Town Planner Pro
Search appeal decisions

Planning appeal decision

Dismissed19 September 20253367409

Glebe Meadow , Adjacent King Georges Field , Station Road Southminster , Essex, CM0 7GZ

‘Application for planning permission to create 36 no. one, two, three and four bedroom houses and maisonettes, associated landscaping, roads, parking and drainage infrastructure, plus a new area of public open space and the addition of a footway to the east side of Vicarage Court’

Authority
Maldon District Council
Appeal type
major · Planning Appeal
Procedure
Hearing
Development
residential · Major dwellings
Inspector
Chamberlain G

Main issues, as the Inspector framed them

  • Whether the appeal site is an appropriate location for the proposed development, with reference to the spatial strategy in the Local Plan (LDP)
  • The effect of the proposed footway on i) the character and appearance of the area and ii) the living conditions of existing residents
  • Whether the proposed development would provide appropriate living conditions for future occupants, with reference to noise, disturbance and privacy
  • Whether the proposed development would provide an adequate housing mix
  • Whether the proposed development would adequately mitigate the effect on reptiles
  • The effect of the proposed development on early years education

What decided it

The cumulative and unresolved harms — to the character of Vicarage Court, the living conditions of existing and future occupants, and the failure to secure enforceable mitigation for protected reptiles — were found to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the housing and other benefits, including those arising from the housing land supply shortfall.

The benefits of housing delivery (including addressing a serious 2.7-year housing land supply shortfall), affordable housing and other modest benefits were significantly and demonstrably outweighed by the harms to the character and appearance of Vicarage Court, living conditions of existing and future occupants, housing mix, and unmitigated harm to protected reptiles.

Framework references: 11, 58, 200

Plan policies cited: Policy S1, Policy S8, Policy D1, Policy H4, Policy H2, Policy I1

The main issues and the deciding factor are read from the published letter by Town Planner Pro; the letter itself is the record. Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Research, not advice.

In the app this decision sits on the map beside every other appeal around it, with the full reasoning summary, the letter held on file, and the case law it applies.