Meeting Details

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Topping and Councillor Noble.

During the discussion of Item 14 - On-Street Parking Regulations Resident Exemptions, Councillor Beavan declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest, as he was in possession of a resident parking exemption permit.  He abstained from the vote on this item.

The Chair stated that the Tour of Britain had been excellent, with good tv coverage.  It had showed the district a very positive light and he wished Babergh and Mid Suffolk Councils the same success when the tour was in their districts.
 
Councillor Whitelock took the opportunity to thank all of the Officers who were involved in arranging the Tour of Britain.  It had been very successful and looked professional.

Councillor Langdon-Morris commented that there had been a recent legislative change regarding imports of meat and he queried whether the statements within the minutes were still correct and that the risks remained low?  Councillor Candy responded that the new rules had not yet taken effect and the Port Team were experienced in dealing with changes to legislation.  Councillor Candy then provided clarification that the changes to the imports of meat, related to live meat imports, which did not take place at the Port.

On the proposition of Councillor Candy seconded by Councillor Wilson it was unanimously 

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 8 July 2025 be agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Councillor Beavan, Cabinet Member for Housing, presented report ES/2373, which related to the Review of the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy.  Councillor Beavan reported that the Council had a statutory duty to publish its strategy on a 5 yearly basis and the strategy addressed the major housing crisis in the district.

Councillor Beavan moved the recommendations within the report and he was seconded by Councillor Packard.

Councillor Beavan invited the Head of Housing, to say a few words.  The Head of Housing reported that the Council had a statutory duty to review the nature and extent of homelessness in the district.  The strategy would set out the Council's aims and actions in order to reduce homelessness.  The Council was using its statutory powers and worked alongside Suffolk County Council and other organisations.  It was noted that the recent workshop in Southwold had helped to shape the 6 key priorities, which were:

• Early intervention to prevent homelessness and providing personalised solutions.
• Tackling the root causes of homelessness.
• Meeting the health and wellbeing needs of households in temporary accommodation.
• Increasing access to accommodation that is suitable, sustainable, and affordable. 
• Making rough sleeping brief and non-recurrent. 
• Developing robust partnerships and collaborative working.
 
The Chair then invited questions from Members.
 
Councillor Langdon-Morris asked how housing and homelessness budgets would be affected by Local Government Review.  Councillor Beavan reported that the Council would continue with its strategy and people needed to be supported.

Councillor Daly expressed his support for the strategy, stating that it was crucial to support vulnerable people.  He commented that additional temporary accommodation was needed in the district.
 
Councillor Candy asked how vulnerable people with pets were supported, as temporary accommodation was not always suitable for those with pets.  The importance of including pets was acknowledged and it was noted that some of the Council's temporary accommodation was suitable for pets.
 
Councillor Langdon-Morris commented that there was some temporary accommodation in the pipeline and he queried whether it would provide any savings for the Council?  The Head of Housing responded that a cost benefit analysis had been completed and it would save the Council money, compared with expensive nightly lets.  A further report on Homelessness would be taken to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in due course.   Reassurance was provided that the Council would look at all options to help reduce homelessness and a cost benefit analysis would be undertaken for all the options considered.
 
Councillor Wilson commented on the graph on page 34 of the meeting papers, which showed that those experiencing homelessness were significantly more prone to mental or physical health issues or drug and alcohol issues.  He asked if enough support was being provided to help those people?  Councillor Beavan responded that some people do experience a number of issues and it was important to integrate care services into one place, hopefully this would be easier after the Local Government Review.  The Head of Housing reported that support needs had increased exponentially in recent years.  It was crucial for the Council to work collaboratively in this area.  The Housing Team also followed best practice, attended webinars, training, benchmarking and learned from others experiences.  The Housing Team were also targeting those leaving the care system, to ensure they got sufficient support and to help reduce rough sleeping in the future.
 
Councillor Ashdown asked how many rough sleepers were in East Suffolk and it was reported that there were currently 18, although new rough sleepers may arrive from out of the area.  The numbers increased in the summer months and the Housing Officers worked closely with them and offered accommodation in severe weather.  Not all rough sleepers would engage with the support offered and additional support was provided to help those entrenched rough sleepers.
 
Councillor Jepson commented that the Homelessness Strategy had recently been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the committee had been impressed by the support being provided.  He took the opportunity to thank the Head of Housing and her Team for all of their hard work, as it was very important to support the homeless.
 
