Agenda and minutes

Venue: The meeting will be held remotely in accordance with the provisions of The Local Authorities and Police and Crime Panels (Coronavirus) (Flexibility of Local Authority and Police and Crime Panel Meeti

Contact: Emma Haward or Ian Ford  01255686007 or 01255686584

Items
No. Item

27.

Apologies for Absence and Substitutions

The Committee is asked to note any apologies for absence and substitutions received from Members.

Minutes:

There were none.

 

28.

Minutes of the Last Meeting pdf icon PDF 168 KB

To confirm and sign as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on

Minutes:

Under minutes 21, (paragraph 2) and 23 (paragraph 1), Councillor Harris’ declaration was incorrectly recorded, Councillor Harris had declared a personal interest in Planning Application 19/01706 Land South West of Horsley Cross Roundabout due to being a Ward Member and Parish Councillor of the neighbouring ward. The application was to be brought back to ‘Committee’ rather than the ‘Authority’.

 

It was moved by Councillor Alexander and seconded by Councillor Bray and:-

 

RESOLVED that, subject to the changes outlined above, the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on Tuesday 14 July 2020 be approved as a correct record.

 

29.

Declarations of Interest

Councillors are invited to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests or Personal Interest, and the nature of it, in relation to any item on the agenda.

 

Minutes:

Councillor Bray declared a personal interest in Planning Application 20/00202/FUL Brick Barn Residential Care Home, 106 Walton Road, Kirby-Le-Soken, Frinton-on-Sea CO13 0DB due to being a member of Frinton and Walton Town Council however, he was not predisposed.

 

Councillor Alexander declared a personal interest in Planning Applications 20/00084/FUL Martello Tower F, Marine Parade West, Clacton-on-Sea CO15 1LS and 20/00520/FUL 12 Penfold Road, Clacton-on-Sea CO15 1JN due to being a Ward Member for both applications however, he was not predisposed.

 

Councillor Scott declared a personal interest in Planning Application 19/01856/FUL Alresford Hall, Ford Lane, Alresford CO7 8AY due to being a Ward Member.

 

Councillor Land declared a personal interest in Planning Application 19/01157/FUL Land Adjacent Little Thatch, Mill Lane, Thorpe-Le-Soken CO16 0ED due to being  the Ward Member and, in addition he was the Chairman of Thorpe Parish Council.

 

30.

Questions on Notice pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 38

Subject to providing two working days’ notice, a Member of the Committee may ask the Chairman of the Committee a question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the Tendring District and which falls within the terms of reference of the Committee.

Minutes:

There were no questions on this occasion.

 

31.

A.1 PLANNING APPLICATION - 19/01856/FUL - ALRESFORD HALL, FORD LANE, ALRESFORD CO7 8AY pdf icon PDF 433 KB

The development applied for relates to the construction of a children’s adventure play area on the application site with associated new access from the B1027, car parking area and hard/soft landscaping. The development would comprise of; a main building accommodating indoor play, café and ticketing area, various children play zones, a maze and a woodland walk trail.

Minutes:

Councillor Scott had earlier declared a personal interest in Planning Application 19/01856/FUL Alresford Hall, Ford Lane, Alresford CO7 8AY due to being a Ward Member.

 

The Committee was informed that the development applied for related to the construction of a children’s adventure play area on the application site with associated new access from the B1027, car parking area and hard/soft landscaping. The development comprised of: a main building accommodating indoor play, café and ticketing area, various children play zones, a maze and a woodland walk trail.

 

The Committee was further informed that the application site encompassed land which hosted the former Whistleberry Nursery (to the rear and east of Alresford Hall). Alresford Hall (Grade II Listed) and its grounds are situated approximately 1.6 km south of Alresford and 10 kilometres south-east of Colchester. The site was located outside of the defined settlement boundary for Alresford in both the saved and emerging local plan and within a coastal protection belt within the saved plan only.

 

Taking into consideration the three strands of sustainability namely economic, social and environmental considerations the development was considered by Officers to represent a sustainable development by: creating local job opportunities, attracting additional visitors to the District, promoting children’s interaction with nature, and retaining and strengthening existing landscaping and biodiversity enhancements.

