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.