Agenda item

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

A Members’ Update was received detailing the principle of development together with comments from statutory consultees and other interested parties.

Following the Officer’s presentation, the Chairman addressed two public participation submissions, one from an Objector, Diana Bailey and one from the Applicant, Michael Carpenter.

The Chairman then moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/00097/FUL – Former Petticrows Boatyard, The Quay, Burnham-on-Crouch be refused for the reasons as detailed in section 8 of the report. This was seconded by Councillor Skeens.

A debate ensued where the overarching concern was the dominant nature of the proposed development on the town itself. Councillor Skeens commented that it was outside the strategic development area and in its current form would dwarf the town. Were it to be approved in any form going forward it should be considerably smaller. Councillor Fluker agreed and said that any future development should be more appropriate to the site.

Councillor Stamp said she had some sympathy with the applicant and proposed that the application be deferred for reconsideration by the statutory consultees and submitted to the District Planning Committee for decision. This was not seconded.

The Chairman put the duly seconded Officer’s recommendation of refusal to the Committee. Upon a vote being taken the application was refused.

It was noted that Councillor Channer 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 REFUSED for the following reasons

1                 The proposed development would result in the loss of employment land and a Protected Primary River Related Use.  Insufficient justification or evidence has been provided for the loss of this land by way of evidence that the existing use demonstrably harms the character and appearance of the area, the proposed use would be of greater benefit to the community, or that the site has been effectively marketed for sale and that there is a confirmed lack of interest.  The development would therefore have an adverse impact on the limited supply of employment generating land, contrary to policy E1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan, Policy RI.3 of the Burnham-on-Crouch Neighbourhood Development Plan and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

2                 It has not been satisfactorily demonstrated that there is a need for the development proposed C2 Use, particularly in Burnham-on-Crouch, due to the impacts of other planning permissions for similar developments across the Town and District. Therefore, it is not possible to conclude that the development would not result in an over concentration of C2 uses within Burnham-on-Crouch and an in-migration of the elderly population contrary to Policies S2 and H3 of the Local Development Plan.

3                 The application site lies outside of the defined settlement boundaries 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 character of the area and have an unacceptable visual impact on the countryside and the locality as a result of the excessive scale, mass and bulk of the development. Furthermore, the design of the development would create an out of keeping form of development which would exacerbate the impact on the character and appearance of the area and the locality. The development would therefore be unacceptable and contrary to policies S1, S8, D1 and H4 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), Policies  HC.2 and HO.8 of the Burnham-on-Crouch Neighbourhood Development Plan and Government advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

4                 The proposed development has been applied for as a C2 (extra care facility) with no affordable housing being provided. However, the Applicant has not demonstrated, to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority, that the development would fall within this Use Class. Based on the evidence and guidance available it is considered the development may  result in the creation of separate residential dwellings within the C3 Use Class under The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order  1987 (as amended) or a Sui Generis use.  Therefore, the development makes inadequate provision for affordable housing or a financial contribution in lieu of affordable housing contrary to policy H1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework (2019).

5                 Inadequate information has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal would not result in negative impacts on important ecological assets and there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate that the development would result in a measurable net biodiversity gain. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies S1, D1 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan and the guidance contained within The National Planning Policy Framework.

6                 The proposed development is located within Flood Zone 3a and is therefore of a higher probability of flooding. The proposal is for the provision of a C2 Use which is classified as a ‘more vulnerable’ development. Paragraphs 158 and 160 of the National Planning Policy Framework and policy D5 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan seek to direct development to areas with a lower risk of flooding. The proposal is considered to fail both the sequential test and the exception test and given that the Council can demonstrate a five year housing land supply, and has granted planning permission for a number of C2 Uses above the requirements evidenced through the SHMA,  on sites which have been subject of sequential testing and that the wider sustainability benefits to the community do not outweigh the flood risk posed as required by the exception test, the development would therefore be contrary to core planning principles and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework, the National Planning Practice Guidance and policy D5 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan.

7                 The site would be served by a substandard, contrived and dangerous means of access which would adversely affect the safe and convenient passage of pedestrian users of the access. This would discourage future occupiers to use alternative to vehicle modes of transport and it would be indicative of the unsuitability of the site to accommodate the proposed development.  The proposal would be therefore unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework and policies, S1, D1, T1 and T2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), and guidance contained within the Maldon District Design Guide (2017).

8                 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.

9                 In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, securing the provision of any necessary contribution towards health care provision, the impacts of the development on the existing health care services would not be able to be mitigated contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.