

In response to a question regarding on whether the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) should be a material consideration, the Lead Specialist Place referred to the Local Development Plan and how both the policy and text relating to it had to be read together therefore making the SHMA material consideration and of material weight.

Councillor S J Savage proposed that the application be refused in accordance with Officers’ recommendation.  This was duly seconded and upon a vote being taken was agreed.

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.           The proportion of smaller residential units within the open market housing mix proposed is not consistent with the Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment and inadequate justification for such variation has been provided.  The proposal therefore fails to deliver the housing required to serve the Maldon District and fails to accord with policy H2 of the Maldon District Approved Local Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.           In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the necessary affordable housing and financial contributions towards medical services, education and RAMS have not been secured. As a result, the development would not meet the identified need in the locality to address the Council's strategic objectives on affordable housing and supporting a mixed and balanced community, would have an adverse impact on the European designated nature conservation sites and would not make adequate provision for medical services and education for the future occupiers of the site, contrary to Policies S1, S2¸ S3, S4, H1, D1, D2, N1, N2 and I1 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan and Government advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.