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.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 9 January 2013 as a correct record (attached).

         RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Sub-Committee held on 9 January 2013 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, Councillor Mrs M Sartin declared a non pecuniary interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of the application being in the Lee Valley Regional Park area, the Councillor had been appointed to the Lee Valley Regional Park by the Council. The Councillor had determined that she would stay in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• EPF/2282/12 Sedgegate Nursery, Sedge Green, Nazeing, Waltham Abbey EN9

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.

To consider the attached report.

Background

TPO/EPF/16/12 was made on 9 September 2012 and protected a single large ash tree. The order was served to prevent the tree’s intended removal, having been inspected to confirm the tree as an important landscape feature.

It stood in a large front garden of 12 Downlands and close to the boundary with 11 Downlands. It was approximately 15 metres from the above houses and a similar distance from the front of 286 Roundhills, where the objector lived.

12 Downlands was managed by Estuary Housing, who made the initial enquiry.

286 Roundhills was located to the south, separated by a public footpath and had a reasonably sized private rear garden to the south east, which was unaffected by the tree.

Grounds of Objection:

An objection to the Order had been received from a neighbour at 286 Roundhills. The objection was made on the grounds that:

1) The justification report advised that the tree in question stood approximately 15 metres from the rear of the property at 12 Downlands. It stood at the front of the property, at approximately 14 metres from 286 Roundhills.

2) This unmanaged tree was a health and safety issue. Dead branches threatened pedestrians and damaged the street light. TPO guidance advised the pruning of deadwood, which contradicted the statement that this deadwood filled tree was healthy.

3) The justification stated that the tree was much enjoyed by those walking past it but provided no evidence of how the council had arrived at this belief. A number of people living close to this tree did not enjoy this very large and overgrown tree.

4) The tree ruined the grass lawns, the drains became blocked and the footpath cleared regularly.

5) The council stated that the tree had high intrinsic value within the housing estate. It was agreed that the tree would have high landscape value in a field or forest but not in a built up area, where it caused problems. It should not have been planted in the front garden of a residential house.

6) It was the objector’s belief that the tree was much higher than 14 metres because a root broke through the pavement 1 metre from his house. The surrounding footpaths were broken up severely due to this tree’s roots and were quite dangerous underfoot.

7) Service lines would be affected by the roots in time, if they haven’t been already.

8)  It had been asserted that the roots would affect the foundations of the objector’s house in the near future, for which the council would be held responsible.

9) The height and spread of the tree, with a mass of foliage and branches, removed any intrinsic value to the objector, who then claimed that if a council member were to live near to this tree there would undoubtedly be a different outcome.  

Director of Planning and Economic Development Comments

Description of the tree and its condition.

The tree, subject of the order, was a cut leafed ash,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.

(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 –3 be determined as set out in the annex 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 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.