Pages
Home Page
About this site
News
What's On
2012 Olympics Mountain Biking
Old news
Useful information
Do you remember?
Planning matters
Planning decisions
Neighbourhood Meetings
Churches
Organisations
Drinking & eating establishments
History
War memorials
Links - organisations
Links - planning
Links - miscellaneous
Gallery
Guestbook
Join Beehive
What is Beehive?
Click here to email this page to a friend.
Planning decisions
HELIX - PLANNING DECISIONS

This page gives details of the decisions made on the more important planning applications concerning Hadleigh.

[Page last updated Tue 16 Nov 2010]

The photo below is of Harold House, a locally listed house over 160 years old, on London Road (opposite the site of the now-demolished Waggon & Horses Pub), whose demolition was approved by CPBC Planning Committee, in May 2007. The house has now been demolished and replaced by flats.


Planning application decisions (latest first)
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HADLEIGH PARK LAWN TENNIS CLUB, ELM ROAD, HADLEIGH - CPT/554/09/FUL - REPLACEMENT CLUBHOUSE, NEW PARKING AREA AND FORMATION OF NEW FOOTPATH

REFUSED ON 1 DEC 2009.

ALLOWED ON APPEAL ON 2 NOV 2010.

The inspector considered that the new clubhouse would not be likely to result in noise and disturbance to an extent which would cause harm to the living conditions of local residents. He also concluded that the proposal would not be likely to lead to an increase in on-street parking to an extent which would be detrimental to highway safety or detrimental to the living conditions of local residents.

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/554/09/FUL

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MCDONALDS RESTAURANT, 124 HIGH STREET - CPT/540/10/ADV - INSTALLATION OF A 4.8M TOTEM SIGN

REFUSED ON 2 NOV 2010.

The Case File may be viewed here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F540%2F10%2FADV

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
MCDONALDS RESTAURANT, 124 HIGH STREET - CPT/542/10/ADV - 2 FASCIA SIGNS, 5 FREE STANDING, 1 HEIGHT RESTRICTOR, 2 BANNERS AND I CUSTOMER ORDER SIGNS

APPROVED ON 2 NOV 2010 EXCEPT FOR FREESTANDING SIGN ON EAST SIDE NEAR ENDWAY AND HEIGHT RESTRICTOR, WHICH WERE REFUSED.

The online Case File may be viewed here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=%09++++CPT%2F542%2F10%2FADV

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LAND OFF KILN ROAD, THUNDERSLEY - CPT/459/09/FUL - 150 DWELLINGS, NEW ACCESS AND ASSOCIATED OPEN SPACE

REFUSED ON 26 MAY 2010.

Barratt Eastern Counties Ltd submitted a planning application for 150 dwellings on land between Kiln Road and The Chase, Thundersley.

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/459/09/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
378 LONDON ROAD (CPT/376/09/FUL) - CHANGE OF USE FROM BEAUTICIAN TO A TATTOO AND PIERCING PARLOUR

APPROVED ON 12 OCT 2009.

The on-line Case File with a full report can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/376/09/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THE CROWN HOTEL, HIGH STREET, HADLEIGH (CPT/258/09/FUL) - DEMOLITION OF PUBLIC HOUSE & ERECTION OF DRIVE THROUGH RESTAURANT AND CAR CLEANING POD WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING.

REFUSED ON 21 JUL 2009 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The application sought to demolish the Crown Hotel and replace it with a pre-fabricated Kentucky Fried Chicken drive-through restaurant and a car-wash 'pod'.

The planning officer's decison lists six reasons for refusal. The proposed development fails to maximise the development potential of the site which also has the potential to form part of a larger site enabling comprehensive redevelopment. The existing pub is also on the council's Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest.

The on-line Case File with the full report can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/258/09/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
16-18 THE CRESCENT, HADLEIGH - CPT 465/08/FUL - DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS AND ERECTION OF 7 HOUSES AND 3 BUNGALOWS

REFUSED ON 29 OCT 2008.

ALLOWED ON APPEAL ON 11 MAR 2009.

The on-line case file can be found at:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=465%2F08%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
296 LONDON ROAD (CPT/265/08/FUL) CHANGE OF USE FROM A3 (RESTAURANT & CAFE) TO A4 (DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS)

APPROVED ON 17 JUN 2008

This application relates to the use of the existing building on the corner of London Road and Oak Road South as a drinking establishment.

Two recent applications by East Angla Pub Company to build a pub on the site were refused primarily on car parking grounds. (See below)

It is interesting to note the Planning Department's views on the nil provision for parking in respect of this application. (The car showroom use on the site has a planning requirement of 4 car parking spaces.) The planning officer's report states:
"The proposed use as a pub has a maximum requirement of 1 car parking space per 5m2. Therefore a parking requirement of 38 spaces exists, for which no provision is made on site. Prima facie, the proposal should therefore attract a recommendation of refusal. However, it must be borne in mind that there is a lawful use as a restaurant, which also has a parking requirement of 1 space per 5m2, but no off-street parking provision. This proposal would not have a materially different requirement for off-street parking. On balance, whilst the complete lack of off-street parking is unattractive, it would be no worse than the approved A3 use, reference CPT/700/05/FUL. No objection is therefore raised to the proposal under Policy S5."

