Graham,

What would be the local authorities thoughts on this idea? Is it legal,  and would a Planning Officer give any weight to this if it was put in an application?

Look forward to your comments.

Regards

Cllr  Chris Griffiths

St James Ward

Tendring District Council

Clacton West

Essex County Council

-------------------------------

Dear Chris,

I hope you are well. Unfortunately PPS25 isn’t something that can be altered on a case by case basis.  We (ECC) would like it to be reviewed as a whole and have argued that it effectively blights parts of Essex – including Jaywick – in perpetuity. This can’t be fair. However, it is easy to understand (a sad reminder recently due to the heavy rain in Cumbria) why Whitehall is anxious to prevent any development that would increase flood risk or people at risk of harm in high flood risk areas. There are two tests inherent in PPS25:

1. Test A – is there any other place outside of the flood risk area where the development could take place?
2. Test B – if A is a “no” how will the development be made safe for its lifetime (including the effect on the neighbouring land and anyone occupying the building). For residential development the development has to be safe for 100 years in design terms.

As it stands no new development in Jaywick is able to satisfy the tests. We think that “betterment” should be permissible where it can be proven it is making the building safer. This might be where a wooden extension is replaced with a brick one for example. Even here, however, there are strong counter arguments: a brick wall if hit by flood water might cause more harm than a wooden one!

In a nutshell any change in PPS25 will have to come from Whitehall. Tendring DC’s position is entirely governed by PPS25, they don’t have any leeway to amend, adapt or change the guidance locally.

Kind regards,

Steve