Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence and declarations of interest.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Loughlin and Fairhurst.

• Councillor Freeman declared a non – pecuniary Interest as a member of Saffron Walden Town Council, and in item number 7 as the applicant is known to him.
• Councillor Sell declared a non-pecuniary interest as a member of Stansted Parish Council for item number 6, and as the Chair of the Museum Management Working Group for item number 10.
• Councillor Pavitt declared a non – pecuniary interest as member of Chesterfords and Wendens Ambo Parish Council, and in item number 4 as the applicant is a neighbour.
• Councillor Gerard declared a non – pecuniary interest as Cabinet Member for Residents and Community Partnerships; Police and Emergency Services, as a member of Newport Parish Council, Newport, Quendon and Rickling Steering Group, and as a member of the 100 Parishes Society.  Also a pecuniary interest in item number 7 and would leave the room for consideration of that item.
• Councillor Reeve declared a non-pecuniary interest as the ward councillor for Broad Oak and The Hallingburys in relation to item number 8.
• Councillor Merifield declared a non – pecuniary interest as member of Felsted and Stebbing Parish Council.

To consider the minutes of the previous meeting.

The minutes of the previous meeting were agreed and signed as an accurate record following an amendment of the record of attendees to include Councillor Reeve.

To consider the Chief Officer’s Report.

The Development Manager introduced the report for the Committee to consider changes to the arrangements for public speaking and site visits as proposed by the informal working group which met on 11 July 2019.

The recommendation is that the Committee confirm that the Chair use her discretion to implement the proposals on a trial basis pending a report to the Governance, Audit and Performance Committee on the formal changes to the Constitution.

The proposal to accept the recommendation was put forward by Councillor Gerard and seconded by Councillor Lemon.

RESOLVED:  to implement the following proposals on a trial basis pending a report to the Governance, Audit and Performance Committee on the formal changes to the Constitution.

1. A single representative of Town/Parish Councils to be allotted FIVE minutes to speak.

2. All other public speakers to be allotted FOUR minutes to speak

3. Change the limit of public speakers to TEN, with no distinction between support, oppose or neutral

4. Clarify that representatives of agent/applicant/developers to be given a total of FIFTEEN minutes

5. Limiting Town/Parish Council Representation at Committee Site Visits to TWO

To consider application UTT/19/0514/HHF.

Councillor Pavitt left the room.

The Planning Officer presented the proposal of the erection of a boundary fence and gates to enclose this area of garden which is currently open to the south and north-west with chainlink fencing to the area adjacent to the playing field.

The application was recommended for approval with conditions.

In response to a Member question the Development Manager said that a condition would be added to restrict the height of the gate to 1.83m.

Councillor LeCount proposed the motion for approval of the application with the added condition.

Councillor Caton seconded the motion.

RESOLVED: to approve the application with the added condition to restrict the height of the gate to 1.83m.

Councillor Pavitt returned to the meeting.

To consider application UTT/19/0957/FUL.

The Development Management Team Leader presented the proposal for the erection of a single storey building (joinery) workshop and associated showroom usage) with associated landscaping and civil works.

The application was recommended for conditional approval subject to S106 legal obligation.

The members discussed the need for a joinery workshop, lighting and landscaping of the site, the installation of solar panels and noise pollution.

In response to the discussions the Development Manager agreed that the conditions would be tightened up

Councillor Gerard proposed the motion to approve the application with tighter conditions.

Councillor LeCount seconded the motion.

RESOLVED: to approve the application with tighter conditions as laid out in the decision notice.

To consider application UTT/19/1115/FUL.

On recommendation of the Legal Officer and Chair, Councillor Sell spoke, retired to the public gallery to hear the rest of the speakers and then left the room during the deliberation of the application.

The Planning Officer presented the planning application  for the proposed demolition of the existing bungalow and garage and the erection of two detached dwellings. The dwellings will be two storey and will include associated access and parking to the front of the site. The dwellings will include external materials of brick and weatherboarding under clay tiled roof.

The recommendation was to approve the application with conditions.

The members sought clarification from the officers in relation to the differences between what had already been approved on the site and what the changes applied for were.

The Committee asked for the permitted development rights to be removed on approval of the application, the Planning Officer said that this would be conditioned and that it was not an unusual approach.

In response to a member question the Planning Officer advised that the window which was at risk of overlooking could be conditioned to be obscured or have restricted opening.

The Development Manager also confirmed that there was no convention that meant that properties had to be mirror images of one another.

Councillor Gerard proposed the motion to approve the application subject to conditions.

Councillor Lemon seconded the motion.

RESOLVED: to approve the application with the conditions laid out in the decision notice.

Councillor Sell returned to the meeting.

Cllr Sell and Mr V Ranger spoke on the application.

To consider application UTT/19/1389/FUL.

Councillors Freeman and Gerard left the room.