Upon being put to the vote, it was unanimously
 
RESOLVED
 
Recommend that authority be delegated to the Head of Housing, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, to: -

1. Approve the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2025-2030 (Draft version), attached as Appendix A.

2. Make any presentational or clarificatory improvements or minor non-material amendments as necessary prior to its publication, including updating any data where this becomes available in the intervening period. 

3. Conduct an annual review of progress against the strategy and action plan, which should be reported to Cabinet and ensure the quarterly key performance indicators are reported as part of ESC’s Corporate Performance Framework.

4. The work identified through the Strategic Review of Temporary Accommodation, be supported to reduce the dependency on expensive nightly let accommodation and ensure better access to good quality TA within the ESC area through the Development of a new Temporary Accommodation Strategy.

Councillor Mark Packard, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, presented report ES/2488, which sought approval of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan statutory five-year review assessment and the updated Interim Housing Position Statement, and within this context, to provide an update on the preparation of the East Suffolk Local Plan.
 
The Suffolk Coastal Local Plan was five years old on 23 September 2025. The Council had a statutory duty to review a Local Plan to consider whether it needed to be updated prior to it being five years old. The review had been undertaken and concluded that, principally due to the significant increase in housing need figure, the plan needed to be updated.

The same exercise was undertaken for the Waveney Local Plan prior to it being five years old in March 2024, and it was updated in March 2025 following the introduction of new higher housing need figures. 

The Council had already committed to preparing an East Suffolk Local Plan, with work beginning in 2025 and adoption anticipated for 2029. Once adopted, this would replace the Suffolk Coastal and Waveney Local Plans, which will remain in place until that time.
The conclusions of the review assessment also have implications for decision making. Now that the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan was five years old and had been assessed as requiring a review, the housing land supply must be calculated using the housing need figure (calculated at 981 dwellings per year) rather than the housing requirement in the Local Plan (542 dwellings per year). This meant that the housing land supply had dropped from 6.08 years to 3.36 years. Under national policy, where housing land supply was below five years the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ was applied in decision making on planning applications for housing. This meant that greater weight would be applied to the benefits to housing supply when making decisions. This position had already applied in the Waveney Local Plan area since March 2025. 

The Interim Housing Position Statement at Appendix B, sets out the position in relation to applying the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’, which was approved by Cabinet in March 2025 and had now been updated to reflect the position in the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan area. 

The report also provided an update on preparation of an East Suffolk Local Plan. The interim timetable for the preparation of the Local Plan, set out in the March 2025 Local Development Scheme, was dependent on the introduction of the new national plan-making system. Secondary legislation, policy and guidance were still awaited to enable plan-making to formally begin under the new system, however, work had been taking place in the meantime, including scoping of the evidence needed and undertaking a questionnaire to ask people how they would like to be involved. The Youth Council Local Plan Focus Group had also been established. It was anticipated that the new system would be in place later this year, following which a Local Plan Timetable would be brought to Cabinet for approval. In the meantime activities that can be progressed in advance of the new system will continue and it was proposed that an update be added to the Council’s website, as set out in the report.
 
Councillor Packard moved the recommendations in the report and was seconded by Councillor Beavan.

Councillor Langdon-Morris sought reassurance that, if there was a presumption in favour of sustainable development, Planning Committees would still be required and democratic accountability would be maintained.  Councillor Packard confirmed that nothing would change, applications would still be considered by Planning Committees, just in a slightly different way.
 
Councillor Candy was concerned that if there was insufficient land supply and there was a presumption in favour of sustainable development, that was almost stating that developers could do what they wanted.  When the land supply was low in Felixstowe previously, an estate had been built following an appeal, which had proven unpopular.  Councillor Packard stated that developers had the opportunity to speak to the planners and seek advice as to what would be appropriate and applications would still need to come through to committee.  The Head of Planning and Building Control provided reassurance that the democratic process remained, it was the policy weighting that would change.  It was important to develop a new Local Plan and identify sites for development.  The phrase 'presumption in favour of sustainable development' did not mean that it was a free for all for developers.  Real control was still in place to ensure an effective use of land and efficient locations to secure well designed places.

Members commented that the change was a legal, national expectation and could not be avoided.  This would need to be dealt with responsibly by the creation of a new Local Plan.  The housing targets which were also set by government, had been doubled, increasing the pressure.

Councillor Candy urged caution that future developments should provide the amount of affordable housing that was agreed, rather than renege on it at a later date.  Councillor Packard stated that the Planning Team and Building Control would oversee that.  Once housing was built and being lived in, it was the responsibility of the owners to keep it well maintained.  The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that National Planning Policy Framework clearly defined 'sustainable' and it had 3 clear objectives in relation to financial, social and environmental factors.  The Council still had effective policies and supplementary documents, which would help to ensure that good design outcomes were achieved.
 
