Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies were received from Councillor Fowler with no substitute.

To confirm and sign as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday, 26^th October 2021.

It was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Baker and RESOLVED that the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 26 October 2021 be approved as a correct record subject to following alterations:

1.    Minute 156, Councillor Baker’s declaration of interest should read ‘…due to formerly being a Ward Member of the adjacent Ward’.

2.    Minute 162, the reasons for refusal of application 21/00208/FUL - Land Rear of Strangers Way, Church Road, Brightlingsea were as follows:-

a.    Contrary to ‘Backland Development’ Policies HG13 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy SP7 of the emerging Local Plan by reason of it introducing a long and narrow driveway access in a location close to the side elevation and rear garden of Strangers Way which would result in increased noise, vehicular movements and light pollution to the neighbouring property; and

b.    Contrary to Policy SP7 of the emerging Local Plan in that it would introduce a cramped form of development which would be out of character with the surrounding area, which is predominately characterised by detached dwellings with large rear gardens.

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.

Councillor Baker declared a personal interest in planning application A.1 21/00650/OUT – LAND EAST OF BROMLEY ROAD LAWFORD CO11 2HS. He stated that he was predetermined and that therefore, he would not participate in the Committee’s deliberations and decision making on this application.

Councillor Coley, who was present in the public gallery, declared a personal interest in planning application A.1 21/00650/OUT – LAND EAST OF BROMLEY ROAD LAWFORD CO11 2HS due to his being both a Director and the Chairman of the Lawford Housing Enterprise Trust.

Councillor G V Guglielmi, who was also present in the public gallery, also declared a personal interest in planning application A.1 21/00650/OUT – LAND EAST OF BROMLEY ROAD LAWFORD CO11 2HS due to his being a Director of the Lawford Housing Enterprise Trust.

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.

There were none on this occasion.

Outline planning permission (all matters apart from access - reserved) was granted on 13th April 2017 for a mixed development of 360 houses and community facilities/open space on 22.76ha of land to the south of Lawford, under application ref. 15/00876/OUT. In 2020, there was a Section 73 approval under planning ref. 20/00458/OUT, to vary condition 9 of 15/00876/OUT relating to the delivery requirement of the spine road and access to Long Road before the 201st occupation.

The application also includes bringing forward the delivery of a mini roundabout at the junction of Wignall Street and Bromley Road to the 180th occupation, as opposed to the 200th occupation as presently required.

In accordance with Members’ request, the current submission has been brought to Planning Committee seeking consent with regard to the delaying the provision of access onto Long Road from the 261st occupation on site (73% of the total dwellings on site) to the 360 st occupation on site (99% of the total dwellings on site).

Earlier in the meeting, Councillor Baker had declared a personal interest in this planning application. He had declared that he was predetermined and therefore did not participate in the Committee’s deliberations and decision making on this application.

Earlier in the meeting Councillor Coley, present in the public gallery, had declared a personal interest in this planning application due to his being both a Director and the Chairman of the Lawford Housing Enterprise Trust.

Earlier in the meeting Councillor G V Guglielmi, present in the public gallery, had also declared a personal interest in this planning application due to his being the Director and Chairman of the Lawford Housing Enterprise Trust.

The Committee was reminded that outline planning permission (all matters apart from access - reserved) had been granted on 13th April 2017 for a mixed development of 360 houses and community facilities/open space on 22.76ha of land to the south of Lawford, under application ref. 15/00876/OUT. In 2020, there had been subsequently a Section 73 approval under planning reference 20/00458/OUT, to vary condition 9 of 15/00876/OUT relating to the delivery requirement of the spine road and access to Long Road before the 201st occupation. That application had also included bringing forward the delivery of a mini roundabout at the junction of Wignall Street and Bromley Road to the 180th occupation, as opposed to the 200th occupation as then required.

In accordance with Members’ previous request, the current submission had been brought to the Planning Committee seeking its consent with regard to  delaying the provision of access onto Long Road from the 261st occupation on site (73% of the total dwellings on site) to the 360th  occupation on site (99% of the total dwellings on site).

