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 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 confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Sub-Committee, held on 27 April 2011 (attached).

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 27 April 2011 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record subject to noting that Councillor Philip was present at this meeting.

(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 W Breare-Hall declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda by virtue of knowing the licensee. The Councillors had determined that his interest was not prejudicial and he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

EPF/0454/11 – The Globe, 18 Lindsay Road, Epping.

(b)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillors Jon Whitehouse and K Avey declared personal interests in the following items of the agenda by virtue of being members of Epping Town Council. The Councillors had determined that their interest were not prejudicial and they would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·                     EPF/0792/11 – Highfield Green, Epping;

·                     EPF/0454/11 – The Globe, 18 Lindsay Road, Epping

(c)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor B Rolfe declared a personal interest in the following items of the agenda, by virtue of living in that street. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not prejudicial and he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·                     EPF/0454/11 – The Globe, 18 Lindsay Road, Epping.

(d)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor C Whitbread declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of having known the applicant in the past. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not prejudicial and he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·                     EPF/0454/11 – The Globe, 18 Lindsay Road, Epping.

(e)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor C Whitbread 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 prejudicial and he would leave the meeting for the consideration of the applications and voting thereon:

·                     EPF/0606/11 – Land Adj 14 Harrison Drive, North Weald

(f)         Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillors D Stallan and A Grigg declared a personal interest in the following item on the agenda, by virtue of being members of North Weald Parish Council. 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/0606/11 – Land Adj 14 Harrison Drive, North Weald

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 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 – 3 be determined as set out in the schedule attached to these minutes.

(Director of Planning & Economic Development) To consider the attached report (PE-001-2011/12).

The Sub-committee considered the report on probity in planning on appeal decisions from October 2010 to March 2011. They noted that the Best Value Performance Indicator (BVPI) for district Councils was to aim to have less than 40% of their decisions overturned on appeal.  The latest available figure for the national average for District Councils was 30.9%. The BVPI had been scrapped and replaced by one that records planning appeals only as a Local Performance Indicator (LPI 45) with a target of 25% of allowed decisions.  For 2010/11 a revised target had been set to not exceed 28%. However, this was exceeded at 36.6%. For 2011/12, LPI 45 has been split into two; one part would measure the performance of Committee reversals of officer recommendations.

Over the six month period between October 2010 and March 2011, the Council received 65 decisions on appeal, 56 of which were planning and related appeals and 9 were enforcement related. Of these 24 were allowed (36.9%). Of the proportion of the 22 appeals that arose from decisions of the committees to refuse contrary to the recommendation put to them by officers during the 6-month period, 14 were allowed and 8 dismissed. 63.6% of appeals resulting from Sub-committee reversals were therefore not supported on appeal.

The Council’s performance for this 6-month period and the previous 6 months shows a slight overall worsening of performance compared with 2009/10. Members should think carefully when considering refusing planning permission on highway grounds where there was no firm evidence of highway harm and where no objection had been raised by ECC Highway Officers.

            RESOLVED:

That the Planning Appeals decisions from October 2010 to March 2011 be noted.

(Director of Planning & Economic Development) To consider the attached report (PE-002-2011/12).

In September 2009 permission was granted for alteration to Gunn Lodge bungalow to create a two story dwelling. In January 2011 an enforcement officer confirmed that the new chalet bungalow had not been built according to plan and subsequent to this, a new application was received. The application was refused in April 2011 due to its height, design and overall bulk. Following this, it was noted that the overall height of the chalet bungalow had been reduced and other alterations made to bring it within acceptable levels. It was considered that the property was now very close to the design that was originally approved under EPF/1437/09 and there was no obvious harm from the development. Therefore, it was not considered expedient to serve an enforcement notice.

            RESOLVED:

That an enforcement notice not be served with regard to Gunn Lodge, The Street, Sheering, as the property had now been reduced in size and was very close to the design that was approved under EPF/1437/09.

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.

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.