Council and democracy

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.

There were no items of urgent business.

There were no declarations of interest.

Councillor Kelly declared he had received an email from a Mr Taylor in relation to Planning Application 21/02159/FUL. He had also received an email from the Ward Councillor for Ockendon in relation to Planning Application 21/02159/FUL. He further declared emails had been received from Councillors Churchman and Van Day raising their concerns with regards to Planning Application 22/00077/FULPSI, he also received an email from a resident outlining their objections to the application.

Councillor Polley declared she had received an email from Miss C Sisseton in objection to Planning Application 22/00077/FULPSI. She continued by saying she had been told by members of the public they were not allowed to attend the meeting, however speaking with Democratic Services it was confirmed this was not the case and public were allowed to attend the meeting if they wished to.

The Assistant Director for Planning, Transport and Public Protection presented the report to Members.

During discussions Councillor Halden raised concerns he felt the council were losing more appeals than they were currently winning, as 47% of appeals had been allowed. He asked if it was possible to have a split of the appeals as to whether they were Member or delegated decisions. The Assistant Director for Planning, Transport and Public Protection advised at the first meeting of the new municipal year a performance report would be presented to the Committee, which would show a breakdown of appeal decisions and compare against other Local Authorities.

RESOLVED:

That the report be noted.

The report was presented by the Senior Planner.

The Chair of the Committee commented on the energy efficiency rating. The Senior Planner explained within the planning policy it stated an ‘outstanding/’ energy rating should be achieved however the school was offering an efficiency rating a ‘very good’.

Councillor Halden enquired as to why bulge classes were not being used given the time restraints. The Strategic Lead Education Support Services

explained the Pupil Place Plan assisted officers in forecasting the number of students expected for the coming year, she stated that in-year applications were also to be taken into account and the current local schools in the area were filling up quickly.

During discussions it was highlighted there were 88 school places required within Aveley, Councillor Halden commented he understood there was pressure for school places within the area, however the number of spaces required for this year didn't seem a valid reason to approve the application as a matter of urgency. He continued by stating he agreed new schools were required however with this application he had concerns with its design. This was echoed by Councillor Little who also remarked she had concerns with the design of the application.

The Strategic Lead Education Support Services advised Members if approved the school would be opened as a two form entry, starting as one form entry to begin with, having the ability to become two form entry and grow with the number of children within the area when required. She continued by advising the Committee the Pupil Place Plan was reviewed annually,and for the last four years there had been bulge classes at  Benyon Primary however this was no longer suitable. Members heard how the free school had been approved by the Department for Education.

It was observed by Members and commented they had the impression officers were not entirely happy with the design of the application, however even with this in mind some were minded to approve the application, if it was to ease the pressure on local schools. It was comment as to whether it would be possible to negotiate with the applicant with regards to the design so that it was in line with the council's policy.

Councillor Watson enquired as when the school was to be opened. The Strategic Lead Education Support Services confirmed the school was hoping to open in 2023.

Speaker statements were heard from:

Statement of Support: Michelle Davies, Agent

During the debate Councillor Halden suggested the application be deferred given the concerns raised by Members and to be able to have a more in depth conversations with the applicant. As well as to receive more information of the Local Plan. He continued by stating he didn't feel the decision was one which urgently needed to be made at this meeting.

Councillor Polley mention she felt there were too many unanswered questions with regards to the application one of which was there was no travel plan.

Councillor Piccolo reminded the committee this was Green  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

The report was presented by the Principal Planner, during which she advised conditions 9 and 10 were to be updated and following the consultation eight letters of support for the application had been received.

It was enquired by the Chair  whether the temporary building would be used by the Rugby Club.  The Principal Planner advised that the temporary structure would only be used by the school and the artificial cricket strip would be used by the Club as it was to replace an existing dilapidated cricket strip on the same site.

Cllr Piccolo asked whether it would be difficult to reinstate the ground upon which the structure would be located after the temporary 2 years.  The Principal Planner advised that as this area was just grassed it would not be an issue at all.

Cllr Little asked if the cricket strip was permanent and the Principal planner advised that it was to be permanent and on the same site as the existing tired strip.

Speaker statement was heard from:

Statement of Support, Steve Munday, Applicant.

During the debate Members welcomed the application and commented it was pleasing to see an applicant working with the local community.

Councillor Halden proposed the officer’s recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Watson.

For: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Mike Fletcher, James Halden, Terry Piccolo, Susan Little, Georgette Polley and Lee Watson

Against: (0)

Abstained (0)

This application was deferred to the next available meeting.

The report was presented by the Senior Planner.

Councillor Piccolo sought clarification with the wording for condition three within the report. The Senior Planner confirmed the wording of conditions three and five were to be amended had been agreed with the agent.

Councillor Little queried access to the site was via the A13 and not the A128. The Highways Engineer confirmed access to the site was via the A13 and that access via Fen Lane was not permitted. He continued by advising a condition within the application stated Medebridge Road was to be used to gain access to the site.

The Chair of the Committee commented that the solar farm was not for storage off the electricity however instead to feed into the grid, this was confirmed by officers

Speaker statement was heard from:

Statement of Support, Owen Saward, Agent.

During discussions it was enquired as to whether general obligations of the community contribution had been included as part of the application and that officers were happy with these. The Assistant Director for Planning, Transport and Public Protection commented the applicant had agreed to the community contribution, however it was a matter which could be controlled by the planning permission as it does not meet the tests of being necessary to make the proposal acceptable. He continued by stating officers were happy to work with the applicant and the community to honour the funding agreement.

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

For: (8) Councillors Tom Kelly (Chair), Steve Liddiard (Vice-Chair), Mike Fletcher, James Halden, Terry Piccolo, Susan Little, Georgette Polley and Lee Watson

Against: (0)

Abstained (0)