Proposed conversion of a coach house into a 2 bedroom residential dwelling.

Committee members were told that these applications were before Members as the proposal represented a departure from the Local Plan, proposing new residential development outside of the Tendring Settlement Development Boundary (SDB), as defined within the adopted Tendring District Local Plan 2013 to 2033 and Beyond.

Members were also told that these applications related to a single storey timber coach house within the setting of the Grade 2 listed Tendring Hall and likely having formed part of the former Tendring Hall Estate. The site was located on the northern side, at the eastern end of Long Lane, with the dwelling of Suffolk Barn immediately to the west and the dwelling of Hall Farm immediately to the north.

Committee members heard that the site lay outside of the defined SDB of Tendring. The applications were therefore contrary to the spatial strategy set out within the adopted Local Plan Section 1 Policy SP7 and Section 2 Policy SPL2. However, Local Plan Policy SPL2 did not preclude residential development outside of the defined boundary, but rather required careful consideration of the scale of the development in relation to the settlement hierarchy category, site-specific characteristics, and sustainability of the site.

Members were informed that under the site-specific merits of the case great weight was attributed to the conservation of the designated heritage assets. The coach house lay within the Tendring Conservation Area and within the setting of the listed building. In addition, villages were still under pressure to grow and some small-scale development which was sympathetic to the rural and often historic character of the settlement might help younger people to continue to live in the area, keep services viable and help bring balance to an ageing population.

Members also heard that the proposed two-bedroom dwelling would convert the existing coach house, ensuring its external appearance in terms of its form and use of materials remained the same. Officers were satisfied that existing services and facilities within or near Tendring would be capable of supporting the proposed development of one dwelling.

Officers told Members that, although the application site was outside of the defined settlement development boundary, the development would not result in any material harm in terms of scale, layout and design, heritage impact, residential amenities or highway safety, and was acceptable in all other regards.

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 (AP) in respect of the application.

An update sheet had been circulated to the Committee prior to the meeting with details of: “the Officer recommendation of approval remains unchanged, now with a completed unilateral undertaking for a financial contribution towards RAMS.”

There were no public speakers on this occasion. 

It was moved by Councillor Everett, seconded by Councillor Placey and unanimously:-

RESOLVED that:-

1)     on appropriate terms as summarised below and those as may be deemed necessary to the satisfaction of the Head of Planning and Building Control to secure the completion of a legal agreement under the provisions of section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 dealing with the following matters:

-       RAMS financial contribution of £156.76 for one dwelling toward recreational disturbance at the Hamford Water Special Protection Area, Special Area of Conservation and Ramsar site.

2)    the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the agreed section 106 agreement and conditions as stated at paragraphs 8.2 and 8.3 of the Officer report and the extended consultation for Amenities Society and Historic England and that no further issues are raised  together with the alteration to Condition 12 “replacement of Conifer tree if felled with suitable replacement”, 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.

3)    the sending of any informative notes to the applicant, as may be deemed necessary; and,

4)    in the event of the Planning obligations or requirements referred to in Resolution (1) above not being secured and/or not secured within 12 months that the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to refuse the applications on appropriate grounds at their discretion.