Agenda, decisions and minutes

This meeting is to be webcast and the Chairman will read the following announcement:

“I would like to remind everyone present that this hybrid meeting will be broadcast live to the internet (or filmed) and will be capable of repeated viewing (or other such use by third parties).

Therefore, by participating in this meeting, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If any public speakers on MS Teams do not wish to have their image captured, they should ensure that their video setting throughout the meeting is turned off and set to audio only.

Please also be aware that if technical difficulties interrupt the meeting that cannot be overcome, I may need to adjourn the meeting.

Members are reminded to activate their microphones before speaking”.

The Leader of Council made a short address to remind everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the internet, and would be capable of repeated viewing, which could infringe their human and data protection rights.

To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

Pursuant to the Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct, Councillor C Pond declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 11 (Integration of Epping Library into EFDC’s Civic Offices) by virtue of being a member of the Chartered Institute of Librarians and Information Professionals and an Essex County Councillor.

Pursuant to the Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct, Councillor C Whitbread declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 11 (Integration of Epping Library into EFDC’s Civic Offices) by virtue of being an Essex County Councillor.

Pursuant to the Council’s Members’ Code of Conduct, Councillor H Whitbread declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 11 (Integration of Epping Library into EFDC’s Civic Offices) by virtue of being an Essex County Councillor.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 18 March 2024.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 18 March 2024 be taken as read and signed by the Leader as a correct record.

That the minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 18 March 2024 be taken as read and signed by the Leader as a correct record.

To receive oral reports from Portfolio Holders on current issues concerning their Portfolios, which are not covered elsewhere on this agenda.

The Leader introduced the Cabinet for 2024/25 and welcomed the new Cabinet members – Councillors P Keska, T Matthews and K Rizvi.

To receive any questions submitted by members of the public and any requests to address the Cabinet.

(a)        Public Questions

To answer questions asked by members of the public after notice in accordance with the provisions contained within Part 4 of the Constitution (Council Rules, Rule Q3) on any matter in relation to which the Cabinet has powers or duties or which affects the District.

(b)        Requests to Address the Cabinet

Any member of the public or a representative of another organisation may address the Cabinet on any agenda item (except those dealt with in private session as exempt or confidential business) due to be considered at the meeting, in accordance with the provisions contained within Article 7 of the Constitution (The Executive, Paragraphs 27 and 28).

The Cabinet noted that no public questions or requests to address the Cabinet had been received for consideration at the meeting.

To consider any matters of concern to the Cabinet arising from the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny function and to identify any matters that the Cabinet would like the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to examine as part of its work programme.

Councillor R Baldwin, Chairman, advised that there was nothing to report as there had been no recent meetings since the Elections on 2 May and that the first Overview and Scrutiny Committee was being held on 4 June 2024.

(Regulatory Services Portfolio) To accept the recommendations of the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) report (C-003-2024-25).

(1)        That the Cabinet accepted the recommendations of the PAS report;

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed to delegate authority to Lead Officers, together with the Portfolio Holder, to implement required changes, engaging with relevant Member Committees as appropriate; and

(3)        That the Cabinet agreed to the reporting of relevant associated Planning KPIs to Overview and Scrutiny and Planning Committees for monitoring purposes.

G Courtney (Service Manager (Planning Development)) reported that the maximum percentage of Major applications overturned at appeal that the Government considered acceptable was 10%. The Council had narrowly avoided the threat of designation with 9.8% of Major decisions overturned at appeal following decisions by its committees. If the Secretary of State had designated the Council for Major applications, then those planning fees would go to the Planning Inspectorate instead, but the Council would still be required to do a similar level of work in advising the Planning Inspectorate. Consequently, the PAS had approached the Council to help manage the risk by undertaking a review of our planning committee procedures. The seven recommendations made by the PAS were detailed in the agenda report. Therefore, a Special Working Group had been convened for 19 June 2024 that all members were requested to attend, along with the PAS representatives invited. The Constitution Working Group would then review all planning committee procedures on 11 July and report its recommendations to Council at extra meeting convened on 8 August 2024.

