Agenda and minutes

This meeting is to be webcast and the Chairman will read the following announcement:

“I would like to remind everyone present that this hybrid meeting will be broadcast live to the internet (or filmed) and will be capable of repeated viewing (or other such use by third parties). Therefore by participating in this meeting, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for webcasting and/or training purposes. If any public speakers on Zoom do not wish to have their image captured they should ensure that their video setting throughout the meeting is turned off and set to audio only.

Please also be aware that if technical difficulties interrupt the meeting that cannot be overcome, I may need to adjourn the meeting.”

On behalf of the Chairman, the Team Manager for Democratic & Electoral Services reminded everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the internet and would be capable of repeated viewing, which could infringe their human and data protection rights.

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) General advice for those persons attending the meeting of the Committee is attached as an Appendix to this agenda.

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 Committee in relation to the determination of applications for planning permission. The Committee noted the advice provided for the public and speakers in attendance at meetings of the Council’s planning committees.

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

The Committee was advised that no substitute members had been appointed for the meeting.

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To declare interests in any item on the agenda.

The following interests were declared by members of the Committee pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct:

(a)             Councillor S Heap declared a personal interest in item 8 (Planning Application EPF/0826/18 – 48 Russell Road, Buckhurst Hill) of the agenda for the meeting, by virtue of the applicant being known to the Councillor and the Councillor being a member of Buckhurst Hill Parish Council. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not pecuniary and indicated that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon.

(b)        Councillor S Rackham declared a personal interest in item 8 (Planning Application EPF/0826/18 – 48 Russell Road, Buckhurst Hill) of the agenda for the meeting, by virtue of the applicant being known to the Councillor. The Councillor had determined that her interest was not pecuniary and indicated that she would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon.

(c)        Councillor K Williamson declared a personal interest in item 8 (Planning Application EPF/0826/18 – 48 Russell Road, Buckhurst Hill) of the agenda for the meeting, by virtue of the applicant being known to the Councillor. The Councillor had determined that his interest was not pecuniary and indicated that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon.

(d)        Councillor J Lea declared a personal interest in item 9 (planning application EPF/2829/21 – 1A Monkswood Avenue, Waltham Abbey) and item 10 (EPF/2870/21 – 1A Monkswood Avenue, Waltham Abbey) of the agenda for the meeting, by virtue of being the applicant for both applications. The Councillor had determined that her interest was pecuniary and indicated that she would leave the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon.

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 27 October 2021 (attached).

Cllr S Heap proposed that the name of one of the objectors at the last meeting and a summary of their objections should be added to the minutes for the meeting. This proposal was seconded by Cllr C C Pond, but the proposal was lost when voted on by the Committee.

RESOLVED:

(1)        That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 27 October 2021 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(Service Manager – Development Management) A Planning Policy Briefing Note, dated October 2021, has been produced by the Planning Policy Team to ensure that a consistent approach is taken to the provision of planning policy advice for the District, particularly in relation to the Epping Forest District Local Plan Submission Version, which was published on 18 December 2017 and the Main Modifications to the LPSV published for consultation between 15 July and 23 September 2021.

The primary purpose of the Planning Policy Briefing Note is to inform the development management process and to provide assistance for Development Management Officers, Councillors, applicants and planning agents. The Planning Policy Briefing Note is available at:

https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Planning-Policy-Briefing-Note-06-October-2021-accessible.pdf

The Committee was reminded that a briefing note had been prepared to ensure that a consistent approach was taken to the provision of planning policy advice, following the publication of the Epping Forest District Local Plan Submission Version (LPSV) on 18 December 2017 and the Main Modifications to the LPSV, which had been published for consultation on 15 July 2021. Members were advised that the primary purpose of the briefing note was to inform development management activities and to provide assistance for Councillors, Officers, Applicants, Planning Agents and other persons involved in the development management process.

Resolved:

(1)        That the Planning Policy Briefing Note for the Epping Forest District Local Plan Submission Version be noted.

(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for the demolition of the existing bungalow and erection of three flats.

The Planning Officer, C Ahmet, presented a report for the demolition of the existing bungalow at 48 Russell Road in Buckhurst Hill and construction of a block of three flats over three floors. Car parking for each flat along with bin and cycle storage would be located in the front forecourt.

The Committee noted that it had previously considered this application at its meeting held in August 2018, when it was resolved to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and the completion of a legal agreement to secure mitigating measures in relation to the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (EFSAC). This application was before the Committee again as some new material facts and considerations had been identified in line with section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

C Ahmet informed the Committee that the site currently comprised a large single storey detached dwelling on a hillside location. It was flanked by three-storey terraced houses and two-storey semi-detached dwellings. Russell Road was a mixture of dwelling types and styles, and although within an urban area, it was not listed or within a conservation area. One of the neighbouring properties had been extended to the side, but this was unlawful and was currently the subject of enforcement action.

Planning Officers had concluded that the application would provide a well-designed residential scheme that made good use of an existing urban site. The proposed design was acceptable in terms of its scale, bulk and mass, and relationship with neighbouring buildings as well as the impacts on neighbouring amenities. The proposed development would not cause harm to highway safety and the level of parking close to local services and local public transport modes was acceptable. Overall, the proposal complied with the aims and objectives of national planning guidance and the relevant policies contained within the adopted Combined Local Plan and Alterations 2006 and the Submission Version Local Plan 2017.

The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received in relation to this application, and the Committee heard from an objector and the applicant before proceeding to debate the Application.

Cllr S Heap queried that numbers 44 and 46 Russell Road appeared to have moved a metre away from the road in comparison to the original planning application in 2018. The drawing submitted as part of this application showed the building at number 46 to be level with the front of the existing bungalow. However, the drawings submitted in 2018 showed the same building to be forward of the existing bungalow, and therefore these drawings were different. A Marx double-checked the drawings in relation to this application and agreed that in the ‘red line drawing’ (which identified the extent of the site) the houses appeared to be slightly forward. There were occasionally slight discrepancies between the ‘red line drawing’ and the drawings submitted by the applicant, but the Committee were advised to consider the drawings submitted by the applicant which showed that numbers 44 and 46 were more in line  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for a hip to gable extension to the roof and insertion of a rear dormer.

The Planning Officer, S Dhadwar, presented a report for a hip to gable extension to the roof and insertion of a rear dormer with a Juliette balcony.

S Dhadwar reported that the dwelling was a two-storey inter-war semi-detached house which had been converted into two flats. It was located on a corner plot at the junction of Crooked Mile and Monkswood Avenue, but was not located in the Waltham Abbey Conservation Area. The application was before the Committee as it had been submitted by or behalf of a District Councillor.

Planning Officers had concluded that the proposal would have a neutral impact on the character and appearance of the host property, the wider street scene and the adjoining Conservation Area. The living conditions of neighbouring properties would not be adversely affected and the proposal met the requirements of the adopted Local Plan. Therefore, it was recommended to grant planning permission.

The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received in relation to this application. The Committee heard from the applicant before proceeding to debate the application.

S Dhadwar confirmed that the proposed extension to the roof would not increase its height and would not have a material effect on the view of the church spire in the surrounding area.

Decision:

(1)        That planning application EPF/2829/21 at 1A Monkswood Avenue in Waltham Abbey be granted planning permission, subject to the following planning conditions:

1… The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

2… The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and retained strictly in accordance with the following approved plans:

i…Location Plan;

ii…Block Plan;

iii…Existing Plans Elevations and Section; and

iv…Proposed Plans Elevations and Section.

3… The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those in the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for a single storey side/rear extension.

The Planning Officer, S Dhadwar, presented a report for a single storey in-fill rear and side extension.

S Dhadwar reported that the dwelling was a two-storey inter-war semi-detached house which had been converted into two flats. It was located on a corner plot at the junction of Crooked Mile and Monkswood Avenue, but was not located in the Waltham Abbey Conservation Area. The application was before the Committee as it had been submitted by or behalf of a District Councillor.

Planning Officers had concluded that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the site, and would not have an excessive adverse impact on neighbouring residential occupiers. The application also met the requirements of the adopted Local Plan and would not impinge upon the character and appearance of the adjoining conservation area. Therefore, it had been recommended to grant planning permission.

The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received in relation to this application. The Committee heard from the applicant before proceeding to debate the application.

