Planning Committee Minutes 31 March 2010
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
MINUTES of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 31 March 2010 at 7.00 pm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Present: Councillors Stuart St. Clair-Haslam (Chair), Barry Palmer (Vice-Chair), Ben Maney, Joycelyn Redsell, Gerard Rice, Andy Smith and Steve Veryard Co-Opted Mr John Vesey – Campaign to Protect Rural England Members: Apologies: Councillors Peter Harris and Barrie Lawrence In attendance: Councillor Diane Revell (Ward Member speaking on applications 09/00856/COND, 09/00638/FUL and 09/00854/FUL) Councillor Pauline Tolson (Ward Member speaking on application 10/00010/FUL) Councillor John Everett (Ward Member speaking on application 10/00010/FUL) Councillor Sue MacPherson (Ward Member speaking on application 10/00010/FUL) Councillor Wendy Herd (Ward Member speaking on application 09/00793/FUL) A Millard - Head of Strategic Planning and Delivery A Esplen – Group Leader, Development Control L Nicholson – Planning Officer, Development Control C Blow – Planning Officer, Development Control M Ford – Assistant Engineer, Highways D Lawson – Deputy Monitoring Officer, Legal Services K Williams – Legal Services A Stuart – Principal Regeneration Solicitor B Clarke – Principal Democratic Services Officer V Freeman – Senior Democratic Services Officer ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Chair took the opportunity to inform those present that the meeting would be audio recorded. 300 MINUTES The Minutes of the Planning Committee, held on 11 March 2010, were approved as a correct record. 301 ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS The Chair advised Members that there were no items of urgent business however, in noting that he was aware of a number of late possible requests for deferrals on the Agenda, he afforded the Head of Strategic Planning and Delivery the opportunity to explain that it may be beneficial to follow the order of the Agenda as printed, referring to the case officer prior to discussion, in order to ascertain whether the application was required to be deferred, giving the opportunity for reasons to be discussed. This prompted further discussion by the Committee, particularly in relation to applications 09/00793/FUL, 0900638/FUL and 09/00854/FUL which sought planning permission, contrary to policy, in the Green Belt. In querying the matter, particularly in relation to the rescinding of some recent decisions and additional information that had recently been received by the Council in connection, but which was yet to be considered by officers, Members sought legal advice. The committee were informed by Mr Williams that in light of a QC’s opinion that had been received the day prior to the meeting, it was believed that the Planning Committee members should receive further, proper advice that had been fully considered, prior to making a decision on Green Belt applications. It was the wish of the Deputy Monitoring Officer that the committee go into private session in order to receive his advice, after which the public would be informed of the outcome and be given reasons for any actions taken. Members raised concern at being requested to defer these particular applications further as they had been deferred more than once in the past, but agreed that at the appropriate time they would consider moving to an exempt session. 302 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Redsell declared a personal interest in Application No 09/00854/FUL as she regularly visited Orsett Hall. Mr Vesey declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Application No 09/00856/COND and informed the Committee that he would leave the meeting during consideration thereof. 303 PLANNING APPEALS The Head of Strategic Planning and Delivery submitted a report on the appeals that had been lodged and the decisions taken on planning appeals, together with the dates of forthcoming inquiries and hearings. RESOLVED: That the report be noted. 304 PUBLIC ADDRESS TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE Members were informed that in accordance with the rules for addressing the Committee, 11 members of the public had registered to speak at the meeting in addition to 5 Ward Members. Mr Vesey left the meeting during consideration of the following application. 305 PUBLIC ADDRESS Ms Lesley Mansfield, Local Resident, addressed the Committee in objection to the following application. Mr Stanley Trencher, Secretary to the Trustees of Orsett Churches Centre, addressed the Committee in support of the following application. Councillor D Revell was invited to address the Committee in relation to the following application. 306 APPLICATION 09/00856/COND - APPROVED Orsett Congregational Church, High Road, Orsett Variation of Condition 10 of consent 00/00909/FUL, revised parking layout. Members were informed that since publication of the Agenda, four further pieces of correspondence had been received, 2 of which were from the neighbours immediately adjoining the site and 2 letters from residents in the nearby area. The comments related to: Issues relating to rights of way across the site Queries relating to the size of the parking spaces and turning areas within the site Potential for drivers to be blocked in when using certain spaces Vehicles already queue to get into the site The number of spaces proposed was less than that originally required when the centre was first granted permission Members were also advised that since receipt of the correspondence outlined above, revised plans, which were appended to the Supplemental Report which had been distributed at the meeting, had now been received and which had addressed previous highways concerns, thus now deemed to be acceptable in highways terms. In view of this, approval was therefore now recommended, subject to the condition that the layout shall be implemented in accordance with the revised plans within 28 days of the date of decision, should Members approve the application. Members raised concern in relation to the issue of rights of way across the site, however they were informed by Mr Williams that this was a Civil matter and a planning decision could only be made on planning grounds. The rights of way could not be considered in determining the application. In concluding the debate, the Chair proposed the recommendation as contained within the subsequent supplemental report. This was duly seconded by Councillor Palmer. In being put to the vote, 5 members voted in favour of the proposal and 2 against, whereupon the Chair declared the proposal to be carried. RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the condition outlined in the subsequent supplemental report circulated at the meeting. Action: Head of Strategic Planning and Delivery 307 PUBLIC ADDRESS Mr. Stephen Peak, Resident, addressed the Committee in objection to the following application. Mr. Gary Cumberland, Agent, addressed the Committee in support of the following application. Councillors Tolson, Everett and MacPherson were invited to address the Committee in relation to the following application. 308 APPLICATION 10/00010/FUL – REFUSED 11 Foxfield Drive, Stanford le Hope Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 1 No. x 2 bed Single Storey dwelling, 1 no. x 3 bed Single storey dwelling and 2 x 3 bed Two Storey dwellings. Further to Minute No 276 (meeting held on 11 March 2010), a site visit was held on Thursday 25 March 2010 at 4.00 pm. Present: Councillors Palmer, Redsell, Veryard, Maney and Mr Vesey. Apologies: Councillor Rice. In attendance: C Blow, Planning Officer, Development Control M Ford, Assistant Engineer, Highways V Freeman, Senior Democratic Services Officer Members were informed that a further 2 letters had been received since publication of the agenda. Furthermore the updated report contained in the Agenda included two additional conditions, outlined on page 43, regarding root protection of an existing tree within the adjacent garden and restriction of permitted development. Members were also informed that the legal agreement, in accordance with Policy BE10, had now been signed by the applicants. Members raised concern that the proposal represented over development on a cramped site, was contrary to policy H11 and were very concerned that the junction would be faced with problems, particularly later in the day. The Chair who had indicated that upon hearing all the facts, was minded to go against the officer recommendation, enquired as to whether any other Member of the Committee would wish to put the recommendation outlined in the report. With no response, the Chair put the alternative proposal of refusal, for the reasons outlined above. This was seconded by Councillor Palmer. In being put to the vote, the proposal was unanimously agreed. RESOLVED: That the application be refused for the reasons outlined during debate, the detailed wording of which be delegated to officers in conjunction with the Chair of the Committee. Action: Head of Strategic Planning and Delivery The meeting was adjourned at 8.25 pm to allow for a comfort break and reconvened at 8.42 pm. On reconvening the meeting the Chair posed the question to Mr Williams of Legal Services of the necessity to go into an exempt session for some of the applications. Members were informed that entering a closed session would be for the purpose of receiving privileged legal advice in connection with the business of the Committee, in accordance with the Local Government Act 1972, which stated that the Council was entitled to give and receive legal advice in a closed