During discussions the following points were raised by both Cabinet members and other councillors present at the meeting.

·     Local say was pivotal in planning and that member representations were allowed.

·     The expertise of members and officers was crucial.

·     Planning reports needed to be accurate and right.

·     The criteria to bring applications to committee seemed vague, as the number of objections submitted was important.

·     The provision of ward members to speak at planning meetings would be necessary if the planning committees were reduced and not ward specific for the committee memberships.

·     If planning committees were reduced to two, could applications be divided into major and minor ones.

·     Area Plans South was a very large committee, so a selection of members for each planning committee was an option but with the ability of members to speak on local planning applications.

·     Restructuring the planning committees was a way to move forward as there was a gap to close in generating revenue for the Council.

·     Legal knowledge would be welcomed, as there was a lack of legal advice given at planning committee meetings.

·     Site visits were important, but it would be better if these were arranged before a meeting took place.

·     Confusion on green belt land designation cropped up at meetings.

·     There was a need to be able to call-in an application.

·     The training element was important.

·     Some planning officers were better at presenting reports at meetings than others.

·     This review was an opportunity to look at our systems for both members and officers, and perhaps combined training with planning officers working alongside members would make presenting less daunting.

Replying to a question that the stimulus for this review was because the Council was close to designation, yet no analysis was included, G Courtney advised the report provided the extent of the PAS review, but this data could be brought to the Special Working Group workshop on 19 June.

Planning Services Director, N Richardson, advised that the planning officers  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

To agree to formally adopt the EHMG SPD (C-001-2024-25). Please note: Appendix A (HGGT Board East of Harlow Masterplanning Guidance Adoption SPD report) is attached.

For information: Appendices B (Draft East of Harlow Masterplanning Guidance SPD) and C (East of Harlow Consultation Report) are published separately.

(1)        That the Cabinet noted the process undertaken and the outputs from the joint public consultation by Epping Forest District Council and Harlow Council on the Draft East of Harlow Masterplanning Guidance (EHMG) Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) between July and October 2023;

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed the EHMG SPD be formally adopted to inform the development of a masterplan for the site by a developer consortium; and

(3)        That the Cabinet agreed the Planning Services Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, be authorised to make minor amendments to the EHMG SPD, including any mapping and links, prior to adoption.

Councillor N Bedford (Housing & Harlow and Gilston Garden Town (HGGT) Portfolio Holder) outlined the report on the East of Harlow masterplan site, which was identified in the Local Plan to allocate 750 homes in Epping and 2,600 homes in Harlow Districts. These homes were accompanied by key infrastructure such as the new Princess Alexandra Hospital, 3 schools, 2 local centres, primary healthcare provision, green public spaces and a sustainable transport corridor. In March 2023, it was agreed that the document should be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document by Harlow and Epping Councils. The public consultation undertaken between July and October 2023 was detailed in the Consultation Statement. This masterplan guidance was significant for the area in that it put the principles and views of partner councils and residents forward first – before a developer drafted a masterplan. In doing so, a robust basis for masterplanning this important site had commenced where partners would enter dialogue with developers with agreed principles. This should speed the planning process and delivery of the much-needed homes and supporting infrastructure that the district needed.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

As no questions were raised by other Cabinet members or councillors present at the meeting, the Cabinet agreed the decisions below.

            Decision:

(1)        That the Cabinet noted the process undertaken and the outputs from the joint public consultation by Epping Forest District Council and Harlow Council on the Draft East of Harlow Masterplanning Guidance (EHMG) Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) between July and October 2023;

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed the EHMG SPD be formally adopted to inform the development of a masterplan for the site by a developer consortium; and

(3)        That the Cabinet agreed the Planning Services Director, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, be authorised to make minor amendments to the EHMG SPD, including any mapping and links, prior to adoption.

