No apologies were received. 

The minutes of the Planning and Licensing Committee held on 21 March 2017 were approved and signed as a true record. 

The minutes of the Licensing Sub-Committee held on 13 April 2017 were approved and signed as a true record. 

Mr Mikolajczyk was present and addressed the committee as an objector to the application.  

Mr Valley, the Agent, was also present and addressed the committee in support of the application. 

Cllr Russell was present as a Ward Member and expressed concerns relating to the size of the proposed development and increase in traffic onto London Road. Local residents have requested that no access either by pedestrian/cycle or vehicles be permitted into Westbury Drive.

Cllr Chilvers, as also present as a Ward Member expressed concerns relating to over development for the area and the increase in traffic movement.

Cllr Newberry, a committee member and Ward Member, agreed with the comments made by his fellow ward members. He indicated a wish for the historical features of La Plata House be retained during the development. He expressed concerns relating to the height of the proposed development, and overbearing to the neighbours in Westbury Drive. 

After a full discussion, a motion was MOVED by Cllr Mynott and SECONDED by Cllr Newberry to REFUSE the application on the grounds of breaching Replacement Local Plan policy CP1 paragraphs one and two.

A vote was taken by a show of hands:

FOR:              Cllrs Mynott, Newberry, Morrissey, Hubbard, Keeble (5)

AGAINST:     Cllrs Faragher, Ms Sanders, Mrs Murphy, Mrs Middlehurst, Bridge, Ms Rowlands, McCheyne (7)

ABSTAIN:      (0)

The motion was LOST.

A motion was MOVED by Cllr Bridge and SECONDED by Cllr Faragher to APPROVE the outline application, subject to the conditions within the report.

A vote was taken by a show of hands:

FOR:  Cllrs Faragher, Ms Sanders, Mrs Murphy, Mrs Middlehurst, Bridge, Ms Rowlands, McCheyne (7)

AGAINST:     Cllrs Mynott, Newberry, Morrissey, Hubbard, Keeble (5)

ABSTAIN:  (0)

RESOLVED that application is APPROVED subject to a S106 agreement and the following conditions:-

1.         Approval of the details of the scale, layout and appearance of the buildings, the means of access and the landscaping of the site that are reserved for later approval (hereinafter called the reserved matters) shall be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority before the development is commenced and the development shall be carried out as approved. 

Reason:  To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.    

2.         Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. 

Reason:  To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

3.         The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission, or before the expiration of two years from date of approval of the last reserved matters to be approved. 

Reason:  To comply with Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act  ...  view the full minutes text for item 351.

Mr Rothery was present and addressed the committee as an objector to the application.

Mr Driscoll, the Agent, was also present and addressed the committee in support of the application. 

Cllr Potter, Doddinghurst Parish Council was present and spoke in objection to the application.

After a full discussion, a motion was MOVED by Cllr McCheyne and SECONDED by Cllr Bridge to REFUSE the application due to proposed impact on the neighbouring listed building.

A vote was taken by a show of hands:

FOR:              Cllrs Faragher, Ms Sanders, Mrs Murphy, Mrs Middlehurst, Bridge, Mynott, Newberry, Morrissey, Mrs Hubbard, Keeble, McCheyne and Rowlands (12)

AGAINST:     (0)

ABSTAIN:      (0)

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY that application is REFUSED for the following reasons, subject to the amendment of condition 3. 

1.         The proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt that would materially detract from openness and would represent an encroachment of development into the countryside.  It would therefore conflict with Brentwood Replacement Local Plan Policies GB1 and GB2 and the objectives of the Framework as regards development in the Green Belt.  

2.         Other matters that may weigh in favour of the proposal have been considered but collectively they do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt or the other harms identified.  Therefore, very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt do not exist.

The proposed development, by reason its massing, design and close proximity to the listed building and its curtilage structures, would be harmful to the heritage asset and setting of the adjacent Grade ii listed building 'Barfield Farmhouse'. The proposed harm to the setting of the Listed Building outweighs the public benefit that would be derived from the scheme. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy C16 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan and the provisions of the Framework.

3.         The proposal does not provide any provision for affordable housing as part of the proposed scheme.  The lack of affordable housing does not contribute to the significant need for affordable housing in the Borough and is therefore contrary to Policy H9 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan and the provisions of the Framework. 

