Agenda item

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

Following the Officers presentation, Mrs L Beales, an Objector, addressed the Committee. The Chairperson opened the floor for debate.

Councillor M E Thompson proposed to refuse the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation, this was duly seconded.

Following a brief discussion, the Chairperson put the proposal to refuse the application to the Committee and when put to a vote was agreed.

RESOLVED that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.         The site is located outside of a defined settlement boundary where rural policy constraints apply.  By virtue of the layout of the existing built form and the relationship of the site to the development to the north, south, and east of the site, the excessive height of the dwellings proposed, and the introduction of a new access road, parking areas, and domestic paraphernalia, the development would appear as a visually prominent and incongruous form of development that would urbanise the site and cause harm to the intrinsic character and beauty of the open countryside. The proposal has not considered the context within which it will sit, and a development of this quantum is not acceptable. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S1, S2, S8, D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), Policies GT01 and GT02 of the Great Totham Neighbourhood Development Plan (2022), and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

2.         The cumulative Gross Internal Area of the proposed dwellings and garages exceeds 1000 square metres. All developments of more than 1000 square metres will be expected to contribute towards affordable housing. The proposal is for 9no. market dwellings and does not provide for any affordable units. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy H1 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), the Council’s Affordable Housing Supplementary Planning Document (2019), and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

3.         The proposal has been found to cause less then substantial harm to the significance of Poplar Grove Farmhouse, a grade II listed building, through the urbanisation of one of the last remnants of its agricultural setting. In accordance with Paragraph 202 of the NPPF (2021), such harm must be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. The public benefits of the scheme do not outweigh the harm caused and the proposal is not acceptable in this regard. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S1, D1 and D3 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

4.         Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal would be acceptable in terms of highway safety and efficiency in relation to the proposed new access at Broad Street Green Road. The proposal is contrary to the policies contained within the County Highway Authority’s Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance (February 2011), Policy T2 of Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the policies and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

5.         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 the 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 (2017) and the policies and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).