 

The application and supporting documents/surveys had demonstrated that there would be no overriding harm which could not be mitigated in respect of heritage, landscape, ecology or highways considerations. The proposed development would reuse part of the estate which had been previously developed and would provide a unique visitor attraction within the District for families.

 

Subject to the recommended conditions within section 8.2 of this report, the proposal was considered by Officers to be acceptable with no material harm to visual or residential amenity, heritage assets, ecology interests or highway safety, and the application was therefore recommended for approval.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.

 

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Officer (ML) in respect of the application.

 

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of:

 

(a)      An amendment to Condition 2 (Approved Plans) to reflect correct ‘Access Arrangements Plan’ and Condition 18 (Shuttle Bus) to reflect ECC-Highway’s wording as follows:

 

2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans/documents:

- 663-100C

- 663-101B

- S01 Rev B

- S02 Rev C

- B01

- 2019-F-006-009

- Ground Floor Plan – Main Building

- Proposed Mezzanine & Roof Plan – Main Building

- Proposed North & East Elevations – Main Building

- Proposed South and West Elevations – Main Building

- Toilet/Changing Floor Plans and Elevations

 

Reason – For the avoidance of doubt.

 

18)  Within two years of the opening of the attraction; in year two a free shuttle minibus service; in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

32.

A.2 PLANNING APPLICATION - 20/00202/FUL - BRICK BARN RESIDENTIAL CARE HOME, 106 WALTON ROAD, KIRBY LE SOKEN, FRINTON ON SEA CO13 0DB pdf icon PDF 195 KB

The application relates to Brick Barn Residential Care Home located at 106 Walton Road within the Parish of Kirby-le-Soken. The site lies a short distance from the edge of the Kirby-le-Soken Settlement Development Boundary as defined within the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2007 but is fully within the extended Kirby-le-Soken Settlement Development Boundary as defined within the emerging Tendring District Local Plan 2013-2033 and Beyond Publication Draft (June 2017).

Minutes:

Councillor Bray had earlier declared a personal interest in Planning Application 20/00202/FUL Brick Barn Residential Care Home, 106 Walton Road, Kirby-Le-Soken, Frinton-on-Sea CO13 0DB due to being a member of Frinton and Walton Town Council however, he was not predisposed.

 

Members were informed that the application had been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Knowles due to her concerns with the perceived negative impact on neighbours from the proposed use and previous poor Care Quality Commission (CQC) reports.

 

The Committee was made aware that the application related to Brick Barn Residential Care Home located at 106 Walton Road within Kirby-le-Soken. The site lay a short distance from the edge of the Kirby-le-Soken Settlement Development Boundary as defined within the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2007 but was fully within the extended Kirby-le-Soken Settlement Development Boundary as defined within the emerging Tendring District Local Plan 2013-2033 and Beyond Publication Draft (June 2017).

 

The application sought full planning permission for the change of use of the existing Care Home (within use Class C2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 as amended) to a Hostel for the Homeless (a “sui generis” use meaning a use that did not fall within the categories defined with the Use Classes Order) including internal alterations reducing the current accommodation from 15 bedrooms to 9.

 

Members were advised that this application followed a previously refused application under planning application reference 19/01532/FUL for the proposed change of use from care home to HMO (House in Multiple Occupation) with no physical alterations. That application  had been refused due to the lack of  marketing information therefore failing to justify the loss of employment in line with the requirements of Saved Policy ER3 of the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2007. Since this previous application, it had come to light that the proposal would involve internal/physical alterations to the building and the use would in fact fall under the definition of a Hostel and not a HMO as previously considered by officers. The facility would be supported by 4 full time staff and 4 part time staff and therefore did not result in the loss of an employment use and did not require assessment under the provisions of Saved Policy ER3 of the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2007.

 

Given the current shortage of affordable homes in the District, it was felt that facilities such as this played a vital role in providing short term accommodation for sections of society, which was supported by national policy.

 

Officers stated that the site was located within easy walking distance of the local convenience store and post office, with other facilities and employment opportunities within the village. There were bus stops in close proximity to the site providing regular services to Walton, Frinton and Clacton, and also a service to Colchester. The sustainable location of the site was reflected in the Council's inclusion of the site within the extended settlement development boundary of the emerging Local Plan.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

33.

