See below for this week's key planning applications in the Maldon District, received or decided on by the Council.

Applications received

1. Land at St Peters Church, Church Road, Great Totham

An application to change the use of unused arable land to a new churchyard extension.

2. Land At Forrester Park Golf And Tennis Club, Beckingham Road, Great Totham

Installation of a workshop/maintenance building and associated works.

3. 25 Shakespeare Drive, Maldon CM9 6DP

Demolition of existing garage, bathroom and conservatory and erection of single storey side extension and internal alterations.

4. 39 Viking Road, Maldon CM9 6JR

Removal of existing shed and replace with an outbuilding for the use of a snooker room in rear garden.

Applications approved

1. Poundstretcher, 67 High Street, Maldon CM9 5EP

External alterations at first floor level involving enlargement of front-facing and rear-facing windows, and insertion of door to the front elevation at first floor.

2. Land South Of Wycke Hill And Limebrook Way, Maldon

Reserved matters application for the approval of appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of Phase 3 of the Western Parcel (comprising 78 residential dwellings (Use Class C3), new public open space and car parking) of approved planning application 22/00393/VARM (Variation of condition 35 (details of employment land) on approved planning permission 20/00074/FUL (Variation of condition 10 (speed review strategy) and 20 (pedestrian/cycle crossing of Limebrook Way) on approved application 19/01134/FUL (Removal of condition 11 (details of 'Access Link Strategy') on approved planning application FUL/MAL/18/00071 (Variation of conditions 5,13,21,25,43,53,55,61,63,67, 68,69,74,81,84 on approved application OUT/MAL/14/01103 (Outline application for up to 1000 dwellings, an employment area of 3.4 hectares (Use Classes B1, B2 and B8 uses), a local centre (Use Classes A1-A5, B1a, C2, C3, D1 and D2 uses), a primary school, two early years and childcare facilities, general amenity areas and formal open space including allotments, sports playing fields, landscaping, sustainable drainage measures including landscaped storage basins and SuDs features, vehicle accesses onto the existing highway network and associated infrastructure.))

3. Lower Farm, Blind Lane, Tolleshunt Knights CM9 8EP

Retrospective application for an outbuilding for the use of a psychotherapy practice on an ancillary basis.

4. Langmere, Maldon Road, Langford, Maldon CM9 4SS

Two storey rear extension, single storey rear extension, dormers to front and rear, alterations to roof, extension to car port and internal alterations.

Applications refused

1. Land West of Maypole Road, Heybridge

Outline planning application with all matters of detail reserved except for means of access to the site for the construction of up to 45 dwellings, together with associated garaging, parking, public open space, landscaping, access, highways drainage and infrastructure works.

Reasons for refusal:

1. The proposal would undermine the aim identified within Policy S4 of the Local Development Plan and the North Heybridge Strategic Masterplan Framework for this site to form part of the rural setting at the edge of the Garden Suburb and Maypole Road being the logical and 'defensible' edge of the housing area. The development, as a result of its nature, extent and location, would harm the character of the site and its rural surrounding, visually intruding into the countryside. The proposed development would, therefore, be contrary to Policies S1, S2, S3, S4, S8, D1 and H4 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.

2. It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that the impact on the local highway network caused by this proposal is acceptable in terms of highway safety and accessibility with particular regard to the following:

• It has not been demonstrated that the proposed vehicular access can be provided with appropriate visibility splays for the actual speed of the road at this location. The lack of such visibility would result in an unacceptable degree of hazard to all road users to the detriment of highway safety.
• An appropriate assessment of the proposal in terms of the safety impact for all users of the highway has not been made. The submitted Stage 1 Road Safety Audit is not satisfactory as the standards for Road Safety Audits have changed since 2016 and the speed and accident data are out-of-date.
• The application has failed to demonstrate that the proposed off-site works to encourage the use of modes of transport other than the private car can all be fully accommodated within highway land. Therefore, trips to/from the site by means other than the private motor car would not be minimised.

This proposal is therefore contrary to Policies T1, T2 and I1 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.

3. In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, securing the following necessary planning obligations:

• A financial contribution towards Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy or an appropriate mitigation strategy to overcome the impacts of the development on the European designated nature conservation sites,
• A financial contribution towards the provision of education,
• A financial contribution towards the provision of medical services,
• Management/maintenance of the public open space and
• Affordable housing provision

The development would have an adverse impact on those European designated nature conservation sites, would not adequately provide for the educational and medical needs of the future residents of the site, would not ensure that the public open space proposed was appropriate managed and maintained and would not meet the affordable housing needs of the District. The development is, therefore, contrary to Policies S1, H1, N1, N2, D1, D2, T1, T2, I1 and I2 of the approved Maldon District Local Development Plan and the NPPF.

