There were no apologies for absence.

The following interests were declared at the meeting:

(i) Councillor Borton – Minute No. 730 (Application Ref No. 22/01118/FULM - Nazareth House, 111 London Road, Southend on Sea) – Received an email from the developer;

(ii) Councillor Buck – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Applicant’s family is known to him;

(iii) Councillor Dear – Minute No. 733 (22/02260/PA61 - 14 Broadlawn, Leigh-on-Sea) – Has been contacted by two of the objectors and has viewed the applicant’s property from their gardens;

(iv) Councillor F Evans – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Applicant is known to her;

(v) Councillor Garston – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Applicant’s family is well known to him;

(vi) Councillor A Jones – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Applicant’s family is known to her;

(vii) Councillor Mulroney – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Applicant’s family is known to her;

(viii) Councillor Mulroney – Minute No. 732 (22/02368/FUL - 995-1003 London Road, Leigh-on-Sea) – Objector is known to her;

(ix) Councillor Sadza – Minute No. 735 (22/02444/FUL & 22/00283/UNA_B - 151 Hamlet Court Road, Westcliff-on-Sea) – Has received correspondence from the residents of the neighbouring property;

(x) Councillor Walker – Minute No. 734 (22/02471/AMDT - 15 Leslie Close, Eastwood, Leigh on Sea) – Has been contacted by residents; and

(xi) Councillor Ward – Minute No. 731 (22/02098/BC4 - Adventure Island, Western Esplanade, Southend on Sea) – Employer has undertaken work at Adventure Island in the past.

The supplementary report by the Executive Director (Growth and Housing) will provide additional information (if any) on the items referred to on the Agenda and will be available on the morning of the meeting.

The supplementary report by the Executive Director (Growth and Housing) will provide additional information (if any) on the items referred to on the Agenda and will be available on the morning of the meeting.

Proposal: Demolish existing buildings and erect two 4 storey buildings, comprising 60no. self-contained retirement flats in one building and 84no. assisted living units with associated communal areas in the other, layout landscaping, parking, bin store and form new vehicle access onto Brighten Road

Applicant: Mr Amit Rabheru of McCarthy Stone Retirement Lifestyles Ltd and Anchor Hanover Group

Agent: Mr Richard Butler of The Planning Bureau

Resolved:-

(a) That the Executive Director (Growth and Housing), Director of Planning or Service Manager - Development Control be DELEGATED to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the completion of an AGREEMENT under SECTION 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) to secure the following:

• Affordable Housing - 52 x Use Class C2 assisted living shared ownership units on site. 

• Sustainable Travel - The provision of  a Travel Plan and Travel Information Packs for residents and Travel Plan Monitoring.

• £8,400.31 (61 x £137.71) towards biodiversity mitigation, management, protection or education (RAMS).

• Landscaping within the public realm of London Road directly to the south of the site, costed at £5200 plus ground preparation costs, and a financial contribution to cover the future maintenance of this landscaping for 20 years up to a maximum of £56,000 (estimated to be £63,000 in total). 

• Standard S106 Monitoring Fee.

(b) That the Executive Director (Growth and Housing), Director of Planning or Service Manager – Development Control be DELEGATED to GRANT PLANNING PERMISSION subject to the completion of the section 106 agreement referred to above and subject to the conditions set out below:

01 The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than three years from the date of this decision.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

02  The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans LSE-2794-3-AC-0002 A, LSE-2794-3-AC-0010 A (Showing EV charging points), LSE-2794-3-AC-1000 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1001 A, LSE-2794-3-AC-1002 A, LSE-2794-3-A, -1003 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1004 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1010 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1011 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1012 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1013 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1014 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1015 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1016 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1017 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1018  B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1019 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-2000-B, LSE-2794-3-AC-2010-B, LSE-2794-3-AC-2012 B, LSE-2794-3-AC-1001  A, LSE-2794-3-AC-2011 C, LSE-2794-3-AC-3000 A, LSE-2794-3-AC-4000-A, LSE-2794-3-AC-4001-A.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the Development Plan.

