This application had been referred to Planning Committee by Councillor Gareth Barrett for the following reasons:

This application conflicts with strategic policy BE14 of the Brentwood Local Plan, specifically:

1. e. respond positively and sympathetically to their context and build upon existing strengths and characteristics, and where appropriate, retain or enhance existing features which make a positive contribution to the character, appearance or significance of the local area (including natural and heritage assets);

i. avoid unacceptable overlooking or loss of privacy;

j. safeguard the living conditions of future occupants of the development and adjacent residents.

Further the Town Centre Design Guide states for the Brentwood Station area where this site is located that:

- Scale, massing and architectural style

- Respect the scale, proportions and style of adjacent and surrounding buildings and ensure that proposals respond appropriately to this context.

- Ensure that building height is in-keeping with the surrounding townscape. The exact height is subject to the site specific location and must be discussed in the preapplication process. Taller buildings are acceptable along the railway and around the station, but where new development is adjacent to existing low rise buildings, the proposed heights should respect this scale.

It is in conflict with policy BE13: Parking Standards, with justifications for this position not sufficient. Given restrictions on local parking permits and that the location is at capacity, new residents would not be able to access any parking nearby.

The Brentwood Town Centre Design Guide states that for this area:

- Ensure any parking is well designed and integrated into the public realm proposals and provide an appropriate quantum of parking subject to parking surveys and local need.

That justifications for the lack of affordable housing are not sufficient and in breach of policy HP05.

The supplementary Brentwood Town Centre Design Guide, highlights that developments respect the scale, proportions and style of adjacent buildings and respond appropriately to context.

This development will be overbearing on two Victorian streets of terraced housing, inappropriately moves the boundary of building of a significantly greater height from Kings Road into the wider community of Gresham Road and King Edward Road.

Overall, by scale, massing, overlooking, impact on privacy, lack both of car parking and affordable housing provision, and the inappropriate context of the height of the application in the wider setting of King Edward Road and Gresham Road.

Ms Julia Sargeant presented the report to Members.

Mr Sam Mullender was present at the meeting and spoke objecting to the application.

Mr Mark Thomson addressed the Committee on behalf of the Applicant in support of the application.

Cllr Barrett, Ward Councillor, was present and summarised his reasons for referral.

Cllr Dr Barrett also spoke, objecting to the application for reasons including lack of parking, no affordable housing provision, loss of sunlight and out of context with surrounding area.

A motion to REFUSE the application was MOVED by Cllr Dr Barrett and SECONDED by Cllr Mynott.

Following a full discussion Members voted as follows:

FOR:  Cllrs Barber, Dr Barrett, Bridge, M Cuthbert, Mrs N Cuthbert, Mrs Gelderbloem, Gorton, Mrs Marsh, Munden, Murphy, Mynott (11)

AGAINST:  Cllr McCheyne (1)

ABSTAIN: (0)

The motion to REFUSE the application was CARRIED.

Reasons for Refusal:

1.      The proposed development due to its scale, form, bulk and massing fails to respond to the context and characteristics of the site and its setting within King Edward Road and would result in the encroachment of a building of unacceptable height into the predominantly low scale residential setting of King Edward Road and Gresham Road.  The proposed development does not respond positively and sympathetically to its context and fails to respond to the existing character of Victorian terraced properties.  The Development is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy BE14 of the adopted Brentwood Local Plan, the adopted Brentwood Town Centre Design Guide as well as guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.      The proposed development due to its scale, form, bulk, design, massing and positioning within the plot would fail to safeguard the living conditions of adjacent residents and would result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking and loss of privacy as well as material loss of light towards No. 17 Gresham Road and residential units within Ewing House contrary to policy BE14 of the adopted Brentwood Local Plan, the adopted Brentwood Town Centre Design Guide as well as guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

3.      The development fails to provide car parking to meet the needs of the development contrary to policy BE13 of the adopted Brentwood Local Plan and the adopted Brentwood Town Centre Design Guidewhich would lead to additional on street car parking in an already congested area and where resident permit spaces are in short supply.

4.      The development fails to provide any affordable housing and the viability information submitted in support of this application is insufficient to justify this position contrary to policy HP05 of the adopted Brentwood Local Plan as well as guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.