(Place Portfolio) To approve the South Epping Masterplan Area (SEMPA) Strategic Masterplan Framework and Design Code commencement of public consultation for the allocation site identified under Policy P1 in the Adopted Local Plan (C-002-2024-25).

For information: Parts 1 and 2 of the Strategic Masterplan Framework and Design Code are published separately.

(1)        That the Cabinet approved the South Epping Masterplan Area (SEMPA) Strategic Masterplan Framework and Design Code commencement of public consultation for the allocation site identified under Policy P1 in the Adopted Local Plan;

(2)        That the Cabinet noted the public consultation would take place over a minimum of 6 weeks from early June 2024 and would run through July 2024; and

(3)        That the Cabinet noted a further update would be provided to share the results of the public consultation, updates to the masterplan framework and design code to reflect consultation and to endorse the masterplan and design code, so that it could be given appropriate weight as a material planning consideration in the determination of future planning applications.

Councillor K Williamson (Shaping our District Portfolio Holder) introduced the report. The development of the South Epping Masterplan Area (SEMPA) Strategic Masterplan Framework (SMF) and Design Code responded to the adopted Epping Forest District Local Plan 2011-2033 and Policy P1 ‘Epping’. The SEMPA formed one of the allocated strategic masterplan sites where the need for an SMF was identified. Following the requirements in policies SP2 and P1, a strategic masterplan and Design Code was being developed for the allocated strategic area. The Consortium that comprised three developers and one promoter wished to consult on, and gain endorsement for both the SMF and Design Code concurrently and this had been agreed through the planning performance agreement. This was an efficient route to develop the documentation and both parts would be combined in a single strategic document.

The Finance & Economic Development Portfolio Holder, Councillor H Whitbread, stated she was happy to endorse the recommendations. To make sure this was right for the community, consultation would be very important. A key element was infrastructure especially for healthcare and GP services. Addressing highways issues around the Ivy Chimneys Primary School would be essential and public transport was also vital.

The following points were raised by other councillors:

·     Infrastructure was important as was consultation, but the delivery of leaflets and newsletters would also be helpful for residents.

·     Concerns about sufficient public consultation, as this would be important to mitigate any issues.

·     Adequate road, cycling and pedestrian infrastructure was essential.

·     The bridge across the Central Line would benefit residents but also ensuring there was better passenger capacity on the railway was needed.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

            Decision:

(1)        That the Cabinet approved the South Epping Masterplan Area (SEMPA) Strategic Masterplan Framework and Design Code commencement of public consultation for the allocation site identified under Policy P1 in the Adopted Local Plan;

(2)        That the Cabinet noted the public consultation would take place over a minimum of 6 weeks from early June 2024 and would run through July 2024; and

(3)        That the Cabinet noted a further update would be provided to share the results of the public consultation, updates to the masterplan framework and Design Code to reflect consultation and to endorse the masterplan and Design Code, so that it could be given appropriate weight as a material planning consideration in the determination of future planning applications.

(Finance Portfolio Holder) To commit to the principles of sharing space and co-locating with library services in the existing reception, welcome lounge, community hub and associated areas on the ground floor of the Civic Offices, and to agree resources from existing budgets (C-004-2024-25).

(1)        That the Cabinet committed to the principles of sharing space and co-locating with library services in the existing Welcome Area, Welcome Lounge, Community Hub and associated areas on the ground floor of the Civic Offices and to identifying suitable waiting and meeting rooms for Essex County Council’s Registration Services; and

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed resources from existing budgets to further explore the proposal enabling a more detailed paper setting out proposals for Cabinet’s approval at a later stage.

The Finance & Economic Development Portfolio Holder introduced this report and supported the idea of integrating Epping Library into the Civic Offices. It was a good location by the High Street and would enhance the existing community services. A layout plan had been circulated as a supplementary agenda.