03 Notwithstanding the details shown on the plans and materials schedule submitted and otherwise hereby approved, no construction works other than demolition and construction up to ground floor slab level shall take place unless and until full product specifications of the materials to be used on all the external elevations of the development, including walls, including brick decoration and accents, roof, including slope, ridge and flat roof areas, balconies, including balustrade, floor, underside, gable edge detail, eaves, fascias and soffits, windows and doors, including sills, dormers, entrance porches and rainwater goods have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details before it is brought into first  ...  view the full minutes text for item 730.

Proposal: Install a new big wheel and observation tower attractions within the existing Adventure Island site (Part Retrospective)

Applicant: Mr Miller, Stockvale

Agent: SKArchitects

Resolved:-

That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the conditions.

01  The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.

Reason: Required to be imposed pursuant to Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

02  The development hereby permitted shall, in respect of the big wheel be retained, and in respect of the observation tower be carried out, in accordance with the following approved plans P101A, P102A, P103A.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the Development Plan.

03  The materials and colours for the development hereby approved shall be white powder coated steel for the big wheel and blue powder coated steel with red accents for the tower as set out on plan reference P103A or in accordance with any other materials and colours details of which have previously been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority under the scope of this planning condition.

Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of nearby heritage assets and the area generally, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) Core Strategy (2007) policies KP2 and CP4, Development Management Document (2015) Policy DM1 and DM5 and advice contained within the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009) and National Design Guide (2021) .  

04  The lighting for the development hereby approved shall be as detailed in the Lighting Strategy by SKArchitects reference 783-10-22 and maintained as such for the lifetime of the development. All illumination shall be in accordance with the Institute of Lighting Professionals "Guidance Note 01/20: Guidance notes for the reduction of obtrusive light" and "PLG05 The brightness of illuminated advertisements”. The development hereby approved shall not include any vertically emitting lighting and any lighting associated with the development must not present a hazard to aircraft i.e. glare / dazzle / distraction.

Reason: To ensure any protected species and habitats utilising the site are adequately protected and in the interests of aircraft safety, the setting of nearby heritage assets and residential amenity in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Core Strategy (2007) policies KP2 and CP4, Development Management Document (2015) policies DM1,  DM2 and DM3 and DM5.

05  There shall be no advertising on the development hereby approved above the adjacent public highway pavement level.

Reason: To safeguard the visual amenities of the area including the setting of nearby heritage assets, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) Core Strategy (2007) policy KP2 and CP4, Development Management Document (2015) Policies DM1 and DM5 and advice contained within the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009).  

06  Noise from the development hereby approved, comprising all associated mechanically generated noise, amplified music and amplified speech, shall be limited to 10 dB(A) below the background noise level including any penalties for noise characteristics such as tone and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 731.

Proposal: Erect two storey rear extension and form new second floor to main building with roof terrace to form a further 5no. self-contained flats with associated parking, bin and cycle store (Amended Proposal)

Applicant: Mr Schofield

Agent: Mr Steven Kearney of SKArchitects

Mr Mylroie, a local resident, spoke as an objector to the application.  Mr Smith, responded on behalf of the applicant’s agent.

Resolved:-

That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

01  The proposed development would, by reason of the size, scale, siting and design, of the new third storey lead to an unbalancing of the wider terrace, resulting in a form of development that would be out of keeping with and significantly harmful to the character and appearance of the building, the terrace and the surrounding area. The proposal is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), policies DM1 and DM3 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the advice contained within the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009) and The National Design Guide (2021).

02  The proposed development would, by reason of the size and scale, bulk, siting and degree of elevation of the new third storey relative to No.10 Grasmead Avenue, result in significant harm to the residential amenity of the neighbouring occupiers by way of an overbearing impact on the setting and reasonable enjoyment of their rear garden environment . This harm cannot reasonably be overcome by conditions. This is unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Southend Core Strategy (2007) policies KP2 and CP4, Southend Development Management Document (2015) policies DM1 and DM3 and the advice contained within the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009).

?

