To consider the report of the Director of Service Delivery, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.
Minutes:
Application Number |
23/00321/OUTM |
Location |
Land west of Maypole Road, Heybridge |
Outline planning application with all matters of detail reserved except for means of access to the site for the construction of up to 45 dwellings, together with associated garaging, parking, public open space, landscaping, access, highways drainage and infrastructure works |
|
Applicant |
Peter & Jennifer Travis Endurance Estates Land Promotion Ltd |
Agent |
Mrs Kathryn Slater – Eclipse Planning Services |
Target Decision Date |
26.06.2023 |
Case Officer |
Kathryn Mathews |
Parish |
HEYBRIDGE |
Reason for Referral to the Committee / Council |
Major application Part of strategic allocated site within the Local Development Plan |
The Members’ Update advised of a request from the Applicant to defer this application and the advice of Officers that there was no reason to delay determination of the application. It was also noted from the Members’ Update that consultation responses had been received from Essex County Council (ECC) Highways, ECC Ecology and the Strategy Team and updated reasons for refusal were detailed.
Following the Officers’ presentation the Agent, Mrs Kath Slater addressed the Committee.
Councillor M F L Durham proposed that the Committee accept the Officers recommendation of refusal. This proposal was duly seconded and duly agreed.
RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED for the following reasons:
1 The proposal would undermine the aim identified within Policy S4 of the Local Development Plan and the North Heybridge Strategic Masterplan Framework for this site to form part of the rural setting at the edge of the Garden Suburb and Maypole Road being the logical and ‘defensible’ edge of the housing area. The development, as a result of its nature, extent and location, would harm the character of the site and its rural surrounding, visually intruding into the countryside. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Policies S1, S2, S3, S4, S8, D1 and H4 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.
2 It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that the impact on the local highway network caused by this proposal is acceptable in terms of highway safety and accessibility with particular regard to the following:
1. It has not been demonstrated that the proposed vehicular access can be provided with appropriate visibility splays for the actual speed of the road at this location. The lack of such visibility would result in an unacceptable degree of hazard to all road users to the detriment of highway safety.
2. An appropriate assessment of the proposal in terms of the safety impact for all users of the highway has not been made. The submitted Stage 1 Road Safety Audit is not satisfactory as the standards for Road Safety Audits have changed since 2016 and the speed and accident data are out-of-date.
3. The application has failed to demonstrate that the proposed off-site works to encourage the use of modes of transport other than the private car can all be fully accommodated within highway land. Therefore, trips to/from the site by means other than the private motor car would not be minimised.
This proposal is therefore contrary to Policies T1, T2 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.
3 In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, securing the following necessary planning obligations:
· A financial contribution towards Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy or an appropriate mitigation strategy to overcome the impacts of the development on the European designated nature conservation sites,
· A financial contribution towards the provision of education,
· A financial contribution towards the provision of medical services,
· Management/maintenance of the public open space
· Affordable housing provision
The development would have an adverse impact on those European designated nature conservation sites, would not adequately provide for the educational and medical needs of the future residents of the site, would not ensure that the public open space proposed was appropriate managed and maintained and would not meet the affordable housing needs of the District. The development is, therefore, contrary to Policies S1, H1, N1, N2, D1, D2, T1, T2, I1 and I2 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.
Councillor A S Fluker left the meeting during this item of business and did not return.
Supporting documents: