Agenda item

To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery, (copy enclosed, Members’

Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Member’s Update that further comments had been received from interested parties

Following the Officer’s presentation and in accordance with the public participation scheme the Chairman read out a submission from the Applicant, Susan Strathern.

The Chairman then moved the Officer’s recommendation as set out in the report. This was seconded by Councillor Durham.

The Lead Specialist Place in response to a query about private amenity and boundary treatments clarified that the private amenity space was to the rear of the property only. He advised that since boundary treatments were currently not included in the application, should Members be minded to approve, boundary treatment appropriate to the setting would need to be imposed as a condition.

To dispel any confusion around the status of previous planning history the Lead Specialist Place took the Committee through the key details. Prior approval was granted in 2015 on the proviso that works be completed in 2018. The works were not completed within the timescale; therefore the permitted development application had ceased. Furthermore, the previous application was a prior approval process that did not require consideration of sustainability issues, confirmation of compliance with policies etc. This application was a planning application and, as such, had to be measured against all material planning considerations and policies before granting approval.

Councillor Durham, noting that it was outside of the development boundary therefore contrary to the adopted LDP and the need for consistency in decision - making, said he supported the Officer’s recommendation.

The Chairman put the Officer’s recommendation to refuse the application to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken the application was refused.

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.               The application site lies within a rural location outside of the defined settlement boundary of Purleigh 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 proposed development would substantially alter the open character and intrinsic beauty of the countryside and would detract from the agricultural character and appearance of the site as a result of the domestication of the site and the inclusion of associated residential paraphernalia. If developed, the site would be disconnected from the existing settlement and by reason of its location and access, it would provide poor quality and limited access to sustainable and public transportation, resulting in an increased need of private vehicle ownership. The development would therefore be unacceptable and contrary to policies S1, S2, S8, D2 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and Government advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2018)

2.         The development results in family accommodation. The private amenity space provided is substantially short of that required and is considered to result in an amenity space provision that would fail to be adequate in meeting the needs of current and future occupiers of the site, to the detriment of their amenity and standard of accommodation, failing to comply with policy D1 of the Approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance contained with the Maldon District Design Guide.

3.         In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the necessary financial contribution towards Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy has not been secured. As a result, the development would have an adverse impact on the European designated nature conservation sites, contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.

Councillor Fleming experienced problems re-joining the meeting and therefore was unable to vote on the next item of business, Agenda Item 9, 20/00340/FUL – Land South West of Broadfield Farm, Braxted Park Road, Great Totham.