This application related to the residential redevelopment of the former garden centre site.  The proposal would remove the remaining buildings and erect six detached dwellings.  Access to the site would remain from North Drive. As originally submitted, the proposal would also have involved the replacement of a single dwelling along the Rayleigh Road frontage with two dwellings, though that part of the scheme had been omitted at the applicant’s request.

 

This application had been referred to committee at the request of Councillor Hossack for reasons set out in the report.

 

Mr Mike Ovenden was present at the meeting and summarised the report.

 

Cllr Hossack, Ward Cllr, submitted a statement in support of the application which was read by the Chair.

 

The Chair read a statement from Mr and Mrs Laut objecting to the application:

 

          PARKING

This proposal includes a total of 24 bedrooms and yet only allows for 12 resident car parking slots. Our concern is that residents and visitors will cause an obstruction by parking along North Drive or in front of our house in Rayleigh Road.

BOUNDARIES

The plans show that a new 1.8mtr fence will be built all around the site. 

All of the boundaries around 634 are ours - as documented in our pre-purchase searches by the original owners of this site.

We have a high decorative brick wall to the north of our property that matches our hard landscaping.  We will not authorise the loss of our wall.

Special care needs to be taken when doing works near our north boundary wall.  We would expect any damage to be repaired by the developer’s insurance.

OVERLOOKING

We are pleased to see that proposed plot 6 does not have any windows directly overlooking us at 634. We’d like it included in the conditions that no further windows could be added.

LIGHTING

The plans say that each property will have its own lighting. Please can a condition be made that their lights don’t shine onto our property.

 

 

PROPERTIES

We feel that this is too dense a development for Havering’s Grove. Currently the area enjoys long frontages, substantial houses and large gardens.  To retain the feeling of our village this site should have no more than 3 properties rather than the 6 proposed.

Additionally, the proposed height of the houses will be visible from our garden and our house. With the proposed garden centre development, the building was tucked behind our games room so not obtrusive.

AMENITIES

The plans show a bin store. We don’t think this is necessary and it could encourage rats.

OUR GAMES ROOM

The eastern end of the northern wall of our games room is covered by the existing garden centre building.  We envisage that when the garden centre building is removed that portion of the wall may need rendering as it will no longer be protected.

Also, when building works commence for plot 6, including their fence, special care must be taken not to cause damage, such as cracks, in our building. Any such damage must be repaired by the developer’s insurance.

TREES

Trees are proposed as landscaping.  We would like, as a condition, that no trees are planted along our north boundary as their roots could damage our wall and our games room.

In addition, the landscaping trees are shown as growing across our boundary. We’d like to ask as a condition that no trees are planted within 6 foot of our boundary.”

 

A statement on behalf of the Applicant., from Mr Stephenson, was also read by the Chair:   

 

The proposed Garden Centre, when compared to the existing buildings on the site, was considered in 2016 by officers as compliant with all relevant national and local planning policy. This sets a precedent on this site and ‘benchmarks’ the volume of development and level of activity that officers would consider to be acceptable to the openness of the Green Belt.

 

The officer’s report does not give proper weight to the strength of the 2016 permission as a fall-back in this case. Neither does the officer’s assessment have any proper regard to the enclosed nature of the site on all sides, which mitigates the potential impact on the openness of the Green Belt. National Planning Guidance confirms that visual aspects and the degree of activity affecting the site are both relevant factors (NPPG, reference: 64-001-20190722).

 

                    By comparison with the ‘benchmark’ set for what might be regarded as an acceptable level of impact, the current proposal represents a significant improvement on the approved (and now implemented) Garden Centre proposal.  It should mainly be noted that there is a 54% reduction in roads and hardstanding relative to the Garden Centre, more than 7.5 times the amount of soft landscaping and probably 5% of the traffic movements when the two are compared.

 

This last aspect is particularly relevant to ‘openness’, is closely associated with parking and hardstanding which facilitates such a level of activity and confirmed as such in national planning guidance.

 

                    Therefore, with the strong fall-back position, the proposal can reasonably be regarded as meeting the test of ‘openness’ and complying with national and local plan policy in this respect.

