Land East of Gleneagles Way, Hatfield Peverel, Cm3 2Jt Application Ref: 16/02156/Out

Our ref: APP/Z1510/V/17/3180729 Mr Jonathan Dixon Savills (UK) Ltd Unex House 132-134 Hills Road Cambridge 8 July 2019 CB2 8PA Dear Sir, TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 – SECTION 77 APPLICATION MADE BY DAVID WILSON HOMES EASTERN LAND EAST OF GLENEAGLES WAY, HATFIELD PEVEREL, CM3 2JT APPLICATION REF: 16/02156/OUT 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of Brian Cook BA (Hons) DipTP MRTPI, who held a public local inquiry from 12 December 2017 to 30 January 2018 into your client’s application for outline planning permission for residential development of up to 120 dwellings, together with associated open space, landscaping, highways and drainage infrastructure works on land east of Gleneagles Way, Hatfield Peverel in accordance with application ref: 16/02156/OUT, dated 16 December 2016. 2. On 12 July 2017, the Secretary of State directed, in pursuance of Section 77 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, that your client’s application be referred to him instead of being dealt with by the local planning authority. Inspector’s recommendation and summary of the decision 3. The Inspector recommended that that planning permission be granted subject to conditions. 4. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions, except where stated and agrees with his recommendation. He has decided to grant planning permission subject to conditions. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report. Procedural matters 5. On 21 June 2018 the Secretary of State wrote to the main parties to afford them an opportunity to comment on the implications, if any, of the judgement of the Court of Ministry of Housing, Communities & Local Government Tel: 0303 444 43594 Andrew Lynch, Decision Officer Email: [email protected] Planning Casework Unit 3rd Floor Fry Building 2 Marsham Street London SW1P 4DF Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in Case C-323/17 People Over Wind and Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta on the correct application of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, which was handed down on 12 April 2018. 6. On 1 August 2018, the Secretary of State wrote further to the main parties, to afford them an opportunity to make representations on the implications, if any, on the new National Planning Policy Framework, which was published on 24 July 2018. 7. On 2 October 2018, the Secretary of State wrote further to the main parties, to afford them an opportunity to make representations on the implications, if any, on the revised guidance on how councils should assess their housing need, which was published on 13 September 2018, and on new household projections for England published by the Office of National Statistics on 20 September 2018. 8. On 5 March 2019, the Secretary of State wrote to the main parties, to afford them an opportunity to make representations on the implications, if any, on the following documentation: • Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) on housing and planning issued on 19 February 2019 • 2018 Housing Delivery Test measurement data published on 19 February 2019 • The Government’s response to the technical consultation on updates to national planning policy and guidance, dealing with the calculation of Local Housing Need and other matters, including the People Over Wind and Sweetman v Coillte Teoranta issue, published 19 February 2019. • Revised National Planning Policy Framework, published on 19 February 2019. • Updated guidance for council’s on how to assess their housing needs (document). • Braintree District Council’s latest published 5 year supply statement, January 2019 (see also paragraphs 36 to 43 of this letter). • Latest position statement with regard to the emerging Hatfield Peverel Neighbourhood Plan, and weight to be attached to that. • Three recent planning casework decisions (brought to the Secretary of State’s attention by the Stone Path Meadow Residents Group - SPMRG). 9. A list of representations received in response to these letters, is set out at Annex A. Copies of these letters may be obtained on written request to the address at the foot of the first page of this letter. 10. In addition, a number of representations were received following the close of the inquiry. These raised a variety of issues, and are dealt with under the considerations of main issues below. The Secretary of State is satisfied that the issues raised do not affect his decision, and no other new issues were raised in this correspondence to warrant further investigation or necessitate additional referrals back to parties. A list of representations which have been received since the inquiry is also at Annex A. Copies of these letters may be obtained on written request to the address at the foot of the first page of this letter. 2 Policy and statutory considerations 11. In reaching his decision, the Secretary of State has had regard to section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 which requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. 12. In this case the development plan consists of the saved policies of the Braintree District Local Plan Review (LPR) adopted in 2005 and the Braintree District Core Strategy (CS), adopted in 2011. The Secretary of State considers that the development plan policies of most relevance to this case are those set out at IR25-32. 13. Other material considerations which the Secretary of State has taken into account include the National Planning Policy Framework (‘the Framework’) and associated planning guidance (‘the Guidance’). The revised National Planning Policy Framework was published on 24 July 2018 and further revised in February 2019. Unless otherwise specified, any references to the Framework in this letter are to the revised Framework. Emerging plan 14. The emerging plan comprises the Braintree New Local Plan (BNLP) and the Hatfield Peverel Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP). The Secretary of State considers that the emerging BNLP policies of most relevance to this case include those set out in IR34- 38 and the emerging NDP policies of most relevance are HPE1, HPE2 and HPE6 as described at IR41-42. 15. Paragraph 48 of the Framework states that decision makers may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: (1) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan; (2) the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies in the emerging plan; and (3) the degree of consistency of relevant policies to the policies in the Framework. 16. At the time of the Inquiry the examination hearings into part 1 of the BNLP were due to commence in January 2018, with Part 2 to follow at a later date. The Secretary of State notes that on 8 June 2018, the Inspector for the emerging Local Plan wrote to the three local planning authority areas covered by the Part 1 Examination, setting out his views as to the further steps he considered necessary in order for the Section 1 Plan to be made sound and legally-compliant, and seeking views on options to pursue these matters. A joint response from the three authorities dated 19 October proposed suspending the Examination until February 2019, with a view to sitting again in June. In the light of these letters, and for the reasons given in IR425-428, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that only limited weight should be given to the BNLP. 17. The Secretary of State notes that while some progress has been made with regard to the NDP since the close of the Inquiry, the further examination of the NDP has not yet concluded. For the above reasons, and for the reasons given in IR429-431, the 3 Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that very limited weight can be given to the NDP at this stage. Main issues Policies in the Framework on delivering a wide choice of high quality homes 18. For the reasons given in IR420-422, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that the Green Infrastructure Plan and Design and Access Statement set important context and establish important principles at this outline application stage, and that there is no evidence to suggest that the application site will not provide a range of high quality homes. The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with the development plan for the area 19. For the reasons given in IR435-437, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector that although as a policy for the supply of housing policy CS1 should be considered out of date, the spatial strategy within it should still be afforded some weight, and he considers that a moderate weighting is appropriate. The Secretary of State further agrees with the Inspector for the reasons in IR435-437 that the appeal proposals would be in accordance with the spatial strategy. For the reasons given in IR438-446, the Secretary of State further agrees with the Inspector that there is a conflict with adopted development plan policies RLP2 and CS5, concerning development outside of defined boundaries of settlements, where countryside policies apply. The Secretary of State further agrees with the Inspector that the conflict with policies RLP2 and CS5 should attract moderate weight when it comes to the overall planning balance, given that they would act to restrict the supply of housing and frustrate the aim of the Framework paragraph 59. He notes that the local planning authority in their representation of 22 October 2018 share his view as to the weight to be attached to policies RLP2 and CS5 at this time.

Load more