300 homes and facilities at Wash Road, Laindon

The site and surroundings

The approximately 36.9-hectare site formed part of Bensons Farm, lay in the Green Belt, and contained fields, hedgerows, trees, rights of way and an airstrip.

“The site comprises approximately 9 arable and improved grassland field parcels separated by hedgerows and sporadic trees, following a historical rectilinear field pattern. Some intermittent hedgerows also border the site to Wash Road and Barleylands Road. A narrow grass airstrip with associated small hanger structures is in the north part of the site.”

“The Noak Bridge Conservation Area (designated in 1996) is adjacent to the site on the south side of Wash Road. Approximately 400 metres to the east of the application site is Laindon Ponds, a moated property comprising a Grade II listed 17th century house, located on the south side of Wash Road. Daniels Farm, a Grade II listed late 17th century house, is located some 100 metres further to east of this on the northern side of Wash Road.”

Officer report

Earlier applications

Earlier permissions covered a telecommunications monopole, a dog-walking field, an all-weather farm track and an environmental impact screening opinion for the future housing application.

“Application Proposal Decision 01/01335/TEL 15 metre telecommunications monopole and equipment cabin Permitted Development 27.12.2001”

“Granted 20.07.2022 22/01293/AGBAS All weather surface farm track Permitted Development 07.10.2022 24/01271/SCREEN EIA Screening Opinion for future submission of hybrid planning application for up to 300 dwellings (phased) including large areas of landscaping, open space, improvement works to public highway along Wash Road and related infrastructure.”

Officer report

What officers advised

Officers considered the development appropriate grey belt development that met the Golden Rules, with benefits outweighing Green Belt, landscape, heritage and agricultural land harms.

“In the opinion of Officers, the proposed development constitutes appropriate development of grey belt land. The proposed development complies with the Golden Rules, carrying significant weight in favour of the grant of permission, in accordance with paragraph 158 of the NPPF. The development is therefore not inappropriate.”

“However, should Members consider that the development is inappropriate, paragraph 153 of the NPPF is relevant and permission should not be approved except in Very Special Circumstances. It is, however, considered that all of the harms identified, which include the heritage harm, the harm to the local landscape character and to the openness of the Green Belt and the loss of Grade 3b agricultural land are, in the opinion of Officers, clearly outweighed by the Very Special…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A ward councillor, an Essex County councillor, a parish councillor and another borough councillor spoke against, while the developer’s agent spoke in support.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed Green Belt openness, views, the village, school access and walking safety, while officers explained the separation distance, open space and flood assessment.

“In respect of flood risk, the officer clarified that a flood risk assessment and drainage strategy had been considered as part of the report, that the majority of the site was not at risk and that existing drainage ditches would be preserved. ECC, as the authority for flooding, had raised no objections.”

“Members discussed the application, raising concern about the impact of the development on the openness of the Green Belt and views across to Burstead, along with the impact on the village of Noak Bridge. There was also some concern about access to schools and the safety of walking routes.”

Minutes

A request to defer

A proposal to defer for newer traffic modelling was rejected after officers said the existing modelling to 2031 remained current and had considered nearby permissions.

“Councillor Journet proposed deferring a decision on the application pending more up to date traffic modelling. This was seconded by Councillor Blake. Officers reiterated, however, that modelling to 2031 had been undertaken, taking into account recent planning applications granted in the vicinity, and the report was therefore considered in date by ECC Highways. Members voted and the proposal to defer was not carried.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

The committee granted permission subject to completing the S106 agreement, applying the report’s conditions and delegating minor amendments before the decision notice.

“That Planning Application No. 25/00171/OUT be granted planning permission subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the planning obligations and contributions set out at section 5.26 of the report and subject to the conditions set out at Section 6.7 of the report and for any minor amendments that might be necessary up to the issue of the decision notice to be delegated to the Assistant Director of Planning for approval.”

Minutes