Application CPT/700/05/FUL was in respect of a change of use from a car showroom to a ("bistro-style") restaurant. The report for that application indicated that, prima facie, the application ought to be refused on the basis of lack of on-site parking provision since the the A3 use requires the provision of 38 spaces.

However, it was considered that reclaiming the car showroom site for a more appropriate town centre use would enhance the area. There was no objection from the Highways Authority and the report states that "there are a number of public car parks and short-term parking lay-bys available within walking distance. Some unlimited parking during the day is available in Oak Road South and more unrestricted parking generally is available after 7.00pm."

The report continues: "Whilst there is some concern over the potential impact to nearby residential neighbours of any on-street parking, no objections have been raised by neighbours."

Interestingly, when the recent applications to build a pub on the site were refused, it was considered that "the proposed development, by reason of the provision of no on-site parking provision and the relative isolation of the site from available public car parks would be likely to result in a significant increase in on street parking, to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety, and to the free flow of traffic contrary to Polices S5, T2 and T8 of the Council's Adoped Local Plan".

The latest planning approval restricts the A4 use of the building to between the hours of 7.00am to 11.00pm Sundays to Thursdays and Bank Holidays, and 7.00am to 1.00am Fridays and Saturdays.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
325-339 LONDON ROAD CPT/99/08/FUL) - CONSTRUCTION OF 30 FLATS AND 3 COMMERCIAL UNITS WITH BASEMENT CAR PARKING ACCESSED FROM OAK ROAD NORTH

APPROVED SUBJECT TO TWO UNDERTAKINGS (SEE BELOW).

NOTE: AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION WAS DELEGATED TO THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENT AND THE CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMITTEE AT THE PLANNING COMMITTEE MEETING ON TUE 8 APR 2008. APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT PROVIDING A UNILATERAL UNDERTAKING TO PROVIDE SIX AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ON SITE AND A CONTRIBUTION OF £10,000 TOWARDS THE PROVISION/IMPROVEMENT OF RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AT THE JOHN H BURROWS RECREATION GROUND.

This planning application includes demolition of the existing properties at 325-339 London Road, Hadleigh. These properties are/were occupied by Alpine Insurance, Furniture World (now closed), Aspenair and Motor Fair. The two largest commercial units have a proposed use of restaurant/drinking establishment.

Authority to approve was delegated by the Planning Committee because of a late change to the plan, which saw the proposed use of two of the commercial change from A3 (Restaurant) to A3/A4 (Restaurant/Drinking establishment). This change, together with other changes in the drawings, led to an extension of the deadline for public consultation to Friday 11 April (after the Planning Committee meeting), hence the delegated power to approve subject to no further substantive objections and certain undertakings.

In his report to the Planning Committee, the Director of Planning, Ian Burchill, admitted that based on current car parking standards 99 on-site car parking spaces would be required for the three commercial units. He considered that the 6 spaces shown on the plans for the commercial units could reasonably serve as staff parking and as such there is a deficiency in "visitor" car parking of 93 spaces.

However, Mr Burchill considers that the relaxation of the normal rules [to a zero requirement for "visitor" parking] is consistent with current Government guidance, which encourages a reduction in reliance on the car and increased use of alternative modes of transport. He also states that the Government has an on-going campaign to discourage drink driving which may be facilitated by the restriction of parking facilities.

CPBC planners recently refused an application for a pub/restaurant at 296 London Road (directly opposite 325 London Road) because no car parking was provided when the car parking standards required 61 spaces to be provided. This was raised at the Planning Committee meeting by local resident Mrs Vanda Jimmick, who spoke against the application. In reply, Miss Kim Fisher (Chief Development Control Officer) explained that the application for 296 London Road relied wholly on on-street parking whereas this application provided 6 on-site car parking spaces, which, it was suggested, could be used by customers of the pub/restaurant commercial units.

There were a number of objections to the application including a petition submitted by local resident Mrs Jimmick.

Objections were based on a variety of matters inclduing the scale of the building, lack of car parking spaces for residents and customers of the proposed restaurants/drinking establishments, increased danger to traffic/pedestrian safety.

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/99/08/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
296 LONDON ROAD HADLEIGH (CPT/13/08/FUL) - NEW BUILDING CONTAINING A RESTAURANT/PUBLIC HOUSE WITH ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 4 MAR 2008.

This was a revised planning application submitted by The East Anglia Pub Company. A previous application for the same site (CPT/455/07/FUL) was refused by CPBC on 14 September 2007.

The application was refused on two grounds:
- failure to make appropriate provision for amenity area for the residential accommodation provided [one flat];
- lack of on site parking provision for customers (likely to result in increased street parking to the detriment of highway and pedestrian safety, and to the free flow of traffic).

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/13/08/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
22-26 CASTLE LANE (CPT/751/07/OUT) - DEMOLISH EXISTING THREE COTTAGES AND CONSTRUCT A PART 3-STOREY PART 4-STOREY BLOCK OF 11 FLATS

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 13 FEB 2008 (DELEGATED DECISION).

This outline planning application which includes mainly basement car parking was refused for a variety of reasons, including:
~ would create an an obtrusive and prominent feature in the streetscene, detrimental to the character and appearence of the area;
~ does not appear to provide adequate vehicular access to the basemment parking;
~ some parking bays of insufficient size;
~ lack of footway from ground level parking area to Castle Lane footway;
~ inadequate refuse storage facility.

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/751/07/OUT

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
SALVATION ARMY TEMPLE, 150 LONDON ROAD, HADLEIGH (CPT/830/07/FUL) - STORAGE AND OFFICE EXTENSION TO THE WEST SIDE

APPROVED BY CPBC ON 6 FEB 2008 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The on-line Case File may be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/830/07/FUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
16-18 THE CRESCENT (CPT/706/07/FUL) - DEMOLISH EXISTING BUILDINGS AND CONSTRUCT 6 THREE-BEDROOM HOUSES & 4 FOUR-BEDROOM HOUSES

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 5 FEB 2008 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The application was refused for a variety of reasons including overdevelopment (insufficient isolation space, small gardens, inadequate distances between first floor windows and site boundary etc), some garage forecourts too short, inadequate car parking provision, difficult manoeuvring into some garages, road not to adoptable standard.

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/706/07/FUL

Footnote: A second application (CPT 465/08/FUL) was lodged to demolish the existing buildings and erect 7 houses and 3 bungalows. This was refused on 20 Oct 2008 but allowed on appeal on 11 Mar 2009. (See above)

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LAND OFF SCRUB LANE - TWO APPLICATIONS

(CPT/729/07/OUT) - 18 HOUSES & ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT INCL CHILDREN'S PLAY AREA)

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 28 JAN 2008 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/729/07/OUT

(CPT/730/07/OUT) - 22 HOUSES & ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 28 JAN 2008 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The on-line Case File can be found here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/730/07/OUT

Both applications were refused for the same reasons, which included:
~ below PPS3 minimum density of 30 dwellings per hectare (the applications had densities of 16 and 20 respectively);
~ development of the site in isolation of adjoining land prejudices development potential of the allocation;
~ plans fail to take adequate account of longer term plans for relocation of the school and ECC is potentially failing to facilitate the enhancement and improvement of existing educational facilities;
~ insufficient information provided regarding risk of flooding;
~ implications for educational facilities not adequately addressed.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
McDONALD's, 124 HIGH STREET (CPT/704/07/FUL) - INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FREE STANDING ("BIG M" or "GOLDEN ARCHES") SIGN ON A 3M HIGH POLE

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 12 DEC 2007 (DELEGATED DECISION).

The application was refused because it would create "an obtrusive, unnecessary and overdominant feature in the streetscene, detrimental to the visual amenities of the streetscene and the aspect of the St. James The Less Church."

The case file for the application including the report and decision letter can be accessed here:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F704%2F07%2FADV

A previous application (CPT/610/02/ADV) for a sign on a 3.5m pole was also refused by CPBC Planning Committee. An appeal by McDonald's against this refusal was turned down.

The refusal report and the appeal decison can be accessed here:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT/610/02/ADV
[21 Dec 2007]

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
100 SCRUB LANE (& 56 BILTON ROAD) - CPT/701/06/FUL - DEMOLISH HOUSE (AND BUNGALOW) AND REPLACE WITH 5 THREE-BEDROOM HOUSES & 8 FOUR-BEDROOM HOUSES [ORIGINALLY 3 THREE-BEDROOM & 10 FOUR-BEDROOM HOUSES] WITH GARAGE AND ONE PARKING SPACE PER HOUSE PLUS ONE VISITOR'S PARKING SPACE

REFUSED BY CPBC ON 18 JAN 2007 (DELEGATED DECISION).

APPEAL LODGED - PUBLIC INQUIRY HELD ON 23 AUG 2007 - SITE VISIT ON 20 SEP 2007 - APPEAL ALLOWED ON 31 OCT 2007.

This was the second planning application for this site by Swanvale Management. It involves the demolition of the old cottage at 100 Scrub Lane and the neighbouring bungalow on the corner of Bilton Road (No 56).

An earlier application for 17 three-bedroom houses was refused by CPBC.

The application was originally for 3 three-bedroom houses and 10 four-bedroom houses.

There were five reasons for refusal given by CPBC:
~ unacceptable levels of overlooking and loss of privacy;
~ inadequate isolation space;
~ inadequate provision for private amenity area;
~ lack of forecourt depth to some plots that is likely to lead to conflict with users/visitors of the site to the detriment of highway safety;
~ inadequate provision of safe and convenient on-site parking.

The applicant lodged an appeal against the refusal and the appeal was dealt with by means of a Public Inquiry, held at Runnymede Hall on 23 August 2007.

Before the Public Inquiry, amended plans for 5 three-bedroom and 8 four bedroom houses were submitted. The Planning Inspector decided to allow these plans to be the subject of the public inquiry.

The Planning Inspector, Frances Mahoney, allowed the appeal on 31 Oct 2007.

The Planning Inspector did not think the cul-de-sac design and small gardens would be out of character with the surrounding area.

Her appeal decision report, identified the main issues as privacy, private amenity space and car parking.

In respect of windows of two of the plots, she concluded that the oblique nature of the views between the windows and the distances separating them would not give rise to unacceptable levels of overlooking and loss of privacy.

In respect of the proposed garden (amenity) space, whilst accepting that most of the gardens are below the council's guideline (minimum) area of 93 sq.m., the report states that the "proposed individual garden space is conveniently located to each property and is a reasonable amount of space for sitting out in and other forms of limited outdoor recreation". The proximity of Hadleigh Great Wood was also an influence on her decision.

In respect of car parking, the Planning Inspector considered that the level of car parking to be provided would be acceptable in a location close to schools, services and shops. (All houses have a garage, mostly integral, and an additional parking space. There is one additional space for visitors.)

The Inspector's report states that no tangible evidence had been submitted to her that showed that the development would be likely to significantly add to the existing level of on-street parking in the locality or that it would potentially create an obstruction to traffic flows and a danger to other road users. (The Highway Authority had raised no objection on these grounds).

To view the online Case file for the planning application go to:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/showCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F701%2F06%2FFUL

The appeal Case Summary and decision can be viewed on the Planning Portal website by going to this search page:

http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch.asp

and entering the following Case Reference:

APP/M1520/A/07/2040897

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
8-12 PARK CHASE (CPT/193/07/FUL) - 29 APARTMENTS (WITH 39 CAR PARKING SPACES)

APPROVED ON 30 OCT 2007

This is a revised application by Innovation Homes. An earlier application (CPT/585/06/FUL) for 29 flats with 29 parking spaces was refused by CPBC Planning Committee on 13 Nov 2006 because the proposed development did no tincorporate any affordable units.

The second application was approved by the CPBC Planning Committee on Tue 30 Oct 2007. The application was linked to another application (CPT/190/07/FUL) for 8 affordable homes, consisting of 6 one-bedroom and 2 two-bedroom flats, at 165 Kiln Road, Thundersley, which was also approved.

To view the online Case file for the planning application go to:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/showCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F193%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
296 LONDON ROAD (CPT/455/07/FUL) - DEMOLISH EXISTING BUILDING AND REPLACE WITH RESTAURANT/PUBLIC HOUSE WITH ANCILLARY RESIDENTIAL ACCOMMODATION

REFUSED ON 14 SEP 2007

The planning application was submitted by the East Anglia Pub Company for a pub and restaurant at 296 London Road, at the junction with Oak Road South.

The planned maximum capacity of the pub and the restaurant was 120 people and 56 people respectively.

No on-site car parking was provided as part of the proposed development. A planning statement submitted by the applicant estimated the maximum car parking requirement as 30 spaces and considered that this could be served by existing public car parking and on-street parking.

The application was refused on various grounds including:
- lack of car parking provision (likely to result in increased street parking affecting highway and pedestrian safety and traffic flow and likely to lead to undue noise and disturbance);
- lack of suitable screened and enclosed refuse facility;
- overdevelopment arising from inadequate amenity area for the residential accommodation included in the plan.

Documents pertaining to the application can be viewed/downloaded here:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F455%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
370 LONDON ROAD (CPT/372/07/FUL) - DEMOLISH EXISTING BUILDINGS AND ERECT BLOCK OF 12 FLATS (with 13 car parking spaces)

REFUSED ON 10 SEP 2007

A planning application was submitted by Turnham & Hill Ltd to build a three-storey block of 12 flats (next to Poona restaurant).

The application was refused for various reasons including:
- restricted width of vehicular access and lack of visibility at its junction with highway;
- lack of natural light to three kitchens;
- close proximity to highway resulting in undue noise and disturbance and unacceptable levels of visual intrusion from passing pedestrians.

Documents pertaining to the application can be viewed/downloaded here:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F372%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HAROLD HOUSE, 122 LONDON ROAD - CPT/387/06/FUL -
DEMOLISH EXISTING HOUSE AND CONSTRUCT 12 SHELTERED HOUSING UNITS WITH 6 PARKING SPACES

REFUSED ON 9 JAN 2007

APPEAL DISMISSED BY PLANNING INSP. ON 27 JUL 2007

See separate section below for more details. See also item lower down regarding a revised second application that was approved on 22 May 2007.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
BROOK FARM, 441 DAWS HEATH ROAD - CPT 238/07/FUL - RETROSPECTIVE USE OF LAND FOR STORAGE OF CARAVANS, BOATS & SMALL TRAILERS

REFUSED ON 27 JUN 2007

To view Case File documents see:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F238%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HADLEIGH BOWLS CLUB, JOHN H BURROWS RECREATION GROUND - CPT/299/07/FUL - SHORT MAT BOWLS EXTENSION TO PAVILION

APPROVED ON 26 JUN 2007

To view Case File documents see:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F299%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
300 LONDON ROAD - CPT/268/07/FUL - HAND CAR WASH

APPROVED ON 22 JUN 2007

To view Case File documents see:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F268%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
221/223 LONDON ROAD - CPT/266/07/FUL - REAR EXTENSION TO FORM ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE

APPROVED ON 21 JUN 2007

Application by Brown & Brand for extension at rear of 221 and 223 London Road.

To view Case File documents see:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F266%2F07%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
HAROLD HOUSE, 122 LONDON ROAD - CPT/179/07/FUL - DEMOLISH EXISTING HOUSE AND CONSTRUCT 10 SHELTERED HOUSING UNITS WITH 5 PARKING SPACES

APPROVED ON 22 MAY 2007

See separate section below for more details.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
22-28 BENFLEET ROAD - CPT/21/07/ADV - EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FREE STANDING

REFUSED ON 4 APR 2007 (DELEGATED DECISION)

This was a second planning application by La Quinta to erect a totem sign outside the restaurant. The application was for an externally-illuminated 4.25m sign with a digital display unit.

There was a considerable number of objections from local residents and businesses including a petition from residents of nearby King's Lodge and Queen's Lodge.

The case file can be viewed at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F21%2F07%2FADV

An earlier planning application (CPT/287/06/ADV) for a 7.5m internally and externally illuminated sign was also refused by Castle Point Council. (Delegated decision).

The case file for the earlier application can be viewed at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F287%2F06%2FADV

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
6 & 8 OAK ROAD NORTH (CPT/122/06/FUL)
DEMOLISH TWO SEMI-DETACHED HOUSES AND CONSTRUCT 10 APARTMENTS (WITH 10 CAR PARKING SPACES)

REFUSED BY CBPC ON 10 APR 2006.
ALLOWED ON APPEAL ON 17 JAN 2007.

This application to demolish the two semi-detached houses at 6 & 8 Oak Road North and construct ten flats with ten car parking spaces was submitted to CPBC on 21 February 2006. The application was refused by CPBC on 10 April 2006 because... "The proposal represents overdevelopment of the site by reason of the close relationship between the proposed car parking and the adjoining dwellings to the north...".

However, an appeal was lodged on 30 Aug 2006 and the appeal was allowed on 17 Jan 2007.

Before the appeal on the first application was made, a second application, reference CPT/362/06/FUL, was submitted on 24 May 2006. The second application was for a 3-storey building with the same number of flats and incorporating a terrace with a glazed roof. The number of parking spaces had been reduced from ten to five. This second application was refused by CPBC on 19 July 2006.

To view Case File documents see:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F122%2F06%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
303-307 LONDON ROAD - CPT 740/06/FUL - CHANGE OF USE TO (INDIAN) RESTAURANT

APPROVED ON 27 DEC 2006 (DELEGATED DECISION)

An initial planning application (CPT/469/06/FUL) was submitted on behalf of Mr Liakat Ali to change the use of the 303-307 London Road, Hadleigh from A1 and B2 to A2 classification and to open an Indian restaurant. The premises were formerly occupied by the Supreme travel agency and associated offices.

The initial application was refused on 4 Oct 2006. There were two reasons for refusal. The first reason concerned "an unacceptable intensification on non-retail uses within the designated primary shopping frontage". (The planning officer's report points out that the existing shop frontage in the area already has a reduced retail percentage of 45%, well below below the minimum 55%).The second reason for refusal related to the absence of any provision for on-site car parking. Planning rules would normally require 75 parking spaces for restaurant usage (compared to 12 spaces for the existing usage).

Documents pertaining to the initial application can be viewed/downloaded at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F469%2F06%2FFUL

A second application (CPT/740/06/FUL) was submitted and was approved. The second application retains the front part of 303 London Road as A1 usage. The restaurant comprises the whole of 305 and 307 London Road, a new unit on the rear ground floor of 303 London Road and the upper floor of the same address.

In the planning officer's report it states that "the proposal would not continue the unacceptable diminution of the retail frontage within this part of Hadleigh".

According to car parking standards, the proposed A1 unit at 303 London Road would require the provision of 2 car parking spaces and the restaurant (A3 usage) would require the provision of 64 car parking spaces. The proposal provides for no on site car parking spaces. (The previous usage would have required 12 parking spaces under the standards.)

However, the planning officer's report states: “Whilst it is acknowledged that the previous application was refused due to a short fall in car parking, the current proposal has a requirement of some 9 car parking spaces less than the previous application, and now retains a vital A1 element to the scheme. In the light of the revised scheme, current Government guidance, which encourages a reduction in the reliance on the car and increased use of alternative modes of transport, and no objection from the Highway Authority, it is not considered that a refusal to this application solely on car parking grounds could now be successfully sustained at appeal.”

A condition of the approval is that a suitable scheme of noise attentuation measures is installed.

Documents pertaining to the second application can be viewed/downloaded at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F740%2F06%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4-12 PARK CHASE - CPT/585/06/FUL - 29 FLATS

REFUSED ON 13 NOV 2006

The application was submitted by Innovation Homes.

Outline approval was given in April 2004 to build 12 flats on the site.

At the Planning Committee Meeting on Tuesday 31 October 2006, the application was refused owing to the lack of a suitable scheme for the incorporation of affordable housing.

However, as there were no objections in principle to flats on the site, permission will probably be granted if a revised plan with a suitable scheme for affordable accommodation is submitted.

To view the online Case file for the planning application go to:
http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F585%2F06%2FFUL

Footnote: A second application for 29 flats was approved on 30 Oct 2007 - see above re CPT/193/07/FUL.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
136 HIGH STREET - CPT/245/06/FUL - SINGLE-STOREY FRONT AND REAR EXTENSIONS

APPROVED ON 26 MAY 2006 (DELEGATED DECISION)

This planning application was submitted by Paul Newman Interiors. The premises at 136 High Street were built in the 18th century and were the former porter's lodge for the original Hadleigh Hall.

The rear extension will fully occupy the space at the rear of the site. The front extension will conceal (destroy?) the remainder of the original ground floor facade of what is one of Hadleigh's oldest buildings. The building will be extended nearer to the pavement, with the loss of the existing garden.

In his report the planning officer states:
"The proposal would contribute to the building having a more balanced front elevation and would, it is considered, enhance its appearance generally. The proposal does not compromise the visual appearance of the first floor of the building, which would retain its historic form and integrity."

"The proposal would provide approximately 148sqm of additional A1 floor space requiring the provision of an additional 7 parking spaces. No on-site car parking provision is currently provided and clearly the site is incapable of accomodating the additional requirement. However, it should be noted that the site is located near to a public car park and on a main road where there are good bus services."

A programme of archaelogical work must be implemented before any demolition or preliminary groundworks take place.

The planning application and the planning officer's report are available to view/download at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F245%2F06%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
247-249 LONDON ROAD - CPT/87/06/FUL - TWO-STOREY REAR EXTENSION & CHANGE OF USE OF 1st FLOOR TO TREATMENT ROOM

REFUSED ON 4 APR 2006 (DELEGATED DECISION)

The application was submitted on behalf Mr Asif Moledina.

The reasons for refusal refer to "an overdominant and oppressive form of development", "excessive overlooking of the occupiers of the adjoining flat" and "inadequate levels of privacy for patients using the treatment room".

Documents pertaining to the application can be viewed/downloaded at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F87%2F06%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
350-356 LONDON ROAD - CPT/231/05/FUL - FOUR-STOREY BUILDING WITH GROUND FLOOR COMMERCIAL UNIT & 15 FLATS (WITH 15 CAR PARKING SPACES)

APPROVED ON APPEAL ON 9 MAR 2006

The application was submitted by Professional Cycles.

Although the planning application was recommended for approval by planning officers, it was refused by the Planning Committee on 2 August 2005 on the basis that the car parking (15 spaces), delivery area and amenity space were deficient for the scale of proposed development.

The applicant appealed and the appeal was upheld.

The planning inspector considered that the development "would present a visually exciting feature in the street scene and improve the character and appearance of the surrounding area".

The planning inspector disagreed with the Planning Committee reasons for refusal stating that "the site lies in a town centre location where its urban character predominates. The locality can be considered a sustainable location where the provision of services and public transport is particularly well-developed. I have also noted that the surrounding area, other than London Road, benefits from on-street parking.

Each proposed flat will have its own balcony. Although small in size, I consider this proposed dedicated space, in such a town centre location, would be of more benefit to the future residents than any disconnected area, out back, in the car park. In addition, the size and type of accommodation proposed is such that, in my judgement, the flats are more likely to be occupied by single people or couples where the need for external amenity space is not of such significant importance."

According to the Echo newspaper of 28th March, Bill Sharp, Chairman of the Planning Committee, said he was "bitterly disappointed" at the planning inspector's decision.

Documents pertaining to the planning application can be found at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F231%2F05%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
WAGGON & HORSES PUB SITE – CPT/666/05/FUL -
31 RETIREMENT FLATS (WITH 10 CAR PARKING SPACES)

APPROVED ON 7 FEB 2006

This planning application by McCarthy & Stone was first discussed at the CPBC Planning Committee meeting on Tuesday 10 January 2006.

The Council's Director of Environment (Mr Ian Burchill) recommended that the application be referred to Government Office East (GO-East), as a departure from the Development Plan, with the comment that the Authority is minded to approve the proposal subject to the applicants entering into a S106 Agreement to provide a contribution of £30,000 towards the provision of pedestrian disability ramps and bus stop enhancements (subject to various conditions).

Despite the committee’s previous objection to residential development on the site (see below), the Director's recommendation was agreed by a majority of the planning committee.

After the vote, the Chair of the Planning Committee, Cllr Bill Sharp, made a statement describing the committee's decision as “a tragedy [for Hadleigh], but not of our [the council's] making”.

It would appear that there was concern over losing a possible appeal and having costs awarded against the council.

On 26 January 2006, the Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport & The Regions decided not to call in the planning application for a public inquiry.

On 7 February 2006, the application was finally determined by CPBC Planning Committee when approval was granted. A condition of approval was that before any demolition is carried out on the pub site, an archaelogical excavation must be carried out. (The car park was thought possibly to be the site of a Belgic or Late Iron Age burial group.)

Documents pertaining to this planning application are at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/showCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F666%2F05%2FFUL

An earlier planning application (CPT/93/05/FUL) by McCarthy & Stone for 32 sheltered appartments (with 12 car parking spaces) was refused by the CPBC Planning Committee on the 12 July 2005. The main reason for refusal was that "the proposal represents an unacceptable departure from the Development Plan and is not consistent with the Council's vision for Hadleigh. If implemented, the proposal would prejudice the future development of this part of the town centre and would serve to undermine the vitaality and viability of the retail area". The refusal also noted deficiencies in car parking spaces and amenity space based on relevant policies.

McCarthy & Stone appealed that the council had failed to determine their application within the required timeframe and requested that the appeal take the form of a Public Inquiry. The Public Inquiry was due to be held on 10 and 11 May 2006 but was cancelled.

