Agenda and minutes

1.         This meeting is to be webcast. Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking.

2.         The Democratic Services Officer will read the following announcement:

”I would like to remind everyone present that this meeting will be broadcast live to the internet (or filmed) and will be capable of repeated viewing (or another use by third parties).

If you are seated in the lower public seating area then 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 then you should move to the upper public gallery.

Could I please also remind Members to activate their microphones before speaking.”

The Senior Democratic Services Officer made a short address to remind 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.

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, for the determination of applications for planning permission. The Committee noted the advice provided for the public and speakers in attendance at Council Planning Committee meetings.

(Director of Governance)  To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting in accordance with Council Rule S1 in the Constitution (Part 4 “The Rules” refers).

The Committee noted the following substitutions for this meeting:

(a)        Cllr L Hughes for Cllr S Kane; and

(b)        Cllr J Philip for Cllr G Chambers.

(Director of Governance) To declare interests in any item on the agenda.

(a)      Pursuant to the Council’s Member Code of Conduct, Cllrs B Sandler and J Knapman declared a personal interest in the following item of the agenda, by virtue of having been present when Chigwell Parish Council had pre-submission discussions with the Applicant. The Councillors had determined that their interest was non-pecuniary and would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

·                 EPF/3386/16           Land West of Froghall Lane, South of Chigwell                                         Cemetery, Chigwell.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 10 July 2017.

Click here for District Development Management Committee Minutes 10 July 2017

Resolved:

(1)        That the minutes of the meeting held on 10 July 2017 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for a hybrid application requesting:

(i)         Full planning permission for an assisted living development comprising of apartments and integrated communal and support facilities; landscaped residents gardens; staff areas;             refuse storage; construction of a new site access; a sustainable       urban drainage system; a new sub-station and associated infrastructure and services, and;

(ii)        outline planning permission for a 0.45 hectare extension to Chigwell Cemetery.

The Principal Planning Officer (Development Management) presented a report for an assisted living development comprising of apartments and integrated communal and support facilities, landscaped residents’ gardens, staff areas, refuse storage, construction of a new site access, a sustainable urban drainage system, a new sub-station and associated infrastructure and services. The application also included outline planning permission for a 0.45 hectare extension to Chigwell Cemetery. These applications had been considered by Area Planning Sub-Committee South at its meeting on 23 August 2017, when they had been refused permission as per the Officer’s recommendation. However, four Members of that Sub-Committee then invoked the Minority Reference rules within the Council’s Constitution to refer the applications to this Committee for a final decision.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that the application site comprised approximately 2.8 hectares situated west of Froghall Lane, between Chigwell Cemetery to the north and residential development to the south. The northern part of the site extended up to land that was part of the Central Line railway, the reminder of the site was set approximately 100 metres east of the existing turning head between 33 and 35 Mount Pleasant Road. Land levels fell 9 metres over a distance of 175 metres from the main eastern site boundary to Froghall Lane, and 1.5 metres over a distance of 30 metres in the north west corner of the site. Presently, the site was unused scrubland and was entirely within the Metropolitan Green Belt. The site was not in a conservation area but was in a Flood Risk Zone 1 area.

The Principal Planning Officer clarified that the site would be laid out as five buildings (blocks A – E), with each building having four floors containing a mixture of one and two bedroomed apartments. This would give a total of 105 apartments: 94 two-bedroomed apartments and 11 one-bedroomed apartments. Blocks B, D and E would stand alone in the central and eastern part of the application site, whilst blocks A and C would be situated on higher ground in the western area of the site. Each block was designed to have steeply pitched roofs with prominent gable features, and ridge heights would typically be between 16.5 and 17.5 metres above ground level.

The Principal Planning Officer explained that the proposed community facilities rooms would extend beyond each building on both ground floor levels, such that they would form a two-storey link between the blocks; the link building would also contain a reception / office area. The submitted planning statement had stated that the community facilities to be provided would include a library, restaurant, gymnasium and cinema. The Committee was also informed that the second reason for refusal should be amended by removing the second part of the first sentence which read “…and by restricting that contribution towards provision for older people only the proposal fails to make appropriate provision for affordable housing. …”.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that as part of the application, the Applicant had offered the following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for the retrospective  application for the retention of the existing 3-bedroom bungalow dwelling.

