Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and declarations of interest.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Fairhurst.

Councillor Bagnall declared a personal non-pecuniary interest as a ward member for Little Canfield.

Councillor Sutton declared a personal non-pecuniary interest as a ward member for Takeley and a parish councillor for Takeley.

Councillor Gerard declared a personal non-pecuniary interest as a ward member for Newport, a member of Newport Parish Council and a member of the Newport and Quendon and Rickling

Councillor Lemon said he would be recusing himself from item 7 and declared a personal non-pecuniary interest as he knew the applicant.

Councillor Merifield said she would be recusing herself from item 5 and declared a personal prejudicial interest as the landowner was a family friend.

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the meeting on 18 December 2019 were approved and signed as a correct record subject to the following amendments:

PC82 – Cllr Gerard recalled that he gave Cllr Fairhurst’s apologies.

PC93 and PC93 – The application title incorrectly stated the ward as Barnston. The location was High Easter.

To consider application UTT/19/1064/DFO.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report which proposed approval of the reserved matters following outline application UTT/15/0879/OP for 12 dwellings (allowed on appeal under reference APP/C1570/W/15/3137906). This included layout, scale, appearance and landscaping. The details of access to the site had already been considered and allowed under the above planning application.

Councillor Gerard proposed deferral of the application. Councillor Pavitt seconded this motion. This vote did not pass.

Councillor Caton proposed approval of the application. Councillor Freeman seconded this motion.

RESOLVED to approve this application subject to the conditions in the report and the following additional conditions

1)    Full fibre broadband connections shall be installed at each of the houses hereby approved. These shall be provided, fully wired and connected, ready to use before first occupation.

REASON: The requirement of the broadband connection is required to provide advanced, high quality and reliable communications infrastructure for economic growth and social well-being. This is in accordance with Paragraph 112 of the NPPF (2019).

2)    Within 3 months of the commencement of the development hereby permitted or other such period as agreed by the local planning authority details of the suitability of roof mounted PV solar panels to be used throughout the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. These suitable measures shall be implemented during the construction of the development and completed prior to the occupation of the development, unless otherwise previously agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

REASON: These measures are required to identify suitable areas for renewable and low carbon energy sources, and supporting infrastructure in accordance with paragraph 151 (b) of the NPPF (2019).

J Emanuel spoke on this item.

To consider application UTT/19/2257/FUL.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report which sought full planning permission for a four-bedroomed detached house with an attached single garage, following outline approval in application UTT/17/2513/OP.

Members expressed concern that the application was contrary to policy GEN2 (Design) and aspects of the National Planning Policy Framework.

                        RESOLVED to refuse this application for the following reason:

The proposed house; by reasons of its scale, bulk, proximity of built form to boundaries and proportion of built form to open setting, arrangement of projecting single storey front bay  being incongruous with forms of neighbouring houses and failure to respect a visual front building line; would result in significant harm to the visual amenity and character of the site and its setting thereby failing to achieve good design. As such the proposal is contrary to Policy GEN2 of the adopted Local Plan and the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework especially at paragraphs 124 and 130.

S Ryan spoke on this application.

To consider application UTT/19/1166/OP.

Councillor Merifield left the room for consideration of this item.

The Development Management Team Leader gave a summary of the report which proposed approval of a hybrid application relating to two phases of development. Area A sought detailed planning permission for a new Council Depot comprising vehicle workshop, office building, external storage, ground maintenance storage, parking, landscaping and supporting infrastructure. Access was proposed to be taken from Area B leading onto the B1252.

Members expressed concern that the proposal was contrary to policy S7 (Countryside) and the NPPF as it was located in the countryside.

Members expressed concern that the application would have an unacceptable impact on nearby listed buildings and was therefore contrary to policy ENV 2 and the NPPF.

Members expressed concern that noise and air pollution produced by the development would make the application contrary to policies GEN2 (Design) and GEN4 (Good Neighbourliness) and to the NPPF.

Members also expressed concern that the application was contrary to policy GEN6 (Infrastructure Provision to Support Development) because it failed to mitigate for the increase in pressure on infrastructure that it would cause.

Councillor Loughlin proposed to refuse the application. Councillor Sutton seconded this motion.

                        RESOLVED to refuse the application for the following reasons:

1)     The proposed development by reason of its nature and siting within the Countryside is unacceptable to the detriment of its rural natural, the amenity of the surrounding locality, contrary to Policy S7 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

2)    The proposed development by reason of relationship with adjacent neighbouring Listed Buildings would have an unacceptable impact upon their setting which is not outweighed by public benefit contrary to Policy ENV2 of the Uttlesford Local Plan (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

3)    The proposed development would result in a significant loss of residential amenity to neighbouring residential properties due to noise and fumes, contrary to Uttlesford Local Plan Policies GEN2 and GEN4 (adopted 2005) and the NPPF.

4)    The development hereby permitted would increase the pressure on the local infrastructure within the district, as listed within the schedule of Heads of Terms of the report presented to the 6th June 2018 Planning Committee (page 60). In the absence of any legal agreement to address this, the application fails to fully mitigate the impacts of the development contrary to Policy GEN6 of the Uttlesford Local Plan 2005.

Councillor G Driscoll, P Uragallo, D Adams, M Bulling, I Butcher, C Day, J Fulcher and J Bellafield spoke on this application.

Councillor Merifield returned to the room.

To consider application UTT/19/1864.

The proposal related to the erection of a solar farm which would consist of rows of photovoltaic (PV) panels running east to west across the site. The development would have an operational lifespan of 40 years.

Members requested a Section 106 Obligation including a clause covering the decommissioning after 40 years including a respective bond for the works.

Councillor Gerard proposed approval of this application. Councillor Lemon seconded this motion.

RESOLVED to approve this application subject to the conditions in the report and the additional Section 106 Obligation.

Councillor Tayler, D MacPherson, W Brazier, R Haynes and J Hartley-Bond spoke on this application.

To consider application UTT/19/2159/FUL.

Councillor Lemon left the room for this item.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report which recommended approval of Section 73A retrospective permission for continued use of the B2/B8 building, ancillary buildings and associated yard area.

Councillor LeCount proposed deferral of this item for a site visit. Councillor Freeman seconded this motion.

                        RESOLVED to defer this application for a site visit.

S Amico, D Baker and J Salmon spoke on this application.

Councillor Lemon returned to the room.

To consider application UTT/18/3524/FUL.

The proposal was to demolish a non-original rear wing to the Listed Building, demolish modern commercial style buildings to the rear of the house and erect detached houses in a backland position relative to the Listed house.

Members were of the opinion that they had not been provided with enough information to make an informed decision.

The Chair proposed to defer this application for a site visit and a more detailed report to be provided to Members. Councillor Storah seconded this motion.

                        RESOLVED to defer this application for a site visit.

P Hewitt and M Williams spoke on this item.

To consider application UTT/18/3525/LB.

The proposal was to demolish the extensions to the listed building and retain it as a single dwelling.

Members were of the opinion that they had not been provided with enough information to make an informed decision.

Councillor Gerard proposed to defer this application for a site visit and a more detailed report to be provided to Members. Councillor Pavitt seconded this motion.

                        RESOLVED to defer this application for a site visit.

The meeting closed at 18.45.