Decision:

(1)        That planning application EPF/2870/21 at 1A Monkswood Avenue in Waltham Abbey be granted planning permission, subject to the following planning conditions:

1… The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

2… The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and retained strictly in accordance with the following approved plans:

i…Location Plan;

ii…Block Plan;

iii…Existing Plans Elevations and Section; and

iv…Proposed Plans Elevations and Section.

3… The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match those in the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for a part single/two storey rear/side extensions, replacement larger roof window on rear elevation, and conversion of rear half of existing garage (Revised application to EPF/0052/21).

The Service Manager for Development Management, A Marx, presented a report for the demolition of the existing single storey utility building, conversion of the rear half of the garage into a habitable room, the erection of a single-storey rear extension, the erection of a two-storey rear extension, a change of roof from a pitched roof to a shallow hip roof, and enlargement of the central rear roof slope skylight for the stairway. This application was before the Committee by virtue of a minority reference from Area Planning Sub-Committee East at its meeting on 13 October 2021.

A Marx informed the Committee that the site currently consisted of a two-storey gable roof double fronted detached dwelling house located to the north of Boleyn Row, which was residential in character.  The property had a detached side/rear garage and a two-storey rear aspect that formed part of the original house sited to the east elevation of the property. The properties in this part of Boleyn Row were uniform in character comprising of large detached dwellings of equal spacing and of a similar main front building line.  Numbers 7 and 8  were sited on the corners of the access to King Henry’s walkway and were the only 2 properties in this frontage that varied in design terms with a rear staggered building line. The property was not part of a conservation area and was not listed. The site had been subject of a previous planning application, which had been refused permission in February 2021.

Planning Officers had concluded that the proposed development had satisfactorily addressed the previous reason for refusal and was considered appropriate in terms of its design and appearance, maintaining the established spatial pattern of development in Boleyn Row and would not result in any appreciable harm to its architectural local context. The extensions were not judged to result in any amenity implications to neighbouring properties and other aspects in relation to parking/highway safety were considered satisfactory. The application was considered to be in accordance with the adopted Local Plan and Alterations (1998-2006) and the emerging Local Plan Submission Version 2017 and with the relevant parts of the National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, it was recommended that planning permission be granted subject to planning conditions.

The Committee noted the summary of representations in respect of this application and heard from an objector, Epping Town Council and the applicant before proceeding to debate the application.

Cllr P Keska reported that Area Planning Sub-Committee East had felt that the application was not detrimental to the existing street scene; the estate was originally built to be uniform but this had been stretched in the past and the Sub-Committee had felt this application to be acceptable. The Committee was reminded that the application had been referred up with a recommendation to approve permission. Other members of the Committee accepted that a garage did not have to be used to store cars anymore, and as there was some distance between the neighbouring properties  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 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.

It was noted that there was no other urgent business for consideration by the Committee. A Marx took the opportunity to explain to the Committee that a Legal Officer had been present for the application at 48 Russell Road in Buckhurst Hill in order to answer any legal questions that might have arisen from the re-consideration of this application by the Committee.

Exclusion

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To consider whether, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public and press should be excluded from the meeting for the items of business set out below on grounds that they will involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the following paragraph(s) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act (as amended) or are confidential under Section 100(A)(2):

The Local Government (Access to Information) (Variation) Order 2006, which came into effect on 1 March 2006, requires the Council to consider whether maintaining the exemption listed above outweighs the potential public interest in disclosing the information. Any member who considers that this test should be applied to any currently exempted matter on this agenda should contact the proper officer at least 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Background Papers

(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) Article 17 (Access to Information) of the Constitution defines background papers as being documents relating to the subject matter of the report which in the Proper Officer's opinion:

(a)        disclose any facts or matters on which the report or an important part of the report is based;  and

(b)        have been relied on to a material extent in preparing the report and does not include published works or those which disclose exempt or confidential information and in respect of executive reports, the advice of any political advisor.

The Council will make available for public inspection one copy of each of the documents on the list of background papers for four years after the date of the meeting. Inspection of background papers can be arranged by contacting either the Responsible Officer or the Democratic Services Officer for the particular item.

The Committee noted that there was no business which necessitated the exclusion of the public and press from the meeting.