Agenda item

This application has been called to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Steady and Councillor Barry for the following reasons:

•           The proposal is contrary to the Development Plan

•           Highway and Traffic Impact

•           Adverse impact on ancient woodland

•           Is outside the development area

•           The proposal could impact on highway safety at a difficult location and where school children are regularly walking.

This application seeks planning permission for the erection of 5 no. self-contained residential bungalows with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space at land to the rear of Strangers Way, Church Road, Brightlingsea. 

It was reported that this application had been called in to Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Steady and Councillor Barry for the following reasons:-

•           The proposal was contrary to the Development Plan

•           Highway and Traffic Impact

•           Adverse impact on ancient woodland

•           Was outside the development area

•           The proposal could impact on highway safety at a difficult location and where school children were regularly walking.

Members were informed that this application sought planning permission for the erection of 5 no. self-contained residential bungalows with associated parking, landscaping and amenity space at land to the rear of Strangers Way, Church Road, Brightlingsea. 

The Committee was made aware that the site was located to the rear of the properties known as Strangers Way and Stronvar in Church Road, Brightlingsea.  Church Road comprised generally of large detached buildings set on large plots.  To the west of the site was a small development which had been granted permission at appeal in 2017 for the erection of 4 detached bungalows to the rear of Homefield, Church Road, Brightlingsea.

The site was located outside of the Settlement Development Boundary as defined under Policy QL1 of the adopted 2007 Local Plan. However, the publication draft of the Local Plan had included the site within the proposed Settlement Development Boundary, with no change proposed in the most recent modifications.   The Local pPlan was at a very advanced stage of preparation, and should be afforded considerable weight.

Members were further informed that the immediate locality was characterised by a mixture of two storey, one and a half storey and single storey dwellings.  They were all detached dwellings and located on large plots, with the exception of a small development of bungalows to the rear of ‘Homefield’, which was considered to set a precedent for in-depth development in the locality. 

The design, layout, access, were considered by Officers to be acceptable.  The proposal would result in no significant material harm to residential amenity or highway safety. 

It was also considered by Officers that the proposal would not adversely affect the Ancient Woodland or any protected species.

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Team Leader (SCE) in respect of the application.

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of the following proposed condition in addition to those set out in the Officer’s Report: 

“Prior to the occupation of any dwelling a scheme detailing how a minimum of 20% of the energy needs generated by the development can be achieved through renewable energy sources shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall detail the anticipated energy needs of the scheme, the specific renewable technologies to be incorporated, details of noise levels emitted (compared to background noise level) and how much of the overall energy needs these will meet and plans indicating the location of any external installations within the development. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and shall be retained as such thereafter

Reason: To ensure the development contributes to minimising the effects of, and can adapt to a changing climate.”

 That condition had been agreed with the applicant’s agent.

Amy Hambling, the agent on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Paula Webb, a local resident, spoke against the application.

Councillor Barry, a local Ward Member, spoke against the application.

Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Harris and unanimously RESOLVED that, contrary to the Officer’s recommendation of approval, the Assistant Director (Planning) (or equivalent authorised officer) be authorised to refuse planning permission for the development and overturn the recommendation due to the following reasons:-

-          Loss of privacy to host dwelling

-          Light and noise pollution

-          Cramped nature out of character

-          No tree preservation orders on the site

-          The site was not in a conservation area where notice would need to be given to the Council before removing a tree.

The Chairman requested approval from Members of the Committee to continue the meeting past the allowed period of 3 hours as required by Council Procedure Rule 35.1. It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Baker and RESOLVED that the Committee continue its deliberations.