Council and democracy

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 16 July 2020.

The minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 16 July 2020 were approved as a true and correct record.

To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Chair announced that planning application 19/01814/OUT Tremorgan, Sandown Road, had been withdrawn from the Agenda at the Applicant’s request.

The Chair also mentioned the recent mandatory planning training that Planning Committee Members had received and reminded Members to bear in mind the lessons learned from the training when it came to decision making.

There were no declarations of interest.

In relation to 20/00251/FUL 32 Lancaster Road, Chafford Hundred:

• Members declared receiving a leaflet from Havering Building and Landscapes Ltd.
• The Chair declared that he had received an email from Andrew Ansell.
• Councillors Shinnick and Lawrence received a phone call and the Vice-Chair had received a few phone calls from Andrew Ansell.

The report was presented by Leigh Nicholson. The Committee was satisfied with the report.

RESOLVED:

That the Committee noted the report.

This item was withdrawn from the Agenda at the Applicant’s request.

The report which can be found on pages 45 – 58 of the Agenda was presented by Lucy Mannion. The Officer’s recommendation was to refuse planning permission as outlined on page 56 of the Agenda.

The Vice-Chair questioned whether further discussions had taken place between developers and the Council’s planning team. He went on to say that the proposal for the site had been amended to a smaller size and was still not acceptable. He queried what the acceptable size would be for that site and if anything could be built on that site. Officers could not confirm if further discussions had taken place between developers and the Council’s planning team but there had been no further submissions from the Applicant so it could be inferred that no further discussions had taken place. As for the size, it could not be much smaller to be practicable and therefore it was unlikely that a development could be built on that site, although any alternative scheme would be judged on its individual merits.

The Committee questioned if there was a Tree Preservation Order around the site which only the trees to the rear of the site had. The Committee also discussed a recent planning application in Badgers Dene, Grays which the Committee noted that Officer’s recommendation had been to approve as the average amenity space had been acceptable but the Committee had refused on this basis.

The Chair proposed the Officer’s recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Rice.

FOR: (4) Councillors Tom Kelly, Sue Shinnick, Gerard Rice and Dave Potter.

AGAINST: (4) Councillors Mike Fletcher, Colin Churchman, Angela Lawrence and Gary Byrne.

ABSTAINED: (0)

Following the Council’s Constitution procedures as outlined on Chapter 5, Part 2, 5.2, the Chair used his casting vote to vote in favour of the Officer’s recommendation.

20/00251/FUL was refused planning permission.

The report which can be found on pages 59 – 96 of the Agenda was presented by Matthew Gallagher. The Officer’s recommendation was to approve the reserved matters as outlined on pages 91 – 96 of the Agenda.

Councillor Rice queried whether there were electrical charging points as part of the scheme. He went on to say that there were more electric vehicles used nowadays. Matthew Gallagher answered that there were no electric charging points on the scheme required as part of the planning conditions associated with the outline application which had been granted planning permission by Committee back in 2015. Although the use of electric vehicles had increased in recent years and there could be a potential discussion with the developers about voluntarily installing charging points, the outline application had been agreed already and could not be deviated from to any material degree by imposing a new planning condition.

Councillor Byrne mentioned that the GP surgery within the area of the site already had 13,000 patients and with the extra potential 600 patients from the scheme, there would be additional pressure on the surgery. He went on to say that the access road in and out of the site was narrow. In addition, with there being only one exit from the roundabout to the A13 and the increase in traffic during rush hours, he was concerned that emergency services would not be able to access the site easily when needed.

Referring to Councillor Byrne’s concerns on impact of the scheme to the nearby GP surgery, Matthew Gallagher answered that the outline planning permission had a s106 agreement with a number of secured contributions that included a healthcare contribution of £43,600 which was to be spent towards health care provision in the area of the site. In regards to the road access, Matthew Gallagher explained that the outline planning permission had secured that point of access onto Victoria Road which was fixed within that outline planning permission. He went on to say that the outline application had been considered by this Committee in 2014 and that point of access would have been discussed and agreed by Committee Members at the time. What was for consideration in the application before the Committee was the arrangement of pedestrian and cycle routes within the site.

