Mr Walker, the Applicant Representative was present and addressed the Committee in support of the application.

Councillor Hossack speaking both as Ward Member and as Committee Member spoke in support of the application.

A motion was MOVED by Cllr Hossack and SECONDED by Cllr McCheyne to approve this application.

The motion was LOST.

For:               Cllrs Hossack and McCheyne (2)

Against:        Cllrs Aspinell, Baker, Carter, Cloke, Mrs Henwood, Mrs Hones,                      Morrissey, Mynott and Quirk (9)

Abstain:         (0)

After a full discussion, it was recommended by the Chair that this land be forwarded to the LDP for consideration. 

Mr Glenday confirmed that the land is a potential option within LDP consultation.

A motion was MOVED Cllr Baker and SECONDED by Cllr Mynott to refuse with application.

The motion was CARRIED.

For:              Cllrs Aspinell, Baker, Carter, Cloke, Mrs Henwood, Mrs Hones,                     Morrissey, Mynott and Quirk (9)

Against:      Cllrs Hossack and McCheyne (2)

Abstain:      (0)

RESOLVED that the planning permission is refused for the following reasons:  

U09013         

The proposal would be inappropriate development in the Green Belt as defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework). It would detract from the openness of the Green Belt and would represent an encroachment of development into the Green Belt countryside.  The proposal would therefore conflict with Brentwood Replacement Local Plan Policies GB1 and GB2 the objectives of which are fully consistent with the objectives of the Framework as regards development in Green Belts.   The Framework indicates that within Green Belts inappropriate development is harmful and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.   The Framework goes on to indicate that "very special circumstances" will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.   The considerations set out by the applicant do not clearly outweigh the harm to the Green Belt arising from this proposal and it follows that the "very special circumstances" needed to justify the approval of inappropriate development in the Green Belt have not been demonstrated.

U09014         

The proposal would detract from the character and appearance of this edge of built-up-area location in conflict with Policy CP1(i) of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan and one of the core planning principles set out in the Framework which indicates that the intrinsic character of the countryside should be recognized.

U09015         

The proposal fails to demonstrate that the development has been designed to minimise its impact on biodiversity and the proposal would therefore conflict with paragraph 109 of the Framework which indicates that the planning system should minimise impacts of development on biodiversity and where possible provide net gains in biodiversity.

Informative(s)

INF05

The following development plan policies contained in the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan 2005 are relevant to this decision: CP1, GB1,GB2 the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and NPPG 2014.

INF20

The drawing numbers listed above are relevant to this decision

INF25

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and determining the application within a timely manner, clearly setting out the reason(s) for refusal, allowing the Applicant the opportunity to consider the harm caused and whether or not it can be remedied by a revision to the proposal.  The Local Planning Authority is willing to meet with the Applicant to discuss the best course of action and is also willing to provide pre-application advice in respect of any future application for a revised development.