Apologies as a Committee Member were received from Cllr Kerslake and Cllr Nolan substituted for him.

Members RESOLVED that the minutes of the 16 October 2019 Planning and Licensing Committee meeting be approved as a true record.

Members RESOLVED that the minutes of Licensing Sub-committee meetings held on 13 September 2019, 27 September 2019, 1 October 2019, 15 October 2019, 14 November 2019 and 15 November 2019 be approved as true records.

Planning permission was sought for the demolition of the existing buildings and the erection of 4 new buildings comprising a total of 86 flats, including 8 affordable units on the site of the former Blood Transfusion Centre.  The development would include the provision of bin and cycle stores, gates fronting the vehicular /pedestrian access points and 106 parking spaces within a landscaped setting. 

Mr Pattison addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mr Jackson, on behalf of the developer, addressed the committee in support of the application.

Shenfield Ward Councillors Tumbridge, Mrs Pound and Fryd each spoke in objection to the application.

Cllr McCheyne MOVED and Cllr Tanner SECONDED that the application be REFUSED.

Following a discussion a recorded vote was taken and Members voted as follows:

FOR:  Cllrs Chilvers, Fryd, Haigh, Jakobsson, Keeble, McCheyne, Morrissey, Mynott, Nolan, Miss Sanders, Tanner and  Mrs Tierney (12)

AGAINST:  (0)

ABSTAIN: (0)

It was RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY that the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1)            The proposal would amount to an overdevelopment of the site by reason of the number of units proposed, which would be out of character with the surrounding area, policy CP1.

2)            As a consequence of the excessive number of units,  there would be an unacceptable impact on the road traffic network resulting in too many movements along the road (Crescent Drive), and would result in displacement of parking from the site onto the nearby Community Hospital car park.

3)            The measures proposed for drainage of surface water fail to take into account the off-site flooding issues experienced by nearby residents and would likely lead to a worsening of off-site flooding.

This application was reported to committee at the discretion of the Development Management Team Leader as it related to a development of scale which was likely to be of interest to the committee.

This is an outline planning application with all other matters reserved – i.e. details of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale - at this stage. It comprised the demolition of all buildings; construction of new buildings providing 35,000 sqm of class B1b, B1c, B2 and B8 (i.e. research and development, light industrial, general industrial and storage and distribution respectively) floor space and 250 sqm of class A3 (restaurants and cafés) floor space, together with associated vehicle parking, loading, cycle parking and infrastructure.

As an outline application with all matters reserved, specific details of the form of development would be provided at the reserved matters stage if outline planning permission was granted. Nevertheless, an indicative layout plan, parameter plan showing building heights and a plan showing indicative points of access accompanied the application. The former showed 13 new buildings, retention of one existing building.  The latter drawing showed all access (at three points) being from the Tilbury Road. The current T-junction of the A128 and Tilbury Road would be replaced by a roundabout within the existing limits of the highway funded by the developer.

Cllr Foan, representing West Horndon Parish Council, addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mrs Palmer addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mr Alabaster, representing Elliotts Close Residents’ Association, addressed the committee in objection to the application.

Mr Tabachnik, agent for the developers, addressed the committee in support of the application.

Ward Councillor Mrs Pearson spoke in support of the application.

Ward Councillor and Planning and Licensing Committee member Cllr Mrs Tierney MOVED and Cllr Nolan SECONDED that the application be APPROVED.

A full discussion ensued and the Chair, Cllr Miss Sanders, proposed that consideration of the application be deferred to a future Planning and Licensing Committee meeting.

Cllr Mrs Tierney WITHDREW her MOTION and a vote was taken on a show of hands to DEFER consideration of the application to a future

P & L Committee meeting pending further consideration and this was RESOLVED accordingly.

Members were advised that consideration of this application was to be deferred to the 15 January 2020 Planning and Licensing Committee meeting. When making the application, the Council as applicant should have served notice on the Golf Club as it has a lease on part of the existing building.  This notice was not served and therefore the application must be deferred to allow for this to happen. Notice was served on 19 December 2019.

Fees and charges made by the Council for various services were reviewed on an annual basis by the relevant Committees relating to the services provided. Recommended amendments to the fees and charges were incorporated into the budget setting process to take effect from the following financial year. 

The Director of Corporate Resources, the Section 151 officer, had given apologies due to illness therefore it was not possible for Members’ questions on the report to be answered satisfactorily.  The Chair proposed and Members agreed to DEFER consideration of relevant fees and charges to the 15 January 2020 Planning and Licensing Committee meeting.

Members were reminded that Highways England had recently consulted on a revised scheme to Junction 28 of the M25 (Brook Street roundabout).  Proposals related to M25 anti-clockwise traffic connecting with the A12 eastbound towards Chelmsford.  This followed previous consultations that Brentwood Borough Council has responded to.  This Supplementary Consultation focused on additional environmental surveys and design work that had informed minor amendments to the scheme.

