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.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the last Sub-Committee meeting on 21 November 2012 be agreed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

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

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Members Conduct, Councillor Jennie Hart declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 8(4) (site at 162 Queens Road, Buckhurst Hill) of the agenda by knowing the objector. The Councillor indicated that they would leave the meeting for the consideration of the item.

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Members Conduct, Councillor K Angold Stephens declared a non-pecuniary interest in items 8(1), (3), (6) and (7) of the agenda by virtue of being a member of Loughton Town Council who had made representations. The Councillor indicated that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the items.

Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Members Conduct, Councillor James Hart declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 8(7) (site at 43 Traps Hill, Loughton) of the agenda by virtue of knowing the applicant. The Councillor indicated that they would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the item.

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 additional business for consideration at the meeting.

            Recommendation:

            That the tree preservation order TPO/EPF/20/12 not be confirmed.

REPORT

Background

1.         Tree Preservation Order TPO/EPF/20/12 was sealed on 18 October 2012 to protect a single oak tree in the rear garden of 3 Lee Grove, Chigwell.  It was made following a Tree Preservation Order check revealing that the intention was to have the tree felled. A site plan is attached.

2.         The justification for the TPO was that from available evidence it was a large and potentially important tree; the order was necessary to investigate the justification for felling and the amenity value of the tree. 

Grounds of Objection

3.         Objections have been received to the order from the owner, as well as the neighbours on either side, at 5 Lee Grove and 7 Chigwell Rise. 

4.         The grounds of objection on behalf of the owners are that:

(1)        It is not expedient in the interest of the amenity to make a TPO.

(2)        The tree included within the TPO is dangerous.

(3)        The Council has provided no evidence that they have followed any internal process when determining whether the tree is suitable to be protected by a TPO.

(4)        No systematic system was employed to determine the merit of serving the TPO.

5.         The objection from 5 Lee Grove mentions the safety of the tree, but also considers that the tree has outgrown its immediate surroundings and essentially is too large for its situation.

6.         The objection from 7 Chigwell Rise is on the basis of safety, but also loss of natural light. 

7.         In relation to the objection from the owners the main points above are expanded as follows:

(a)        Visibility: to be protected a tree should normally have a significant visual impact; because of its situation in a rear garden this tree can only be glimpsed from public places.  The tree has no particular importance; it is not rare and has no value as a screen, and makes no significant contribution to the character or appearance of a conservation area.  It may have been expedient to serve the order but it is not expedient to confirm it. 

(b)        In relation to danger, the objection points to numerous clumps of toadstools identified as honey fungus growing throughout the garden although predominating towards the house end.  And to an extensive pocket of decay in the lower stem extending into the heart wood.  Evidence of seasonal fungal fruit brackets, provisionally identified as Inonotus hispidus were present.  On the balance of probability the tree would be described as a hazard with a potential to fail imminently. 

(c)        In relation to the council’s procedures the objection notes that there is no evidence that the authority has employed a systematic assessment, such as TEMPO, for evaluating the suitability of a tree for being protected by a TPO.  Because the Council was not able to visit the tree before making the TPO, the order has been made without any clear understanding or knowledge of the individual tree or its general condition.  It  ...  view the full agenda text for item 60.

The Committee considered whether to confirm a Tree Preservation Order on an Oak tree in the rear garden of 3 Lee Grove, Chigwell which had been made as the Oak had been threatened with felling. An application (to be considered later in this meeting) had also been received.

It was noted that an objection had been made to the confirmation of the order by the owner and that on subsequent inspection of the tree, it was found not to be in good condition with fungal growth and decay. To retain it would require a program of crown reduction. This would diminish its amenity value such that it did not justify the use of planning powers to insist on its retention. The Committee concurred with this view and declined to confirm the Tree Preservation Order.

            Resolved:

That the Tree Preservation Order TPO/EPF/20/12 not 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) 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.