Agenda and minutes

The Democratic Services Officer reminded everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the Internet, and that the Council had adopted a protocol for the webcasting of its meetings.

The Chairman welcomed members of the public to the meeting and outlined the procedures and arrangements adopted by the Council to enable persons to address the Committee, in relation to the determination of applications for planning permission. The Committee noted the advice provided for the public and speakers in attendance at Council Planning Committee meetings.

(Director of Governance) To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Committee noted the following substitutions for this meeting:

(i)         Councillor C Whitbread for Councillor A Boyce; and

(ii)        Councillor C P Pond for Councillor C C Pond.

(Director of Governance) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

(a)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor C Whitbread declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of being acquainted with the public speaker through his business activities. The Councillor had determined that his interest, whilst not pecuniary, was prejudicial and would leave the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·         EPF/2670/14   Former Carpenters Arms, High Road, Thornwood.

(b)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor R Butler declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of being the Applicant. The Councillor had determined that his interest was pecuniary and would leave the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·         EPF/0293/15   11 Stoney Bridge Drive, Waltham Abbey.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee.

Resolved:

(1)        That the minutes of the meeting held on 11 February 2015 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to the following amendment:

            (a)        amending minute 39(b) to show that Councillor H Brady had            worked at Pine Lodge Riding Centre for one hour per week, not one day per          week, and it had not been under different ownership at the time.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for the proposed demolition of a restaurant and the erection of 3 Town houses and 2 detached houses. This application is a re-submission following the withdrawal of application EPF/1810/14 (DEV-012-2014/15).

The Assistant Director of Governance (Development Control) presented a report on the proposed demolition of a restaurant and the erection of 3 town houses and 2 detached houses. This application was a re-submission following the withdrawal of application EPF/1810/14.

The Assistant Director reported that the application had originally been considered by Area Plans Sub-Committee East, after a deferral for a site visit, in February 2015. The Sub-Committee had refused the application on the grounds that the erection of the two detached houses in the Green Belt would be inappropriate development for which no special circumstances had been demonstrated. The development would also have a significantly adverse impact on the openness of the Green Belt and that the proposals amounted to overdevelopment of the site. Following the vote, the application was referred to this Committee by four members of the Sub-Committee under the minority reference rules within the Constitution for a final decision.

The Assistant Director stated that the application site currently comprised a large, part two storey building whose previous two uses had been a public house and Indian Restaurant. To the rear of the building was a car park associated with the site. The building itself was outside the metropolitan Green Belt, but the car park was within it. To the north of the site, there were residential properties fronting the High Road, and a row of residential properties were on the opposite side of the Carpenters Arms Lane to the south leading to Teazle Mead. There were open fields to the east and west of the site, which was located within a flood risk assessment zone.

The application sought to demolish the existing building, last used as an Indian Restaurant but now vacant, and construct five new dwellings on the land including the car park to the rear of the existing building. Three of the new dwellings would form a terrace fronting the High Road, whilst the other two dwellings would be detached and front Carpenters Arms Lane. The three terraced houses would be three-bedroom properties, whilst the two detached houses would be four-bedroom properties. The terraced properties would have one parking space each within the front garden areas, whilst the detached properties would each have two parking spaces to the side accessed from the existing Lane; there would also be a small car park at the western end of the site with five additional spaces.

The Assistant Director listed the main issues for the Committee to consider, which were the suitability of the site, the impact on the Green Belt, the loss of the community use, the character of the area, the impact on neighbours’ amenity, the impact on the existing landscaping, and the highways and parking issues related to the development.

Planning Officers had concluded that whilst the development was not in a sustainable location and involved the erection of two new buildings in the Green Belt, the harm from this development would be limited due to its location. It was also felt that the community  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for the erection of a single storey rear extension (DEV-013-2014/15).

The Assistant Director of Governance (Development Control) presented a report on the proposed erection of a single storey rear extension with a centrally located roof lantern at 11 Stoney Bridge Drive in Waltham Abbey. The application was before the Committee as the applicant was a serving District Councillor for Waltham Abbey Honey Lane.

The Assistant Director stated that the site was located on the northern side of Stoney Bridge Drive and contained a two storey semi detached dwelling. The site adjoined open fields to the east, which were within the metropolitan Green Belt.

The Assistant Director reported that the main issues for the Committee to consider were the impact on the Green Belt, the effect of the extension on the character and appearance of the existing dwelling, the effect of the development on the neighbours’ living conditions, and the effect on the applicant’s living conditions. Planning Officers had concluded that the proposal would cause no undue harm to amenity and complied with the national and local planning policies.

The Committee noted the summary of representations, and that the Parish Council had no objections to the development. There were no public speakers registered for this application, and the Committee felt the application was sufficiently straightforward that it warranted little debate or any additional conditions to those proposed by the Planning Officers.

Resolved:

(1)        That planning application EPF/0293/15 at 11 Stoney Bridge Drive in Waltham Abbey be granted permission subject to the following conditions:

            1.         The development hereby permitted must be started not later than the         expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

            2.         Materials to be used for the external finishes of the proposed           development shall match those of the existing building, unless otherwise           agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for outline planning permission for a new 4 bedroom dwelling with some matters reserved (DEV-014-2014/15).

The Assistant Director of Governance (Development Control) presented a report concerning outline planning permission for a new four-bedroom dwelling with some matters reserved on land adjacent to Longacre Cottage, School Road in Stanford Rivers.

The Assistant Director reported that this application had been considered by Area Plans Sub-Committee East at its meeting in March 2015. A proposal to refuse the application had been defeated, but before the Officer’s Recommendation to grant the application could be considered four Members of the Sub-Committee had invoked the Minority Reference rules in the Constitution to refer the application to the Committee with no further recommendation. However, the Sub-Committee did request that further information on ‘limited infilling in villages’ be provided for the Committee to consider, along with four additional highways related conditions covering issues concerning sight lines, the surface material to be used on the driveway, no discharge of surface water into the highway, and any gates to be positioned six metres back from the highway.

The Assistant Director advised the Committee that the application site was rectangular in shape and situated on the east side of the triangular village green in Toot Hill bounded by School Road, Toot Hill Road and Epping Road. The site was to the north of Long Acre Cottage, and was within both the metropolitan Green Belt and the village envelope of Toot Hill.

The Assistant Director explained that the proposal was an outline application for a new four-bedroomed dwelling. Approval was being sought for the reserved matters of access and site layout; detailed floorplans and elevations had been submitted for information purposes. The application had been submitted by the owners of the adjacent property, Long Acre Cottage.

The Assistant Director informed the Committee of the main issues to be taken into consideration for this proposal. Although paragraph 89 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stated that new buildings within the Green Belt should be regarded as inappropriate, there were 5 exceptions listed of which one was ‘limited infilling in villages’. The site was clearly within the village envelope of Toot Hill and the proposal could be considered appropriate development. The residential curtilage shown on the indicative plans was considered to be of an appropriate size, and a condition had been added to restrict the curtilage to the indicated area only and not extend into the paddock behind the site. The plans had indicated the removal of a section of the current hedge to the front of the site to improve highway visibility with the rear part of the hedge to be retained. It had been concluded that the revised frontage of the site would still be appropriate for the location and provide for safe vehicular access to and from the site. Finally, the plans indicated the provision of a garage plus a driveway area that could accommodate several vehicles, so the proposal would not give rise to on-street parking.

Consequently, Planning Officers had concluded that, although the site was located in the Green Belt, the proposal could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

The Committee noted that there was no other urgent business for consideration.