Proposed creation of a 3G Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) with perimeter fencing, acoustic fencing, hardstanding areas, storage container, floodlights, an access footpath and associated bund.

The Chairman of the Planning Committee (Councillor Fowler) reminded Members that Councillors Placey and Sudra had not been present at the time the application had first been before the Committee in May 2024 and that therefore they would not participate in the discussions and decision-making, but they would stay in the room.

Members were also reminded that the proposal was for the erection of an Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) on land that formed part of the existing playing pitch within the grounds of Tendring Technology College and that this application was before the Planning Committee following a call-in request by Councillor Turner, who had raised concerns that the development would result in a negative impact on the scene, and was of a poor layout and would result in a negative impact to neighbours.

Members were reminded that the application had been initially put before the Planning Committee at its meeting held on 14 May 2024, when Officers had concluded that the wider public benefits of the proposed development outweighed the overall identified areas of harm, namely the impacts to neighbouring amenities through noise and light pollution and had therefore recommended, on a fine balance, that the application be approved.

At that meeting the Committee had decided to defer the application and had requested that additional information/actions be provided/undertaken as follows:-

-       Applicant to provide a Bat Survey Report;

-       The Council’s Environmental Protection team to undertake a review of the Noise Impact Assessment provided by local residents;

-       Applicant to demonstrate whether it would be possible to provide for an amended layout/re-orientated 3G pitch that would result in reduced harm; and

-       Submission of a Construction Method Statement to ensure that any construction would be mindful of the school children’s presence on site.

Following that deferral, the applicant’s agent had subsequently provided a Bat Survey which had been confirmed to be acceptable by ECC Place Services (Ecology) subject to conditions, and this Council’s Environmental Protection team had commented on the Noise Impact Assessment to confirm that they had considered both the applicant’s and the local residents’ Noise Impact Assessments fully, and had concluded that their earlier “no objection” comments remain unchanged. They had, however, suggested that the applicant’s Noise Impact Assessment be updated to include additional information, which had since been undertaken. The Council’s Environmental Protection team had confirmed that they were satisfied with the predicted noise levels and the evidence of compliance with relevant guidance, and therefore had had no adverse comments subject to the measures outlined within the Assessment being implemented.

Officers reminded Members that, in addition, the agent for the applicant had clarified that a Construction Method Statement had been submitted alongside the original application submission, and the Council’s Environmental Protection team had previously confirmed that they were satisfied with the contents and had no adverse comments to make (in comments dated 14 September 2023).

An additional drawing had also been provided to outline alternative layouts for the 3G pitch alongside the wider site. Three options were shown, with two showing that it would not be possible without overlapping with the running track (which would likely generate an objection from Sport England if put forward, so therefore would not be feasible), with the third option being sited along the north-eastern boundary which in turn would be closer to a greater number of local residential properties, thereby generating a higher level of harm than the currently proposed siting.

Members were informed that, the proposal would generate a high level of public benefits, notably through the inclusion of modern fit for purpose facilities that could be utilised all year round. Sport England had offered strong support despite the part loss of an existing playing pitch, and Officers were not aware of an alternative location better suited for the proposed development, whilst equally noting that the Playing Pitch Strategy highlighted that there was both a current and future shortfall of youth 11v11 and 9v9 football pitches. A strong level of weight in the overall balance had therefore been given by Officers to the public benefits the scheme would provide.

Officers told Members that, the proposed development was not considered to result in significant harm to the character and appearance of the wider area, that there was sufficient parking provision and ECC Highways had offered no objections subject to conditions. Similarly, ECC Ecology had not objected to the proposal, subject to conditions, and whilst ECC SuDS had initially objected, that had been on technical matters which had since been addressed.

The Committee was also made aware that, in terms of the impact to neighbouring amenities, whilst from a purely technical perspective the change in noise level was considered to be acceptable due to the absolute noise levels being within the WHO guidelines and the suggested mitigation measures proposed, Officers equally acknowledged that there was inevitably a degree of noise disturbances given the relatively close proximity of the development to neighbouring properties. Amendments to reduce the operating hours and re-locate the AGP away from the neighbouring properties had helped reduce the level of harm, but Officers had still afforded weight to that harm in the overall planning balance.

Officers further reminded Members that, taking all of the detailed considerations above into consideration, Officers had concluded that, on this occasion there were strong wider public benefits of the proposed development that outweighed the identified harm and with that careful assessment, the planning application was 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.

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

An Officer Update Sheet had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting which informed the Committee that an additional letter of observation had been received from a neighbouring property, raising concerns that any noise generated would be increased in windy conditions.

Robert Rouse, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in support of the application.

Terry Allen, a member of the public and Chairman of the Academy Community Board, spoke in favour of the application.

Stephen Smith, a member of the public, spoke against the application.

Councillor Mark Cossens, Mayor of Frinton and Walton Town Council, spoke against the application.

Councillor Richard Everett, a Ward Councillor for Frinton, spoke against the application.

Councillor Nick Turner, a Ward Councillor for Frinton and the Caller-in of this application, spoke against the application.

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

RESOLVED that:-

1)    the Head of Planning and Building Control be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions as stated at paragraph 9.2 of the Officer Report (A.1), 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.