Agenda item

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 two public participation submissions, one from Supporters, Ivor and Kay Newman and one from the Applicant, Jack Ellum.

He then moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/00210/HOUSE -46 Wentworth Meadows be refused for the reasons as detailed in Section 8 of the report. This was not seconded.

Councillor Morris proposed that the application be approved contrary to the Officer’s recommendation and this was seconded.

A debate ensued around the reasons for refusal in the Officer’s report, in particular the issue of private amenity space. Other concerns were raised about the retention of young families in the area and the need to expand to accommodate growing families.

The Lead Specialist Place, addressing the issue of amenity space, reminded the Committee of the need for consistency in the application of the policy.  He said that this application represented a shortfall of over 40% of amenity space under the current standards which would have a detrimental impact on current and future residents. He advised that this authority consistently adhered to the acceptable standard of amenity space (3 or more bedrooms requiring 100sqm of amenity space) and by not doing could create a dangerous precedent for both new builds and the Planning Inspectorate.  With reference to retention of families he advised that unfortunately personal circumstances had to be very special in order to be considered and that these were not in this instance.

The Chairman, at this juncture, urged Members of the Committee to rule with their heads as opposed to their hearts when forming their decision. Councillor Swain raised a point of order in that he had seconded the first recommendation from the Officer to refuse the application but that due to technology delays this had not been acknowledged and this was noted.

The Chairman indicated that in the light of the circumstances, he would call for a vote on Councillor Morris’ proposal first and should it be necessary, revert to a vote on the Officer’s recommendation. He asked Councillor Morris for reasons to approve the application. Councillor Morris reasoned that the design was acceptable and there was no detrimental impact on the character of the area.

The Chairman put Councillor Morris’ proposal to approve the application to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken it was lost.

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

 RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1                 The proposed development by reason of its scale and design would result in a large, dominant and bulky addition, particularly due to the depth of the proposed rear extension, height and depth of the two storey rear element and the height, depth and width of the first floor side projection.  The development would therefore appear dominant within the site, resulting in demonstrable harm to the character and appearance of the existing dwelling and the locality, contrary to policies D1 and H4 of the LDP and the Maldon Design Guide.

2                 The proposed development would result in an unacceptable level of private amenity space which is considered to detrimentally impact on the quality of life of the current and future occupiers of the dwelling, contrary to policy D1 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan, guidance contained within the Maldon District Design Guide and guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3                 The proposed development by virtue of its depth, height and proximity to the boundary shared with the neighbouring dwellings to the south west and north east, would result in an overbearing impact to the detriment of the residential amenities of those neighbouring occupiers.  The proposal is therefore contrary to policies D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan and the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.