Positive and Proactive Statement:

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and clearly setting these out in the reason(s) for refusal.  Furthermore, Members of the planning committee which took the decision to refuse planning permission based their view on a detailed report prepared by officers and have considered whether there are opportunities to amend the development to address this harm.  Where a potential way forward has been identified, this has been communicated to the Applicant.

Informative

01  Please note that this application would have been liable for a payment under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) if planning permission had been granted. Therefore, if an appeal is lodged and subsequently allowed the CIL liability will be applied. Any revised application may also be CIL liable.

Proposal: Raise ridge height to form new first floor (prior approval)

Applicant: Ms Lottie Reddings

Agent: Mr Alan Green of A9 Architecture

Resolved:-

That PRIOR APPROVAL is required and is GRANTED subject to the following condition:

01  The development hereby permitted shall be carried out only in accordance with the following approved plans: 01 Revision I, 02 Revision I, 03 Revision I, 04 Revision I, 05 Revision, 06 Revision J, 07 Revision I, 08 Revision J, 09 Revision J, 010 Revision J.

Reason: To ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the consent sought, has an acceptable design impact on neighbour amenity and complies with Policy DM1 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the provisions of Class AA Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended).

Informatives

01. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the condition under sub paragraph 2(a) of section AA.2 of Class AA Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended) that the materials used in any exterior work must be of a similar appearance to those used in the construction of the exterior of the existing dwellinghouse.

?

02. You should be aware that in cases where damage occurs during construction works to the highway in implementing this permission, that the Council will seek to recover the cost of repairing public highways and footpaths from any party responsible for damaging them. This includes damage carried out when implementing a planning permission or other works to buildings or land. Please take care when carrying out works on or near the public highways and footpaths in the city.

03. The proposed building equates to less than 100sqm of new floorspace as such the development benefits from a Minor Development Exemption under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) and as such no charge is payable. See www.southend.gov.uk/cil for further details.

04. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the condition under sub paragraph 3(c) of section AA.2 of Class AA Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). The development must be completed within a period of 3 years starting with the date prior approval is granted.

05. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the condition under sub paragraph 3(b) of section AA.2 of Class AA Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended). Before beginning the development, the developer must provide the local planning authority with a report for the management of the construction of the development, which sets out the proposed development hours of operation and how any adverse impact of noise, dust, vibration and traffic on adjoining owners or occupiers will be mitigated.

06. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the condition under sub paragraph 2(b) of section AA.2 of Class AA Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 733.

Proposal: Application to vary conditions 02 (Approved Plans) and 03 (Materials) replace plan number CAD/PP/21499/002 Revision C with CAD/PP/21499/002 Revision E (Minor Material Amendment of Planning Permission 21/02453/FULH allowed on appeal dated 17/06/2021) – (Retrospective)

Applicant: Mr Tony Wilkins

Agent: Mr Carl Brampton of Contour Architectural Designs Ltd

Ms Oram, a local resident, spoke as an objector to the application.

Resolved:-

(a) That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

01  The black vertical cladding at first-floor level rising up to the apex of the gables and to the rear dormer, by reason of its material and detailed design, is significantly out of keeping and at odds with the traditional design and materials of the original application property and the existing bungalows in the immediate streetscene, appearing unduly prominent and incongruous to the significant detriment of the character and appearance of the dwelling, the streetscene, the rear garden scene and the wider surrounding area. The development is therefore unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), Development Management Document (2015) Policies DM1 and DM3 and the guidance contained within the National Design Guide (2021) and the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009). 

(b)  That ENFORCEMENT ACTION be AUTHORISED to require from anyone with an interest in the land (the site) to either:

(i) Build the development in full accordance with approved plan numbers CAD/PP/21499/001 and CAD/PP/21499/002 Revision C pursuant to planning permission reference 21/02453/FULH which was allowed on appeal 17 June 2022 and to include the external materials white render, white uPVC windows and grey roof tiles and to include the first-floor windows in the rear face of the rear dormer replacing the unauthorised doors; or

(ii) Remove the unauthorised external black vertical cladding material in its entirety and replace with the approved white render, including at first floor level rising up to the apex of the gables and to the rear dormer and remove the first-floor doors in the rear face of the rear dormer and replace with the approved windows;

(c) Remove from site all materials resulting from compliance with (i) or (ii) above.

