Agenda and minutes

1.         This meeting is to be webcast;

2.         Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking; and

3.         the Chairman will read the following announcement:

“I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be filmed live for subsequent uploading to the Internet and will be capable of repeated viewing.

If you are seated in the public seating area it is possible that the recording cameras will capture your image and this will result in the possibility that your image will become part of the broadcast although Officers will try and avoid this.

This may infringe your human and data protection rights and if you have any concerns about this you should speak to the Webcasting Officer.”

The Chairman made a short address to remind all present that the meeting would be broadcast on the Internet, and that the Council had adopted a protocol for the webcasting of its meetings.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 21 November 2012.

            RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the last Sub-Committee meeting on 21 November 2012 be agreed.

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

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Members Conduct, Councillors B Sandler and J Knapman declared a non pecuniary interest in the following item of the agenda by virtue of the applicant being a fellow Parish Councillor. The Councillors indicated that they would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the item.

• EPF/1771/12 – Land adj. Rest Harrow, The Kennels, Millers Lane, Chigwell.

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 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.

It was noted that there was no other urgent business for consideration by the Sub-Committee.

To consider the attached report.

            RESOLVED:

            That the Tree Preservation Order TPO/EPF/15/12 be confirmed.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development)  To consider planning applications as set out in the attached schedule

Background Papers:  (i)  Applications for determination – applications listed on the schedule, letters of representation received regarding the applications which are summarised on the schedule.  (ii)  Enforcement of Planning Control – the reports of officers inspecting the properties listed on the schedule in respect of which consideration is to be given to the enforcement of planning control.

The Sub-Committee considered a schedule of applications for planning permission.

            RESOLVED:

            That the planning applications numbered 1 – 7 be determined as set out in the attached schedule to these minutes.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report.

RESOLVED:

That the proposed revised mix for the rented and shared ownership homes in respect of the “fallback position” within the Section 106 Agreement, which retained the same number of rented and shared ownership affordable homes as required by the Section 106 Agreement, be agreed as indicated below:

            Rented Housing

            6 X 2 bed flats

            5 X 2 bed houses

            6 X 3 bed houses                  Total = 17

            Shared Ownership

            16 X 2 bed flats

            13 X 2 bed houses

              6 X 3 bed houses                  Total = 35

As approved, the 17 rented dwellings were to comprise 4 x 2 bed flats and 13 x 3 bed houses and the 35 shared ownership dwellings were to comprise 18 x 2 bed flats and 17 x 3 bed houses. 

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) To consider the attached report.

The Sub-Committee received a report regarding Probity in Planning – Appeal Decisions, 1 April 2012 to 30 September 2012.

In compliance with the recommendation of the District Auditor, this report advised the decision-making committees of the results of all successful appeals i.e. particularly those refused by committee contrary to officer recommendation.  The purpose was to inform the committee of the consequences of their decisions in this respect and, in cases where the refusal was found to be unsupportable on planning grounds, an award of costs may be made against the Council.

In recent years the Council performance has been 18% in 2003/04, 29% in 2004/05, 22% in 2005/06, 30% in 2006/07, 29% in 2007/08, 40.3% for 2008/09, 30.9% in 2009/10 and 36.6% in 2010/11.

Since 2011/12, there have been two local indicators, one of which measures all planning application type appeals as a result of committee reversals of officer recommendations (KPI 55) and the other which measures the performance of officer recommendations and delegated decisions (KPI 54).  

Over the six-month period between April 2012 and September 2012, the Council received 56 decisions on appeals (43 of which were planning related appeals, the other 13 were enforcement related).

KPI 54 and 55 measure planning application decisions and in total, out of this 43, 8 were allowed (18.6%). Broken down further, KPI 54 performance was 2 out of 28 allowed (7.14%) and KPI 55 performance was 6 out of 15 (40%).

Whilst performance in defending appeals has improved, Members were reminded that in refusing planning permission there needed to be justified reasons that in each case, must be relevant, necessary, but also sound and defendable so as to avoid paying costs. Whilst there was clearly pressure on Members to refuse in cases where there were objections from local residents, these views (and only when they were related to the planning issues of the case) were one of a number of the relevant issues to balance out in order to understand the merits of the particular development being applied for. 

            RESOLVED:

That the report regarding Probity in Planning – Appeal Decisions 1 April 2012 to 30 September 2012 be noted.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development) Schedules of planning applications determined by the Head of Planning and Economic Development under delegated powers since the last meeting of a Plans Subcommittee may be inspected in the Members Room or at the Planning and Economic Development Information Desk at the Civic Offices, Epping.

The Sub-Committee noted that schedules of planning applications determined by the Director of Planning and Economic Development under delegated authority since the last meeting had been circulated and could be inspected at the Civic Offices.