Apologies were received from Cllr Morrissey, Cllr Barrett was substituting, and Cllr Faragher and Cllr Trump was substituting.

In the absence of the Vice Chair, Cllr Faragher.  The Chair MOVED and Cllr Bridge SECONDED that Cllr Trump be appointed Vice Chair for the duration of the meeting. 

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

The minutes of the Planning & Licensing Committee held on 25th April 2017 were approved as a true record subject to an amendment to Min. 351 - Essex Police & La Plata House 16/01805/OUT to state that a full discussion was undertaken relating to condition 10 of the report.

Outline Application for the demolition of existing commercial units, former vehicular garages, and clearance of site previously used for garden nursery, and construction of 49 dwellings, new commercial premises, doctor’s surgery and associated parking, creation of public open space, new vehicular access, and associated landscaping. (Appearance, Landscaping, Layout and Scale reserved matters).

Mrs Simpson, was present and addressed the committee in objection to the application.

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

Mrs Jennings, Hatch Road Neighbourhood Association, was present and addressed the committee in objection to the application.

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

Cllr Mrs Davies, Cllr Kendall and Cllr Aspinell, Ward Members were also present a spoke in objection to the application, expressing their concerns relating to the Green Belt, traffic flow within Hatch Road, urban sprawl, large development for a small village like environment.  No support of the applicant from local residents.

Ward Members support the principle of a smaller development on the portion of the site that is contained within the existing Brentwood urban area, as defined by the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan Proposals Map (i.e. not on land within the Green Belt), but with no properties over three stories.

After a full discussion Cllr Bridge MOVED and Cllr Mynott SECONDED that the REFUSE the application.

A vote was taken by a show of hands.

FOR:   Cllrs Barrett, Bridge, Chilvers, Mrs Middlehurst, Mrs Murphy,  Mynott, Newberry, Reed, Ms Sanders, Mrs Slade, Trump and Wiles (12)

AGAINST:      (0)

ABSTAIN:      (0)

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY that the application is REFUSED for the following reasons:

1.         The proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt in that would materially detract from openness, it would represent an encroachment of development into the countryside and it would result in an unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. 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 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.   

Construction of indoor sports facility and pavilion including changing rooms for the outdoor sports using the field to complement the existing village hall.

Mr Tyzack, was present and addressed the committee in objection to the application, with concerns relating to parking, size, Green Belt, noise disturbance and the poor transport links to the village.

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

Mrs Savill, Applicant - Chair of Navestock Parish Council, was present and addressed the committee in support of the application. She informed the committee that care was taken in the design, so it was in-keeping with the surrounding area.

Cllr Parker, Ward Member was present and addressed the committee in support of the application, who confirmed this also has the support from his fellow Ward Members, Cllrs McCheyne and Poppy.  The application has the support of Sport England.  A number of local residents support the development and welcome the idea of an indoor sporting facility.

Members of the committee expressing support and concerns about the application relating to size, not a sustainable location, poor transport link, car parking.  Suggestion was made for the re-development of the Parish Hall for an indoor sports facility to be considered.

Cllr Ms Sanders MOVED and Cllr Trump SECONDED to REFUSE the application.

A vote was taken by a show of hands.

FOR:               Cllrs Barrett, Bridge, Chilvers, Mrs Middlehurst, Mynott, Newberry, Ms Sanders, Trump and Wiles (9)

AGAINST:      Cllr Mrs Slade (1)

ABSTAIN:      Cllrs Mrs Murphy and Reed (2)

RESOLVED that the application is REFUSED for the following reasons:

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 RLP Policies GB1 and GB2 and the objectives of the Framework as regards development in the Green Belt.

2.         As a result of the size, design and appearance of the proposed building the proposal would unacceptably detract from the role and intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.  It would conflict with RLP Policy CP1 and with one of the core planning principles of the Framework which indicates that planning should take account of the different roles and character of different areas and recognize the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside.

3.         The proposed sports hall would be likely to attract users from settlements nearby which are locationally more sustainable. It is considered undesirable to develop a facility that would potentially attract significant numbers of people to this unsustainable location which would result in a high dependency on private cars with limited opportunities for alternative means of transport. The proposal would therefore not satisfy the underlying objective of the Framework as regards sustainable development.

4.         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.

Conversion of LCC House and Waterworks House; single storey extension and conversion to The Reservoir Building and redevelopment of The Pump Room and Former Coal Shed to provide 18 no. Class C3 residential dwellinghouses; associated landscaping, amenity space, a green roof, parking and refuse storage.

This application was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Proposed building to form enclosed dry recycling facility

This application replaces the previous application 16/01411/BBC. 

Cllr Parker, Chair of Environment and Enforcement Committee, spoke in support of the application. 

Cllr Mynott referenced the condition from the previous application Min 236 be added.  It was clarified that the only condition on the previous application related to trees, which is no longer required and it would be unreasonable to impose any new condition on the specific operation of the development.

Cllr Wiles MOVED and Cllrs Mrs Murphy SECONDED to APPROVE the application.

A vote was taken by a show of hands. 

FOR:               Cllrs Barrett, Bridge, Chilvers, Mrs Middlehurst, Mrs Murphy, Mynott, Newberry, Reed, Ms Sanders, Mrs Slade, Trump and Wiles (12)

AGAINST:      (0)

ABSTAIN:      (0)

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY that the application is APPROVED for the following reasons:

1.         The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2          The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the approved drawing(s) listed above and specifications.

Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the local planning authority and for the avoidance of doubt.

The report seeks Members approval on a formal response to Chelmsford City Council’s Draft Local Plan Preferred Options consultation (March 2017).  A response has been submitted to comply with the consultation deadline, subject to the approval of the Council’s Planning and Licensing Committee.

The Council’s response sets out general support for the Draft Local Plan’s commitment to meeting Chelmsford’s identified development needs in full, and to continued collaboration through the duty to cooperate on strategic issues that affect our two areas.

Cllr Sanders MOVED and Cllr Trump SECONDED to APPROVE the recommendation set out in the report.

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

1             To approve the response to Chelmsford City Council’s Draft Local Plan Preferred Options (March 2017), as set out in Appendix A.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION

It is considered appropriate that Brentwood Borough Council express general support for the way in which the Chelmsford City Council Draft Local Plan Preferred Options looks to meet its identified development needs in full, and commit to continued collaboration through the duty to cooperate on strategic issues that affect our two areas.

There was no items of Urgent Business.

The meeting concluded at 20.42