Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision Site visit made on 28 April 2025 by G Dring BA (Hons) MA MRTPI MAUDE an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State Decision date: 04 June 2025 Costs application in relation to Appeal Ref: APP/D1590/W/24/3352206 Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA • The application is made under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, sections 78, 322 and Schedule 6, and the Local Government Act 1972, section 250(5). • The application is made by Mr Stilwell, Belle Vue Motors for a full award of costs against Southend- on-Sea Borough Council. • The appeal was against the refusal of planning permission to erect four storey building comprising of commercial units on the ground floor and 8no. self-contained flats to first, second and third floors, with associated amenity space, landscaping, bike and refuse store and car parking, with vehicle access from Chase Road. Elevation changes to the shop front of the existing separate two storey commercial building. Decision 1. The application for an award of costs is refused. Reasons 2. Parties in planning appeals normally meet their own expenses.

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision However, the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) advises that costs may be awarded against a party who has behaved unreasonably and thereby caused the party applying for costs to incur unnecessary or wasted expense in the appeal process. 3. The applicant contends that the Development Control Committee (DCC) when identifying areas of harm, on reaching a different conclusion to that identified in the Committee Report (CR), did not weigh the harm identified against the public benefits of the proposal, as required due to the Council’s current housing land supply position. 4. The Council state that members of the DCC were aware of the housing land supply position, given it is specifically referred to in the CR and that the Case Officer identified the requirement for an appropriate balancing exercise, considering the benefits of the proposal against any such harm, when the appeal proposal was introduced at the meeting. The Council also refer to one Member who referred to the housing need in the city and assert that this acknowledged the public benefit of housing provision. 5. Members are not beholden to accepting the advice of their officers, although, there must be legitimate and clear reasons for doing so.

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision I find from the transcript that there was clear discussion about the effects of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area and how views of Members differed to that set out in the CR. Matters of design along with the effects on character and appearance are subject to planning judgement and I find that the DCC were entitled to reach a https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision I find from the transcript that there was clear discussion about the effects of the proposal on the character and appearance of the area and how views of Members differed to that set out in the CR. Matters of design along with the effects on character and appearance are subject to planning judgement and I find that the DCC were entitled to reach a https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision Costs Decision APP/D1590/W/24/3352206 decision that was contrary to the CR, which recommended approval of planning permission subject to conditions 6. I accept that the CR that was considered by the DCC included information about the fact that the Local Planning Authority could not demonstrate a deliverable five- year supply of housing sites. Whilst only a brief reference to housing provision was identified in the transcript of the DCC provided, it appeared that the benefit of housing was considered by Members, albeit I find that the balancing exercise could have been more clearly set out. Nevertheless, the Council’s reason for refusal clearly identifies that ‘the adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal, including the provision of housing, when considered against the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework as a whole’. This indicates that the balancing exercise had been carried out. 7. The Council’s statement of case adds flesh to this matter and identifies that in the Council’s view, the public benefits of the scheme, including the provision of only 8 dwellings, does not outweigh the harm identified. 8.

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — Costs Decision In my judgement, although I accept that the balancing exercise could have been more clearly set out, the evidence supports the claim made by the Council that housing land supply matters and the relevant balancing exercise was carried out by members of the DCC, when it reached its decision to refuse planning permission. Based on the further information provided in the Council’s statement of case, I do not consider that the appeal would have been avoided, even if the DCC was clearer in its explanation of its application of the balancing exercise. 9. Therefore, unreasonable behaviour resulting in unnecessary or wasted expense has not occurred and an award of costs is not warranted.

Land At 444 - 456 Southchurch Road, Southend-on-Sea , Essex, SS1 2QA — Southend-on-Sea City Council — G Dring INSPECTOR https://www.gov.uk/planning-inspectorate 2