Councillor Langdon-Morris raised concerns about water supply and flooding, stating that housing developments should not make a negative impact and cause environmental issues.  Councillor Packard provided reassurance that the water companies were informed of planning applications and they then made a report about the potential impacts that the development would cause.  Officers took this into account and also visited the site etc.  The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that he met regularly with Anglian Water and that they were planning on building more reservoirs.  If sufficient water was not available, additional houses could not be built.
 
Councillor Daly commented that it was important to be engaged in the process and that Councils do have an effect on communities and the environment.  Also, Local Government Review was coming up and this would result in more power for the Mayor of Norfolk and Suffolk, therefore we should engage fully in the new process and have local scrutiny of planning matters. Councillor Packard stated that this Council had some of the best planners in the land, applications were considered robustly and good decisions were made.
 
Councillor Reeves stated that there were concerns about this in Felixstowe, which were not just about housing but more the building of infrastructure and the spreading of the Port across the A45.  There had also been no reference to things that did not involve housing, such employment land and logistics, how would they be affected?  Councillor Packard responded that developers were obliged to provide green space and not to cause any flooding.  When the call for land commenced in October, he encouraged Councillors to get involved and speak to the Port and Town Council about where they think that houses should be built.  This was best way to raise any concerns.
 
Councillor Jepson stated stated that the people of Felixstowe did not want the North Garden Neighbourhood, which had been in planning for 5 years.  He felt that everyone was against it and then it was overruled by the government.  We are concerned that the government will overrule our concerns again in the future.   The Head of Planning and Building Control stated that the government have been clear, we cannot argue against the target set for house building, we need to be planning for it.  The Local Plan journey was very important, we were working with neighbouring authorities and local communities to get the best result for all.
 
Councillor Beavan stated that changing the National Planning Policy Framework was not within our gift.  As yet, the details were not clear and call-in could still be used.  It was important to engage with the process to build much needed homes that people can afford to live in.
 
Upon being put to the vote it was
 
RESOLVED
 
That Cabinet:

1. Approved the content and conclusions of the Review Assessment of the East Suffolk Council – Suffolk Coastal Local Plan (Appendix A of this report) and agrees that this is published.

2. Approved the content of the Interim Housing Position Statement (Appendix B of this report) and agrees that this is published.

3. Noted the position in relation to Local Plan preparation and that this report will be published on the Council’s Local Development Scheme webpage along with a brief update as set out in paragraph 2.60, and authorises the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, to make any further updates to the webpage in this regard prior to the approval of a Local Plan Timetable.

4. Authorised future technical updates to the Interim Housing Position Statement to be undertaken by the Head of Planning and Building Control in consultation with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management.

5. Authorised the Head of Planning and Building Control, in consultation with the Cabinet Member with responsibility for Planning and Coastal Management, to make any typographical or presentational changes to the Review Assessment of the Suffolk Coastal Local Plan and the Interim Housing Position Statement prior to their publication.

Councillor Paul Ashton, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Corporate Services – Digital, Customer Services, HR and Assets, presented report ES/2487, which sought approval for the phased redevelopment and procurement approach for the Southwold Caravan and Campsite, following endorsement by the Southwold Harbour Management Committee (SHMC) in March and July 2025.
 
Councillor Ashton stated that the Harbour Lands included the caravan site and part of the touring site.  When drafting the Harbour Revision Order (HRO), Southwold Town Council had commented that they wished for the whole of the campsite to be included in the harbour lands and East Suffolk Council supported that.  It was noted that the HRO approval was a lengthy process.  All funds from the Harbour Lands were ringfenced and could only be spent in the Harbour.
 
The campsite itself was dated and the toilet block was functional.  The touring site was doing well and had a good level of bookings.  The static caravan site contained some very old caravans, which detracted from the overall appeal of the site, and the annual licence fees were significantly below market rate.    The Harbour had some significant costs on the horizon for the south training arm and there was uncertainty surrounding the total costs and when the work would be required.  If the cash generation from the campsite could be improved, the work on the south training arm could be more self-financing.