 

The officer’s comment that the proposal has been “driven by numbers” is spurious. The houses, site and finishes have been designed in accordance with The Essex Design Guide 2018 Edition (version 3) and no issues have been raised by the Brentwood Design Officer.

 

There has been a history of other sites in North Drive approved for housing development, with some extended into open Green Belt (in contrast, this site is more enclosed).

 

Therefore, this proposal fully complies with national and local planning policy and helps to bring forward much-needed additional family housing as the Council struggles to meet its housing supply targets.

 

The applicant has also engaged extensively with local residents and councillors on the detailed scheme and they support for the proposal.  They are still of the opinion that the new houses are a much better fit and use for the site which is in a residential area in comparison to a  busy commercial garden centre with outdoor sales, deliveries and parking.  The site should be used for housing and the proposal is a good fit and appropriate use for the area”

 

 

Following debate Cllr Wiles MOVED and Cllr Barber SECONDED that the application be APPROVED.  A list of conditions was suggested by the officer if the committee was minded to approve the application including:

 

 

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of

three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section

91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by Section 51 of

the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

2 The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the approved drawing(s) listed above and specifications.

Reason: To ensure that the development is as permitted by the local planning

authority and for the avoidance of doubt.

 

3 No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a

Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in

writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be

adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide

for:

i. the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors

ii. loading and unloading of plant and materials

Members requested an additional condition to prevent insertion of windows into the south elevation of plot 6.

iii. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development

iv. wheel washing facilities

v. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction

vi. hours of working and hours during which deliveries may be taken at the

site Reason: In the interests of highway safety, visual and neighbour

amenity.

 

4 No development except demolition shall take place until details of existing and proposed site levels and the finished floor levels of the proposed buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted.

Construction shall be in strict accordance with the approved details. Reason:

To safeguard the character and appearance of the area and the living

conditions of nearby residents.

 

5 No works except demolition shall take place until a detailed surface water

drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydro geological context of the

development, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local

planning authority. The scheme should include but not be limited to:

• Limiting discharge rates to 1l/s for all storm events up to and including the

1 in 100 year plus 40% allowance for climate change storm event. All

relevant permissions to discharge from the site into any outfall should be

agreed.

• SuDS Maintenance plan indicating who is responsible for different

elements of the surface water drainage system. Construction shall be in

strict accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the

development deals appropriately with the drainage of surface water from

the site.

 

6 The development shall be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural

Method Statement by Jon Hartley dated 13 October 2020. Reason: In order

to safeguard the character and appearance of the area.

 

7 No development shall proceed above slab level until a landscaping scheme

showing details of new trees, shrubs and hedges and a programme for their

planting, and any existing trees/hedges to be retained and the measures to be

taken for their protection, has been submitted to and approved in writing by

the local planning authority. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out as

approved. Any newly planted tree, shrub or hedgerow, or any existing tree,

shrub or hedgerow to be retained, that dies, or is uprooted, severely damaged

or seriously diseased within five years of the completion of the development,

shall be replaced within the next planting season with another of the same

species and of a similar size, unless the local planning authority gives prior

written consent to any variation. Reason: In order to safeguard and enhance

the character and appearance of the area.

 

8 No development approved by this planning permission except demolition shall take place until a scheme that includes the following components to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site on that phase shall each be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority

1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified all previous uses

2. Potential contaminants associated with those uses a conceptual model of

the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors potentially unacceptable

risks arising from contamination at the site.

3. A site investigation scheme, based on 1 to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site.

4. The results of the site investigation and detailed risk assessment referred to

in 2 and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving

full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be

undertaken.

5. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order

to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in 3 are

complete and identifying any requirements for longer term monitoring of

pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the express written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

Reason:

To protect and prevent the pollution of the environment.

 

9 No occupation of any part of the permitted development / of each phase of

development shall take place until a verification report demonstrating

completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the

effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to and approved, in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. It shall also include any plan (a "long-term monitoring and maintenance plan") for longer term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and

contingency action, as identified in the verification plan. The long-term

arrangements for monitoring and maintenance plan shall be implemented as approved.

