Venue: Council Chamber - Civic Offices. View directions
Contact: G. Woodhall Tel: (01992) 564243 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
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 allow persons to address the Committee for the determination of applications for planning permission.
(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.
The Committee was advised that the following substitute members had been appointed for the meeting:
(a) Cllr D Stocker for Cllr T Matthews;
(b) Cllr S Kane for Cllr I Hadley; and
(c) Cllr C Amos for Cllr J M Whitehouse.
Declarations of Interest
(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To declare interests in any item on the agenda.
No declarations of interest were made by members of the Committee, pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.
(Team Manager – Democratic & Electoral Services) To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 21 September 2022.
(1) That the revised minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 21 September 2022, as published on the supplementary agenda, be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.
Any member who wishes a site visit to be undertaken for any of the applications listed in this agenda should seek agreement from at least one other member of the Committee and then inform both Planning and Democratic Services prior to the day of the meeting.
There had been no site visits requested by members of the Committee for any of the applications on the agenda for the meeting.
Epping Forest District Local Plan Submission Version - Planning Policy Briefing Note
(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:
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.
(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 a proposed new four-storey office building and associated parking (EFSAC case held in abeyance, now progressing).
The Service Manager for Development Management, A Marx, presented a report for a proposed new four-storey office building and associated parking. The site was located within the Oakwood Hill Industrial Estate and was currently a scaffold yard with ad hoc storage structures and portacabins located behind a palisade fence. The site backed onto the TfL underground railway line and was not in either the Metropolitan Green Belt or a conservation area. The proposed building would be 13.3 metres in height and finished with a cladding; there would be provision for 22 parking spaces within the site.
A Marx advised the Committee that condition 5 required amending to remove the reference to cooking operations. In addition, there were two new conditions to be attached to the application if approved: nothing to be installed on the roof of the building without prior permission from the Council; and details of any roof mounted solar panels to be agreed by the Council before installation.
Planning Officers had concluded that the proposed development would not have an adverse impact on the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation (EF SAC) subject to the imposition of relevant planning conditions including a workplace Travel Plan as well as the provision of electric vehicle charging points, and the application was considered to be acceptable. The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received in relation to this application, which included an objection from Loughton Town Council, before proceeding to debate the application.
The Committee debated the main issues of the application, including: the principle of the development; the design of the proposed building; the impact of the proposed building on amenity; parking and highways issues; and the impact of the proposal on the EF SAC.
Cllr C C Pond proposed the following three amendments to the planning conditions for the application, seconded by Cllr H Kauffman, but these were lost when put to the vote by the Committee:
· The submission of details of landscaping to include the west facing wall;
· The Construction Method Statement to include an additional point to minimise the use of vehicles with internal combustion engines during the construction of the building; and
· Six electric vehicle parking bays to be provided, not four.
Cllr C C Pond, seconded by Cllr H Kauffman, proposed an additional condition to remove the permitted development rights for the site to prevent future conversion of the proposed office block to residential premises, and this was agreed by the Committee.
(1) That planning application EPF/0935/20 for Unit 20 on Oakwood Hill Industrial Estate in Loughton be granted planning permission subject to the following planning conditions:
1…The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision.
2…The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and retained strictly in accordance with the following approved plans:
1991/01 Rev F
1991/02 Rev F
1991/03 Rev E
3…No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, ... view the full minutes text for item 32.
(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for a two-storey side extension and part one-storey, part two-storey rear extension.
The Service Manager for Development Management, A Marx, presented a report for a two-storey side extension and part one-storey, part two-storey rear extension. This application had originally been determined under Officer delegated authority; however, an objection by the Town Council had not been considered when assessing the application. Thus, the decision had been contrary to the Council’s Scheme of Delegation and a Judicial Review was brought against the decision, which was successful. This application was now before this Committee as there was the possibility that the Council could be liable for costs or compensation.
A Marx stated that the site comprised of a semi-detached dwelling within the urban settlement of Waltham Abbey with a pedestrian alleyway along the western boundary linking Halfhides with Farm Hill Road. The site was not listed or within a conservation area, and there were no protected trees within the site. Planning Officers had considered the impact on the character and appearance of the locality, the impact on the living conditions of neighbours, and concluded that planning permission should be granted subject to planning conditions.
