Interactive webcast player

Planning Committee B
Wednesday, 12th August 2026 at 7:00pm

 
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Mary Dadd
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Mary Dadd
Share this agenda point
  1. Laura Kirman
  2. Cllr Mary Dadd
  3. Laura Kirman
  4. Cllr Mary Dadd
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
Share this agenda point
  1. Cllr Mary Dadd
  2. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  3. Laura Kirman
  4. Cllr Mary Dadd
  5. Public Speaker
  6. Cllr Mary Dadd
  7. Public Speaker
  8. Cllr Mary Dadd
  9. Public Speaker
  10. Cllr Mary Dadd
  11. Cllr Chris Whitbread
  12. Cllr Mary Dadd
  13. Cllr Lisa Morgan
  14. Cllr Mary Dadd
  15. Muhammad Rahman
  16. Cllr Mary Dadd
  17. Muhammad Rahman
  18. Cllr Mary Dadd
  19. Muhammad Rahman
  20. Cllr Mary Dadd
  21. Muhammad Rahman
  22. Cllr Mary Dadd
  23. Muhammad Rahman
  24. Cllr Mary Dadd
  25. Muhammad Rahman
  26. Cllr Mary Dadd
  27. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  28. Muhammad Rahman
  29. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  30. Muhammad Rahman
  31. Cllr Mary Dadd
  32. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  33. Cllr Mary Dadd
  34. Muhammad Rahman
  35. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  36. Muhammad Rahman
  37. Cllr Mary Dadd
  38. Cllr Bob Church
  39. Muhammad Rahman
  40. Cllr Bob Church
  41. Muhammad Rahman
  42. Cllr Mary Dadd
  43. Cllr Bob Church
  44. Muhammad Rahman
  45. Cllr Mary Dadd
  46. Cllr Bob Church
  47. Cllr Mary Dadd
  48. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  49. Cllr Mary Dadd
  50. Cllr Bob Church
  51. Muhammad Rahman
  52. Cllr Mary Dadd
  53. Cllr Jodie Lucas
  54. Cllr Mary Dadd
  55. Muhammad Rahman
  56. Cllr Mary Dadd
  57. Cllr Bob Church
  58. Muhammad Rahman
  59. Cllr Mary Dadd
  60. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  61. Cllr Mary Dadd
  62. Muhammad Rahman
  63. Cllr Mary Dadd
  64. Cllr Geoff Shaw
  65. Cllr Mary Dadd
  66. Cllr Mary Dadd
  67. Cllr Clive Amos
  68. Cllr Mary Dadd
  69. Muhammad Rahman
  70. Cllr Mary Dadd
  71. Cllr Mary Dadd
  72. Cllr Mary Dadd
Share this agenda point
  1. Webcast Finished

Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:00:00
My name is Councillor Mary Dadd, I will be chairing this meeting of Planning Committee B.

1 WEBCASTING INTRODUCTION

First of all I'll ask Laura Kerman, who is to my right, to do the webcast introduction and then I'll do the other introductions. Thank you.
Laura Kirman - 0:00:24
I would like to remind everyone that this meeting will be filmed live or recorded and uploaded to the internet and will be capable of repeated viewing.
Therefore, by participating in this meeting, you are consenting to being filmed and to
the possible use of those images and sound recordings.
If any public speakers on MS Teams do not wish to have their image captured, they should
ensure that their video setting throughout the meeting is turned off and set to audio
only.
Members and public speakers are reminded to activate their microphones before speaking
and turn them off when they've finished.

2 ADVICE FOR PUBLIC & SPEAKERS AT PLANNING COMMITTEES

Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:00:55
Thank you. To my right, as I said, is Laura Kerman from Democratic Services, and to her
right is Matt Picking, who is doing webcasting, and to my left is the case officer, Mohamed
Rahman, and online we have senior planning officer, James Rogers, and legal officer,
Amanda Apcar. So I understand number two that you have already given advice to public speakers
on this. Yes, Mr Chairman.

3 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Laura Kirman - 0:01:33
Are there any apologies for absence, please? We have received several apologies for absence.
The Chairman, Councillor Kaufman, Councillor Brahe, Councillor McIver and Councillor Whiskin.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:01:44
We have a substitute member for Councillor Brown,
Councillor Church.
Laura Kirman - 0:01:46
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:01:50
Obviously I'm taking the chair in the place
of Councillor Kaufman.
We would like to then obviously have a vice chairman

4 SUBSTITUTE MEMBERS

and may I suggest that Councillor Amos becomes
the vice chairman for this evening.
Is committee happy with that?
Thank you.
Councillor Amos.
Hmm...

5 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Thank you. Do I have any declarations of interest, please? No? Thank you. Item 6, then, the minutes

6 MINUTES

which you have received, can we confirm that the minutes of the meeting are duly agreed?

