Agenda item

Subject to the required notice being given, members of the public can ask questions of the Leader of the Council, Portfolio Holders or Chairmen of Committees.

The Chairman shall determine the number of questions to be tabled at a particular meeting in order to limit the time for questions and answers to half an hour.

One question has been received, on notice, from a member of the public and is attached to this agenda.

The Council had received a question from a member of the public in relation to disruption caused to local residents by construction sites.

Notice of the question had been given in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10.1.

Question

From Mrs Marguerite Kramer to Councillor Giles Watling, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regeneration:

“Bearing in mind the problems for residents associated with infill brownfield development sites in residential areas, such as excessive noise, dust, pollution, toxic dust from breeze block cutting, diesel fumes, over-looking from flats,  and the potential strain on the local infra-structure:  is it reasonable for Tendring District Council  to approve such development, which may not be implemented  in accordance with the national Construction Code of Practice and national legislation, thus causing harm to  local residents, who  lose their legal right to the peaceful enjoyment of their property, both during and sometimes after construction (where over-looking takes place)?”

Councillor Watling responded as follows:

“Thank you Mrs Kramer for your question. I do not think that there is one person in this Chamber who would disagree that it can be terribly distressing to have building works going on right next to you. I’ve experienced it and Councillor Turner is going through it right now. But I have to speak as the Portfolio Holder for Planning and, of course, it is not in my remit to comment on individual cases and it is not for me, of course, to influence any decisions made. Those are for the Planning Committee and the Planning department but we all sympathise with you on this.

The Planning department receives many applications for land that is adjacent to other properties and existing development. In the determination of each application the proximity of the proposed development and the long-term impact on neighbouring properties is taken into account. This would include the long-term impact of any over-looking once the development is complete. However, reasonable separation distances have to be taken into account as well and it is unlikely for a development to be refused if the degree of over-looking is not considered to be harmful. As local infrastructure is an important consideration, in-fill sites often locate new development in areas where infrastructure is extant. Planning permission can not be reasonably refused where there are no valid planning grounds to do so. In some cases an Officer or Appeal Inspector will add planning conditions to a decision that are considered reasonable to assist in controlling the manner in which the development is carried out. Conditions added to planning applications sometimes include the parking of vehicles for site operators and visitors, the unloading of plant and materials, the storage of plant and materials during construction and wheel washing facilities with major developments.

The rights of neighbouring development are also protected by statutory powers given to local authorities to deal with noise, dust, pollution and fumes. If a development is causing you statutory nuisance, under the terms of those powers in place then action can be taken to stop works whilst any remediation measures are put in place. Other national legislation of safe working by other public bodies add additional protection for those working on-site and at adjoining properties. With a number of protections in place for development to be carried out in a manner that does not cause a statutory nuisance it would not be reasonable to refuse planning permission at a site when it all other respects it should be granted for development.

I sincerely hope that the development which has caused you problems will soon be completed and you can revert to a peaceful life. I understand that you have some issues and that an Environmental Health Officer has intervened and I believe that a couple of instances have been resolved. I hope you have no more.”