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

There were no apologies for absence submitted nor substitutions on this occasion.

To confirm and sign as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday, 4 February 2025.

It was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor White and:-

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday 4 February 2025, be approved as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

Councillors are invited to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests, Other Registerable Interests of Non-Registerable Interests, and the nature of it, in relation to any item on the agenda.

In relation to Agenda Item 5 (report A.1 – Planning Application 24/01890/FUL – Land at High Street Car Park, Carnarvon Road, Clacton-on-Sea), Councillors Alexander and Smith both declared an Interest and both informed the Committee that they would withdraw from the meeting and leave the room whilst the Committee deliberated on this application and reached its decision.

In relation to Agenda Item 6 (report A.2 – Planning Application 24/00937/FUL – Elmtree Garage, Colchester Road, Elmstead), Councillor Wiggins declared for the public record that she was one of the local Ward Members. Councillor Wiggins stated that she was not pre-determined on this application and she therefore would remain in the meeting and take part in the deliberations and decision making.

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 no such Questions on Notice submitted by Councillors on this occasion.

Demolition of existing multi-story car park and clearance of site. Construction of replacement multi-story car park, 28no. residential (Class C3) apartments, and 5no. flexible units (Class E, F1, F2 and related Sui Generis uses).

Earlier on in the meeting, as detailed under Minute 56 above, Councillors Alexander and Smith had both declared an Interest in this application. They thereupon withdrew from the meeting and left the room whilst the Committee deliberated on this application and reached its decision.

Members were told that this application was before the Planning Committee on the basis that the applicant and owner of the site was Tendring District Council.

Officers made Members aware that the application sought the demolition of the existing multi-story car park and all other structures, to be replaced by a new multi-story car park providing 301 spaces, the erection of 28 affordable residential units and the erection of 1,330sqm of flexible commercial floorspace. Given that the site fell within the Settlement Development Boundary for Clacton-on-Sea, and was also an area prioritised for regeneration, the principle of development was acceptable. The proposed commercial uses might not necessarily be main town centre uses, but Officers believed that they would still be a boost to the commercial offering in the surrounding area.

The Committee was informed that Officers considered that the design, scale and layout was an acceptable response to the character and appearance of the area, and whilst there would be a degree of harm to the amenities of Number 39 Carnarvon Road, on balance that was not considered so significant that it warranted recommending a refusal. The residential units all met the technical housing space standards and provided for enough private amenity space, and Essex Highways Authority had raised no objections subject to conditions. The parking provision was also considered to be of an acceptable level.

Members were made aware that the proposed development would result in the loss of a Copper Beech tree, however, whilst unfortunate it would not have been feasible to retain it without significant revisions to the wider scheme. Furthermore, the proposed development included a significant increase of soft landscaping, and therefore on balance the wider benefits of the scheme were considered to outweigh the harm of the loss of that tree.

The Committee was also told that taking all the above into consideration, Officers had concluded that, whilst there were some minor harms as a result of the development, they were significantly outweighed by the benefits the scheme would generate.

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 subject to a Section 106 legal agreement.

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

There was no update circulated to Members prior to the meeting in relation to this application.

Mike Carran, representing the applicant, spoke in support of this application.

Demolition of existing buildings, removal of existing canopy, pump islands and underground tanks. Construction of new sales building with ‘Food to Go’ offer and ATM, installation of new canopy, pump islands and forecourt, installation of 2 x 60KL underground fuel tanks, creation of new Electric Vehicle Charging (EVC) hub and associated infrastructure, jet wash bays and associated plant room, bin store, car parking, car care facilities and all other associated works.

Earlier on in the meeting, as detailed under Minute 56 above, Councillor Wiggins had declared for the public record that she was one of the local Ward Members. Councillor Wiggins had also stated that she was not pre-determined on this application. She therefore remained in the meeting and took part in the deliberations and decision making.

The Committee heard that this application was before Members as the application had been called in by Councillor Scott due to his perceived impact of the proposals on traffic, noise and light pollution.

Members were told that the application sought full planning permission for the “Demolition of existing buildings, removal of existing canopy, pump islands and underground tanks. Construction of new sales building with ‘Food to Go’ offer and ATM, installation of new canopy, pump islands and forecourt, installation of 2 x 60 KL underground fuel tanks, creation of new Electric Vehicle Charging (EVC) hub and associated infrastructure, jet wash bays and associated plant room, bin store, car parking, car care facilities and all other associated works.”

Officers told Members that the existing commercial building (office/storage), sales building and forecourt would be demolished and replaced by a larger sales building and forecourt. The new forecourt would provide refuelling for 16 vehicles. The new sales building would be located along the northern boundary of the site with a GIA of 380sqm, larger than the 289sqm. The sales area would provide two new ‘Food to Go’ uses including a bakery and a hot food takeaway. It would also feature staff area, three customer toilets and a new ATM and pay at night window.

The proposed EVC hub would be comprised of eight bays with canopies above located along the western boundary with a height of 2.8m. A new canopy would also cover the existing fuel pumps in the same location at the existing but covering a larger area. That would be a similar height to the existing.

