Agenda item

To consider the report of the Director of Strategy, Performance and Governance (copy enclosed, Members’ Update to be circulated)*.

It was noted from the Members’ Update that a revised recommendation was suggested and that approval should also be subject to successful screening for a Habitats Regulation Assessment.  Clarification was also provided in respect of management of amenity land and it was noted that part of the proposed pedestrian access and footpath fell outside of the application site.

Following the Officers’ presentation, Councillor Plater, speaking on behalf Tollesbury Parish Council, addressed the Committee.

Councillor E L Bamford, the Ward Member, provided the Committee with detailed background information regarding this site and the outline planning permission granted on appeal.  She raised several concerns regarding the current proposal including drainage of the land, the height of the proposed dwellings, the Planning Inspectors reference to screening the dwellings, the housing mix, the inadequate size of the garage for plot 10 and the lack of pedestrian and bus links from the site to services and facilities.  Councillor Bamford then proposed that the application be refused, contrary to Officers’ recommendation, due to the design of the buildings and the layout with respect to a lack of links to the village, contrary to Policy D1 of the Local Development Plan and Maldon District Council Design Guide in respect of the pedestrian links.  This proposal was duly seconded.

Further debate ensued and in response to questions raised the Principle Planning Officer advised:

·                 The proposed footpaths were not on the definitive maps and there were no proposals to include them.  There was a public footpath to the eastern boundary of the site to which a link was proposed.

·                 There was a requirement for a management plan as part of the outline planning permission granted but if Members had concerns and the matter was not already covered by the management plan a condition could be imposed to this application requiring information on the future management.

·                 Amenity land was within the ownership of the applicant but not within the application site.  It was noted that the Planning Inspector when granting the outline planning application had required that amenity land be provided for the benefit of the residents.  The Officer confirmed that the provision of the amenity land had been included as part of a unilateral undertaking which had been signed and formed part of the appeal decision.

The Chairman referred to the proposal of refusal in the name of Councillor Bamford for reasons relating to layout and design.  In response the Officer raised concern regarding pedestrian links with the village being a reason for refusal as the outline permission had been granted and the Planning Inspector had not raised any concern regarding the facilities or links and felt it was a sustainable location for housing.  However, concerns regarding the layout proposed being out of keeping with the site’s rural setting could reasonably be included and this was noted.  Following further debate the Chairman then put the proposal of refusal to the Committee subject to the detailed reasons for refusal being agreed with the Chairman of the Committee and Ward Member.  Upon a vote being taken this was agreed.

RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1          The development proposed, as a result of the proposed regimented layout of the site, the design, height and size of the dwellings proposed and its suburban character, would be out-of-keeping with and incongruous in this rural location, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the area, contrary to Policies D1, S1, S8 and H4 of the Maldon District Approved Local Development Plan, the NPPF and the Maldon District Design Guide SPD.

In light of his earlier declaration Councillor J V Keyes left the meeting at this point.