300 homes and care home at Southend Road, Corringham

What was proposed

Outline permission was sought for up to 300 homes, a 70-bed care home, access, infrastructure, landscaping, open space and biodiversity improvements.

“This application seeks Outline planning permission with all matters reserved except access for the demolition of existing buildings and the construction of up to 300 residential units (reduced from 320 following design review), a 70-bed care home, and associated infrastructure, landscaping, and access arrangements. Fifty percent (50%) of the dwellings would be affordable, secured by Section 106 agreement, and the proposal includes open spaces and Biodiversity Net Gain.”

“A single vehicular access would be provided onto Lampits Hill and pedestrian/cycle routes would be available onto Southend Road and Lampits Lane.”

Officer report

Why officers supported it

Officers considered the site Grey Belt, identified substantial housing need, and found the proposal met the required affordable housing, infrastructure and green space rules.

“The proposal meets the requirements of NPPF paragraph 155 in that it utilises Grey Belt, would not fundamentally undermine the purposes of the remaining Green Belt across the area of the plan, there is a demonstrable unmet need for the type of development proposed (housing) and the development would be in a sustainable location, adjacent to the built-up area of Corringham.”

Officer report

Support and objections

A petition with more than 900 signatures supported the scheme, while 112 responses included objections concerning healthcare, schools, amenities, neighbour impact and environmental effects.

“Support was received in the form of a petition in support of the scheme with more than 900 signatures submitted by the applicants, citing the benefits of affordable housing, elderly accommodation, investments in infrastructure and community spaces, proximity to London Gateway and…”

“Lack of healthcare facilities • Lack of school places • Inadequate infrastructure and traffic • Environmental impact • Lack of local amenities • Neighbour amenity • Flooding • Traffic • Harm to wildlife • Loss of Green Belt • Loss of farmland • Out of character • Lack of parking • Disruption during construction • Effect on air quality • Climate change • Over-population • Lack of Environmental Impact Assessment…”

Officer report

Who spoke

A resident spoke against the application, and a developer’s representative spoke in support and explained how petition signatures had been collected.

Members’ debate

Members discussed the site’s boundaries, possible Green Belt extension, density, tree protection, affordable rent, transport links and the outline nature of the application.

“Members queried whether any conversations had been held with the portfolio holder regarding Affordable Rented housing and lower rent rates. Members were advised that the applicants have been upfront that the rates will be in line with national policy, there have been no further conversations.”

“Members states that this application did have substantial boundaries to consider it grey belt. The Co-optee expressed concerns regarding where the boundaries are and that it could potentially be extended. Other members expressed concerns around density and overdevelopment. Members were reminded this was an outline application and the final details/ definitive layout if approved would return to committee.”

Minutes

The committee vote

Five councillors voted for the recommendation, two voted against it and nobody abstained.

“For (5): Councillors Fletcher, Sisterson, Cherry, Green, Kelly Against (2): Councillors J Maney, Panjala Abstain (0):”

Minutes

The decision

The recommendation was approved, subject to completing the Section 106 agreement and complying with planning conditions.

“Recommendations That the Chief Planning Officer be authorised to GRANT permission for the development subject to those items set out in section 16 of this report –”

“A) Completion of a s106 Obligation Agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms as set-out at 13.12 onwards…”

Minutes