7 EPF/2770/23 - Land to the East of St. Leonards Road, Lower Nazeing

Agreed? Thank you. We come on to item 7, EPF 277023, Land to the East of St Leonards Road,
Lower Nazing. As you will know, this was brought to Planning Committee B a couple of months
ago and was deferred because of concerns about surface water and road safety and the lack
and wanted more information about those.
So I'll now ask our planning officer
to do a presentation for us.
Thank you.
Thank you, chair.
Good evening, chair members and everyone.
So item seven relates to land to the east
of St. Leon's road in Lower Nazian.
This application is for our land planning permission
for up to 104 dwellings with all matters of reserve
except the primary vehicular access and other works.
As the chair has said, this item was deferred
from the 3rd June Committee B for two reasons.
One, to review the proposed highway improvements
and consider what else can be done.
And the second, explore the wider flooding issues.
Following the deferral, a meeting was held
between planning officers, the drainage team,
board councillors, Councillor Whitbread and Councillor Bassett, Essex County Council highways
and the applicant's team which consisted of planning, drainage and highways experts to
discuss these two matters further of which I will come on to shortly in the presentation.
Turning to the slides, here we have the location plan, the site outline in red.
Here's a view of the site, the local plan site allocation.
The site is located over here, outlined in blue.
It's probably not readily visible.
But there are total of four allocated sites in Nasing for residential development.
The proposal before members tonight consists of three of those allocations.
It's titled South Nasing concept framework plan area.
So it's located here.
You have site 1, 3, and 4.
And site number 2 is up here.
Here's a closer view of the allocation.
So again, site 1, site number 3, and site number 4.
All three sites make up the concept framework area.
Here is an aerial view of the site.
There is a site outlined in red.
And again the three parcels, one, two and three.
So following the previous deferral, members would have seen the technical note attached
to the committee agenda. It does refer to these two figures. So on the left -hand side
we have the diagram of the Litchinbrook, the various culverts. You can see over here the
culvert and the access to the site is located within the Red Line site. So it's within the
the
developer to resolve and upgrade as
secured by condition the culverts
beyond the site outside the red line
which are located in floods on 2 and 3
as shown on the right -hand side image over here.
These are due for within Essex highways
to resolve, it will be unreasonable for to request the
the
able to be used by the developer to
resolve the flooding issues beyond their site.
It does fall within Essex highways to
address the current flooding experience.
Here's the indicative master plan of
how the up 204 units can be accommodated on the site.
second one over here. And the various landscaping and plots throughout the site.
So here's an extract from the local plan infrastructure delivery plan in terms of what contributions
infrastructure requirements this site would be required to provide. You've got various
from highways improvements to education, health and open space.
So these are the section 106 obligations secured towards infrastructure provision.
So you've got 40 % affordable housing which equates to 42 residential units.
You've got highways improvements of 322 .5 grand including two bus stops.
You've got education provision, you've got NHS healthcare provision, sports provision,
community facilities, open space to the Elizabeth Close play facility and Bumble was green in
Nasein and you've got various employment obligations.
This equates to roughly just over 2 million in infrastructure contributions.
So here's the previous highways improvements.
Just one very quickly.
We had the 30 mile per hour enhancement with the gateway sign shown on the right -hand side.
You had various pedestrian crossings, signalised and non -signalised amongst various improvements.
Following the recent discussion, the main change to the highways improvements is the
introduction of an additional 40 mile per hour section, just 200 metres from the existing
30 miles per hour, which is located over here. So you have the 30 mile per hour section starting
from here and then 200 metres down there will be a 40 mile per hour sign. So it will go
down from 60 to 40 to 30 as you enter the area. We do have the images of the Gateway
signs, what it would look like once it's in place. So on the top left you have the
current situation. Signs are barely visible. Obviously it's here, it's shown in leaf.
At the bottom you have the improvements. You have a solid gateway sign readily visible
along with their various signage. On the right -hand side you have the Gateway sign for the 40
mile per hour over here. So chair members, the full assessment is set
in your agenda papers, so I will just highlight the key points. Whilst the proposal is for
104 units, 11 more than the approximate allocated figure of 93 units, however the applicants
have demonstrated that the site is capable of accommodating the increased units without
amounting to harmful overdevelopment of the site, and this increase is welcome in officers'
view given the current shortfall to the five -year housing supply at 4 .22 years. The proposal
satisfies the site specific policy requirements as set out in detail in the agenda. Many of
the finer details are to be resolved at the reserve matter stage and conditions but considering
the indicative proposal it would be able to safeguard the living conditions of neighbouring
amenities, protect the trees, provide a good level of accommodation for future users, deliver
meaningful highways improvements leading to a safer road for not only this site but the
existing residents of Nasing and also not lead to increased flood risk within the area.
There would be benefits from the construction and occupation of the homes, along with the
delivery of 42 affordable homes and over 2 million towards infrastructure provision.
Overall, the proposal would deliver homes on an allocated site in line with the visions
and objectives of the adopted local plan, of which one is to provide a mix of new homes
within the district to meet the needs of existing and future generations. Members
will of course consider the concerns raised by residents, however balance must
be struck in considering the needs of the future generations. They are those