A.3 PLANNING APPLICATION - 20/00084/FUL - MARTELLO TOWER F, MARINE PARADE WEST, CLACTON ON SEA CO15 1LS pdf icon PDF 202 KB

The application relates to Martello Tower F which is located on Marine Parade West near the junction with Tower Road, Clacton on Sea. The building is a designated Scheduled Ancient Monument, a Grade II Listed Building and is also located within the Clacton Seafront Conservation Area.

Minutes:

Councillor Alexander had earlier declared a personal interest in Planning Application 20/00084/FUL Martello Tower F, Marine Parade West, Clacton-on-Sea CO15 due to being a Ward Member however, he was not predisposed.

 

Members were informed that this application was before the Planning Committee as the site was within the ownership of Tendring District Council.

 

It was reported that the application related to Martello Tower F which was located on Marine Parade West near the junction with Tower Road, Clacton-on-Sea. The building was a designated Scheduled Ancient Monument, a Grade II Listed Building and was also located within the Clacton Seafront Conservation Area.

 

The application sought full planning permission for the change of use of the building to a wedding venue and conference centre. The application only sought planning permission for the proposed use and did not propose any alterations to the building. Any future alterations to the building would be the subject of separate applications for planning permission, listed building consent and Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent (as required).

 

The Committee was informed that Historic England and Essex County Council Historic Environment had raised no objection to the change of use and supported the approach to find a new, sustainable and viable use for this important historic structure subject to full consideration of all proposed physical alterations to the building and its curtilage.

 

The Council’s Environmental Protection Team had also raised no objection subject to the submission and approval of a Noise Management Plan. This would deal with issues around amplified music and noise from extraction systems and potential disturbance from activities outside the building.

 

The site was located within a highly sustainable Town Centre location with plenty of on street parking and public transport links and Essex County Council Highways had raised no objection.

 

Officers felt that Martello Tower F was an important historic building and an important landmark that contributed to the character and appearance of the area. There was nothing to suggest that the proposed use would not represent a suitable and viable use which would help to safeguard the future of the building and ensure that its history, architecture and cultural significance are enjoyed by future generations. The application was therefore recommended by Officers for approval subject to appropriate conditions.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.

 

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Team Leader (SCE) in respect of the application.

 

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of:

 

(a)      An additional representation received:

Email of support received from Councillor Chris Griffiths (St James Ward).

 

(b)      Additional information provided by agent via email dated 11/08/2020 regarding the potential capacity of the venue which can be summarised as follows:

             The capacity will depend on when the use starts and whether the Covid-19 spacing arrangements are still in place.

•  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.

34.

A.4 PLANNING APPLICATION - 19/01157/FUL - LAND ADJACENT LITTLE THATCH, MILL LANE, THORPE LE SOKEN CO16 0ED pdf icon PDF 243 KB

The application seeks full planning permission for the erection of one dwelling accessed via Mill Lane.

Minutes:

Councillor Land had earlier declared a personal interest in Planning Application 19/01157/FUL Land Adjacent Little Thatch, Mill Lane, Thorpe-Le-Soken CO16 0ED due to being the Ward Member and , in addition, the Chairman of Thorpe Parish Council.

 

Members were informed that the application  had been referred to the Planning Committee by Councillor Land due to his concerns that the proposed dwelling would cause highway impacts and other traffic issues, a negative impact on neighbours,  and harm the Conservation Area, it was also located on a public right of way and it was within a confined space. Additional comments had been received by email from Councillor Land, dated 26th August relating to a polluted waterway.

 

Officers stated that the application sought full planning permission for the erection of one dwelling accessed via Mill Lane.

 

The application site was located within the defined Settlement Development Boundary for Thorpe Le Soken, as defined by the Saved Tendring District Local Plan 2007 and the Tendring District Local Plan 2013-2033 and Beyond Publication Draft (June 2017).

