Apologies had been received from Cllrs Mrs Murphy and Fryd.  Cllrs Mrs Pearson and Mrs N Cuthbert were substituting respectively.

The Minutes of the last meeting held on 29^th September 2022 were agreed as a true record.

As described within the report, the original building has been demolished; the applicant had made further revisions to the design for which revised drawings were being sought.

Therefore, this application was withdrawn from the agenda and it is anticipated that the item will now be brought to November Committee.

The works for advertisement signage are considered by Officers to benefit from 'deemed consent' as per the Town & Country Planning (Control of Advertisements) (England) Regulations 2007. In such circumstances, there was no requirement for developers to submit an application to the Local Planning Authority and therefore the application had been withdrawn.

The application had been submitted on behalf of Brentwood Development Partnership (the applicant) which is a joint venture between MUSE and Seven Arches Investment Limited (SAIL). Seven Arches Investment Limited is Brentwood Borough Council’s development arm.

Therefore, in accordance with the Council’s constitution, this application was to be determined by the committee because the Council owns part of the applicant company, as indicated above, the proposal relates to Council owned land and it is a major development likely to be of interest to the committee.

Mr Ovenden presented the report.

The Committee then heard from resident, Mr Carroll, and Mr Russell on behalf of the Westbury Road, Residents Association, opposing to the application.

Mr Howell, representing the applicant, also addressed the committee in support of the application.

Cllr Russell, Ward Cllr, was in attendance and spoke in support of the application.  Cllrs Naylor and Cloke, Ward Cllrs, were also present and spoke against the application.

The Chair, Cllr Tanner, spoke in favour of the application, as much needed housing in the borough which constitutes to the regeneration of the Town Centre.  He was also in favour of the Section106 monies in respect of affordable housing, Open Space provision and NHS Clinical Commissioning Group.

Cllr Tanner MOVED that the application be APPROVED.  This was SECONDED by Cllrs Wiles.

During the debate, Members raised concerns, in particular to the lack of affordable housing on the site, undesirable design in the conservation area, loss of privacy to neighbouring properties, inadequate parking provision and the removal of tree screening.

Following a full discussion, Members voted as follows:

FOR: Cllrs Barber, Gelderbloem, Jakobsson, Parker, Pearson, Tanner, Wiles (7)

AGAINST: Cllrs Dr Barrett, M Cuthbert, Mrs N Cuthbert, Laplain, Mynott,

ABSTAIN: (0)

The motion to APPROVE  the application was RESOLVED subject to the conditions and S106 agreement outlined in the report.

There were no items of urgent business. 

                                                            The meeting concluded at 19:55