Members were aware that the site lay outside the defined settlement boundary of the saved Local Plan but within the settlement boundary of the emerging Local Plan. The principle of residential development had been established through the granting of outline planning permission, which had also established the position of the access.

In the opinion of Officers the detailed plans complied with the outline requirements and were considered acceptable with no significant material harm to visual or residential amenity, or highway safety.

Members were advised that a legal agreement, ‘Deed of Variation’ was required for this application in order to ensure the new outline approval linked into the original Section 106 Agreement.

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 Manager (TF) in respect of the application.

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of an amendment proposed to Condition 5 as follows:

“5.        Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority, the Construction Management for Phase 1 and Phase 2 should be implemented in accordance with the details approved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 169.

The application has been called in by Councillor Anne Davis.

The proposal is for the demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of four detached bungalows with associated parking and landscaping. It is also proposed to increase the width of the main access way from Turpins Lane. The site is located within the defined Settlement Development Boundary of Frinton-on-Sea and is already considered to be a backland site.

The Chairman informed the Committee that this item had been deferred at the request of the Applicant.

The Committee noted the forgoing.

The application has been referred to the Planning Committee at the call-in request of Councillor Anne Davis, due to concerns over the potential for the proposal to adversely affect the living conditions of neighbouring residents, some of whom are elderly, by virtue of noise and disturbance. Furthermore, she is concerned that fencing around the site is not in keeping with the character and appearance of the area, and there is insufficient parking for the number of residents and staff proposed.

It was reported that this application had been referred to the Planning Committee at the request of Councillor Anne Davis, due to her stated concerns over the potential, in her opinion for the proposal to adversely affect the living conditions of neighbouring residents, some of whom were elderly, by virtue of noise and disturbance. Furthermore, Councillor Davis had stated that she was concerned that the fencing around the site was not in keeping with the character and appearance of the area, and that there was insufficient parking for the number of residents and staff proposed.

Members were made aware that Frinton and Walton Town Council had also objected to the proposal, due to its concern over land use conflict with adjacent housing. Essex County Council however supported the application, and no other third party representations had been received prior to the publication of the Officer report.

The Committee was informed that the proposal was located within the Settlement Development Boundary and was felt by Officers to be acceptable in principle, in accordance with the policies of the development plan, and a lawful use certificate had previously been granted for a more intensive C2 Residential Institution use of the site. Officers considered that some weight should also be given to the policy compliant reuse of a vacant and underused site.

Members were assured that Officers had fully assessed the proposal having regard to the provisions of the development plan and site specific circumstance. Officers had found that the proposal would not have any unacceptable adverse effect on the living conditions of neighbours, or result in demonstrable harm to highway safety or the character and appearance of the area, and that approval was therefore recommended.

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 (JJ) in respect of the application.

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of further third party representations and the comments of the Officers in response thereto.

Karen Carter, the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Councillor Anne Davis, the local Ward Member, spoke against the application.

This application is before Members as Tendring District Council is the land owner.

The proposal involves the formation of a number of ponds within the John Weston Nature Reserve in order to provide additional feeding opportunities for waders and increase the biodiversity of the overall site. The nature reserve forms part of ‘Hamford Water’.

This application was before Members as Tendring District Council was the land owner.

Members were made aware that the proposal involved the formation of a number of ponds within the John Weston Nature Reserve in order to provide additional feeding opportunities for waders and to increase the biodiversity of the overall site. The nature reserve formed part of ‘Hamford Water’.

The proposal was considered by Officers to be acceptable and there had been no objections received from Essex County Council’s Archaeology or Ecology departments or from Natural England, subject to their recommended conditions to ensure that biodiversity mitigation and enhancement measures were secured.

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 (JJ) in respect of the application.

Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor Placey and unanimously RESOLVED that the Assistant Director (Planning) (or equivalent authorised officer) be authorised to grant planning permission for the development, subject to the following:

Conditions and Reasons:

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason - To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings: 2008/00 Site Layout Plan 2008/02A Proposed Elevations and Floor Plans

Reason – For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. Prior to commencement of the development hereby approved, a construction environmental management plan for biodiversity (CEMP: Biodiversity) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The CEMP (Biodiversity) shall include the following:

a) Risk assessment of potentially damaging construction activities.

b) Identification of “biodiversity protection zones”.

c) Practical measures (both physical measures and sensitive working practices) to avoid or reduce impacts during construction (may be provided as a set of method statements).

d) The location and timing of sensitive works to avoid harm to biodiversity features.

e) The times during construction when specialist ecologists need to be present on site to oversee works.

f) Responsible persons and lines of communication.

g) The role and responsibilities on site of an ecological clerk of works (ECoW) or similarly competent person.

h) Use of protective fences, exclusion barriers and warning signs.

The approved CEMP shall be adhered to and implemented throughout the construction period strictly in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To conserve protected and priority species and allow the Local Planning Authority to discharge its duties under the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and s40 of the NERC Act 2006 (Priority habitats & species).

4.    No development or preliminary groundworks  ...  view the full minutes text for item 172.

This is an application for a Non-Material Amendment (NMA). As the Council is the applicant, and in accordance with our Constitution, the application is referred to Planning Committee for determination.

The description of development above details the proposed changes to the original planning permission. 21/00871/FUL approved ‘Proposed business units, covered market, community garden, public WCs and associated public realm’ on 9 th July 2021 in accordance with Members recommendation at Planning Committee on 6 th July 2021 (report Appended for Members’ assistance).

It was reported that this was an application for a Non-Material Amendment (NMA). As the Council was the applicant, and in accordance with the Council’s Constitution, the application had been referred to the Planning Committee for its determination.

Members were informed that this application sought changes to the original planning permission (21/00871/FUL -   ‘Proposed business units, covered market, community garden, public WCs and associated public realm’) granted on 9th July 2021 in accordance with the Planning Committee’s decision on 6th July 2021.

The Committee was advised that Section 96A of the Town and County Planning Act 1990 stated that in deciding whether a change was material, a Local Planning Authority must have regard to the effect of the change on the planning permission as originally granted. The Planning Practice Guidance confirmed that there was no statutory definition of ‘non-material’. It would be dependent on the context of the overall scheme – an amendment that was non-material in one context may be material in another. The local planning authority must be satisfied that the amendment sought was non-material in order to grant such an application.

The key test as to the acceptability of an NMA application was whether the change was material to any development plan policy. If the answer was 'no', as in this case, three further tests should be applied namely:

“1. Is the proposed change significant in terms of its scale, in relation to the original approval?

2. Would the proposed change result in a detrimental impact either visually or in terms of amenity?

3. Would the interests of any third party or body who participated in, or were informed of, the original decision be disadvantaged in any way?”

Members were informed that it was considered that the answer to all three tests above was no and that the application was therefore recommended by Officers 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.

Councillor Placey had not previously participated in the Committee’s site visits to this location and therefore she did not participate in the Committee’s deliberations and decision making on this application.

Following discussion by the Committee, it was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Baker and unanimously RESOLVED that the Assistant Director (Planning) (or equivalent authorised officer) be authorised to grant planning permission for the development, subject to the following:

Conditions and Reasons:

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

- 182_HAT_PL_100 P2 (Block Plan)

- 182_HAT_PL_110 P1 (Proposed Ground Floor Plan)

- 182_HAT_PL_111 P1 (Proposed First Floor and Roof Plan)

- 182_HAT_PL_120 P1 (Proposed Streetscene)

- 182_HAT_PL_121 P1 (Proposed East and South Elevations)

- 182_HAT_PL_122 P1 (Proposed West and North Elevations)

- 182_HAT_PL_130 P1 (Proposed Sections)

Reason - For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.