Two residential dwellings at Agricultural Building At Wraywick Farm The Marshes, Southminster

“Planning permission is sought for the demolition of two existing agricultural farm buildings and their replacement with two detached dwellings. The barn to be demolished is subject of prior approval granted in January 2024 under Class Q of the GPDO (ref 23/01136/PACUAR) for the change of use of the agricultural building to two dwellinghouses (Use Class C3) and for associated operational development.”

“The site is located on the northern side of The Marshes, accessed via a private drive which serves some residential dwellings, farm buildings and a wind farm. The site is outside of a defined settlement boundary and is in open countryside. Southminster is located 2.5km to the west of the site.”

“The site includes tanks and fencing to the rear which are proposed to be removed. Immediately to the northeast of the site is a large agricultural building and a residential dwelling is located further to the east.”

“As explained within the report, whilst the site is not considered to be in a sustainable location, due to the fallback position that exists at the site by virtue of the recently granted prior approval for conversion of the barn, and the realistic prospect of that scheme being implemented in any event if planning permission were to be refused, the principle of creating residential units at the site is considered acceptable.”

“The overall design of the replacement structure is different to the original conversion scheme, insofar as the barn is demolished and replaced with two separate, slightly taller structures. However, the total volume of the scheme is almost identical to the existing arrangement, with the overall footprint significantly reduced. The design of the replacement structures remains rural in character with a traditional palette of materials.”

“The Director of Place, Planning and Growth then responded to these concerns reminding members that due to the previous consent given the principle of development is there. They also addressed the issues of the site being in a flood zone and lack of sequential tests. The officer then stated the implications that should be considered by Members: • Would the layout and footprint of the site have less impact on the flood storage and displacement of water in that area.”

“Further discussion then took place with Members and Officers referencing the following possible reasons for refusal: • The issues with the site being in flood zone 3A and lack of subsequent sequential test. Which could include access to and from the properties • The Change in form of the buildings from agricultural to a more urban design not being in keeping with the rural area and nature of the site.”

“At this point Councillor A S Fluker proposed that the Committee refuse this application contrary to Officer recommendations. This was duly seconded.”

“Upon a vote being taken this proposal was approved.”

“RESOLVED that this application be REFUSED with reasons for refusal to be confirmed by the Chairperson and Members of this Committee.”