In response to the consultation, which closed on 2 December 2019, an officer response had been submitted subject to Member approval as set out in Appendix A to the report.  As a major national infrastructure project with implications for the Borough, it was important that the Council responded and further consider issues through the Local Development Plan and Duty to Cooperate processes.  Next stages included the Council’s involvement in the Development Consent Order (DCO) process.

Cllr Miss Sanders MOVED and Cllr McCheyne SECONDED the recommendations in the report and following a discussion a vote was taken on a show of hands and it was

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY  that Members

1.    Approve the response to the M25 Junction 28 Improvement Scheme Supplementary Consultation, as set out in Appendix A; and

2.   Approve delegated powers to the Development Management Team Leader as part of the Development Consent Order (DCO) process.

Reasons for Recommendation

1.            It is recommended that the issues set out in Appendix A be issued in response to the consultation from the Council.  The current consultation provides minor changes to the design of the scheme, as a result of previous consultations, environmental assessments and surveys.  The proposed development is to the west of the M25, wholly within the London Borough of Havering.  Whilst the Council should respond to broader strategic issues, it is not considered necessary to offer a view about the specific proposals.

2.            Once Highways England commence the DCO process there will strict deadlines to adhere to, often with challenging timeframes.  It is expected that the DCO will be submitted in late January / early February 2020.  Once submitted the Council’s Planning Development Management Team will be responsible for considering the scheme and responding to the Planning Inspectorate.  In light of the timeframes it is recommended that the Development Management Team Leader be delegated authority to determine the DCO process.  The Planning and Licensing Committee will be kept informed of the outcome and provided an update where appropriate.

Members were reminded that the draft Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy Supplementary Planning Document (the “draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD”) was brought to Planning and Licensing Committee on 12 March 2019 for approval to carry out a joint consultation with 11 other local planning authorities.

Minor amendments to improve clarity had been made to the draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD for developers and their agents. The updated document was attached to the report as Appendix A.  The amendments and procedural matters had been agreed by the Essex Planning Officer Association (EPOA) Chief Officer group.  The overall aim was to ensure a consistent approach to the implementation of the project across Essex.  The 12 authorities had agreed to carry out the joint consultation in January - February 2020, with Essex County Council Place Services collating, reviewing and presenting the results of this consultation by the end of March 2020.

The draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD proposed a Tariff of £122.30 per new dwelling to fund mitigation of recreational impact on the coastal biodiversity sites.  It was recommended that the proposed amended draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD was subject to the joint consultation, with a view that the results would be brought to committee for consideration that it be adopted during 2020. 

Cllr Miss Sanders MOVED and Cllr McCheyne SECONDED the recommendations in the report and following a discussion a vote was taken on a show of hands and it was

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY  that Members

1. Approve the consultation draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD, as set out in Appendix A, for a consultation period lasting six weeks in January/February 2020 across the 12 local planning authorities.

Reason for Recommendation

To provide an update to the Committee on the progress of the proposed 2020 consultation and the oversight and implementation of the draft Essex Coast RAMS SPD.  Approval to consult will enable the Council to comply with the implementation matters agreed by the 12 local planning authorities affected (including Brentwood Borough).

Members were advised that Essex County Council was consulting on a new edition of the Developers’ Guide to Infrastructure Contributions (Appendix B), which would replace the previous edition published in January 2016.  Planning and Licensing Committee formally acknowledged the Developers’ Guide to Infrastructure Contributions (revised edition 2016) as having material weight for planning applications (Item 104, 19 July 2016).

Revisions to the developers’ guide were being proposed in light of changes to the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010.  Among other things, it updated existing guidance and introduced a number of new requirements regarding waste and recycling, libraries, and addressed issues relating to the shortage of labour in the construction industry.

An officer response to the consultation would be been submitted subject to Members’ approval and was attached to the report as Appendix A.  As a planning document which had direct implications on infrastructure funding in the Borough, it was important that the Council responded and further considered issues through the Local Development Plan and Duty to Cooperate processes. 

Cllr Miss Sanders MOVED and Cllr McCheyne SECONDED the recommendations in the report and following a discussion a vote was taken on a show of hands and it was

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY  that Members

1. Approve the response to the Essex County Council’s Developer Contributions Guide Consultation, as set out in Appendix A.

Reasons for Recommendation

It is recommended that Appendix A be issued in response to the Developers’ Guide to Infrastructure Contributions, forming the formal response to the consultation from the Council.  The developers’ guide could be assigned material weight when determining planning applications and can assist the Council in negotiating contributions required for necessary infrastructure.  Therefore, it is important that the Council respond and further consider issues through the plan making process (i.e. Local Development Plan and Duty to Cooperate).

The Chair expressed concern at the large quantity of paper used in printing the appendices to the reports in this agenda and requested that in future a link to relevant documents be included in reports to enable Members to view them on line.

There were no items of urgent business.

___________________________

The meeting ended at 21.30hrs.