The Principal Planning Officer (Development Management) presented a report for the retention of the existing three-bedroomed bungalow on the site, which had been built without prior planning permission being obtained. This application had been considered by Area Planning Sub-Committee East on 6 September 2017, where planning permission had been granted; however, four Members of that Sub-Committee then invoked the Minority Reference rules within the Constitution to refer the application to this Committee for a final decision.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that the site was one of 30 plots in this area, on which stood predominantly single-storey buildings used as dwellings. These lots were close to the eastern boundary of the District in an isolated and discreet rural location to the east of Stapleford Abbotts. These buildings were within the Metropolitan Green Belt, but they were not listed and nor did they lie within a conservation area. Originally, timber leisure chalets had been built on these plots for leisure and recreational uses during the summer months. However, over several decades, these chalets had come to be used as permanent dwellings and many were rebuilt for all year round occupation. Consequently, this section of Curtis Mill Lane was now characterised by bungalow dwellings occupied on a permanent basis.

The Principal Planning Officer reported that a timber chalet had existed on this particular site, but had been demolished to make way for the new bungalow. The new bungalow had been 80% built, but following enforcement action, works had ceased pending the outcome of this planning application. It was estimated that the new building was some 60-70% larger than the timber chalet that it had replaced. However, as it formed part of a built-up enclave, its impact on the openness of the Green Belt was reduced.

The Principal Planning Officer informed the Committee that Planning Officers had concluded this, and the other bungalows in the locality, provided a more affordable form of home than could generally be found elsewhere in the District. And while the erection of this replacement dwelling without planning permission could not be condoned, the proposal was considered acceptable. Therefore, it had been recommended that planning permission be granted, subject to conditions including the submission of details of the materials to be used on the external surfaces and details of a new front boundary enclosure, as well as the removal of permitted development rights.

The Committee noted the summary of representations received in respect of this application, including an objection from the Parish Council on the grounds that the new dwelling was not in character with the buildings in the vicinity, and a letter in support from the neighbour stating that the local rat problem had resolved itself since the old building was demolished. There were no speakers registered for this application so the Committee proceeded to debate the application.

Cllr Brady expressed her concerns about the timber chalet which was previously in situ being replaced by a large bungalow, and that construction was started without seeking planning permission first;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

(Director of Governance) To consider the attached report for a rear extension, garage and loft conversion.

The Principal Planning Officer (Development Management) presented a report for the construction of a rear extension, garage and loft conversion at 41 Bowes Drive in Ongar. This application had been considered by Area Planning Sub-Committee East on 6 September 2017, where it had been directly referred to this Committee for a decision with no recommendation.

The Principal Planning Officer stated that the application site was a single storey semi-detached dwelling within the built up area of Ongar. The site was not within the Metropolitan Green Belt nor a conservation area. The application was requesting permission to construct a roof extension with a box dormer to the rear, and a single-storey rear extension, finished in matching brickwork, with a small link to the existing garage.

The Principal Planning Officer reported that Planning Officers had concluded the proposed development would not be unduly detrimental to the character and appearance of the area or the amenities of the neighbouring residents, and was very similar to that which could be completed under permitted development rights with the same impact upon neighbours. Consequently, the application complied with the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework and the relevant Local Plan policies, and was recommended for approval.

The Committee noted the summary of representations received in respect of this application, including an objection from Ongar Town Council and an objection from the neighbour. The Principal Planning Officer highlighted that a further letter of objection had been received since the publication of the agenda from another neighbour in Bowes Drive, raising similar points to the objection summarised in the agenda. There were no public speakers registered for this application, so the Committee proceeded to debate the application.

The Committee noted that there were very few planning grounds on which to refuse the application, as if there was a 30cm gap between the rear extension and the existing garage instead of the proposed small link then the application could be constructed under permitted development rights.

Decision:

(1)        That planning application EPF/1400/17 at 41 Bowes Drive in Ongar be granted permission, subject to the following conditions:

            1.         The development hereby permitted must be begun not later than the                       expiration of three years beginning with the date of this notice.

2.         Materials to be used for the external finishes of the proposed development shall match those of the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

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

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

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.