Further, the Committee was told that new customer car parking of 15 spaces and 1 accessible bay, four new jet wash bays, new underground fuel tanks and associated infrastructure were all proposed.

Members also heard that the proposed development was considered by Officers to be an upgrade of existing facilities in accordance with the existing use on site.

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 (OA) in respect of the application.

An Officer Update Sheet had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting which covered the following matters:-

“Environment Agency – Additional Consultee Response 24.01.2025 – Holding objection removed

“We have reviewed the documents as submitted and we consider that planning permission could be granted to the proposed development as submitted if the following planning conditions are included as set out below. Without these conditions, the proposed development on this site  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Extension to the clubhouse to accommodate entrance lobby and enclosed race officer box for starting and managing dinghy races.

The Committee heard that this application was before Members as Tendring District Council was the landowner.

It was reported that the application sought full planning permission for a small extension to the sailing club clubhouse to accommodate an entrance lobby and race officer box.

Members were told that the site was located within the settlement development boundary, within Clacton Greensward Safeguarded Open Space and within Flood Zone 2.

The Committee was informed that the proposed development was not considered by Officers to cause any material harm to visual or residential amenity, highway safety, biodiversity, or flood risk.

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 Head of Planning & Building Control in respect of the application.

An Officer Update Sheet had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting setting out changes to the Approved Plans Condition as follows:-

“Addition of two plans; existing and proposed north western elevation and existing and proposed south western elevation and the addition of the ‘North Eastern and South Eastern’ as shown below:

1. COMPLIANCE: APPROVED PLANS & DOCUMENTS

CONDITION: The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the drawings/documents listed below and/or such other drawings/documents as may be approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing pursuant to other conditions of this permission or such drawings/documents as may subsequently be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority as a non-material amendment following an application in that regard.

- Existing and Proposed North Eastern Elevation – Received 26.11.2024

- Existing and Proposed South Eastern Elevation – Received 26.11.2024

- Proposed Floor Plan – Received 26.11.2024

- Existing and proposed North Western elevation – Received 26 February 2026

- Existing and proposed South Western elevation – received 26 February 2026

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper phased planning of the development.”

There were no public speakers on this occasion.

There were no questions from the Committee to Officers on this occasion.

It was moved by Councillor Alexander, seconded by Councillor Wiggins and unanimously:-

RESOLVED that:-

1)    the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as stated at paragraph 10.2, and subject to the variation to the wording of Condition 1 (as detailed in the Update Sheet), or varied as is necessary to ensure the wording is enforceable, precise, and reasonable in all other respects, including appropriate updates, so long as the principle of the conditions as referenced is retained; and

2)    the sending of any informative notes to the applicant as may be deemed necessary.

Installation of 2no. CCTV columns, cameras and ancillary equipment as part of Clacton-on-Sea Safer Streets Scheme.

Members were told that this application was before the Committee as Tendring District Council was the landowner and applicant.

Members were reminded that the application sought full planning permission for the erection of 2no. CCTV and supporting columns on the back edge of the public footway, along the Upper Promenade, off Marine Parade West, Clacton-on-Sea.

Officers made Members aware that the application proposed two 9-metre-high column poles, which included the 1-metre-high swan neck adaptor and dome camera fitted to the top providing a 360-degree view along Marine Parade West and into Alton Road and the second positioned to look down Penfold Road. Both were supplemented by a proposed fixed camera giving a 180 degree view up Alton Road from its junction with Marine Parade West and Penfold Road and its junction with Marine Parade West.

Members were informed that the proposed columns were of a similar height and appearance as existing street light columns and would be viewed in the context of the existing tall lighting columns. The development would not appear prominent, out of character or visually harmful within the street scene.

Furthermore, the CCTV columns, as identified by the Council’s heritage consultants, would have some harm in terms of ‘less than substantial’ harm upon the significance and setting of the historic lampposts, however, the public benefit for the installation of the CCTV cameras to provide security in public areas was considered to outweigh that level of harm and the proposed development was considered to preserve the character and appearance of the Clacton Seafront Conservation Area.

Members heard that the proposed development formed part of the Safer Streets Programme aiming to combat place-based crime through situational crime prevention. The proposed were supported by the Office of the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner by provision of funding to deliver the intended works.

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 (OA) in respect of the application.

There had been no updates circulated to Members prior to the meeting in relation to this application.

Andrew White, representing the applicant, spoke in favour of the application.

The Committee is requested to consider passing the following resolution:-

“That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Agenda Item 10 on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 6a and 6b of Part 1 of Schedule 12A, as amended, of the Act.”

It was moved by Councillor Wiggins, seconded by Councillor Everett and:-

RESOLVED that, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of Agenda Item 10 on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 6a and 6b of Part 1 of Schedule 12A, as amended, of the Act.

To confirm and sign as a correct record the exempt minute of the meeting of the Committee held on Tuesday, 3 December 2024.

It was moved by Councillor Goldman, seconded by Councillor Alexander and:-

RESOLVED that the Exempt Minute of the meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday, 3 December 2024, be approved as a correct record and be signed by the Chairman.

NOTE: Councillors Everett and Smith did not vote because they had not been present when the matter was originally heard.