who'd be living in those 104 homes and support the economy of
Nasing. Accordingly the recommendation before members is to grant planning
permission subject to conditions and the completion of a section 106 legal
agreement to secure the section 106 contributions. Thank you, chair.
I stand. Thank you, Mr Rahman. Before we go to the
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:13:11
speakers, Councillor Morgan, I'm really sorry, but because you're late, you can't participate
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 0:13:21
in this item. No, I appreciate that. Unfortunately, it was
going to cost you two seconds. Is it a fact of my suspicion, because I know I can't vote
Can I ask you a question?
I'll ask Democratic Services.
Laura Kirman - 0:13:35
Councillor Morgan, as you were, because you were late, you can't take part in the debate or vote on the...
Can I sit over there?
I was just going to say you could swap sides.
Is that okay?
If you swap sides for the sake of the webcast and if there is something specific you can ask the Chairman who may give you discretion to speak.
No, no, that's fine and I just want to apologise.
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:14:01
Thank you. Right, I'm going on to speakers. We have, tonight we have three speakers and
we'll start with the objector, Martin Nash. Thank you. This proposal is now about five
Public Speaker - 0:14:23
years down the line from when it was first refused with eight or nine solid planning
reasons and as far as I can see and despite much distorted framing from the planning consultants,
none of these reasons have been suitably addressed. The fundamental issues that completely undermine
this proposal are risk of flooding and traffic volume. So traffic volume. Traffic already
makes nazing a miserable place to live but it's not the speeding as much as that is an
issue, it's the sheer traffic volume. So due to Nasing's unfortunate location, the
village's B roads in and out link the larger conurbations of Broxbourne to Harlow, Hoddiston
to the M25, and this is the shortest route. So this has given the village an A road distribution,
something it more than struggles to handle. The daily rush hour tells back 20
minutes to every journey through the Nazing Crossroads, both sides, and when
the M25 or the A10 closes a lane, which is frequent occurrence, gridlock ensues
and Nazing traffic stands still for hours. I could have screenshopped Google
Maps every day for the last month at rush hour and shown you a thick red line
representing a mile each way of congested traffic,
both sides of the crossroads.
Twice a day, St. Leonard's Road will have stationary traffic.
Nothing will move in or out.
No one gets to school, no one gets to work, tempers fray,
curbs and grass verges get ruined, and this happens now.
You want to add another hundred houses.
Tax filled residents already know this,
And that's for less than 30 houses.
So when maybe 50 cars can't even back out of their driveways due
to backing up traffic, it would become everyone's nightmare
living there.
As vital as it is, did the planners even consider the wider
road network?
Because I'm not so sure.
At the 3rd of June sitting, Arrow Consulting and even the
planning officer were pushing the narrative of only needing
to address traffic speeds when the area is free running, playing down the bigger, unaddressable
issues of traffic congestion. You can deal with the speeding. I don't think you'll ever
deal with the congestion and the volume of traffic, especially if you're adding 200 -plus
cars to it. So I didn't think that was fair, and it was simply failing the village and
the built environment. And on the flood risk, with the increased flooding risk of this build,
there's simply no engineering solution that could mitigate the water run -off from those
fields into St Leonards Road and the rear gardens of Pownclothes that would not bankrupt
this project. None.
Excuse me, would you mind winding up please? Your three minutes is just unfinished.
Okay. Well the amount of rainfall those three fields absorb to protect the roads is substantial
and not factored into any of the design proposals and no SUD arrangements will equal the amount
of rainfall these fields hold. To lose them would be catastrophic. There's a one in four
gradient part of this site. St Leonards Road sits at the bottom and without these fields
it will create a waterfall effect and the properties will take the hit when it rains,
worse than ever. Thank you very much. We now come on to Nasing Parish Council and I think
We have Penny Dixie here.
Good evening, councillors.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:18:05
My name's Penny Dixie, and I'm speaking tonight
Public Speaker - 0:18:08
as the vice chair of Nasing Parish Council,
but also as a proud and active member
of our community speed watch team.
And while the planning committee hasn't directly received
our speed watch report, our district councillors have.
And the hard data we collected on St. Leonard's Road
is highly relevant to your decision tonight.
As a volunteer on those sessions, I know firsthand that speeding here is a daily, terrifying
reality. The proposed access road for up to 104 dwellings sits directly opposite Tatsfield
Avenue junction, and this is the exact hotspot where we have recorded 371 reportable speeding
offences. 371 in just nine one -hour sessions over the past couple of weeks.
And I'd like you to note that our reporting threshold is 35 miles an hour
in this 30 zone, so the actual volume of speeding traffic is significantly higher.
During our sessions we've recorded drivers doing 60, 71 and a horrifying 83
miles per hour on a 30 zone. We ask you not to look at this access plan in
isolation but we ask you to look at the existing dangers that it's going to
compound. Number one the threat to pedestrians. Local parents are anxious
walking their children to school, to playgrounds and to local shops. Older
residents feel so unsafe next to the speeding cars and HGVs that thunder past
that they actively step away from the kerb
and wait in private driveways until they pass.
Number two, the driveway hazard.
Many properties have incredibly steep driveways
and residents have to reverse blindly
into a live stream of traffic.
And at the speeds that we've recorded,
this is already a lethal game of chance.
Adding a busy housing estate junction here
will create a chaotic conflict zone
for reversing residents, for turning cars,
and for vulnerable pedestrians.
I know when visiting councillors from this committee