 

Reason: To protect and prevent the pollution of the environment.

 

10 No windows shall be inserted into the southeast/flank elevation of the dwelling identified as Plot 6 on drawing 19-057/05 Rev C. Reason: To prevent

overlooking of the adjacent property.

 

Informative(s)

 

1 Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the relevant policies of the development plan as set out below. The Council has had regard to the

concerns expressed by residents but the matters raised are not sufficient to

justify the refusal of permission.

 

2 The following development plan policies contained in the Brentwood

Replacement Local Plan 2005 are relevant to this decision: CP1, GB1, GB2,

PC1, National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2019 and NPPG 2014.

 

3 The permitted development must be carried out in accordance with the

approved drawings and specification. If you wish to amend your proposal you

will need formal permission from the Council. The method of obtaining

permission depends on the nature of the amendment and you are advised to

refer to the Council’s web site or take professional advice before making your

application.

 

4 The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in

determining this application by assessing the proposal against all material

considerations, including planning policies and any representations that may

have been received and subsequently determining to grant planning

permission in accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable

development, as set out within the National Planning Policy Framework.

 

5 SUDS Advisory comments:

• We strongly recommend looking at the Essex Green Infrastructure Strategy to ensure that the proposals are implementing multifunctional green/blue

features effectively. The link can be found below.

https://www.essex.gov.uk/protecting-environment

• We recommend that a covenant should be included within the deed to the land to ensure SUDS features are maintained in the future

• Should you wish us to provide further comment additional information should

be supplied to show how SUDS will be implemented on site.

• Summary of Flood Risk Responsibilities for your Council

• We have not considered the following issues as part of this planning

application as they are not within our direct remit; nevertheless these are all

very important considerations for managing flood risk for this development,

and determining the safety and acceptability of the proposal. Prior to deciding

this application you should give due consideration to the issue(s) below. It may be that you need to consult relevant experts outside your planning team.

• Sequential Test in relation to fluvial flood risk;

• Safety of people (including the provision and adequacy of an emergency plan, temporary refuge and rescue or evacuation arrangements);

• Safety of the building;

• Flood recovery measures (including flood proofing and other building level

resistance and resilience measures);

• Sustainability of the development.

• In all circumstances where warning and emergency response is fundamental to managing flood risk, ECC advise local planning authorities to formally consider the emergency planning and rescue implications of new development in making their decisions.

 

6 Environmental health informatives: Where the site is adjacent to residential or business premises, heavy plant, noisy equipment or operations and deliveries, should not take place outside the hours of;

Monday-Friday.........................08.00-18.00

Saturday......................................08.00-13.00.

No noisy activities on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Particularly noisy equipment

such as Pile Drivers/Angle Cutters/Pneumatic Drills/Cement Mixers etc. should be used approximately one hour after the beginning hours mentioned above and one hour before the said end times.

• All plant and equipment should be suitably chosen, sited, operated and

serviced so as to minimise noise, vibration, fumes and dust. Best practical

means should be employed to minimise potential nuisance to neighbouring

properties. All plant should be turned off when not in use.

• Pneumatic tools should be fitted with an integral silencer and/or purpose made muffler, which is maintained in good repair.

• Where the site is adjacent to residential or business premises, bonfires should be avoided, and all waste materials should be removed from site and suitably disposed of. At no time should any material that is likely to produce dark/black smoke be burnt (eg. Plastics, rubber, treated wood, bitumen etc.)

 

7 The developer is reminded of the provisions of the Party Wall etc Act 1996

which may require notification of the proposed works to affected neighbours.

Detailed information regarding the provisions of 'The Act' should be obtained

from an appropriately qualified professional with knowledge of party wall

matters. Further information may be viewed at

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/party-wall-etc-act-1996-guidance

 

A vote was taken and Members voted as follows:

 

FOR: Cllrs Barber, Bridge, Cloke, Gelderbloem, Heard, Jakobsson, Wiles (7)

 

AGAINST:  Cllrs Dr Barrett, Cuthbert, Fryd, Laplain, Mynott, (5)

 

ABSTAIN: (0)

The application was APPROVED.