Matthew Ford added that there had been discussions around the transport assessment in the area of the site which included the access parameters in terms of suitability. The Committee at the time of the outline application, had determined the conditions around the point of access to be considered acceptable following the recommendations of the Highways Team. This had also included accessibility for emergency services in the area, to the town centre and to the train station. The point of access had been looked at in extensive detail and a good resolution had come out of it.

Referring back to Councillor Rice’s earlier point about electric charging points, Matthew Ford said that the outline application was first heard at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

The report which can be found on pages 97 – 106 of the Agenda was presented by Matthew Gallagher. The Officer’s recommendation was to approve the application as outlined on pages 102 – 104 of the Agenda.

The Chair noted paragraph 6.7 on page 101 and sought reassurance that Officers were confident that the materials to be used in the scheme would be up to standards. Matthew Gallagher explained that the materials to be used would give the buildings an improved appearance, improved thermal performance and improved insulation so the building would be more energy efficient and also extend the lifetime of the building. He went on to mention that the Grenfell incident in 2017 was due to start its inquiry again next month and with this mind, the Planning Team had sought advice on the cladding material for the buildings in the current application and the next three to follow (20/00410/TBC; 20/00616/TBC; and 20/00617/TBC) from the Council’s Building Control Department. The advice given was that the cladding material would be to the latest specification and the Applicant would seek further advice during the construction program from the relevant experts at the fire service and from the Council's Building Control Department. This same standard was applied to the next three applications to follow.

The Vice-Chair mentioned that Grenfell had also used material that had been up to the standards at the time of the incident. He sought reassurance from Officers that the materials to be used and the fitting would be up to standard and that a similar incident to Grenfell would be highly unlikely to impossible. Matthew Gallagher said that separate to the planning application, there would be a process to go through with the Building Control Department which was a separate regulatory regime to be negotiated with the Applicant. The Applicant was the Council who was the responsible body and would be managing the scheme to ensure they were up to date with standards particularly where there could be potential emerging recommendations arising out of the inquiry into the Grenfell incident.

The Chair questioned the timeframe of the scheme. He also asked how the scheme would be monitored and whether it would be through an overview and scrutiny committee. Officers answered that each block may be upgraded one after the other and there was a potentially process to go through before works could commence such as tendering for a contract which was a matter for the  Housing Department of the Council. The scheme may well be monitored through another Committee which would be discussed with the Assistant Director of Housing.

Councillor Rice welcomed the improvement works to be done to the high rise buildings which would help to resolve mould issues and safeguard residents.

The Vice-Chair proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Rice.

FOR: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly, Mike Fletcher, Gary Byrne, Colin Churchman, Angela Lawrence, David Potter, Gerard Rice and Sue Shinnick.

AGAINST: (0)

ABSTAINED: (0)

The report which can be found on pages 107 – 114 of the Agenda was presented by Matthew Gallagher. The Officer’s recommendation was to approve the application as outlined on pages 112 – 113 of the Agenda.

Councillor Shinnick proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by the Vice-Chair.

FOR: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly, Mike Fletcher, Gary Byrne, Colin Churchman, Angela Lawrence, David Potter, Gerard Rice and Sue Shinnick.

AGAINST: (0)

ABSTAINED: (0)

The report which can be found on pages 115 – 122 of the Agenda was presented by Matthew Gallagher. The Officer’s recommendation was to approve the application as outlined on pages 119 – 120 of the Agenda.

Councillor Rice proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by the Chair.

FOR: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly, Mike Fletcher, Gary Byrne, Colin Churchman, Angela Lawrence, David Potter, Gerard Rice and Sue Shinnick.

AGAINST: (0)

ABSTAINED: (0)

The report which can be found on pages 123 – 132 of the Agenda was presented by Matthew Gallagher. The Officer’s recommendation was to approve the application as outlined on pages 129 – 130 of the Agenda.

The Vice-Chair proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Rice.

FOR: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly, Mike Fletcher, Gary Byrne, Colin Churchman, Angela Lawrence, David Potter, Gerard Rice and Sue Shinnick.

AGAINST: (0)

ABSTAINED: (0)