2. Eastcroft Cottage, Fambridge Road, Mundon CM9 6PH

Alterations to boundary treatments.

Reasons for refusal:

1. The proposed fence and gate, due to their length, height, design and siting in close proximity to the highway and within a rural area would be a visually incongruous and obtrusive form of development resulting in an urbanising effect which would detract from the character and appearance of the rural area, contrary to policies S1, S8, D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan, and Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.
2. The proposal fails to provide a safe and suitable means of access to/from Fambridge Road as the development would obstruct visibility splays and potentially cause obstruction of the highway, contrary to Policy T2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan, and Government advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. Barn at Old Mill House Vineyard, Hazeleigh Hall Lane, Woodham Mortimer

Convert agricultural barn into vineyard manager's dwellinghouse with associated internal and external alterations, laying out of amenity area and planting of native hedgerows and trees.

Reasons for refusal:

1. The proposed development would result in the creation of a dwelling outside of a defined settlement boundary, in an unsustainable location, remote from community services and essential support services/facilities and inaccessible by a range of means of transport. The proposed conversion of the existing agricultural building would have a detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding countryside. Inadequate evidence has been provided to demonstrate that an essential functional need exists for an essential worker's dwelling, of this scale, at the site or that the business is viable. Therefore, it is considered that the harm identified is not outweighed by other material planning considerations. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies S1, S8, D1, D2, H4, H7, T1 and T2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).
2. In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the necessary financial contribution towards Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy has not been secured. As a result, the development would have an adverse impact on the European designated nature conservation sites, contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).
3. There has been no ecological information submitted in support of this application and the proposed works to the barn to convert it into a dwelling and how this could impact upon roosting bats (European Protected Species) if present. Therefore, the Local Planning Authority does not have certainty of the likely impacts to protected species nor any mitigation to avoid impacts. This could potentially lead to an offence of disturbing or destroying bats or their roost. The Local Planning Authority therefore cannot demonstrate its compliance with its statutory duties, including its biodiversity duty under s40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 and prevent wildlife crime under s17 Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies S1, S8 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

4. Land north of White Gates, School Road, Little Totham

The erection of a detached dwelling with associated car parking, and access to the property and landscaping.

Reasons for refusal:

1. The site is located outside of a defined settlement boundary, where policy constraints apply. The site is not safely linked to a settlement, and future occupants would be required to travel by car to access day to day services, facilities and employment opportunities. The site is considered to be rural, remote, and inaccessible, and the principle of development has been found to be unacceptable. The proposal has been found to be contrary to Policies S1, S2, S8, D1, D2, D3, H4, N1, N2, T1 and T2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), and the policies and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).
2. The site is considered to make a positive contribution to the rural character and appearance of the area. The proposal will significantly close the gap between the heritage asset, The White House, and the adjacent development, Whitegates, introducing additional residential development with associated domestic paraphernalia, that would urbanise the site, eroding, and materially altering, its rural character. The proposal has not considered the context within which it will sit and has been found to be contrary to Policies S1, S8, D1 and H4 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), the Maldon District Design Guide (2017), and the policies and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021). In accordance with Paragraph 134 of the Framework, "development that is not well designed should be refused."
3. The proposed development would interrupt a clear visual break between the neighbouring heritage asset, The White House, and the neighbouring modern development, White Gates. The presence would be strongly felt from the rear of the listed building because of the openness of the two sites and the position of the proposed house. The listed building's rural setting, of which the application site is part, and which complements its significance, would be encroached upon and would have a detrimental effect on the setting of The White House. The harm caused would be less than substantial and the degree of harm is likely to be low / moderate. The proposal has failed to demonstrate that it would present any public benefits that would outweigh the harm caused. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy D3 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017) and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).
4. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that an appropriate visibility splay in accordance with the current standards (Design Manual for Roads and Bridges) could be achieved at the proposed vehicular access. The proposal would therefore lead to a substandard access onto School Road, resulting in an unacceptable degree of hazard to all road users to the detriment of highway safety. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DM1 and DM3 contained within the County Highway Authority's Development Management Policies, adopted as County Council Supplementary Guidance in February 2011, Policy T2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), and the policies and guidance contained in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).
5. In the absence of a completed legal agreement pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the necessary financial contribution towards the Essex Coast Recreational disturbance Avoidance and Mitigation Strategy has not been secured. As a result, the development would have an adverse impact on the European designated nature conservation sites, contrary to Policies S1, D1, N1 and N2 of the Maldon District Local Development Plan (2017), and the policies and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (2021).

Read more

• Burnham Carnival 2023: Event saved thanks to 'generous sponsorship' from local caravan park owners
• Maldon District: Work begins on next phase of new homes at North Heybridge Garden Suburb
• The Emporium to close: Maldon to bid farewell to High Street favourite as owners retire after 30 years