Councillor Jon Whitehouse commented that clear signage would be needed outside the Civic Offices and hoped that relocating Epping Library would improve on the current facilities it provided. Also, would other services such as the Registration Service move? Councillor H Whitbread replied that she had toured and looked at different libraries as an Essex County Councillor. The move would increase footfall and that good signage was vital. The plan showed the library in the circular space at the front of the building, so some of the hub services and community partners would be relocated within the ground floor areas. The Council was still negotiating with the Registrar and Childrens Services. The Strategic Director (J Gould) advised the Council was in negotiations to bring all the other services provided into the Civic Offices.

In reply to Councillor S Murray, the Leader advised that the report outlined the intent of direction of travel, but this was not the final decision. Negotiations were ongoing with the Essex Registrar. By building on the uses and having partner organisations within the Civic Offices, this would provide a more vibrant hub. It also made better use of public buildings.

Councillor C Pond, also an Essex County Councillor, supported the proposal to maximise the use of public buildings on financial and carbon grounds as the strategic direction was right. He did have concerns about the amount of space to be freed up but welcomed this initiative.

In reply to Councillor J Lea, Councillor H Whitbread advised that Essex County Council libraries were open on Saturdays.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

            Decision:

(1)        That the Cabinet committed to the principles of sharing space and co-locating with library services in the existing Welcome Area, Welcome Lounge, Community Hub and associated areas on the ground floor of the Civic Offices and to identifying suitable waiting and meeting rooms for Essex County Council’s Registration Services; and

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed resources from existing budgets to further explore the proposal enabling a more detailed paper setting out proposals for Cabinet’s approval at a later stage.

(Housing and Strategic Health Partnerships Portfolio) To agree EFDC buy 28 homes on completion at Roundhills, Waltham Abbey at a cost, that recognises the current economic circumstances in relation to land value and construction costs (C-005-2024-25).

That the Cabinet agreed for EFDC to buy 28 homes on completion at Roundhills, Waltham Abbey at a cost that recognised the current economic circumstances in relation to land value and construction costs. This being in recognition of the units being of strategic importance to EFDC and met our corporate objectives, Stronger Place and Stronger Communities.

The Housing & HGGT Portfolio Holder introduced the report. The Roundhills site was purchased by Qualis in October 2021 and planning permission obtained for 28 affordable units. A construction cost through tender exercise was held in late 2023 of £8.89 million and was time limited. The development of 28 units would provide much needed homes as there were currently around 1,700 on the Council’s Housing Register and wait times on average exceeded 2–3 years for family sized accommodation and over 1 year for one-bedroom sized accommodation. This was also set against a backdrop of increasing pressures on homelessness services, approaches, and demand for accommodation being experienced both locally and nationally. Since 2021 there had been a general increase in construction costs and materials and much of this had impacted the current financial position of the Roundhills development. The Council recognised an additional 28 units were of key strategic importance and supported the corporate objectives, Stronger Place and Stronger Communities.

Councillor Jon Whitehouse queried the cost, reflecting on the current commercial value. Was the Council paying over the odds for it because Qualis needed the money; or was Qualis making a semi-distressed purchase, so the Council was paying less for it; or was this an independent valuation to reflect construction costs, as he did not understand what was meant? J Gould replied that when the Council looked at council housebuilding developments a valuation tool was used to give an indicative value on council housebuilding, which came in less than the cost to construct the 28 homes, so that was the difference.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

            Decision:

That the Cabinet agreed for EFDC to buy 28 homes on completion at Roundhills, Waltham Abbey at a cost that recognised the current economic circumstances in relation to land value and construction costs. This being in recognition of the units being of strategic importance to EFDC and met our corporate objectives, Stronger Place and Stronger Communities.