The Planning Officer presented the planning application is for the retrospective removal of the existing timber shed building and the proposed erection of a single dwelling. A new access, parking and turning area will be provided via the existing undercroft between 26 and 28 Thaxted Road. The dwelling will be a terrace property, two storeys to the front of the site and three storeys to the rear.

The application was recommended for approval with conditions.

In response to a member question the Planning Officer advised that the previous issues with parking and garden size had been resolved and the application was presented in accordance with the Essex Design Guide.

Councillor Reeve proposed a motion to approve the application.

Councillor Sutton seconded that motion.

RESOLVED: to approve the application subject to conditions laid out in the decision notice.

Cllrs Freeman and Gerard returned to the meeting

To consider the Chief Officer’s Report.

The Development Manager presented the report in relation to the reasons for the refusal of application UTT/16/3565/OP from the Planning Committee Meeting of 24 July 2019.

The recommendation was that the Planning Committee confirms the resolution from Committee of 24 July 2019 to REFUSE planning application reference UTT/16/3565/OP for the following reasons:

1.    The proposals would result in the urbanisation of the rural area resulting in an adverse harm to the openness, character and intrinsic beauty of the countryside, and the countryside hinterland behind the defined Countryside Protection Zone. This includes the breaching of the Flitch Way to the south, which is considered a defensible boundary, in terms of landscape character. The harm arising from the proposals would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits from the scheme. As such the proposals are contrary to Uttlesford Local Plan Policies S7 and S8 and paragraph 170 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

2.    The proposal constitutes further development in the vicinity of the busy Four Ashes junction and would in negative residual cumulative impacts on the road network contrary to Paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2019.

3.      There is no mechanism to secure the following measures that would be required if planning permission were to be granted:

(i) Provision of 40% affordable housing

(ii) Provision of education financial contribution

(iii) Transfer of 2.1ha site for education purposes

(iv) Provision of financial contribution for health (£108,507 index linked)

(v) Provision of financial contribution of £37,000 (index linked) for works to the Flitch Way

(vi) Provision of MOVA at the signalised junction of the B1256/B183, known as the Four Ashes

(vii) Provision of appropriate surfacing and drainage to relevant sections of footpath 23/5 and footpath 48/22

(viii) Provision of financial contribution of £40,740 for mitigation works at Hatfield Forest

(ix) Provision and transfer of dog walking circuit, including a fenced off green area of 1.35ha including a pond and picnic area

(x) Provision and transfer of open space, MUGA and trim trail

(xi) Provision and transfer of neighbourhood building and car park

(xii) Ensure adequate ongoing maintenance of SUDS system.

As such the proposals are contrary to Uttlesford Local Plan Policies GEN6, H9, GEN7, ENV7 and GEN1 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

In response to a member question the Legal Officer confirmed that if the applicant was to appeal that the ‘Gladman Decision’ would be referred to. However, it would be regarded as being of persuasive value only; there is no doctrine of binding precedent in planning matters.

The Development Manager concurred with the Legal Officer and stated that there was no need to refer to the ‘Gladman appeal’ in the reasons for refusal.

Councillor Bagnall proposed the motion to approve the reasons for refusal for application UTT/16/3565/OP.

Councillor Gerard seconded the motion for approval of the conditions.

RESOLVED: to accept the recommendations on the refusal reasons for application UTT/16/3565/OP.

To consider the Chief Officer’s Report.

The Development Manager presented the Committee with the report in relation to application UTT/18/3529/OP; Outline application for residential development of up to 30 no. dwellings with associated roads and infrastructure with all matters reserved except access, which was deferred at Planning Committee 24 July 2019 pending the outcome of the emerging Felsted Neighbourhood Plan.

It was recommended that the Planning Committee support the proposal subject to the Section 106 Obligation and conditions recommended within the Officer’s report dated 24.7.19. For clarification, by agreeing to support the proposal Committee was confirming that the Council would not defend the appeal other than conveying its support for the application. The Council would continue to administer the appeal and progress the Section 106 Obligation with the appellant.

The committee discussed the weight that the emerging neighbourhood plan held.

Councillor Bagnall proposed a motion to not support the proposal and to defend the appeal.

Councillor Storah seconded that motion.

RESOLVED: not to support the proposal.

Cllr Evans, R Ramm, R Freeman and S Wallbank spoke on the application.

To consider the Chief Officer’s Report.

The Development Manager presented the report to seek the Committee’s consideration of the proposed felling of two Sycamore trees in the grounds of the Saffron Walden Museum. The trees are within a conservation area and are on land for which the District Council has responsibility.

Recommendation: no objection

In response to a member question the Development Manager advised that the request to replant trees elsewhere had been made and heard, but that it could not be a condition of the application.

Councillor Freeman proposed a motion of no objection.

Councillor Caton seconded that motion.

RESOLVED: not to object to the felling of the trees as outlined in the report.

Meeting Close 16:50