came to visit the site,
you experienced these dangerous conditions yourself.
Safer Road Essex has already deployed enforcement officers
just three times now in the past fortnight
based on our data alone.
the authorities know that this road is unsafe.
I urge you to listen to the evidence
of our district councillors,
and we ask that you refuse this access layout
until Essex Highways conducts a comprehensive safety review.
The developer must implement robust traffic calming
before this application can safely progress.
Please, we ask you to put the safety
of nursing residents first.
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:21:20
Thank you very much. And now we have the applicant, Mark Schmull. Thank you.
Public Speaker - 0:21:25
Thank you, Chair. Good evening, members. My name is Mark Schmull of Arrow Planning,
speaking on behalf of the applicants. When this application was last before
you, members resolved to defer it so that further information could be provided on
flooding and highway matters. We've heard tonight about local concerns around
those exact issues. Following that last committee meeting, we met with the case
Officer, Ward Councillors Richard Bassett and Chris Whitbread, together with Essex
County Highways, to fully understand the concerns that have been raised and to
agree what additional information would assist members in reaching their
decision. The additional reports submitted are now before you tonight a
result of that collaborative process. Firstly, in relation to flooding, the
additional technical note confirms that this development will not increase flood
risk elsewhere. The drainage strategy has been designed to discharge surface water
at a significantly reduced rate compared with the existing situation, providing a 64 % betterment
over the current greenfield runoff rate. Hydraulic modelling has also confirmed the proposed
works reduce offsite flood risk. Furthermore, the Environment Agency and the Council's drainage
officers are satisfied with this and they raise no objection to this subject to the
recommended conditions which are before you tonight and which the applicant is agreeable
to. Secondly, highways. Members and, as we have
tonight local residents in the parish council have expressed understandable concerns regarding
vehicle speeds on St Leonard's road. In response to those concerns the traffic calming proposals
as have been explained by the case off tonight have been strengthened. There is a new 40 mile
an hour buffer zone approximately 200 metres south of the existing village speed limit
together with enhanced gateway features. These additional measures have now been incorporated
into the recommended highway condition and so they will ensure they are delivered before any
homes are occupied, which is the exact point
that has just been raised by the parish council.
So members will have certainty that that will come forward
first before the homes are there.
And that's under the control of the council
through enforcement of those conditions.
Having reviewed all of the additional information,
Essex County Highways continue to conclude
that the development is acceptable, raises no objection,
and will deliver improvements for both existing
and future residents through enhanced pedestrian facilities,
traffic calming measures, and improved public transport
with the financial contributions and new bus stops
as referenced by the case officer tonight. Members will remember from the report that
this remains an allocated local plan site. It's been designed in accordance with the
endorsed south nazing concept framework which has been approved by the council committee.
It will deliver 104 new homes of which over 40 will be affordable homes meeting local
needs and over £2 million of investment in local infrastructure. Officers remain clear
that the principal development has already been established through the local plan and
the proposal satisfies the relevant site specific policy requirements and technical requirements
and that's reflected the fact there's no statutory consultees objecting.
The matters you've previously raised have now been directly addressed and further information
provided and we respectfully ask members to support our recommendation for approval.
Thank you for your time this evening.
I'll be happy to take any questions you may have.
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:24:25
I now go to district councillors and I think we have Councillor Whitbread tonight who would
like to comment as ward councillor.
Cllr Chris Whitbread - 0:24:37
Thank you. Thank you Chairman and Chairman thank you to the parish council
for being very clear about their concerns and the concerns that have
been raised by speed watch which has been very active in that area over a
period of time. It comes as no surprise to local members that there are issues
on highways in this particular location and indeed in the junction up to this
location as well across Middle Street. There have been problems for many years
that we've been trying to address.
And I thank the developers and the officers
for the incremental changes that have been made.
And I think we have to recognise that this evening.
The additional 40 mile per hour zone
was not easy to get through highways when we met with them.
And they were very, I would class as reluctant
to add that change in.
And I think it came from pressure from members
and from officers and from the developer
that problem needed to be addressed.
So I pay tribute to that consensual working
to try and move things forward.
That's really important.
And of course, what we have to do this evening
or members have to do this evening,
if they're minded to support this application
is to make sure that they do everything they can
to help residents and support residents as we move forward.
The developer cannot resolve all the issues
because they've been going on for many years
and some of them, and I found it when I was the County Councillor,
are County Council -based and can only be resolved by the County Council.
Our officers here in Epping Forest, in particular Trevor Baker, have done
brilliant work on the flooding issues that have been
around that area, but they do exist and they happen almost every year.
You know, there's one house with a garage that gets flooded
all the time, every year, and residents in that area have got
every right to be concerned that this additional development will put more pressure on them.
The issues of speeding, they won't go away.
Even though we've got these additional changes, they will still be there.
