Agenda item

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

Councillor M F L Durham advised that he had called in this application and disagreed with the Officers’ recommendation explaining how he felt a restaurant was an essential part of a garden centre.  He proposed that the application be approved, contrary to Officers’ recommendation.  The Chairman advised that reasons for approval were required.

At this point, the Lead Specialist Place provided further clarification to Members on the areas they needed to consider when determining the application and drew particular attention to paragraph 5.1.9 of the report which set out a section of Policy E4 which Officers considered of relevance.  He explained how the Council’s Policies did not provide for restaurants in out-of-town locations, the proposed development was a restaurant in its own right and separate to the garden centre.

Following further discussions Councillor S White advised that on balance she felt the application complied with employment which was very important for the rural area and proposed that the application be approved.  This was duly seconded.  The Chairman again advised that a reason for approval was required.  The Lead Specialist Place expressed concern that if Members were supportive of the proposed approval that this could set a precedent in respect of employment in the District. 

Councillor White advised that in respect of her proposal the application complied with policy for the following reasons:

·                  in terms of Policy E4 part 1 the application was justifiable and had a functional need to expand the business;

·                  The function of the proposal was directly linked to existing businesses;

·                  The proposed development could not be located in a town centre of allocated employment area because it was a rural business in a rural building with links to tourism.

·                  The proposed development would not impact on wildlife in the natural environment but in fact added to it.

The Lead Specialist Place highlighted that there was an extant permission on the site, Members needed to base any decision on the evidence before them and should refer to the concerns and reasons why the Officer felt the proposal was against policy, as set out in the report.

In response to a question, it was confirmed that there was an existing access from the site onto Maldon Road, although this was not currently in use.  Reference was made to car parking and the Officer explained that the application had a shortfall of 75 spaces in respect of what was required.

The Lead Specialist Place confirmed that there was no Section 106 agreement or submission with the application to indicate the applicant would give up the extant permission if this was granted.

Councillor Durham revised his original proposal, proposing that the application e approved as it was supporting the rural economy, tourism and hospitality businesses in the District.  This amendment was duly seconded and up on a vote being taken was agreed.  The Chairman advised that the conditions would be delegated to Officers.

RESOLVED that this application be APPROVED subject to conditions details of which are delegated to Officers in consultation with the Chairman