Agenda and minutes

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

Resolved:

(1)        That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 February 2012 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to the following amendment:

            (a)        amending the date in minute 7 (Minutes) from 2012 to 2011.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) To declare interests in any item on this agenda.

(a)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor J M Whitehouse declared a personal interest in agenda item 6, Asset Management Co-Ordination Group Report, by virtue of being a resident of St John’s Road in Epping. The Councillor had determined that his interest was non-pecuniary and would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the issue.

(Director of Environment and Street Scene) To consider the attached report. (NWA-001-2012/13)

The Chairman introduced a report on the Ernst and Young review of the Halcrow report.

The Chairman reminded the Cabinet Committee that Halcrow were appointed by the Council in 2010 to undertake a review of aviation intensification at North Weald Airfield, with consideration given to any supporting infrastructure that might be required. They reported to the Cabinet Committee and then to the Cabinet in March and April 2011. Subsequently, no further activity had been undertaken, due in significant part to the inter-relationship between development at the Airfield and other estate management issues such as the redevelopment of the Langston Road depot site.  In mid 2011, following funding from Improvement East, Ernst and Young were appointed to undertake an overview of the present situation, including the comments and recommendations of the Halcrow report and to recommend to the Council how it should best proceed, taking into consideration both aviation and non-aviation developments at the Airfield. It was noted that the Halcrow report had emphasised the technical aspects of aviation intensification whereas the Ernst & Young review was more concerned with the financial aspects.

The Chairman introduced Simon Reilly from Ernst & Young, who gave a short presentation to the Cabinet Committee on their report. The presentation was comprised of the following sections:

·                     a listing of the main activities currently taking place at the Airfield;

·                     an outline of the approach taken to conduct the review;

·                     an overview of the current operations at the Airfield;

·                     the key findings from the review by Ernst & Young; and

·                     the proposed next steps:

o        Work Package 1 – 3 months estimated delivery; and

o        Work Package 2 – 12 months estimated delivery.

A ward member for North Weald Bassett highlighted the use of the term ‘Airport’ to describe the Airfield at North Weald, and queried whether residents would welcome the introduction of scheduled flights by Airlines from the Airfield. In addition, there was no involvement from residents and the Parish Council in the process outlined by Ernst & Young. The Consultant from Ernst & Young suggested that community consultation could take place after Work Package 1 was complete and before Work Package 2 commenced, but the ward member felt that residents should be involved at an earlier stage, as this would be in accordance with the Government’s stated aim of promoting Localism. The Leader of the Council added that consulting with local residents would be a vital element of the process, and that this should be integrated with the Issues & Options consultation for the Local Plan. The Director of Planning & Economic Development stated that the future of North Weald Airfield would be an integral part of the new Local Plan. A significant portion of the Airfield was in the Green Belt, but there were brownfield sites on the Airfield which could be re-developed.

The Cabinet Committee considered the expansion that the Airfield could accommodate before it impacted upon Stansted Airport, and whether the runway was in a sufficiently good condition. The Consultant from Ernst & Young stated that the report from Halcrow  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

(Director of Environment and Street Scene) To consider the attached report. (NWA-002-2012/13)

The Chairman presented a report concerning the possible relocation of the Waste Management Depot to North Weald Airfield.

The Cabinet Committee was reminded that as proposals for the redevelopment of the Langston Road depot site was progressed, it was necessary to consider how best to re-provide this facility at an alternative location. It had previously been considered that land within the North Weald Airfield boundary could be suitable, but it was now suggested that, due to the possible implications for the future uses of the Airfield, the complications surrounding a covenant, as well as technical considerations, the proposal to relocate the depot to the Airfield should be abandoned.

A local ward member for North Weald Bassett welcomed the report and inquired whether local ward members would be informed of possible future sites. The Acting Chief Executive assured the Cabinet Committee that local ward members would be given an early indication of possible sites for the depot. One option under consideration was for the waste management contractor to provide the depot, however it would probably be cheaper for the Council to own its own depot. A new waste management contract had to be signed by November 2014, and that an alternative site had to be identified by early 2014 at the latest.

Recommended:

(1)        That the current waste management depot located at Langston Road be not relocated to land at North Weald Airfield; and

(2)        That alternative locations continue to be investigated alongside other contractual options for future depot re-provision.

Reasons for Decision:

To enable strategic decisions to be made around the future uses of North Weald Airfield without the complications that the presence of a waste management depot would bring.

Other Options Considered and Rejected:

None, other than to retain North Weald Airfield as a possible location for the re-provision of a waste management depot.