(Commercial & Estates) To agree to approve the funding of the construction of a new combined Control Tower Building (CTB) and Fire Station at North Weald Airfield in order to allow the safe continuation of aviation activities following the adoption of the Master Plan and subsequent land sale which incorporates the current facilities (C-006-2024-25).

(1)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve the funding of the construction of a new combined Control Tower Building (CTB) and Fire Station at North Weald Airfield in order to allow the safe continuation of aviation activities following the adoption of the Master Plan and subsequent land sale which incorporated the current facilities. The estimated sum was £4,859,000;

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed to allow officers and advisers to instruct and finalise negotiations with contractors in order to award the contract for construction of the new combined Control Tower Building (CBT) and Fire Station subject to Leader, Portfolio Holder, and Section 151 Officer approval;

(3)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve funding for associated equipment required for the new Control Tower Building including that for the Visual Control Room (VCR) subject to Council approving a variation to the Capital Programme. The estimated sum was £300,000; and

(4)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve the funding for the management and delivery of obligatory capital works arising from the transaction conditions within the sale of land inside the employment Master Plan area subject to Council approving the variation to the Capital Programme. This included the adaptation of a new interim Airfield access point and enabling works associated with the electrical power supply. The estimated sum was £554,916.

Councillor T Matthews (Commercial & Estates Portfolio Holder) introduced the report and remarked that as the control tower was located on the land that had been sold to Google, it needed to be relocated. Also, the current facilities in the control tower were quite old.

Councillor N Bedford commented that this was an excellent report. The Council was committed to investing in both the North Weald Airfield and its facilities, and the residents in North Weald. Councillor S Patel (Transformation Portfolio Holder) and Councillor S Murray both supported this development proposal.

Councillor M Morris queried if the money was coming from the Google land sale? The Portfolio Holder replied that the breakdown was detailed in the report, but it had been covered by money coming in from Google. D Goodey (Service Manager Commercial) confirmed the money had come from the capital receipt from Google’s land purchase.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

            Decision:

(1)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve the funding of the construction of a new combined Control Tower Building (CTB) and Fire Station at North Weald Airfield in order to allow the safe continuation of aviation activities following the adoption of the Master Plan and subsequent land sale which incorporated the current facilities. The estimated sum was £4,859,000;

(2)        That the Cabinet agreed to allow officers and advisers to instruct and finalise negotiations with contractors in order to award the contract for construction of the new combined Control Tower Building (CBT) and Fire Station subject to Leader, Portfolio Holder, and Section 151 Officer approval;

(3)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve funding for associated equipment required for the new Control Tower Building including that for the Visual Control Room (VCR) subject to Council approving a variation to the Capital Programme. The estimated sum was £300,000; and

(4)        That the Cabinet agreed to approve the funding for the management and delivery of obligatory capital works arising from the transaction conditions within the sale of land inside the employment Master Plan area subject to Council approving the variation to the Capital Programme. This included the adaptation of a new interim Airfield access point and enabling works associated with the electrical power supply. The estimated sum was £554,916.

(Commercial & Estates Portfolio) To consider the content of the report with particular emphasis on the ongoing monitoring actions required within paragraph 4.9 and make such representations to Qualis as are considered necessary (C-008-2024-25).

That the Cabinet considered the content of the report with particular emphasis on the ongoing monitoring actions required within paragraph 4.9 and made no further representations to Qualis.

The Commercial & Estates Portfolio Holder introduced the report and commented that the revaluation of assets was a key concern for all local authorities because of the downturn nationally. The Council continually monitored and assessed performance, so the Council was limiting its risk, but also to ensure Qualis was moving forwards on delivering services.

Councillor Jon Whitehouse queried if the Council was changing repayment schedules with Qualis? The Portfolio Holder replied that he had already requested a full breakdown on the Council’s loans and when the repayments would be made and would report back in due course.