And it's an Essex County Council issue that needs resolving.
I understand that one of the flashing VAS signs has already been knocked down by a vehicle
in recent times.
So I welcome the fact that the changes are going to be made before the first occupation
of any property in that location. But if members are minded to support this this evening, what
I do ask for is a strengthening of the uninformative to say that work must be ongoing with Essex
County Council. It is their responsibility. They need to address the flooding issues.
They need to address the highways issues. We've talked about it for too long. And some
of what the is happening on this site is the frustration that we get from the
County Council I have to say it feels at the moment like they've drawn up they
pulled up drawbridge and don't want to talk to anyone and it's really important
that they open up their doors and start listening to the residents of the area
and the representatives of the area rather than just trying to ignore the
problem it won't go away it will increase so we do need a strength and
informative to go along with this,
the recommendations this evening,
if you're minded to accept them,
that says that we will engage,
continue to engage with the County Council,
continue to press as a district hand with the developer
to improve road safety in that location
and support the Parish Council
in what they're trying to achieve.
The police and I believe are actually doing
more active repoles in that location now
as a result of what Speedwatch have done.
And we need to support that as well.
So I think working together we can improve what's been put forward.
There are no easy solutions. This is a local plan site. Members have to recognise that.
So it's very difficult from that point of view.
And the key point here this evening is over the access to the site, which we've heard is a difficult access.
Let's work together to try and improve that as it's all going, as the detail moves forward.
but please recognise by a strong informative that this needs to be addressed
and it really can only be addressed by the County Council.
They need to pull their finger out. They were slow when I was trying to push them.
They've been slow when the Parish Council has tried to push them.
And sometimes, I have to say I hear this an awful lot in Nasing and in Roydon,
they feel like the Forgotten Villages because they sit on the borders of Hertfordshire.
they feel that they get forgotten by all the services and it's really
important that we show tonight if you're minded to accept the application that
you support the parish council, you support the residents and help to push
the problems that we have with Essex County Council in addressing the
problems. That would help us with something. The other thing I would like
to ask for and Nasing is a small village it has the same problems as everywhere
And of course there is an affordable housing element to this application.
And it would be good, I've asked for it on other applications in the past, if we could
have an informative to ask the eventual provider of affordable homes to look at a village homes
allocation as well so that the local people can benefit from these homes in their area.
Thank you very much, Chairman.
Thank you, Councillor Whitbread.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:30:06
Councillor Morgan, you wanted to say something as well?
If I can please, that would be,
first of all I'd like to say it's really good
to actually see a developer working with EFDC
and the Pash Council and the local councillors
on this issue because it is a local plan
Cllr Lisa Morgan - 0:30:25
and it's really nice to see that they're working together.
I was really shocked actually,
didn't realise the figures was that bad.
I had heard from a couple of people that live in Nasing
that there was really bad speeding but 41 speed as an hour was a real shock and it's
good to see that they have looked at the change but I don't think it's been looked at well
enough and it does need significant improvement as we've said I mean it's just disgusting
I did actually visit there last week because I miss the thing I wasn't around and I was
really surprised how many cars actually sped along there. It is really something that Essex
Highways needs to have a look at. Unfortunately there are not many people here that do it,
but we need to go back to Essex Highways. I am very supportive of what the Vice Chair
of the parish council said and I really do think it would be nice that the committee
highlight these things when we go forward. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:31:33
Before we open this for debate I just want to get some clarification from our
case officer about the conditions which have been raised. First of all condition
22 which I understand perhaps you'd like to say how that has been strengthened
and that relates to the 40 mile an hour speed limit
approximately 200 metres to the south of the existing
30 mile an hour limit on St. Leonards Road.
And the improvements that have been worked on,
I understand is covered in condition 22, is that correct?
That's correct, Chair.
Condition 22 has been proven to include
the 40 mile per hour speed limit, just shown here, and the red circle over here. And the
Muhammad Rahman - 0:32:31
trigger point is prior to occupation, the impacts do start once the hazards are occupied.
So prior to occupation, you would want the improvements in place to ensure there's no
impact. Thank you, Jay.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:32:48
Thank you, thank you and then also I understand also that the additional
flooding aspects with a new culvert is also included in in the conditions but
then I want to come on to another point that's been raised by Councillor
Muhammad Rahman - 0:33:13
Whitford. That's correct I believe the condition 11 does require details
the trigger point for that one is prior to any development so before any
construction works takes place they need to resolve the culvert design. And condition 12 as
well relating to details of the surface water disposal and can I just clarify
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:33:38
for the committee's benefit that riparian ownership includes that they have to put things
right if more digging out of ditches or whatever is the case, which might be contributing to
some of the flooding further north.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:34:01
So I believe anything within the ownership in the red line they'd have to resolve?
