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 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 Stallan for Councillor Hart;

(ii)        Councillor C P Pond for Councillor Kauffman; and

(iii)       Councillor Shiell for Councillor Lea.

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

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 8 October 2014.

Resolved:

(1)        That the minutes of the meeting previously circulated held on 8 October 2014 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for a proposed detached annexe building with habitable space on the ground floor and swimming pool in the basement level (DEV-008-2014/15).

The Committee considered an application for a proposed detached annexe building with habitable space on the ground floor and swimming pool in the basement level at 12 Ravensmere in Epping.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that this application had been considered by Area Plans Sub-Committee East on 15 October 2014, but had been referred to this Committee without recommendation. The Sub-Committee had agreed three additional conditions to be attached to the application, but the Officer recommendation to grant permission had been lost.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that the application site was a detached property located in a cul-de-sac close to Epping town centre. The level of the rear garden was above the ground floor level of the house and was reached by a small set of steps from a small patio area. The application was for the construction of a two-storey outbuilding along the boundary with 11 Ravensmere, with one storey located below ground and containing a swimming pool. The upper storey would contain a guest bedroom, bathroom and gymnasium. The building would be 15.2m long, 4.75m wide and rise 3.5m above ground level at the highest point of the slanting roof. It was intended to excavate the rear garden down to the same level as the rear doors of the house.

The Principal Planning Officer reported that, after the main issues had been considered, Officers had concluded the proposed development was considered to have an acceptable level of impact upon neighbouring properties and would not result in an excessive loss of amenity.

The Principal Planning Officer advised the Committee that the main issues to consider were the impacts of the proposed extension on neighbour amenity, the design and appearance of the proposed extension, the preserved tree adjoining the site, and issues regarding land drainage and the basement construction.

The Committee noted the summary of representations, and that the Town Council had objected to the application on the grounds of the detrimental impact upon the amenity of the neighbouring property and had also commented that the absence of any plan to deal with subterranean drainage was also a concern. The Epping Society and three neighbouring properties had also objected to the application; there were no letters of support for the application.

The Committee heard from an objector, who intimated that the applicant had submitted two further applications for the site, before proceeding to debate the application.

The Principal Planning Officer accepted concerns had been raised about the levels shown on the submitted plans, and it was acknowledged that the submitted ground level plan was inaccurate. However, this did not prevent an informed decision being made by the Committee on the application, as the finished level for the garden would be the same as the patio area and therefore the proposed height of the building could be determined. There were nine conditions attached to the application for approval, with the last condition requesting the current and proposed ground levels to be provided in writing before the development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

Resolved:

(1)        That, as agreed by Chairman and in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs (6) and (24) of the Council Procedure Rules, the following item of urgent business be considered following publication of the agenda:

            (a)        EPF/0853/14 – Tottenham Hotspur Training Ground, Luxborough    Lane in Chigwell.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for the redevelopment of the former Tottenham Hotspur training  ground  with  an  autistic  spectrum  disorder school, comprising a 3800 sq metre school building to accommodate up to 128 pupils aged 4-19, a mixed use games area, playing fields,           100 parking spaces and a minibus drop off area; additionally, the development of 60 dwellings on land to the west of the proposed school to act as enabling development to facilitate delivery of the school.

The Committee considered an application for the redevelopment of the former Tottenham Hotspur Training Ground with an autistic spectrum disorder school on the eastern side of the site, comprising a 3,800 square metre school building to accommodate up to 128 pupils aged 4 – 19, a mixed use games area, playing fields, 100 parking spaces and a minibus drop-off area. Additionally, the development of 60 dwellings on land to the west of the proposed school to act as an enabling development to facilitate delivery of the school.

The Principal Planning Officer reported that this application had been considered by Area Plans Sub-Committee South on 26 November 2014. The Sub-Committee had recommended the grant of planning permission, subject to the addition of an additional condition concerning street lighting. The application had been referred to the District Development Control Committee for a decision as the proposal was for a major application that contravened the Council’s policy concerning the Green Belt. If permission was granted by this Committee then the application would need to be referred to the National planning Casework Unit for the same reason.

The Principal Planning Officer advised that the main issues to consider in determining this application were the need for the Autistic Spectrum Disorder School, the need for the enabling development, the use of Green Belt land for the development including the very special circumstances to ne considered, potential contamination of the land at the site following it previous use in the 20^th Century as a landfill site, plus highway safety and vehicle parking for the proposed development. Other matters to be considered by the Committee included the provision of affordable housing as part of the development, the flood risk, nature conservation matters, the loss of the current playing fields at the site, the design and appearance of the developments, the impact on the living conditions of neighbouring properties, and additional education and healthcare provision arising from the enabling development.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that, following consideration of all the issues, Officers had concluded that very special circumstances had been demonstrated which would outweigh the harm inflicted on the Green Belt by this (normally) inappropriate development. In addition, the proposed Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) school was demonstrably necessary to meet the need for the provision of such education in West Essex. There was no other suitable site outside of the Green Belt, and no other suitable site within the Green Belt where the development would be less harmful. It had been concluded that all other matters arising from the proposal were either acceptable or could be properly addressed by planning conditions and the proposed Section 106 agreement. Therefore, the application was recommended for approval with 16 conditions attached.

The Committee noted the summary of representations, which included an objection letter signed by 12 residences in Luxborough Lane, five further objection letters including the Epping Forest Riders Association, Buckhurst Hill Parish Council and Chigwell Parish Council. Four letters in support of the application had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 33.