Foul drainage amendment at Sidney Little Road, St Leonards-on-Sea

What was proposed

The application sought retrospective permission to vary approved plans so the internal ground-floor foul drainage layout could be changed.

“Proposal: Variation of condition 3 (Approved Plans) of Planning Permission HS/FA/21/00306 - Amendment to internal ground floor foul drainage runs…”

“Proposed development This is a retrospective application that seeks permission for the variation of plans approved under condition 3 of Planning Permission HS/FA/21/00306. This amendment is to allow for an alternative layout of the internal ground floor foul drainage runs. No other alterations are proposed as part of this application.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is in an industrial estate, near ancient woodland, with the closest homes at least 200 metres away and screened by woodland.

“Site and surrounding area The site is located within the Churchfields Industrial Estate and is accessed via Sidney Little Road which is a no through road leading from Highfield Drive and provides access to several existing industrial units. The site is located south-east of Sidney Little Road. To the south and east of the application site is an area of ancient woodland (Church Wood and Robsack Wood). The remaining immediate surrounding area is predominantly industrial.”

“The closest residential properties are located a minimum of 200 metres from the application site and the site is well screened from these properties by the woodland.”

Officer report

Officers’ recommendation

Officers recommended approval because the amendment was modest, invisible from the public domain and acceptable in relation to neighbouring amenity and drainage.

“Impact of the development on the character of the area has already been assessed and determined as acceptable by way of approval of HS/FA/21/00306. The alterations proposed as part of this application relate only to the internal drainage layout. As the alterations are minor and would not be visible from the public domain, it is considered that the works are acceptable and the impact on the character of the area would not be altered.”

“This was due to the separation distance of the proposed development to neighbouring properties being a minimum of 200 metres. This level of separation, combined with the level of screening that is afforded by the existing ancient woodland, was concluded to result in a development where no neighbouring amenity would be lost.”

Officer report

The drainage issue

The application addressed a previously refused drainage installation evidence submission because the installed foul drainage layout differed from the approved plans.

“Foul Water As part of the original consent a condition (No.28) was imposed to secure final details of the surface water drainage proposals. Parts (i, ii, iii and iv a-b) of this condition (hydrolic calculations, details of outfall, ditch/watercourse survey, maintenance and management plan) were approved under HS/CD/22/00160.”

“The 'as-built' drainage layout (201-C1) and Manhole Schedule (202-C1) submitted in support of the current application have been reviewed in conjunction with Southern Water and the Hastings Borough Council Senior Sustainable Urban Drainage and Flood Risk Officer. No objections have been received from either party and as such, the amended internal foul drainage layout is considered acceptable.”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Southern Water, county flood officers and borough drainage officers raised no objections, while Natural England referred to standing advice.

“Consultation comments Southern Water - No objection ESCC SUDS - No objection HBC SUDS - No objection Natural England - No comment - referred to standing advice.”

Officer report

Public representations

A site notice was displayed and no responses were received.

“Representations In respect of this application a site notice was displayed at the front of the site on Sidney Little Road. No responses were received.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The senior planning officer presented the retrospective application and said there had been no updates since publication of the report.

Committee discussion

There were no questions or debate, and approval in line with the officer recommendation was proposed and seconded.

“There being no questions nor debate, approval of the application in accordance with the Officer’s recommendation was proposed by Councillor Simnett, seconded by Councillor Rumfitt. The Chair called upon the Committee to vote and it was…”

Minutes

The decision

Full planning permission was granted subject to the officer report’s conditions and completion of a Section 106 agreement.

“To GRANT Full Planning Permission subject to the conditions set out in the Officer’s report and the completion of a Section 106 agreement.”

Minutes