Agenda and minutes

The Chairman of the Planning Committee (Councillor Fowler) read out the following statement:-

“I have been made aware that during the course of yesterday, Councillors Jeff Bray and Peter Harris, our colleagues on this Committee, informed the Chief Executive by formal notices to that effect, that they were resigning from the Conservative political group on Tendring District Council and that they were forming a new political group, namely the Tendring Residents’ Alliance Group.

One of the consequences of those actions is that Councillors Bray and Harris have ceased to be members of this Committee and this is why they are absent this evening. The Leader of the Conservative Group, Councillor Carlo Guglielmi, will notify the Chief Executive, as soon as he is able, of the names of their replacements and I look forward to welcoming those Councillors to the Planning Committee in due course. Thank you.”

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

There were no apologies for absence or substitutions submitted on this occasion.

To confirm and sign as a correct record, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday 24 October 2023.

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

RESOLVED that the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee, held on Tuesday 24 October 2023, be approved as a correct record and 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.

There were no declarations of interest submitted by Councillors.

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.

Proposed drop kerb with vehicular access along with driveway and parking.

The Committee heard that the application involved the installation of a lowered curb providing vehicular access and a driveway that included a parking space in front of the property. The Officers’ opinion was that the proposed development, subject to certain conditions, met acceptable standards in terms of design and aesthetics and was not expected to have any major adverse effects on residential amenities. Essex County Council Highways had been consulted regarding the application and had indicated that it complied with highway safety requirements, subject to the conditions as included in paragraph 8.2  of the officer report.

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 (CC) in respect of the application.

There were no updates circulated to Members on this application.

Steve McClaine, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of this application.

Retrospective application for a single storey rear extension to provide facilities for disabled person.

Members were told that the application had been brought to the Planning Committee as the building was owned by Tendring District Council.

The Committee heard that the application sought retrospective planning permission for the erection of a single storey rear extension measuring 3.8m in depth and 3.1m in height.

Members were made aware that the extension was sited to the rear of the house and was deemed by Officers to be of an acceptable size, scale and appearance with no significant adverse effects on the visual amenities of the area.

Officers also told the Committee that the single storey nature of the extension meant it posed no significant threat to overlooking or loss of privacy to the adjacent neighbouring dwellings. It had no significant impacts on the loss of light, which were so significant as to justify refusing planning permission.

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 and Building Control (JP-G) in respect of the application.

There were no updates circulated to Members for this application.

There were no public speakers for this application.

Proposed erection of one self-build dwelling (in lieu of Prior Approval for one dwelling, subject of application 22/00360/COUNOT for Barn B).

It was reported that the application had been referred to the Planning Committee as the proposed development would conflict with the requirements of the Development Plan, principally Policy SPL2 (Settlement Development Boundaries) of the Tendring District Local Plan 2013 – 2033 and Beyond Section 2 (adopted January 2022) being located outside of any defined settlement boundary and had an Officer recommendation of approval.

Members heard that, although the proposed dwelling would see an increase in height and slight increase in footprint in comparison to the development approved under prior approval 21/00360/COUNOT, due to its location and the existing vegetation and proposed landscaping, it was not considered to cause any harm to the visual or neighbouring amenities.

The Committee was informed that the Council’s Tree and Landscape Officer had raised no concerns, whilst sufficient parking and private space was provided, and Officers felt that there would not be significant harm to existing neighbouring amenities or ecology impacts. Essex Highways Authority had also raised no objections.

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 Unilateral Undertaking and Conditions.

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

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details on the rewording of the recommendation and replacement of the comparison table which is as follows:

“Recommendation under the Executive Summary

Part 2 of the recommendation should refer to the conditions which are 8.2 of the Officers report. The recommendation should read as follows:

Comparison Table

The comparison table below is to replace the comparison table under 6.17 of the Officers report. The changes are to the ridge and eaves height of the prior approval application and the eaves height of the current application. The changes are considered to be minor and do not alter the Officers assessment or recommendation. The table should read as follows:

Proposed retention of existing frontage and ground floor commercial unit, demolition of rear outbuildings and construction of a part two/part three storey building, to form 7no. one-bedroom self-contained units and 1no. studio self-contained unit and first floor commercial unit with associated cycle storage and refuse stores to rear.

 It was reported that this application was before the Planning Committee as it had been called in by Councillor I Henderson.

The Committee heard that the proposal was for the construction of a new part two/part three storey building to provide 8 units of residential accommodation and 1 additional commercial unit (ground floor commercial unit as well as the existing shopfront to be retained). The site was located within the settlement development boundary of Harwich and Dovercourt and the Dovercourt Conservation Area.

Members were told that the proposed scheme had been amended in line with extensive consultation with ECC Place Services Heritage Officers and was considered by Officers to be of a size, scale and design in keeping with the Conservation Area. Subject to conditions and mitigation there were no Officer concerns raised regarding the impact on the environment, neighbouring residential properties, the recently approved car park, area and the proposal was acceptable to Officers in regard to Highways and Parking impacts.

Members were reminded that the application had been previously before the Planning Committee in April 2022, for the same scheme. The Committee had approved the granting of planning permission subject to the completion of a legal agreement within six months relating to the following matters:

-       Financial Contribution towards RAMS

-       Open Space

-       Highway Contribution towards residents parking

The Committee was told that while the legal agreement had now been completed, the time period had exceeded the six-month deadline, and therefore the application had been returned before Members to renew the authority to issue planning permission. In addition, while the previous recommendation had secured a financial contribution towards Open Space this had since been reviewed and the Council’s Open Space team no longer required any such contribution given the local need and available facilities.

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.

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting to show the correct front page which the location of the application A.4 which was as follows:-

There were no public speakers on this application.