(Director of Corporate Support Services) To consider the attached report. (NWA-003-2012/13)

The Principal Valuer & Estates Surveyor presented the Asset Management Co-Ordination Group report.

The Principal Valuer & Estates Surveyor updated the Cabinet Committee on the progress of a number of projects at the following sites:

·                     Langston Road Retail Park - an agreement was expected with Polofind by Christmas;

·                     Oakwood Hill Depot - draft plans had been drawn up to accommodate the Council being relocated there;

·                     Pyrles Lane Nursery – an application for outline planning permission was being prepared;

·                     St John’s Road – the Development & Design Brief would be considered by the Cabinet next week;

·                     Waste Management Depot – would not be relocated to North Weald Airfield, alternative sites were being considered;

·                     Torrington Drive – options to redevelop the supermarket would not incorporate the neighbouring petrol station;

·                     Winston Churchill Public House – discussions were ongoing about developing the site;

·                     The car parks at the Broadway – no firm proposals at the current time;

·                     Burton Road Depot – no firm proposals at the current time;

·                     Lindsay House, Epping – consideration was being given to the assignment of the current lease;

·                     Town Mead Depot – advice was being taken regarding the Strategic Flood Assessment;

·                     The former car park at Church Hill – no progress to report; and

·                     Leader Lodge, North Weald – the freehold sale of the site was being marketed.

Local ward members for the Broadway in Loughton highlighted that the development of the Winston Churchill public house would be a contentious issue in Debden, and that the Council should consider further consultation due to the unpopularity of the current proposals. In addition, a number of the shop units in the area were falling into disrepair. The Principal Valuer & Estates Surveyor responded that it was hoped the development would be an exciting one for the area, and it was a shame that the petrol station site was not being included. New agents had been appointed for the Broadway retail units. Some units would be demolished to provide additional car parking for the supermarket, although the lease for the supermarket also needed to be re-let.

Resolved:

(1)        That the Asset Management Co-Ordination Group report be noted.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs 6 and 25 of the Council Procedure Rules contained in the Constitution require 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.

Resolved:

(1)        That 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 Leader of the Council had permitted the following item of urgent business to be considered following the publication of the agenda:

(a)        The Broadway Regeneration Action Plan.

(Director of Housing) To consider the attached report (NWA-004-2012/13).

A report on the Action Plan for the regeneration of the Council controlled sites in The Broadway area in Debden, in pursuance of The Broadway Design & Development Brief adopted in 2008, was presented by the Director of Housing.

The Director of Housing reported that the Council’s Management Board had established an Officer Working Party to monitor/facilitate developments at The Broadway by third parties, and oversee the delivery of developments by the Council in respect of land and assets under the control of the Council, in accordance with The Broadway Design and Development Brief. Appendix 1 of the report was a summary of the proposals within the Design & Development Brief. The Working Party had formulated a Draft Broadway Regeneration Action Plan, which had been endorsed by the Management Board, and was attached at Appendix 2 to the report.  The Action Plan provided a “road map” for the delivery of the different sites under the control of the Council within the Design Brief, for consideration by the Cabinet Committee and subsequent adoption by the Cabinet.

The Chairman had invited the two local ward members for Loughton Broadway to attend the meeting in a non-voting capacity, and they had been provided with a copy of the report when the supplementary agenda had been published. The Cabinet Committee considered each of the sites on the Action Plan in turn.

·                     Site 4 – Vere Road (South)

The Director of Housing stated that the site at Vere Road (South) was too large for the Council to develop itself, but proposed that, in principle, 40% of the developed accommodation should be provided as affordable housing. The local ward members stressed that Vere Road was currently a very unattractive area of The Broadway which required redevelopment, but that it was also important that surface parking provision within the area should not be lost.

In response to questions from the members present, the Director of Housing stated that it was not unusual to have surface parking provision next to residential accommodation that was not restricted to residents, and the proposed separation of parking provision from the proposed housing would more usefully alleviate the current problems in the area than the provision of garages under maisonettes as proposed by the Design Brief.

 In response to another question, the Director of Housing stated that if a particular garage block was selected for redevelopment then tenants would be notified well in advance of having to vacate their garages and would be given priority for other garages that came available in the vicinity. It was noted that the Council charged a standard rent across the whole District for its garages, although non-Council tenants were additionally charged Value Added Tax (VAT), as required by Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (HMRC). It was emphasised that Council owned garages should only be used for the storage of cars, not for general storage by residents or local shopkeepers.

·                     Site 4 – Vere Road (North-West)

The Design & Development Brief at this site had proposed that the garages should  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.