Agenda and minutes

1.         This meeting is to be webcast. Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking.

2.         The Chairman will read the following announcement:

“I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live to the Internet and will be capable of repeated viewing and copies of the recording could be made available for those that request it.

If you are seated in the lower public seating area it is likely that the recording cameras will capture your image and this will result in the possibility that your image will become part of the broadcast.

This may infringe your human and data protection rights and if you wish to avoid this you should move to the upper public gallery”

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. The Sub-Committee noted the Council’s Protocol for Webcasting of Council and Other Meetings.

The Chairman welcomed members of the public to the meeting and outlined the procedures and arrangements agreed by the Council, to enable persons to address the Sub-Committee in relation to the determination of applications for planning permission.

In the absence of the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Mrs M Sartin was appointed Vice Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 31 August 2011 as a correct record (attached).

         RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 31 August 2011 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

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

(a)       Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillors S Stavrou, J Lea and A Mitchell declared personal interest in agenda items 7 (1) (EPF/1578/11 - 8 Windsor Wood, Waltham Abbey); 7(2) (EPF/1886/11 – 9 Windsor Wood, Waltham Abbey); 7(3) (EPF/1778/11 – 35 Highland Road, Nazeing, Waltham Abbey); 7(4) (EPF/2106/11 – 10 Harrier Way, Waltham Abbey); and 7(6) (EPF/1668/11 – 78 Roundhills, Waltham Abbey) by virtue of being members of Waltham Abbey Town Council Planning Committee.  The Councillors declared that their interests were not prejudicial and indicated that they would remain in the meeting during the consideration and voting on the items.

(b)       Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillor J Wyatt declared personal interest in agenda items 7 (1) (EPF/1578/11 - 8 Windsor Wood, Waltham Abbey); 7(2) (EPF/1886/11 – 9 Windsor Wood, Waltham Abbey); 7(4) (EPF/2106/11 – 10 Harrier Way, Waltham Abbey); and 7(6) (EPF/1668/11 – 78 Roundhills, Waltham Abbey) by virtue of being a member of Waltham Abbey Town Council.  The Councillor declared that his interests were not prejudicial and indicated that he would remain in the meeting during the consideration and voting on the items.

(c)        Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillor Y Knight declared a personal interest in agenda items 7 (3) (EPF/1778/11 - 35 Highland Road, Nazeing, Waltham Abbey) by virtue of knowing the applicant.  The Councillor declared that her interests was prejudicial and indicated that she would leave the meeting during the consideration and voting on the item.

(d)       Pursuant to the Council's Code of Member Conduct, Councillor P Smith declared a personal interest in agenda items 7 (5) (EPF/1668/11 - The Old Granary, Copped hall, Epping) by virtue of being a member of the Parish Council.  The Councillor declared that her interests were not prejudicial and indicated that she would remain in the meeting during the consideration and voting on 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 reported that there was no urgent business for consideration at the meeting.

(Director of Planning and Economic Development)  To consider the planning applications 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, Planning applications numbered 1 – 6 be determined as set out in the annex to these minutes.

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

The Sub-committee noted that Planning Permission was granted in 2002 for the change of use of an outbuilding at Greenacres to a granny annexe. (EPF/1795/98)  Permission for the use was granted subject to a condition restricting occupancy and also to a legal agreement under section 106 preventing the annexe being sold or otherwise separated from Greenacres.  The Annexe was completed in accordance with the Planning Permission in 2002,  but  the annexe had not been occupied since completion.

The applicant applied last year for change of use of the annexe to a single dwelling house, and to discharge the legal agreement, but this application was refused at committee in accordance with Officer’s recommendation, on the grounds that the development was inappropriate in the Green Belt.

The applicant appealed this decision and the Inspector upheld the appeal and granted planning permission for use of the building as a separate dwelling subject to conditions. The Inspector was however unable to consider the removal of the legal agreement as he did not consider that a valid application for such removal had been made.

On the basis that Planning Permission had now been granted for the use of thebuilding as a separate dwelling house, it would be perverse to try and enforce the associated legal agreement.  The legal agreement therefore now served no useful purpose and on this basis in accordance with government advice, authorisation was sought for the agreement to be discharged.

            RESOLVED:

That the Section 106 Agreement dated 4 April 2002, which prevents the building known as The Barn at Greenacres, Tatsfield Avenue being sold or let or otherwise separated from the adjacent house be discharged.

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

The Sub-Committee received a report regarding Probity in Planning – Appeal Decisions, April 2011 to September 2011. In compliance with the recommendation of the District Auditor, this report advises the decision-making committees of the results of all successful appeals, particularly those refused by committee contrary to officer recommendation.

The Council created a Local Performance Indicator (LPI 45) recording planning appeals only. In previous years, this target has been to not exceed 25% of allowed decisions.   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.

For 2011/12, there are now two local indicators, one of which measures planning application 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 2011 and September 2011, the Council received 50 decisions on appeals (41 of which were planning related appeals – including 1 tree related appeal and 9 were enforcement related). Of these, 17 were allowed (34%).

For KPI 54 and KPI 55, which only considered appeals against the refusal of planning related permission (so does not include enforcement, tree-related appeals, nor appeals against conditions), the 6-month performance figure in total is 30% allowed (12 of 40 appeals).

However, Area Planning Sub-committee West only had one appeal allowed, making it one of the better sub-committees of the Council.

In conclusion it was noted that whilst performance in defending appeals had improved, particularly in respect of committee reversals, Members were reminded that in refusing planning permission there needed to be justified reasons that in each case, must not only be relevant and necessary, but also sound and defendable.

            RESOLVED:

            That the Planning Appeal Decisions for April to September 2011 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 details of planning applications determined by the Head of Planning Economic Development under delegated authority since the last meeting had been circulated to all members and were available for inspection at the Civic Offices.