The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received for this application, which included an objection from the Town Council. The Committee heard from an objector and the applicant’s agent before proceeding to debate the application.
The Committee discussed whether to add an extra condition to prevent any windows being fitted to the wall facing the alleyway between Halfhides and Farm Hill Road. Whilst some members supported the recommendation to approve the application, Cllr C C Pond proposed a motion to refuse planning permission for the application – seconded by Cllr H Kane – on the grounds of the impact on the character and appearance of the area and neighbour amenity due to its mass, bulk and siting.
(1) That planning application EPF/0610/22 at 32 Halfhides in Waltham Abbey be refused planning permission for the following reasons:
1…The proposed extension, by reason of its mass, bulk and siting, would have an overdominant and oppressive impact upon the character and appearance of the area when viewed from the highway and alleyway. This is contrary to Policies CP2 and DBE10 of the adopted Local 1998 & 2006, Policy DM9 of the Local Plan Submission Version 2017, and Paragraphs 126 & 130 of the NPPF 2021.
2…The proposed extension, by reason of its mass, bulk and siting, would have an
overbearing visual impact upon neighbour amenity. As such, the proposal fails to
safeguard or enhance the living conditions of neighbouring properties and is therefore
contrary to policies CP7 and DBE9 of the adopted Local Plan 1998 & 2006, Policy DM9
of the Local Plan Submission Version 2017, and the NPPF 2021.
(Service Manager – Development Management) To consider the attached report for the replacement of the existing two-storey side extension with a new three-bedroom detached dwelling.
The Planning Officer, M Rahman, presented a report for the demolishing of the existing two-storey side extension and replacement with a new three-bedroom detached dwelling. This application was originally considered by Area Planning Sub-Committee East with a recommendation to grant planning permission at its meeting held on 2 November 2022. The Sub-Committee narrowly voted to refuse the application, but it was referred to this Committee for a final decision under the Minority Reference rules within the Constitution.
M Rahman reported that the site was residential garden space for 41 Dukes Avenue, located on the corner of Dukes Avenue and Heath Drive. The site was not listed, nor within a conservation area, the Metropolitan Green Belt or a flood zone. The application had been recommended for refusal by the Sub-Committee on the grounds that the proposal did not relate positively to the locality due to its form, scale and massing. Planning Officers felt that a second reason for refusal should be added if the Committee upheld the Sub-Committee’s recommendation, that the development failed to mitigate against the adverse impact it would have on the Epping Forest Special Area of Conservation in the absence of a Section 106 legal agreement.
The Committee noted the summary of representations that had been received for this application, including an objection from the Parish Council. The Committee heard from an objector, the Parish Council, and the applicant before debating the application.
The majority of the Committee felt that there was a consistency of design within Dukes Avenue, which this proposal would be in opposition to, and therefore the application could not be supported. It was also highlighted that it was not environmentally sustainable to demolish an extension that had only been erected 11 years ago.
(1) That planning application EPF/1289/22 at 41 Dukes Avenue in Theydon Bois be refused planning permission for the following reasons:
1… The proposal, by reason of its form, scale, and massing, fails to relate positively to the locality or make a positive contribution to Theydon Bois, contrary to Policies CP2, CP7 & DBE1 of the adopted Local Plan 1998 & 2006, Policy DM9 (A – i & ii) & (D – ii & iv) of the Local Plan Submission Version 2017, and Paragraphs 126 & 130 of the NPPF 2021.
2… In the absence of a completed Section 106 planning obligation the proposed
development fails to mitigate against the adverse impact that it will have on the Epping
Forest Special Area for Conservation in terms of recreational pressure and air pollution. Failure to secure such mitigation is contrary to policies CP1 and CP6 of the adopted Local Plan 1998 & 2006, Policies DM2 and DM22 of the Local Plan Submission Version 2017, Paragraph 180 of the NPPF 2021, and the requirements of the Habitats Regulations 2017.
Any Other Business
(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.
Exclusion of Public and Press
(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.
(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.