Agenda and draft minutes

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

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M G Bassenger, Miss A M Beale, V J Bell, M R Edwards, C Mayes, S P Nunn, R H Siddall, N J Skeens, W Stamp and E L Stephens.

To confirm the Minutes of the special meeting of the District Planning Committee held on 3 March 2022 (copy enclosed).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the District Planning Committee held on 3 March 2022 be approved and confirmed.

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 M F L Durham declared a non-pecuniary interest as a Member of Essex County Council who were statutory consultees and had been consultees on quite a number of applications pertaining to this application.

Councillor Mrs J L Fleming declared a non-pecuniary interest as a Member of Essex County Council who were statutory consultees.

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

It was noted from the Members’ Update that a correction was made to paragraph 5.6.4 and consultation responses had been received from Essex County Fire and Rescue Service.

Following the Officers’ presentation, the Agent, Mr Wood addressed the Committee.

Members discussed the application in length and during the discussion the following information was provided by Officers:

·                 Delivery of provisions relating to residential care, shops, sports etc. form part of future phases of the development and would be secured through the Section 106 agreement.

·                 The height of the proposed buildings was discussed, and Members were advised that the Council’s design codes had accepted the height of the properties.  Although the tilted balance was weighted in favour of the developer Members were advised that if they felt that the harm caused by these properties on the scale of the development was significant and that the harm outweighed the benefits then this could be a reason for refusal.  It was highlighted that Officers’ professional recommendation was that the scheme was acceptable.

·                 According to the Vehicle Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document the proposal allocated one electric charging point adjacent to each dwelling and with flats at least one charging point would be in each flat development.

·                 An affordable housing delivery scheme was submitted and approved as part of the approved scheme.  Overall the scheme must provide the quantum of development but there was no proportional requirement for this across the phases.  Officers were happy this would be met and therefore there was no requirement to condition.

·                 The long-term stewardship  ...  view the full minutes text for item 624.