56 homes at East Of High Lane Stansted, Stansted Mountfitchet

What was proposed

The application sought 56 homes, three accesses, affordable housing, open space, landscaping, footways, drainage and related infrastructure.

“PROPOSAL: Proposed erection of 56 no. dwellings, (including affordable housing) formation of site accesses, open space, landscaping and associated infrastructure.”

“Full planning permission is sought for the erection of 56no. dwellings with the provision of 3no. vehicle access roads proposed to the east of High Lane. Other associated works include pedestrian footways, public open space provisions, attenuation basins and landscaping.”

Officer report

The site and its setting

The triangular agricultural site lies outside Stansted Mountfitchet’s development limits, beside existing homes, roads, nature areas and flood-risk land.

“The site comprises of a triangular shaped plot approximately 3.26 ha of agricultural land and located outside the development limits of Stansted Mountfitchet but adjacent to existing residential settlements.”

“The enquiry site lies East of High Lane, Stansted Mountfitchet and is a triangular shaped plot comprising of approximately 3.26ha of land in agricultural use, outside development limits, and therefore within the countryside. South of the site lies a parcel of land that has recently been approved for residential development (refs UTT/22/0457/OP and UTT/23/3236/DFO). Northwest of the application site is a new development granted in 2019 for 35 dwellings (UTT/18/1993/FUL).”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the site was considered suitable and sustainable, with the housing and other benefits outweighing adverse impacts.

“By reason of the development proposing a residential scheme in a rural context there are adverse impacts of the development. However, Officers are of the view that the location of the site is suitable for development due to the residential character of the western portion of High Lane and other developments that are currently under construction directly south of the site. Given the context of the immediate locality a…”

“The Council does not have a 5 Year Housing Land Supply and the adverse impacts of the scheme have been assessed in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Consequently, it has been concluded that the benefits outweigh the adverse impacts of the scheme.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The applicant spoke in support of the application.

Members’ discussion

Members discussed the play area and security, drainage, parking, affordable-home sizes, materials, lay-by controls and the proposed s106 contribution.

“In response to questions from Members, officers: • Confirmed that four properties would include flint. • Said that although the Parish Council had requested a £50k fee be included in the s106 agreement, this was matter for the Environment Agency, although it could be included on a s106 wish list. • Said that any lay-by controls were covered within Condition 22.”

“Members discussed: • The location of the play area and security arrangements; officers confirmed that the layout provided more natural surveillance. • Drainage concerns. • Parking layout.”

Minutes

The committee’s decision

Councillor Emanuel proposed approval, Councillor Sutton seconded it, and the committee resolved to grant permission.

“Councillor Emanuel proposed approval of the application, together with the two additional conditions from the Addendum List.”

“RESOLVED that the Strategic Director of Planning be authorised to grant permission for the development subject to those items set out in section 17 of the report, together with additional conditions from the Addendum List. This was also subject to completion of a s106 Obligation Agreement in accordance with the Heads of Terms as set out.”

Minutes