No, I'm talking about outside the red line where there's existing flooding. We've said
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:34:10
that it's Essex Highways but they don't necessarily own everything. Is there some that is private
ownership, do we know? I don't have the full details before me but
Muhammad Rahman - 0:34:21
the owners would have to resolve whether that includes private residents or Essex Highways
or any other owners.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:34:33
Thank you. Another technical point, and then I'll come on to the open debate, is that
Councillor Whitbread has suggested strengthening the informatives. Is that something that can
be done at this meeting?
I'd need to seek advice from a legal officer. I believe it's two informatives. The first
Muhammad Rahman - 0:34:55
one, can we add an informative requiring the affordable housing units to go to local residents
first? And the second, can we add an informative to essentially request Essex County Council
to resolve the wider flooding issues. And the road safety issues.
And the road safety. It's working with them I think.
So is it within our gift to add those two points as an informative?
So I would seek advice from Amanda. And then when we come into debate if that
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:35:30
is what the committee would like. Yes, sorry.
Amanda Appcar our legal advisor.
Yes good evening committee.
They're only informative on the conditions, they're not actually the conditions so I think you could put some informatives on.
I'm not sure about the affordable housing going to villages because I don't know off the top of my head what our nomination agreements are
but as it's an informative,
then it's something that could be looked into.
It's not necessarily something that is a condition
that would be enforced, is it, Mo?
That's correct, yeah.
Yeah.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:36:18
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:36:21
Right, committee then.
Over to you.
Councillor Shaw.
Councillor Shaw.
Just a very quick one.
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 0:36:31
Could somebody just explain
why we can't put speed cameras there?
Muhammad Rahman - 0:36:40
That's within the remit of Essex Police. It's not within the remit of the developers or
Essex Highways. I believe it's a matter the parish can pursue with Essex Police, make
a case and try to have speed cameras installed.
Is that something that we can reinforce and strengthen the parish council in pursuing
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 0:37:01
Essex Police? They've got a speed camera there.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:37:06
It's probably a discussion outside this meeting with the board councillors and the
police.
Councillor Lucas.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:37:15
Thank you, Chairman.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:37:18
I'm pleased to see that the deferral wasn't a waste of time and it has been quite useful
and there has been some positives that have come out of it.
I must say that I still have serious concerns and I fully understand exactly what the resident
has explained with the traffic.
You've only seen today what's happened in Eppin and I live in Waltham Abbey and I know
what happens in Waltham Abbey.
We are unfortunately in an area where the traffic, when there's a problem, it impacts
us all and it is terrible but we are also in a position where we need more houses so
I really sympathise with it.
I'm not ignoring it and it is impacting us all
in all areas of the district.
But particularly what the vice chair
of the parish council said with regards to speeding,
I'm only oh so familiar with that area
and also I live on the Crooked Mile.
I can only tell you how bad it is.
I live in a 40 mile an hour area of the Crooked Mile
before it goes to 30.
They've done exactly the same thing there.
It doesn't work.
In my area, before it hits the 30,
they are still flying through at national 60 mile an hour.
It's a shame.
I really like the idea of it.
I think the gates actually visualise
that that looks a lot better.
And seeing that going into other areas where I visited,
I think that that is actually more effective than just
having the signs.
So I'm really pleased to see the gates and obviously
the markings on the road, but I don't think it's going to be enough. I fully support
Councillor Whitbread in his recommendation that we, the developers, need to put pressure
on Essex County Council to put something in place. I have serious concerns about the pedestrian
crossings. We've seen what's happened in Onga in the last couple of months, and God forbid
We do not want that repeated in Naisin.
It's going to be a lot of children crossing these crossings.
We're coming from very high speed down to a small village near a primary school.
And I still remain to have very, very, very valid concerns.
That aside, I understand everything that's been done.
It's policy compliant.
and the drainage seems to be the issue on site has been met,
but still obviously there needs to be the working
with Essex County Council outside of the site
and there must continue to be strengthened
on how pedestrians are gonna use any pedestrian crossings
or at all are exiting that site,
even with the vehicle movements in and out of the site,
I still have a lot of concerns,
but that being said from all the policy
and I really appreciate all the work that has been done
with the developers and the case officer
and the local councillors, the parish council,
it's really been a lot of team effort
to get to this position.
It's been, as they said,
five years since the first consideration.
We probably, the local plan wasn't in force then.
So we are in a very different situation now,
But I can only just hope that there continues to be full process into what can be done to
improve that area in terms of road safety.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:40:49
Just to say to the case officer, he confirmed that one of the pedestrian crossings is actually
a signalled one.
And that is right, isn't it?
That's correct.
The northern one?
Muhammad Rahman - 0:41:06
Yeah, the northern circle over here is the signalised crossing.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:41:16
Is this part of what we're agreeing today with the crossings as well?
That's correct.
Okay, good. That's really good, the signalised one.
I mean, I'd prefer that they were both signalised.
Can I ask, is it the second one that's signalised or the first?
