Agenda item

19/01/1566/OUT Kings Farm

Minutes:

The Planning officer provided a summary of the report, advising that the application included an outline for planning permission with all matters reserved apart from access. It is proposed to include mixed use development comprising up to 750 no. residential dwellings, medical facility, retail, and commercial units.

 

The committee were advised there will be an indicative mix of housing and apartment with 35% of the properties being affordable housing, in line with policy. Main access to the site from A128 will provide a three-arm roundabout.

 

The Planning officer advised that the application is scheduled for determination by the Planning Committee because it is considered to have significant policy or strategic implications and constitutes a departure from the Development Plan (in accordance with Part 3 (b), Section 2 2.1 (a) of the Council’s constitution). The application was scheduled to be heard at two previous committee meetings in January 2023 & July 2023 and at those meetings it was agreed by the chairman of the Planning Committee that both items would be withdrawn from the agenda.

 

The main issues include harm to the greenbelt; harm to the landscape character, isolated location with reliance on private transport, along with insufficient access information/ impact on the town, and insufficient highways information. The recommendation is to refuse planning permission.

 

·       A speaker statement was heard in opposition to the application from the ward councillor.

·       A speaker statement was heard in support from the applicant.

 

Members questioned whether the active airfield needs to be protected. Planning officers advised that the site is large and underdeveloped, however there are some buildings on the site that are used in relation to the airfield at this time. In this instance they don’t think there is a reason for refusal on these grounds.

 

Members questioned whether the roundabout will be put in near the A128. They were advised this would only be approved if the application was approved.

 

The Co-Optee questioned whether there was on single access to the site. It was confirmed this was the case, however there was a second option for emergencies.

 

Members stated there is another village development in Brentwood with 4000 homes near A128 and wanted further clarification on whether access was the issue with this application. It was confirmed that it is a wider issue of sustainability as there is no footpath or cycle path to this site to access all the main services and facilities. Therefore, you would be reliant on having a car.

 

Members questioned whether there was any public transport along the A128, that would go through this development. The Highways Officer confirmed there is a non-frequent bus service that goes towards Brentwood. The applicant has suggested this could potentially be enhanced, however more details on this have not been provided.

 

The Chair summarised the key points advising members to consider the current policies.

 

Members moved to debate. The main points included that it is on the greenbelt and transport is an issue there and access on the A128 isn’t great. Members thought it was an inappropriate development and the benefits didn’t outweigh the harm. In addition to this the volume of traffic for potentially 1500 vehicles that would put a strain on the existing area.

 

One member argued the density of the area makes it difficult to ascertain, however thought there was potential to develop the land in the future.

 

The Co-Optee added A128 is one of the most dangerous roads in Thurrock, with accidents that happen regularly, making the site inappropriate.

 

The Chair summarised the key points and read the recommendation. 

 

Recommendation: To refuse planning permission.

 

This was proposed by Councillor Shinnick and seconded by Councillor P Arnold. Members proceeded to vote.

 

For (8): Councillors Liddiard, Byrne, Shinnick, J Maney, P Arnold, Polston, Sisterston, Fletcher

Against (0): None

Abstained (1): Councillor Kelly

 

RESOLVED: Application has been refused.

 

Suspended standing orders were agreed at 19.54

Supporting documents: