Agenda item

20/01166/FUL - Land South Of Charwood and East of Orchard House, Stoney Hills, Burnham-On-Crouch

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

Minutes:

Application Number

20/01166/FUL

Location

Land South Of Charwood and East of Orchard House, Stoney Hills, Burnham-On-Crouch

Proposal

Construct cul-de-sac road with turning head and vehicular and pedestrian access off Stoney Hills, erect one detached bungalow and garage, lay out parking spaces and garden

Applicant

Mr Burrows - Virium Technology Limited

Agent

Mr Stewart Rowe - The Planning And Design Bureau Ltd

Target Decision Date

22.02.2021

Case Officer

Louise Staplehurst

Parish

BURNHAM NORTH

Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council

Departure from the Local Plan 2017

Member call in by Councillor Vanessa J Bell

Reason: The proposed dwelling, as a result of its style, design and bulk, would result in a contrived and dominant development which would cause significant and undue harm to the character and the surrounding area. The proposal is contrary to policies S1, S2, D1 and H4 of the LDP. MDC has it’s 5-year plus land supply. Overlooking loss of privacy to immediate property.

This is an overdevelopment of the site having 53 houses already being approved on Stoney Hills, outside the NDP & LDP allocations. It is outside the development boundary.

No difference to previous application.

 

It was  noted that a Members’ Update had been circulated that detailed further objections to the application. Following the Officer’s presentation, the Agent, Mr Rowe, and the Applicant, Mrs Yates addressed the Committee.

 

The Chairman then moved the Officer’s recommendation that planning application 20/01166/FUL, Land South of Charwood and East of Orchard House, Stoney Hills, Burnham-on-Crouch be approved subject to a signed Unilateral Undertaking to confirm that the developer will contribute to Essex Coast RAMS and the conditions as detailed in Section 8 of the report. This was seconded by Councillor Helm.

 

Councillor Bell, having called in the application opened the debate by stating her objections. She said that the development represented serious loss of amenity and loss of privacy due to the proximity to Orchard House. She added that this was a clear case of over development, it did not meet the requirements of the Essex Design Guide and was not an acceptable development given the residents of Orchard House could no longer use certain areas of their home due to loss of privacy..

 

Councillor Channer sought clarification on the height of the new building and felt that 5.7 metres in relation to the boundary was quite high and a cause for concern. She had grave concerns around the design, orientation and proximity of the development which would cause demonstrable harm to the living conditions of the residents of Orchard House.

 

The Lead Specialist Place advised that design was subjective and a difficult position to take as a council. He said that as the development was for a bungalow it should not overlook the neighbouring property, that every application influenced someone and that Members, as decision-makers, needed to take into account material considerations..

 

The Chairman then put the Officer’s recommendation of approval to the Committee. As a result of there being an equality of votes the Chairman used his casting vote and the Officer’s recommendation was lost.

 

Councillor Bell proposed that the development be refused for the reason that the style, design and bulk would result in a contrived development that would cause significant  harm to the amenity of neighbours and contravened policies S1,S2,D1 and H4 of the Local Development Plan. She clarified that she had taken these reasons from the agenda papers and that Burnham Town Council had refused the application for the same reasons. This was seconded by Councillor Bassenger and Councillor Channer added that the application would cause demonstrable harm to amenities and living conditions of Orchard House.

 

The Chairman put Councillor Bell’s proposal 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 proposed development, due to its style, design and bulk would result in a dominant and contrived development which would result in undue harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area and the amenity of neighbouring sites, contrary to policies S1, S2, D1, H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan.

 

2.     It is considered that the development would result in demonstrable harm to the residential amenity of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling to the west, Orchard House, contrary to policies D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan.

Supporting documents: