Creeping Planning Applications - A Masterclass (Part 2)

First Attempt Tuctaway in 2010

Read Part 1 first here.

The first planning application on the site was lodged on 15 July 2010 with Tendring District Council. The documents relating to this application (10/00819/FUL) can be found here. It is worth noting that the trees on the western end of the plot were subject to Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs).

Tuctaway in 2013

 There were 26 formal comments and of these 25 were to object to the plans. Those that were made available online at the time can be viewed here.

One correspondent,  (the elderly resident of Tuctaway, Jaywick Lane, Clacton On Sea, Essex CO15 2DR), wrote in with a NEUTRAL comment, but the basis for this neutral stance is not clear as their comment is marked as being unavailable.

Tuctaway was sold on 23 October 2013 for £143,000. Interestingly, Tuctaway has since become part of the scheme involving Grove Cottage and Willow Park Farm.


To return to the planning application of 2010 (10/00819/FUL).  A sketch plan of the proposed building works is shown below.






This application, for the "demolition of existing dwelling and erection of 12 x 3 Bed detached bungalows and garages thereto",  was refused. The officers decision report is date June 2011, so it took nearly a year for a a decision to be made.

This may partly have been due to the number of comments received from the public. As mentioned above, the application was refused. If would would like to see the reasons in detail for this, please see the documents on the Tendring District Council Planning web pages.The main reasons given for refusal were:


"This proposed design solution is bland and fails to create a sense of place."

"No tree survey or report has been submitted with this application to allow a proper assessment of the immediate impact of the proposal on protected trees or the extent to which obstruction to daylight and sunlight reaching the proposed residential properties has the potential to harm the long-term viability of the trees (taking into account future growth). A drawing entitled 'Root Protection Plan' has been submitted, but this does not mark Root Protection Zones in the correct position."

"....the development also fails to respect the existing character of the area."

The fact that there was no ecological survey of the site did not bode well either.

This was all summarised as:

"...the proposal is unattractively designed, not in keeping with the surrounding area, and threatens trees protected by Tree preservation Order. Consequently the proposal would harm visual amenity....."

and

"..that "an initial scoping or extended Phase 1 habitat survey should be conducted to assess the site and the results  of this used to inform (the need for) subsequent species specific surveys". No such information has been provided with this application." 


The architects for the scheme were Paul Newbold Planning and Building Design Services of Clacton-on-Sea.

The developers were not to be put off, however, and they returned with a different scheme some time later. This will be the subject of my next post......

Creeping Planning Applications - a Masterclass (Part 1)

I have a friend who has had to move into supported living in the Clacton-on-Sea area.

As a good citizen, (rights and responsibilities etc.), I thought I would look into the background of the brand new premises that my friend would be moving into. It was a revelation and it introduced me to the concept of the "Creeping Planning Application" (CPA).

To make use of this approach to getting round all sorts of planning rules and regulations you must be patient, superbly prepared and not at all impulsive. Success also relies upon the local planning officers being overworked and local residents being indifferent or unaware about how planning applications come to be successful.

It is a complicated story, perhaps not an easy read, but it will fill you with admiration for the focus and determination of those making the application to get what they want.

Here goes....... Oh, by the way, I will publish this in several instalments. Just like the "Creeping Planning Application" technique.... an exemplar of deferred gratification.

One more thing before I start. Although this is about a plot of land in Clacton-on-Sea in Essex, it can be universally applied across the UK....and indeed it is!

The property I have chosen for this exemplar of a CPA is (or was!) Grove Cottage, Jaywick Lane, Clacton-on-Sea, CO15 2DR. It was an attractive, thatched building in its own considerable grounds. See the aerial view here:

Aerial View of Grove Cottage

The label at the end of the above link is placed by Google in the wrong place (I think!). I am not a local, so I may be mistaken. Anyway, the building and its grounds that I am interested in is the one I have marked and roughly indicated in red below. I will come back to the blue line later!

Grove Cottage from Google Maps (see link above)

Whilst preparing this post I came across the Street View photograph of the building as in the picture below (at the end of the link too). I was fairly shocked to see what a lovely building this was! In fact, I would have thought it should have been listed. Sadly, that horse has bolted.

Grove Cottage in October 2012 from Google Street View (see link below)

Grove Cottage before its demise.


The "birds eye" view from Bing Maps, at the end of the link here, shows the house in better times, before it had been sold in 2010. The next picture is an extract from the Bing Maps view.

Grove Cottage - a birds eye view from Bing Maps - pre-2010(?)

On 31 March 2010 the property was sold for £650,000 and was purchased by, according to the title at The Land Registry (EX804229):

WILLOW PARK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED (Co. Regn. No.
06821377) of 92 Station Road, Clacton-on-Sea, Essex CO15
1SG and of Willow Park, The Street, Weeley, Essex CO16
9JE.

This is where the blue line on the illustration above comes into play...I think. We will look at that in a later post.

For the moment, a final caveat.. I may be entirely wrong about this whole thing and I am hopeful that readers will take the time to enter debate, via comments, about the process and my understanding of it.