Improving the profitability of the campsite would involve a mix of offers - static caravans, touring caravans and, potentially, lodges.  Further work would take place to look into the feasibility of lodges to make sure that they were suitable for Southwold, which was a unique site.  The caravans and, possibly lodges, would either be bought outright and used by the owners or be used as holiday lets.  It was acknowledged that there was greater revenue from holiday lets, although there were the additional costs of changeover, cleaning, voids, marketing etc.
 
The infrastructure of the site did need significant investment and this would necessitate all caravans being cleared from the site.  It was noted that some caravans would not survive being moved, so the owners would need to decide whether to purchase a new caravan and return to the refurbished site or leave the site entirely.  Consideration was also given to whether the licences should be increased to the market rate and be extended for longer than 10 years.  Caravans would need to have an age limit and MOT each year afterwards, to make sure they were still in suitable to be in use.  It was noted that should some caravan owners decide not to have a caravan on the refurbished site, there was a considerable waiting list.
 
Councillor Ashton emphasised that general principles were being agreed this evening, rather than specifics.  Evidence would be gathered regarding lodges and it was likely that a few would be trialled to begin with.  It was anticipated that work would start on the campsite after the summer season in 2026.
 
Councillor Ashton moved the recommendations in the report and was seconded by Councillor Beavan.
 
Councillor Beavan stated that he was the Chair of the Harbour Management Committee and whilst he was not keen on lodges for this site, he would keep an open mind.  He reported that when static caravans were discarded, they go into landfill and could not be recycled.  Therefore, it was important for the static caravans to last as long as possible, with regular maintenance and MOTs when they were past 10 years old.  He asked Members to bear in mind the need to build flood resilience into the site, as sea levels were predicted to rise in future years.  Therefore, he favoured modular units, which could be moved when required.  If the Harbour was lost over time, South Beach would also be lost, therefore, it was important to keep the Harbour functioning.
 
Councillor Candy suggested that recommendation 3 should be amended to state 'eco lodges' rather than lodges, as discussions had taken place at the HMC meetings and they had agreed that the lodges should be as environmentally sustainable as possible.  There followed some discussion and it was stated that there was no clear definition of an eco lodge and it was inappropriate to decide such details when the HMC should be considering the procurement requirements over the coming months.  Councillor Candy moved that 'eco lodges' should be added to the recommendation and this was not seconded.  It was confirmed that it was too early to agree that level of detail.

Councillor Langdon-Morris sought clarity on why construction of the site would be taking place over winter and whether this was feasible.  Councillor Ashton reported that it was avoiding the peak seasons and to retain as much income as possible.  Detailed information on the construction plans would be provided in due course and if it was possible to complete the work in a quicker time, they would aim to do so.  Councillor Jepson commented that winter construction in Felixstowe had proven to be rather challenging and he hoped that lessons could be learned.
 
Upon being put to the vote it was unanimously
 
RESOLVED
 
That Cabinet:

1. Approved the adoption of the flexible, blended redevelopment approach set out in the Southwold Caravan Site Forward Strategy reported to the Southwold Harbour Management Committee in March 2025 involving a combination of static caravans, lodges and touring pitches.

2. Approved progression to a ten-year rolling licence model for static caravan plots, to replace the informal seasonal licences currently in place, subject to legal review and advice.

3. Endorsed the phased procurement strategy covering design consultancy, site infrastructure works, and the sourcing of caravan and lodge units via market engagement and competitive procedures. 

4. Authorised the immediate procurement of a Design Manager through a compliant framework call-off process, within current delegated financial authority. 

5. Noted the continuing stakeholder engagement programme with static pitch holders and local consultees, alongside the application of a structured plot allocation framework.

6. Approved continued development and implementation of the Phase 1 mobilisation programme, with a targeted delivery window from December 2026 to April 2027.

7. Approved up to £250,000 for design management costs, set out in paragraph 4.3 to be funded by harbour reserves. 

Councillor David Beavan, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Housing, presented report ES/2489, which sought approval for 6 newly developed housing policies, which had been identified as priorities through a gap analysis of the Council's housing policy framework.  These policies were essential to ensuring compliance with current legal and regulatory requirements. Their adoption would support consistent service delivery.  The policies for approval were:
 
1. Recharge Policy - Establishing a fair and transparent process for recovering the cost of repairs or replacements caused by tenant damage, unauthorised works, or negligence.

2. Housing Compensation Policy - Outlining the circumstances under which ESC may offer discretionary financial compensation to tenants or leaseholders and when statutory compensation may be applicable.

3. Access Policy - Setting out the Council’s approach to gaining access to its properties, including gardens and external areas, for a range of essential purposes.