Councillor M Morris remarked that from the accounts detailed in the report it looked like the Council had £10 million unsecured, so how was this risk being managed? The Portfolio Holder confirmed this was correct. There had been a £6 million reduction on the valuation of assets. To understand the cashflow and if the Council could sustain the position it was in, he had requested and received a report from officers but assured members the Council was in a secure position.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

            Decision:

That the Cabinet considered the content of the report with particular emphasis on the ongoing monitoring actions required within paragraph 4.9 and made no further representations to Qualis.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs 6 and 24 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution requires that the permission of the Chairman be obtained, after prior notice to the Chief Executive, before urgent business not specified in the agenda (including a supplementary agenda of which the statutory period of notice has been given) may be transacted.

In accordance with Operational Standing Order 6 (non-executive bodies), any item raised by a non-member shall require the support of a member of the Committee concerned and the Chairman of that Committee.  Two weeks' notice of non-urgent items is required.

(a)           Quarter 4 Budget Monitoring Report 2023/24 (Provisional Outturn)

Decision:

(1)        That the Cabinet noted the General Fund revenue position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24 (Appendix A);

(2)        That the Cabinet noted the General Fund capital position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24 (Appendix B);

(3)        That the Cabinet noted the Housing Revenue Account revenue position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24;

(4)        That the Cabinet noted the Housing Revenue Account capital position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24(Appendix C); and

(5)        That the Cabinet noted and approved the Movements on Reserves presented in Paragraphs 3.1 to 3.7, including specific proposals (presented in Paragraph 3.5) to create additional reserves earmarked for the mitigation of risk (“Capital Investment Risk Reserve”) and the funding of corporate priorities (“Transformation Revenue Reserve”).

(a)           Quarter 4 Budget Monitoring Report 2023/24 (Provisional Outturn)

The Finance & Economic Development Portfolio Holder thanked ex-Councillor J Philip for his work as the previous Finance Portfolio Holder. She would be working closely with Councillor Matthews as their portfolios intertwined and stated that the Council wanted to keep taxes as low as possible and protect the services that were important to our residents. The Portfolio Holder announced that the Annual Statement of Accounts for 2023/24 had been published today. The quarter 4 position showed there was an underspent of just under £1 million on the adopted budget, which was good news. The land sale to Google, the surplus income from business rates and savings made on consultants had all helped. There were key challenges with a planning application income shortfall (49% of budget), housing benefit and Qualis. Overall, the Council was in a better position.

Councillor R Brookes asked if planning applications had not come in because of construction industry costs and the state of the economy. The Planning Services Director advised that pre-application submissions had continued but planning applications were taking longer to come in. A Small (Strategic Director & 151 Officer) continued that because of the economy downturn there had been a decrease in applications. Finance officers had been aware of this when they were preparing the budget for 2024/25, and the income assumption from planning applications had been significantly reduced accordingly. The increase in planning fees was helpful in reducing the size of the required budget adjustment.

Councillor D Sunger asked if pre-application advice fees had increased, which the Planning Services Director confirmed, but officers had also looked at other local authority planning charges as a comparison to EFDC’s. The Leader added that developers were reluctant to push forward but inflation was holding, and prices would start to fall.

The report set out the options considered, if any, and the reasons for the recommendation and the decision.

Decision:

(1)           That the Cabinet noted the General Fund revenue position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24 (Appendix A);

(2)           That the Cabinet noted the General Fund capital position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24 (Appendix B);

(3)        That the Cabinet noted the Housing Revenue Account revenue position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24;

(3)           That the Cabinet noted the Housing Revenue Account capital position at the end of Quarter 4 (Provisional Outturn) for 2023/24(Appendix C); and

(4)           That the Cabinet noted and approved the Movements on Reserves presented in Paragraphs 3.1 to 3.7, including specific proposals (presented in Paragraph 3.5) to create additional reserves earmarked for the mitigation of risk (“Capital Investment Risk Reserve”) and the funding of corporate priorities (“Transformation Revenue Reserve”).