So this one up here, the northern one, is signalised.
Because that's the second one from the very fast approach in traffic.
I mean, as much as I would encourage us to have these crossings,
I think I'd still even potentially prefer to have one that was the signalised crossing,
than two with the first one of potentially having people crossing without the signalised crossing
on the bit where the faster cars are travelling.
But obviously it's a very difficult one because I don't think that we're talking about what's
being proposed today.
I couldn't make the recommendation of a change like that this evening, but I just think that
maybe that could be discussed.
We did explore having both of them signalised, but the highway's team said it was not possible
to have this one over here closer to as you enter the site having that signalised. So
it has to be non -signalised. It does have markings along with bus stops nearby. So it
Muhammad Rahman - 0:42:47
was explored but it was not possible. The other thing that I'm sure that the Nogusine
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:42:51
parish council will probably want to look at
is there are some measures that parish councils
can do about enforcement with speed cameras
and vehicle activating signage.
And I'm sure that outside of this meeting
that that might be explored,
particularly if we can have an informative
that we're working together to try and do some improvements.
Anyone else?
Councillor Church.
Cllr Bob Church - 0:43:24
Thank you, Chairman. Are the crossings going to be fitted before the commencement of the
building works? If they're not, could we make it a strengthening of the informative that
Muhammad Rahman - 0:43:42
they are? So the impacts start when the houses are occupied. So the current trigger point
is prior to first occupation. So before the houses are occupied, the improvements are
in place. So that is robust enough to ensure there's no impacts once the houses are occupied.
So before any of the houses are lived in, the measures will be in place.
All these improvements will be in place before the first house is occupied.
Cllr Bob Church - 0:44:18
One of the concerns is that the residents are protected whilst the development is being
constructed because of the heavy lorries, the turning cement mixes, et cetera. That
concerns me. That's why I would like to see the pedestrian crossings fitted before commencement
of works. I mean, it's within members' gift to alter
Muhammad Rahman - 0:44:40
the trigger point from prior to occupation to an earlier trigger point, it's within members'
gift. But we do have a construction management statement which scrutinises, which covers
the construction phase to ensure that there are no impacts. So that would cover the issues.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:45:07
Cllr Bob Church - 0:45:09
I'll be happy that it's fully robust and strong enough to protect the residents.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:45:22
So it's condition four which seeks the construction method statement and it does set out certain
details that we expect, which officers along with our environmental health team would scrutinise
before we approve the details and before we do so we would have to be certain that A is
robust, there are no highways or pedestrian harm from the construction works including
the HDVs.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:46:02
Councillor Church, are you asking that we actually strengthen the condition number four
relating to demolition construction? Yes, Chair.
Cllr Bob Church - 0:46:13
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:46:19
How does the committee feel about that? How would it be strengthened?
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:46:21
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:46:24
What I think, Councillor Church, if you can correct me if I'm wrong, is that you want
the road safety aspects to be put in place when the construction is working rather than
when the first occupation.
Indeed, yes.
Fully implemented.
Cllr Bob Church - 0:46:40
Muhammad Rahman - 0:46:46
So if you refer to Condition 22, as I said, it's within members' gift to alter the trigger
point from prior to first occupation to an earlier trigger point. But as I say, the impact
does start from occupation, so it follows that the trigger point is before the occupation.
Do I have a proposal that item condition 22, prior to the first occupation development,
the access of the et cetera, et cetera, to include speed limits, et cetera, et cetera,
to be implemented instead of being prior
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:47:18
to the first occupation, you change it to,
yes, Councillor Lucas.
Cllr Jodie Lucas - 0:47:27
I really understand what Councillor Church
is trying to achieve, but my thought,
I've got a couple of potential issues with it.
So that's gonna be a construction site
for a couple of years.
We may actually be encouraging people to access that site.
I'm just talking from a health and safety perspective.
If there are the pedestrian crossings prior
like during the development, that's one concern that I have.
And the second concern, I just like more clarity
from councillor Church.
Whilst trying to protect the residents
and I agreed that we want to protect any nays in residents
from any harm from the development whilst it's taking place.
But in, the traffic calming measure makes sense,
but in terms of having the crossings
and everything in place,
I don't know how we are safeguarding them
or protecting them because they're not crossings,
they're just crossings from people,
native residents that are already
over the other side of the road,
accessing to the side of the road of the development,
because nobody would be using it
from the side of the development across
because nobody would be living there yet.
So if you could try and emphasise the purpose of strengthening that.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:48:51
Advise members that the Condition 4 along with 22 is robust.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:48:54
The trigger points are reasonable.
Condition 4 would deal with any impact from the construction phase and then the highways
improvements they'll be in place before the new units are occupied.
Does that satisfy you, Councillor Church?
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:49:17
Cllr Bob Church - 0:49:20
So the office is happy that the plan in place to monitor regularly is fully robust.