Informative(s)

1.         The following development plan policies contained in the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan 2005 are relevant to this decision: GB1, GB2, C16 and T2; the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and NPPG 2014.

2.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and clearly identifying within the grounds of refusal either the defective principle of development or the significant and demonstrable harm it would cause.  The issues identified are so fundamental to the proposal that based on the information submitted with the application, the Local Planning Authority do not consider a negotiable position is possible at this time.   

(Cllr Morrissey declared a non-pecuniary interest under the Council’s Code of Conduct by virtue of her working for an on-line Estate Agent). 

Mr Keane, the applicant, was present and addressed the committee in support of the application. 

Cllr Poppy & Cllr Parker, Ward Members were present and addressed the committee in support of the application subject to condition on the removal of permitted development rights for the property.

A motion was MOVED by Cllr McCheyne and SECONDED by Cllr Rowlands to APPROVE the application, subject to a condition of the removal of permitted development rights.

A vote was taken by a show of hands:

FOR:               Cllrs Ms Sanders, Ms Rowlands and McCheyne (3)

AGAINST:      Cllrs Faragher, Mrs Middlehurst, Bridge, Mynott, Newberry, Morrissey, Mrs Hubbard and Keeble (8)

ABSTAIN:      Cllr Mrs Murphy (1)

The motion was LOST.

After a full discussion, a motion was MOVED by Cllr Mynott and SECONDED by Cllr Bridge to REFUSE the application.

A vote was taken by a show of hands:

FOR:   Cllrs Faragher, Mrs Middlehurst, Bridge, Mynott, Newberry, Morrissey, Mrs Hubbard and Keeble (8)

AGAINST:      Cllrs Ms Sanders, Ms Rowlands and McCheyne (3)

ABSTAIN:      Cllr Mrs Murphy (1)

RESOLVED that application is REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.         The site is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the replacement of the existing mobile home with a permanent dwelling is inappropriate development and therefore harmful to the Green Belt.  The proposal therefore does not accord with Policies GB1, GB2 and GB6 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan and the National Planning Policy Framework. 

2.         Other matters that may weigh in favour of the proposal have been considered individually and collectively they do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt or the other harms identified.  Therefore, very special circumstances to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt do not exist.   

Informative(s)

1.         The following development plan policies contained in Brentwood Replacement Local Plan 2005 are relevant to this decision: GB1, GB2 & GB6; the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and NPPG 2014.

2.         The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and clearly identifying within the grounds of refusal either the defective principle of development or the significant and demonstrable harm it would cause.  The issues identified are so fundamental to the proposal that based on the information submitted with the application, the Local Planning Authority do not consider a negotiable position is possible at this time.  

The report presented an update on the performance of the Development Management Team, including enforcement, in the last financial year.  It provided a summary of performance over a range of measures.  It showed that against a range of metrics the team’s performance had improved in comparison to previous years. 

Changes to processes established within the department over the last 12 months had made a considerable impact on the delivery of swifter and more consistent responses and decision making.  The overall outcome is that developers and those wishing to extend their homes had certainty about what would be allowed where and when.  In turn, this provided support to the local economy, boosts housebuilding while continuing to give local communities and residents a say in their neighbourhood.  

A motion was MOVED by Cllr McCheyne and SECONDED by Cllr Rowlands to approve the recommendation in the report.

A vote was taken by a show of hands and it was RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY that:

1.         That the Improvement in performance achieved is noted. 

Reason for recommendation

To keep the committee informed about the improving performance of the Development Management Team for the last year and the plans for continued performance improvement next year.   

The report set out a change to the Local Land Charge fees and charges, following notification of a change in fee for the Essex Highways element on a CON29 Local Land Charges search. 

A motion was MOVED by Cllr McCheyne and SECONDED by Cllr Rowlands to approve the recommendation in the report.

A vote was taken by a show of hands and it was RESOLVED UNANIMOULSY that:

1.         To agree the change increase in fee introduced by Essex highways relating to the Highway element on a CON29 Local Land Charge search from 1 May 2017.  

Reason for recommendation

The change in fee is to take account for the proposed change of fee charged by Essex Highways to Brentwood Borough Council for this service. 

There was no urgent business to discuss.

The meeting ended at 21:20.