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 the new members of the Sub-Committee, namely Councillors W Breare-Hall and Ms S Jones. The Chairman outlined the procedures and arrangements adopted by the Council to enable persons to address the Sub-Committee, in relation to the determination of applications for planning permission. The Sub-Committee noted the advice provided for the public and speakers in attendance at Council Planning Sub-Committee meetings.

To note the Chairman of the Area Plans East Sub-Committee as decided at Council on 25 May 2010.

It was noted that in accordance with the decision taken at the Annual Council meeting on 25 May 2010, Councillor A Boyce was elected Chairman of the Area Plans East Sub-Committee.

In the absence of a Vice Chairman, the Chairman requested nominations for the role of Vice Chairman.

RESOLVED:

That Councillor R Morgan be elected Vice Chairman for the duration of the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the Sub-Committee meeting of 12 May 2010.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2010 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 R Morgan declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda by virtue of knowing the applicant. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not prejudicial and that he would stay in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• EPF/0418/10 Mitchells Farm, Stapleford Road, Stapleford Abbotts, Romford

(b)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor Mrs D Collins declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda. The Councillor had determined that her interest was not prejudicial and that she would stay in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• EPF/0398/10 Essex Motocross, Weald Hall, Weald Hall Lane, Thornwood

(c)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillors Mrs A Grigg and D Stallan declared a personal interest in the following items of the agenda, by virtue of being members of North Weald Parish Council. Councillor D Stallan also declared that in respect of application EPF/0705/10 North Weald Airfield, Merlin Way, North Weald Bassett, he knew one of the objectors who was a fellow school governor. The Councillors had determined that their interests were not prejudicial and that they would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the applications and voting thereon:

• EPF/0398/10 Essex Motocross, Weald Hall, Weald Hall Lane, Thornwood; and

• EPF/0705/10 North Weald Airfield, Merlin Way, North Weald Bassett, Epping

(d)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillors Mrs A Grigg and D Stallan declared personal interests in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of being members of North Weald Bassett and District Rural Preservation Society. The Councillors had determined that their interests were not prejudicial and that they would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• EPF/0398/10 Essex Motocross, Weald Hall, Weald Hall Lane, Thornwood

(e)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor D Stallan declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of knowing one of the objectors who was a fellow school governor. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not prejudicial and that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• EPF/0705/10 North Weald Airfield, Merlin Way, North Weald Bassett, Epping

(f)         Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor J Philip declared a personal interest in the following items of the agenda, by virtue of being a member of Theydon Bois Parish Council. The Councillor added that in respect of application EPF/0380/10 3A The Weind, Theydon Bois, he knew some of the objectors. The Councillor had determined that his interests were not prejudicial and that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the applications and voting thereon:

• EPF/67/09 Chestnuts, The Green, Theydon Bois;

• EPF/0333/10 Greenview, Adj 2 Blackacre Road, Theydon Bois; and

• EPF/0380/10 3A The Weind, Theydon Bois

(g)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, together with paragraphs (6) and (24) 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.

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

The Sub-Committee received a report requesting Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order EPF/39/10 Bishops Hall, New Road, Lambourne End, Essex.

After having served this order it had been bought to officer’s attention that the trees included within it were not all in the ownership of Bishops Hall. Historically the area was part of the estate of Bishops Hall, but the land was now split into separate ownerships. Some of the trees protected by this order were now on land owned by Dews Hall and Poultry Farm.

For the sake of clarity it was considered best practice to reflect the current ownership of the trees.

RESOLVED:

That Tree Preservation Order EPF/39/10 is confirmed subject to amendment of the title to read “Bishops Hall, Dews Hall and Poultry Farm, New Road, Lambourne End, Essex.”

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

The Sub-Committee received a report requesting Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order EPF/67/09 Chestnuts, The Green, Theydon Bois.

Tree Preservation Order EPF/67/09 was made to protect a Horse Chestnut Tree within the front garden of Chestnuts, Theydon Bois. The property was at the junction of The Green with Loughton Lane and overlooked the green. The tree was mature and estimated to be 70 years old. It was 10 metres tall with a crown spread of 9.2 metres.

Members were informed that two objections had been received. A report had been commissioned by the tree owner objecting to the Tree Preservation Order for the following reasons:

• There was no justification in terms of expediency for the serving of the Tree Preservation Order.

• The assessment of the public amenity value was not consistent with best practice guidance, it appeared that no consideration was given to the existing form and condition of the tree or that there were more prominent and publicly recognised important trees nearby.

• The likelihood of the tree to decline suggested its retention was unsuitable and that its contribution as a public amenity would be limited to the short term only.

The owner had also submitted a separate letter which objected to the Tree Preservation Order for the following reasons:

• Damage was being caused by the tree to the paving slabs on the front drive and entrance porch of the property.

• The tree was dying and dangerous because it had bleeding canker.

The information received from the Parish Council, Theydon Bois Rural Preservation Society and the local Tree Wardens, was that the property had recently changed hands and concern was raised that without a Tree Preservation Order the tree could be felled prior to an application being submitted for the re-development of the site. The tree was deemed by the Parish Council to be an important part of the street scene, and, to ensure that proper consideration was given its future it was considered expedient to make the order.

Although it was acknowledged that the tree had bleeding canker there was nothing to suggest that the tree was in such decline that it needed to be felled imminently. The confirmation of the order allowed the Council guidance in the on-going management/maintenance of the tree. It would also ensure that a suitable replacement was planted in due course.

RESOLVED:

That Tree Preservation Order EPF/67/09 Chestnuts, The Green, Theydon Bois is confirmed without modification.

(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.

RESOLVED:

That the planning applications numbered 1 - 8 be determined as set out in the schedule attached to these minutes.

To consider the attached report.

The Sub-Committee considered a report regarding Probity in Planning – Appeal Decisions, October 2009 to March 2010. The report advised the decision making committees of the results of all successful appeals, particularly those refused by committee contrary to officer recommendation.

Over the six month period between October 2009 and March 2010, the Council received 60 decisions on appeal, of which 56 were planning and related appeals and 4 were enforcement related. Of these, 19 were allowed (31.7%).

The proportion of the 56 appeals that arose from decisions of the committees to refuse contrary to the recommendation put to them by officers during the 6 month period was 23%, and of the 13 decisions that this percentage represented, the Council was not successful in sustaining the committee’s objection in 7 of 13 (53.8%). Two of the seven cases allowed directly involved re-development and a higher density of housing and it was understood that the Inspectorate had been charged to allow appeals for new dwellings whenever possible to assist in meeting housing needs. Therefore refusals based upon density factors or overdevelopment were unlikely to succeed in roads of mixed residential uses that already included flats, unless real harm to the surroundings or adjacent properties could be shown, or poor design could be identified.

During this period, there were no awards of costs made for or against the Council.

The Council’s performance for this 6 month period and the previous 6 months, was an improvement on 2008/09, despite there being fewer appeals submitted.

RESOLVED:

That the Probity in Planning Appeal Decisions October 2009 to March 2010 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 Head of Planning and Economic Development under delegated authority since the last meeting had been circulated and could be inspected at the Civic Offices.