That detail would be reviewed as part, when they submit the construction method statement
Muhammad Rahman - 0:49:32
And we would scrutinise it before we agree the construction details.
Thank you.
Anybody else?
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:49:42
Councillor Shaw.
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 0:49:48
I think I would agree that the traffic calming measures should be in place before construction
starts.
But I agree that the pedestrian part doesn't seem to fit.
they are there for the new residents of the new properties and not for the existing couple
of houses that are there. So I think I'm in favour of the traffic calming speed limits
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:50:19
go in before construction starts. Can we suggest Mr Rahman that those points are looked at
in the construction stage,
when you look at the construction management,
or is that going to be complicated?
We can review the details.
I'm assuming Councillor Shaw is suggesting
the gateway signs are in place,
the 40 mile and the 30 mile per hour.
Muhammad Rahman - 0:50:45
That could be possible to bring that
to an earlier trigger point.
This would then members give to propose that.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:50:54
Do I have a proposer for that?
Councillor Shaw.
Cllr Geoff Shaw - 0:51:01
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:51:06
So you're proposing that the gateway signs and the speed signs are put in place at the
construction stage before heavy loads?
Before construction starts, yes.
Before construction starts.
We've got them in Faden boys down Payson Hill and they're excellent.
Do I have a seconder? Thank you. And could I have a vote please?
Are you not in favour?
Pardon?
Did you say all in favour? I'm smising it.
Oh I see.
Could you put your hands again please?
That's all in favour, unanimous. Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:51:38
Any other questions or debate that people would like?
Councillor Amos.
Thank you, Chairman.
I'm very mindful of the problems with speeding traffic.
Cllr Clive Amos - 0:51:58
I'm a community speed watch volunteer and the deputy coordinator for the speed watch
in Thaden Voice.
and whilst we haven't reached 83 miles an hour,
we have got as high as 73 and a 30 limit,
and I am very mindful of the problems that this causes.
I'm also mindful, of course, that this is an area
in the local plan that is allocated for development.
And since we met before and discussed this,
We have seen that in regard to the flooding,
this is not a matter that we could reasonably ask
the developer to address.
And we have seen some improvements with the crossings,
particularly pedestrian controlled crossings
onto St. Leonard's road.
And so overall, with the informatives
that Councillor Whitbread has suggested,
I would be mindful to vote in favour of this proposal,
Madam Chairman, thank you.
Thank you.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:53:04
I just wanted to say something before,
if anyone has got anything else to say,
before we come to a vote, and that is at our last meeting,
there was also discussion about reserve matters,
and I would actually look to the developer and the case officers
to be mindful that when those come forward,
we must remember that this is not a sustainable location.
And some of the matters that were raised before
was does the increase in housing numbers,
would it affect the character of the development
and is the housing mix going to be appropriate?
Are the heights going to be appropriate?
Is the density going to be appropriate?
And the parking space is appropriate.
and also to make sure that the PROW, particularly going to the school, is properly maintained
at the moment, it's mud and there should be a management thing in place. So I would ask
the case officer to bear, and the developers to bear that in mind that those were some
of the concerns of local people when it comes to reserve matters. Is there anything else
anybody wants to add? Well, I'm going to ask for a voting, we have before us a motion to
approve this in respect of the recommendations by the case officer. With the change in the
conditions and also outside of this to actually look at informatives. So it will be modification
Muhammad Rahman - 0:54:50
into condition 22 to essentially split it
so the gateways are in place before construction
and the remaining prior to occupation
along with the informatives.
Councillor Woodbrick has suggested.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:55:07
Right, can I have a proposal of those informatives please?
I'll propose.
Second. Councillor Church, thank you. All in favour of the informative...
Unanimous, Chairman.
Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:55:28
Unanimous, thank you. Thank you. Can we now have a vote for the proposal for...
Sorry?
No, no.
The land to the east of St. Leonards Road, Lower Nasing, the outline planning application
with all matters reserved except access to the erection of up to 104 dwellings, provision
of vehicle and pedestrian access, public right of way improvements, green infrastructure
including biodiversity net gain and landscaping and other infrastructure provision which is
the south nazing concept framework allocated site
as recommended by the officer.
All those in favour?
Unanimous chairman.
Thank you.

8 ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Cllr Mary Dadd - 0:56:24
Now come on to item eight, any other business?
No other business, I declare this meeting closed
start four minutes to eight.
Cllr Clive Amos
District councillor for Theydon Bois with Passingford ward
Liberal Democrats
View profile Cllr Clive Amos
Cllr Bob Church
District councillor for Buckhurst Hill West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Bob Church
Cllr Mary Dadd
District councillor for Ongar ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Mary Dadd
Laura Kirman
Democratic Services Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Laura Kirman
Cllr Jodie Lucas
District councillor for Waltham Abbey West ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Jodie Lucas
Cllr Lisa Morgan
District councillor for Grange Hill ward
Epping Forest Independents Group
View profile Cllr Lisa Morgan
Muhammad Rahman
Senior Planning Officer
Epping Forest District Council
View profile Muhammad Rahman
Cllr Geoff Shaw
District councillor for Theydon Bois with Passingford ward
Reform UK
View profile Cllr Geoff Shaw
Cllr Chris Whitbread
District councillor for Roydon and Lower Nazeing ward
Conservative Party
View profile Cllr Chris Whitbread