4. Decant Policy - Detailing how the Council would manage temporary or permanent rehousing of tenants due to essential works, safety issues, or redevelopment, ensuring minimal disruption and appropriate compensation. 

5. Domestic Abuse Policy - Setting out the Council’s commitment to supporting victims/survivors of domestic abuse, in line with statutory duties and best practice. 

6. Damp and Mould Policy - Outlining a proactive and responsive approach to preventing and addressing damp, mould and condensation in council-managed properties, in line with the Housing Ombudsman’s recommendations. 

Councillor Beavan moved the recommendations within the report and was seconded by Councillor Packard, who reserved his right to speak.

Councillor Langdon-Morris asked if the budgets were ready for these changes?  It was confirmed that work was underway in this respect.

The Cabinet commended and thanked the Housing Team for their work on the policies.

Upon being put to the vote it was
 
RESOLVED
 
That Cabinet:

1. Approved all six policies (Appendices A to F) and agrees that these are published on the Council’s website and shared with relevant stakeholders as part of the wider housing service improvement plan.

The policies for approval were:
1. Recharge Policy
2. Housing Compensation Policy
3. Access Policy
4. Decant Policy
5. Domestic Abuse Policy
6. Damp and Mould Policy

2. Approved the fees and charges listed in the Recharge Policy and ensures they are added to the ESC Fees and Charges book.

3. Gave delegated authority to the Head of Housing, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing, to make amendments and update the policies as required in response to changes in legislation, operational feedback, or best practice.

Councillor Paul Ashton, Cabinet Member with responsibility for Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Corporate Services – Digital, Customer Services, HR and Assets, presented report ES/2491, which provided an overview of the draft outturn position for Southwold Harbour for the financial year ending 31 March 2025.   It was noted that the report was approved by Southwold Harbour Management Committee on 10 July 2025, in line with the Committee’s responsibilities to monitor financial performance and report to Cabinet.  

Councillor Ashton stated that overall, the Harbour had under performed and the Caravan Site had over performed.  He then moved the recommendations within the report and was seconded by Councillor Beavan.

Councillor Langdon-Morris sought clarification regarding the surplus funds and it was reported that any profit from the harbour lands, including the caravan site, was ringfenced for use in the harbour.  The ringfenced funds would be used to service the debt needed to repair the groyne and infrastructure.
 
Upon being put to the vote it was unanimously
 
RESOLVED
 
That Cabinet:

1. Approved the Draft Outturn Report for the financial year 2024/25.

2. Approved the transfer of the surplus from the Harbour and Caravan Park operations into the Southwold Harbour reserves.

3. Noted the increased pressures due to rising utility costs and maintenance and directs future budget considerations to account for these.

Councillor Paul Ashton, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member with responsibility for Corporate Services – Digital, Customer Services, HR and Assets, presented report ES/2493, which sought approval of the adoption of the East Suffolk Council Compulsory Purchase Order Protocol.  It was noted that the Protocol set out the principles the Council will follow when considering, and then (if necessary) undertaking, the compulsory purchase of property/land for legitimate and justifiable public interest reasons.    The proposed Protocol was at Appendix A to the report.

Councillor Ashton stated that the Protocol would provide clarity for all and the lack of an up to date protocol could be used against the Council.  The Protocol would be reviewed in future, as appropriate.
 
Councillor Ashton moved the recommendations within the report and was seconded by Councillor Beavan.
 
Councillor Beavan thanked officers for their work in drafting the protocol, which he hoped could be used to provide more affordable housing in the district.
 
Councillor Langdon-Morris commented on the protocol and the number of steps which needed to be followed.  He stated that the Anglian Revenues Partnership were looking into a similar protocol and further information could be provided outside of the meeting.
 
Upon being put to the vote it was unanimously
 
RESOLVED
 
That Cabinet:

1. Agreed to adopt the East Suffolk Council Compulsory Purchase Order Protocol.

2. Delegated to one or more of the Strategic Directors, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Housing, Corporate Services, Economic Development & Transport, to make any presentational or typographical amendments and make minor factual updates to the East Suffolk Council Compulsory Purchase Order Protocol prior to it being published.

3. Delegates authority to one or more of the Strategic Directors, in consultation with the Cabinet Members for Housing, Corporate Services, and Economic Development & Transport to make appropriate updates to the East Suffolk Council Compulsory Purchase Order Protocol to ensure it is up-to-date and aligns with current legislation.

On the proposition of Councillor Daly seconded by Councillor Candy it was unanimously

 

RESOLVED

 

That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.