 

Members were reminded that  a previous application for this site, planning application reference 18/00781/FUL, had been refused by the Planning Committee on the following grounds: impact upon neighbouring amenities – Little Thatch and Mill Lodge; the proposal was contrary to Saved Policy EN6 Biodiversity and EN6a ‘Protected Species; and the impact upon the setting of the Listed Building, Mill Barn Farm. The application  had subsequently been taken to appeal and dismissed on 25 July 2019. However, the sole reason for dismissing the appeal had related to coastal habitats in that the proposal had failed to provide a RAMs contribution. In all other respects the appeal scheme  had been considered acceptable by the Planning Inspector and the reasons for refusal had not been upheld.

 

The Committee recalled that the current resubmitted application had been due to have been  determined on 19 September 2019. However,  the Chairman of the Committee had decided that it be deferred for later consideration as a consequence of a late consultation response from ECC Ecology seeking a Great Crested Newt Survey for this site. In spring 2020, a Great Crested Newt Survey  had been provided by the applicant, which concluded that great crested newts (GCN)  were likely to be absent from all surveyed ponds within 250m of the site. ECC Ecology  had been re-consulted on the submitted Great Crested Newt Survey and had raised no objections, subject to conditions relating to biodiversity enhancement.

 

In conclusion, the previous appeal (reference APP/P1560/W/18/3213632)  had been dismissed on the single issue of a lack of a Unilateral Undertaking (UU) to address a RAMS contribution. This application had addressed this, a UU had now been completed to address the RAMS contribution. The principle of residential development in this location was acceptable to officers and subject to conditions there was not considered to be any material visual harm, harm to neighbouring amenities, harm to ecology and biodiversity, harm to heritage assets or highway safety.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

35.

A.5 PLANNING APPLICATION - 20/00520/FUL - 12 PENFOLD ROAD, CLACTON ON SEA CO15 1JN pdf icon PDF 200 KB

Proposed change of use from dwelling (C3) to children's home (C2) for 2 children.

Minutes:

Councillor Alexander had earlier declared a personal interest in Planning Application 20/00520/FUL 12 Penfold Road, Clacton-on-Sea CO15 1JN due to being a Ward Member however, he was not predisposed.

 

Members were advised that the application was  before the Planning Committee as its approval would result in a proposed development which would conflict with the requirements of the Development Plan, principally Policy COM5 (Residential Institutional Uses) of the Tendring District Local Plan 2007.

 

It was reported that the site fell within a ‘Control of Residential Institutional Uses Area in Clacton and Frinton’, as defined on the adopted Local Plan Proposal Map. Within such areas the provision of new Residential Institutions  were not generally supported in recognition that concentrating such accommodation in small areas could lead to various problems, including the cumulative effect such developments  could have on the ‘image’ and tourism function of the resort concerned. Furthermore, such uses  could cause harm in terms of pressure on local medical and support services, the loss of visitor accommodation and an erosion of local character through the conversion of front gardens to forecourt parking.

 

Notwithstanding this policy position prescribed in Policy COM5 of the adopted Local Plan, Policy LP10 (Care, Independent Assisted Living) of the emerging Local Plan set out a more positive planning policy position in terms of providing support for care homes and extra care housing within settlement development boundaries. The emerging Plan did not seek to replicate the previous areas of control for Residential Institutional Uses.

 

The application proposed changing the existing four-bedroom domestic dwellinghouse (which had a Use defined as C3) to a property which used two of the available bedrooms to accommodate children between the ages of 7 and 15 who were under the care of Essex County Council (‘Looked After Children’).

 

Officers considered that by reason of the small-scale nature of this proposal, being to accommodate only two children, in a four bedroom dwelling house, that it would not materially conflict with the overall aims of policies which governed the provision of residential uses.  Further, the development would result in offering two place within the District – which currently had a very high proportion of children who  were placed outside the District due to the limited places available.  Placing children outside areas they  were familiar with could contribute to the breakdown of placements, a lack of continuity of support and a lack of educational provision. On balance, given the particular circumstances and small-scale nature of the proposals, it was considered by Officers that this application  could be supported.

 

The Committee had before it the published Officer report containing the key planning issues, relevant planning policies, planning history, any response from consultees, written representations received and a recommendation of approval.

 

At the meeting, an oral presentation was made by the Council’s Planning Team Leader (SCE) in respect of the application.

 

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of:

 

A further Consultation response received:

A consultation response had been received from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.