Documents pertaining to the first planning application are at:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/findCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F93%2F05%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
296 LONDON ROAD - CPT/700/05/FUL - CHANGE OF USE FROM CAR SHOWROOM TO BISTRO STYLE RESTAURANT

APPROVED ON 31 JAN 2006 (DELEGATED DECISION)

This planning application was made by Mrs J. Kwan.

The Planning Officer's report makes the following comments:

"Prima facie the proposal ought to be refused on the basis of a lack on on-site parking provision. However, the attractiveness and vitality of Hadleigh as a Town Centre has for many years suffered from being occupied by too many inapproriate uses such as car sales. The reclaiming of one of these sites for a more appropriate town centre use would only serve to enhance the area. It should be noted that the Highway Authority has not objected to the proposal and that there are a number of public car parks and short term parking bays available within walking distance."

Documents relating to the planning application can be viewed/downloaded from:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM133/showCaseFile.do?appNumber=CPT%2F700%2F05%2FFUL

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Harold House demolition
Note: The following article is a bit dated now but I have left it here because other locally-listed buildings, especially the Crown pub, are at risk of demolition.

Harold House stood opposite the Waggon & Horses pub on London Road. Approval to demolish Harold House and replace it with ten retirement flats with 5 car parking spaces was granted by Castle Point Borough Council's (CPBC) Planning Committee on Tuesday 22 May 2007. Six Conservative councillors voted to approve the application and four Canvey Island Independent councillors voted against. Four Hadleigh councillors attended the Planning Committee meeting as guests and spoke against the application. The only Hadleigh councillor who was a member of the committee at that time, Cllr Colin Riley, was on holiday when the committee met.

The approval was in respect of a second planning application (CPT/179/07/FUL) by William Nelson Ltd. The first application (CPT/387/06) for 12 retirement flats with 6 car parking spaces was refused by the Planning Committee on 9 January 2007.

The first application was refused on various grounds:

1. "The proposed development, by reason of the limited provision of private amenity area and inadequate parking provision, represents overdevelopment of the site which will have an adverse impact on the amenity of future occupiers of the dwelling..."

2. "The proposed development, by virtue of the proximity of the building to the boundaries of the site, represents overdevelopment of the site..."

3. "The proposed development would result in the creation of an obtrusive and overdominant feature in the street scene, out of character with, and detrimental to, the character of the surrouding area."

The plan had been recommended for approval by the Director of Environment, Mr Ian Burchill.

The applicant lodged an appeal against the refusal of the first application whilst submitting the second application. This appeal was dismissed by the Planning Inspectorate on 27 July 2007. (Unfortunately, this was after the decision on the second application.)

One of the main reasons given by the Planning Inspector for refusing the appeal on the first application was that a three-storey development would be out of character for the area. He also regarded the shortfall in amenity space as important.

The Case File documents for the second application can be viewed/downloaded from here:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM/showCaseFile.do?councilName=Castle+Point+BC&appNumber=CPT%2F179%2F07%2FFUL

The Case File documents for the first application can be viewed/downloaded from here:

http://wam.castlepoint.gov.uk/WAM/showCaseFile.do?councilName=Castle+Point+BC&appNumber=CPT%2F387%2F06%2FFUL

The Planning Inspector's report on the appeal against the refusal of the first application can be found by going to the following page:

http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.uk/pcsportal/casesearch.asp

and then entering the following Case Reference:

APP/M1520/A/07/2039619

The Planning Inspector's report makes very interesting reading, not just for those interested in saving Hadleigh's heritage.

Harold House was one of Hadleigh's oldest houses and one of the prettiest. It appears on the Tithe Map of 1847 (see inside cover of "Hadleigh, An Essex Village" by Sandra Harvey & Marion Hancock) but its exact build date is not known. Sadly, virtually all of the original internal features had been removed and so Harold House was never worthy of statutory listing.

However, owing to its age and external appearance, the house was included on the council's Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest. The entry on the list referred to the building as "An attractive red brick house with (chalk) quoins". [The chalk quoins had unfortunately been plastered over in recent years!]

Harold House was quite a grand house in its time - an advert for an auction held in 1886 (see page 26 of "Hadleigh Past" by Ian Yearsley) describes the house as “A Capital Brick-Built House… with Large Garden, Orchard, Stable and Chaise House”. Whilst it may no longer have been a "Capital" house, it still served as a reminder of what Hadleigh was like when it was still a small village.

HAROLD HOUSE - A PERSONAL VIEW

As administrator of the HELIX website I normally try to remain neutral when reporting news stories. However, in the case of Harold House, I am willing to make an exception!

For those interested, here are some extracts from a letter of complaint sent by me to David Marchant, Chief Executive of Castle Point Borough Council on 19 June 2007:

"Many local authorities maintain a Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest and Castle Point Borough Council has such a list. Although buildings on a Local List do not enjoy full statutory protection, Para 6.16 of PPG15 states:
'…It is also open to planning authorities to draw up lists of locally important buildings and to formulate local plan policies for their protection, through normal development control procedures'.

The Government encourages Local Lists and acknowledges their role in the planning system. It affirms this in the White Paper 'Heritage Protection for the 21st Century' by stating:
"We encourage the use of local designation to provide communities with the opportunity to identify and manage those aspects of their heritage that are important to them… The inclusion of a historic asset on a local list can be a material consideration within the planning system." [Paras 56 & 58]

Harold House is included on Castle Point Borough Council's List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest. Furthermore, the council's development control procedures in the Local Plan do afford protection to buildings on the Local List through Planning Policy EC37, which states:

POLICY EC37 - LOCAL LIST OF BUILDINGS

PROPOSALS WHICH WOULD ADVERSELY AFFECT, TO A SIGNIFICANT DEGREE, THE CHARACTER OR SETTING OF ANY BUILDING CONTAINED WITHIN THE LOCAL LIST OF BUILDINGS OF ARCHITECTURAL OR HISTORIC INTEREST WILL BE REFUSED.

For anyone interested in heritage conservation, this policy is as clear-cut as one could wish.

However, despite having queried the approval of CPT/179/07/FUL with Cllr Norman Smith, Chairman of the Planning Committee, I am no wiser as to why Policy EC37 was not considered by the Planning Committee. As already indicated, the Director of Environment failed to include any reference to this policy in his report to the committee; nor was it raised by the Assistant Director of Planning in her verbal summary of the application before the application was discussed. Although Cllr Godfrey Isaacs briefly mentioned Policy EC37 when speaking, as a guest, against the application, neither the Chairman of the committee, nor the Assistant Director of Planning, or the Director of Environment made any response.

I have been advised by Cllr Norman Smith that a majority of the Planning Committee felt that accepting ten flats on the Harold House site was preferable to losing the appeal on the first application for twelve flats. He mentioned that they were being strongly advised that the outcome of the appeal would most likely be approval.

I consider that the first application was refused on good grounds and, although perverse appeal decisions are not unknown, I doubt that it would have been approved on appeal. However, in my view, the council’s case would have been much stronger had Policy EC37 been included in the reasons for refusal.

The White Paper 'Heritage Protection for the 21st Century' has a very interesting statistic in the footnote on page 49. The footnote refers to research by Peter Boland in 1997/98 which found that of 20 appeal decisions relating to buildings on local lists, only one was negative [i.e. appeal upheld], leading him to conclude that "Appeal Inspectors appear highly accepting of Local Lists, viewing them as a perfectly proper exercise of the powers of local planning authorities". Given the increasing interest in the nation's heritage and the focus on retaining local character and identity as expressed in PPG15 and other documents, I am sure that this conclusion would still be drawn today.

The core of my complaint arising from what I have written above is that Castle Point Borough Council has failed to adhere to its own Local Plan, specifically Policy EC37, when dealing with planning application CPT/179/07/FUL. This action is detrimental to the residents of Hadleigh and others who appreciate the importance of Harold House.

The action appears to be contrary to the council’s own constitution. Para 3.1 on page 144 of the Constitution states that "Members and Officers should, therefore, support the Council's planning policies and make decisions in accordance with them unless there are sound and valid reasons not to do so".

Para 1.3 on page 144 of the Constitution states: "In deciding on planning applications, Members must take into account any relevant views expressed by neighbouring occupiers, local residents…" My belief that the application was contrary to Policy EC37, which was expressed in Point 4 of my letter of objection, was not taken into account by the committee. (As a last resort, I tried to raise the matter before the vote was taken on the application but I was told to sit down or be ejected from the chamber!)

Harold House should be one of the jewels in Hadleigh’s crown being described as an "attractive red-brick house" in the Local List entry and being one of the very few buildings still standing from an era when Hadleigh was a small village.
Regrettably, the Director of Environment and a section of the Planning Committee appear not to be concerned about Hadleigh’s local heritage despite the fact that Aim 3 of the Local Plan is: 'To conserve and enhance the architectural and historic heritage of the Borough'.

I consider that the failure to conserve Harold House is a disgrace and a massive disservice to the residents of Hadleigh, many of whom already have little faith in the council's planning regime. The fact that four Hadleigh ward councillors attended the Planning Committee meeting as guests and spoke against the application only heightens the sense of injustice arising from this planning decision.

I look forward to the results of your investigation of my complaint. If there are any means whereby the demolition of Harold House may be prevented pending the outcome of your investigation then I urge you to take the necessary action.

Yours sincerely

Mr M G Brown

Postcript
---------
Harold House has now been demolished. I had one unsatisfactory reply to the above letter from Ian Burchill (Director of Environment) and a second unsatisfactory reply from Steve Rogers (Head of Planning & Open Spaces) to a follow-up letter.

I therefore lodged a complaint with the Local Government Ombudsman. To cut a long story short, CPBC accepted that it was at fault in not referring to Policy EC37 explicitly and in the way my correspondence was treated. I was offered (and accepted) £100 for my time and trouble in bringing the complaint. I would have preferred stronger action by the Local Government Ombudsman's office but the only further action that they could take would have been to publish a report about what the council had done wrong and what they needed to do to put it right. This level of action is not taken very often.
[Updated 21 Oct 2009]


Advertisements
Search
Click here for a list of links to other Beehives around the UK

The Beehive Community Network is managed by Northcliffe Media Ltd, Registered in England, Company registration number: 00272225, VAT no: 243571174