The authorised enforcement action to include (if/as necessary) the service of an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Act and the pursuance of proceedings whether by prosecution or injunction to secure compliance with the requirements of the Enforcement Notice.

When serving an Enforcement Notice the Local Planning Authority must ensure a reasonable time for compliance. In this case a compliance period of three (3) months is considered reasonable to build the development in accordance with the approved plan numbers and remove the unauthorised development.

Positive and Proactive Statement

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and determining the application within a timely manner, clearly setting out the reason(s) for refusal, allowing the Applicant the opportunity to consider the harm caused and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 734.

Proposal: Replacement UPVC windows, facias, render to the ground floor elevation and repainting (retrospective)

Applicant: M & A Knightsbridge Properties Ltd

Agent: Miss Beth Evans of Freeths LLP

Resolved:-

(a) That planning permission be REFUSED for the following reason:

The  development, by reason of the detailed design and materials of the replacement windows at first and second floor level on the east and north elevations has resulted in visually prominent, out of keeping and incongruous alterations to the existing building which are harmful to the character and appearance of the site, the streetscene, the Frontage of Townscape Merit, the wider Hamlet Court Road Conservation Area and harm the setting of the Grade II listed Havens building opposite the site. Whilst this harm is less than substantial, it is nevertheless significant in degree and is not outweighed by any public benefits of the development. This is unacceptable and contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (2021), Policies KP2 and CP4 of the Core Strategy (2007), Policies DM1, DM3 and DM5 of the Development Management Document (2015) and the advice contained within the National Design Guide (rev 2021), the Southend-on-Sea Design and Townscape Guide (2009) and the Hamlet Court Road Conservation Area Appraisal (2021).

(b) That ENFORCEMENT ACTION be AUTHORISED to secure:

(i) the removal of the unauthorised UPVC windows from the east and north elevations at first and second floor.

(ii) the removal of the unauthorised fascia from the building’s east and north elevations.

(iii) the removal from site all materials resulting from compliance with (i) and (ii) above.

The authorised enforcement action to include (if/as necessary) the service of an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Act and the pursuance of proceedings whether by prosecution or injunction to secure compliance with the requirements of the Enforcement Notice.

When serving an Enforcement Notice the Local Planning Authority must ensure a reasonable time for compliance. In this case a compliance period of six (6) months is considered reasonable for the removal of the unauthorised operational development and obtaining planning permission for acceptable replacement windows and fascia.

Positive and Proactive Statement

The Local Planning Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this application by identifying matters of concern with the proposal and determining the application within a timely manner, clearly setting out the reason(s) for refusal, allowing the Applicant the opportunity to consider the harm caused and whether or not it can be remedied by a revision to the proposal.  The detailed analysis is set out in a report prepared by officers. In the circumstances the proposal is not considered to be sustainable development. The Local Planning Authority is willing to discuss the best course of action.

Informatives

01 You are advised that as the proposed development equates to less than 100sqm of new floorspace, and does not involve the creation of a new dwelling (Class C3), the development benefits from a Minor Development Exemption under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended) and as such  ...  view the full minutes text for item 735.

Breach of Planning Control: Demolition of wall within a Conservation Area

Resolved:-

That ENFORCEMENT ACTION be AUTHORISED to secure the re-instatement of the original boundary wall using the same materials and method of construction to restore the land to its condition before the breach of planning control took place.

The authorised enforcement action to include (if/as necessary) the service of an Enforcement Notice under Section 172 of the Act and the pursuance of proceedings whether by prosecution or injunction to secure compliance with the requirements of the Enforcement Notice. The Local Planning Authority may also decide to instigate a prosecution under the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended.

When serving an Enforcement Notice the Local Planning Authority must ensure a reasonable time for compliance. In this case a compliance period of 3 months is considered reasonable for the re-instatement of the wall.