Agenda item

To consider the report of the Assistant Director: Planning and Implementation, (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Members’ Update that the Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) had been undertaken by the Council’s Ecology consultant and was summarised in the Update.

Following the Officers’ recommendation Mr Singh an objector, Councillor Burgess (speaking on behalf of Althorne Parish Council), and Ms Haynes the Agent addressed the Committee.

Councillor M G Bassenger, a Ward Member, expressed concern regarding the proposed development, commenting on the character of the surrounding area, access to the site, the unsustainability of Althorne village, and the lack of facilities within the small village. He then proposed that the Officers recommendation of refusal be agreed. This was duly seconded.

During the debate that followed, Members discussed the application, with a number of concerns being raised regarding the proposal. In particular the:

·                proposed introduction of a large scale residential development outside of the Althorne settlement boundary. It was noted that Althorne was a small village with limited facilities, employment and services.

·                location of the site and access to public transport, the site would by reliant on use of cars.

·                adjacent highway, including vehicle speeds along the road and related accidents.

In response to questions, including a reason for refusal relating to sustainability, the Development Management Team Manager advised that should Members be mindful to refuse the application an additional reason for refusal could be added relating to the sustainability and scale of the development. She explained that if agreed the Committee would need to nominate a Member to work with officers should the decision be appealed. At this point, Councillor W Stamp nominated Councillors Bassenger A Fittock and herself.

In light of the earlier discussions, the Chairperson proposed that the Committee agree the additional reason for refusal to the Committee. This was duly seconded. The Officer clarified that the reason would be drafted and agreed in consultation with the Chairperson of the Committee and Councillor Stamp.

Following further discussion, the Chairperson moved the Officers’ recommendation of refusal with the additional reason for refusal relating to sustainability and the scale of the development. Upon a vote being taken this was duly agreed.

RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED subject to the following reasons:

1.              The proposed development is beyond a settlement boundary where development plan policies seek to protect the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside. The site comprises a valued landscape with a high sensitivity to change. The resultant effect of the proposed development on the character of the landscape would be substantial and adverse. The adverse impacts of the development in terms of landscape and visual impact would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Local Development Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework taken as a whole. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S1, S8 and D1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.              The Council's strategic policies seek to focus growth in the District's main settlements of Maldon, Heybridge and Burnham on-Crouch as they constitute the most suitable and accessible locations in the District. The proposal would introduce large scale residential development beyond the settlement boundary of Althorne, identified as a 'smaller village' in Policy S8 which provides limited services, facilities and employment opportunities, where the principle of the proposed development is not supported. The site is not well located in terms of access to and provision of public transport, access roads are constrained and narrow, and there is not sufficient infrastructure to support the scale of development proposed. The majority of journeys to and from the site would be reliant on travel by private car. Accordingly, the proposal would result in unsustainable development. The proposal conflicts with the development plan's spatial framework contrary to Policies S1, S2, S8, I1, and T1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.              The application includes insufficient ecological information to assess the impact of the proposed development on European Protected Species (Great Crested Newt). The proposal is contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1 and N2 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

4.              In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 the proposal fails to:

·                include adequate provision to secure the delivery of affordable housing to meet the identified need in the locality, address the Council's strategic objectives on affordable housing, and supporting a mixed and balanced community, contrary to Policies S1, H1 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework;

·                secure the necessary contribution towards healthcare provision, such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, contrary to Policies S1 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework;

·                secure the necessary contributions towards education provision, such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, contrary to Policies S1 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework;

·                secure the necessary transport improvements such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, contrary to Policies T1, T2 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework;

·                secure the necessary 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, and the development would thereby have an adverse impact on those European designated nature conservation sites, contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1, N2 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan, the Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance Mitigation Strategy Supplementary Planning Document, and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

·                secure the necessary contribution towards green infrastructure and sports provision, such that the impact of the development cannot be mitigated, contrary to Policies S1 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.