Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 25 August 2016 and to authorise the Chairman to sign them.

The minutes of the meeting held on 25 August were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The report before Members detailed an application to make alterations to the existing car park layout and provision of additional car parking on adjacent land to serve the existing foodstore, together with reinstatement of former a community allotment on the remainder of adjacent land, associated landscaping and works.

The application had originally been presented to the Committee on 30 June 2016. The application had been deferred by Members so that clarity could be sought from the applicant regarding the exact nature of the proposals, including what was proposed to be offered by way of community benefit and clarity regarding the case for very special circumstances to justify the development, as well as future proposals for management of the remainder of the land and maintenance proposals.

An update was given in the report.

Members noted that the application had been called-in by Councillor Jason Frost on the grounds that having worked very closely with the developer to ensure the maximum benefit for the residents of the area, It was felt that not enough consideration had been duly given to such efforts and Councillor Frost wanted the Committee to take a view on the application.

With its agreement Councillor Linda Trew addressed the Committee.

Councillor Trew commented that the current condition of the land was an eyesore and that the proposed works would enhance the area. Councillor Trew also commented that the applicant had a financial contribution towards the upkeep of the nearby King George’s Playing Fields.

During a brief debate Members discussed the proposed works and the benefits they would bring to the area.

The report recommended that planning permission be refused however following a motion to approve planning permission it was RESOLVED to delegate to the Head of Regulatory Services to grant planning permission contrary to recommendation subject to prior completion of a legal agreement to cover:

·         Clause requiring reversion of site to Green Belt open land on cessation of car park use by Aldi.

·         £12,000 financial contribution to nearby public open space plus imposition of conditions to be decided by the Head of Regulatory Services but to include a maintenance scheme for the meadow area in perpetuity.

In the event the legal agreement could not be satisfactorily negotiated the application would come back to the Committee for determination.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The reports before Members detailed applications for a proposed garage conversion, a proposed conservatory at the rear of the property with part rear extension and conversion of an existing outbuilding to a granny annexe.

Members noted that all three applications had been called-in by Councillor Damian White on the grounds that the proposals raised concerns in regards to their impact upon neighbouring amenity and also their combined level of development.

In accordance with the public speaking arrangements the Committee was addressed by an objector with a response by the applicant.

The objector commented that that he was representing the neighbouring properties who were objecting to the garage conversion as they believed the applicant was planning on operating the proposed development on a commercial basis. The objector also commented that the conservatory along with other previous extensions would lead to a gross overdevelopment of the property and a loss of visual amenity and privacy to neighbouring properties. The objector concluded by commenting that the proposed granny annexe was a further overdevelopment of the site that would also lead to a loss of privacy to neighbouring properties.

In response the applicant’s agent commented that there was little uniformity in the road and that his client had no intention of using the premises for commercial use. The agent also commented that the proposed conservatory had been reduced so as not to affect the privacy of the neighbouring properties. The agent concluded by commenting that the granny annexe was for the provision of care to an elderly relative and would also not be used for commercial activity.

During the debate Members discussed all three of the proposals and their impact on the amenity and privacy on the neighbouring properties. Members also sought and received clarification of the existing streetscene and of permitted development rights.

Although all three applications were considered together they were voted on separately.

P0643.16 – It was RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The vote for the resolution to grant planning permission was carried by 9 votes to 0 with 2 abstentions.

Councillors Wallace and White abstained from voting.

P0644.16 – The report recommended planning permission be granted however subject to a motion to refuse the granting of planning permission it was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the grounds that the conservatory, by reason of its depth of penetration into the rear garden seen in relationship to the impact of the existing large annex outbuilding, would overdevelop the site with built form harmful to its open rear garden character which would be out of keeping with the surroundings.

The vote for the refusal of planning permission was carried by 7 votes to 1 with 3 abstentions.

Councillors Best, Wallace, Ganly, Whitney, Hawthorn, Martin and Williamson voted for the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

Councillor Misir voted against the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

Councillors Kelly, White and Donald abstained from voting.

P0645.16 it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions as set out in the report.

The Committee considered the report and without debate RESOLVED that the application and all relevant documentation be forwarded to the Secretary of State for determination in accordance with Section 12 of the Listed Building Act 1990 and regulation 13 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Regulations 1990 and that should the Secretary of State be minded to grant Listed Building Consent that the conditions and Reason for Approval contained in the report be considered in respect of such consent.

The application before Members was for the erection of a single apartment block for 19 one and two-bedroom flats on a brownfield site at Straight Road, Romford. Planning permission had previously been granted for a mixed-use redevelopment of the site comprising retail on the ground floor and residential above over two additional floors. The current proposal was for a part three and part two-storey building over a larger area of the site. 

During a brief debate Members discussed possible overlooking issues, overdevelopment of the site and a lack of parking provision.

The report recommended that planning permission be granted however following a motion to refuse the granting of planning permission it was RESOLVED that planning permission be refused on the grounds that the proposal would represent:

·         A cramped, excessively dense development of the site;

·         Overbearing relationship to neighbouring residents;

·         Insufficient on-site parking;

·         Failure to secure school places contribution through legal agreement.

The vote for the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission was carried by 10 votes to 1.

Councillor Misir voted against the resolution to refuse the granting of planning permission.

The Committee considered a report that updated Members on the position of legal agreements and planning obligations. This related to approval of various types of application for planning permission decided by the Committee that could be subject to prior completion or a planning obligation. This was obtained pursuant to Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Acts.

The report also updated the position on legal agreements and planning obligations agreed by this Committee during the period 2000-2016.

The Committee NOTED the report and the information contained therein.

The report accompanied a schedule of appeals and a schedule of appeal decisions, received between 28 May 2016 and 19 August 2016.

The report detailed that 36 new appeals had been received since the last meeting of the Monitoring Committee in June 2016.

The Committee NOTED the report and the results of the appeal decisions received.

The Committee considered and noted the schedules detailing information regarding enforcement notices updated since the meeting held in June 2016.

Schedule A showed notices currently with the Secretary of State for the Environment (the Planning Inspectorate being the executive agency) awaiting appeal determination.

Schedule B showed current notices outstanding, awaiting service, compliance, etc. with up-dated information from staff on particular notices.

The Committee NOTED the information in the report.

The report updated the Committee on the progress and/or outcome of recent prosecutions undertaken on behalf of the Planning Service.

The Committee NOTED the report.

Members had previously been emailed a schedule which listed the complaints received by the Planning Control Service regarding alleged planning contraventions for the period 4 June 2016 to 26 August 2016.

The Committee NOTED the report and AGREED the actions of the Service.