Nine family homes at 30 Bridge Hill, and Land to the Rear Epping

What was proposed

The scheme would demolish one home and build nine family dwellings with access, parking, landscaping and pedestrian and cycle connections.

“Planning permission is sought on behalf of Mount Street Developments to demolish one existing residential property on Bridge Hill and to construct 9 new family dwelling with associated parking and landscaping. A cycle route is also proposed linking the proposed dwellings with Bridge Hill.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The 0.40-hectare site lies south of Epping, beside residential streets, open fields, the M25, housing and a railway line.

“The site is located to the south of Epping and measures approximately 0.40 hectares. Surrounding the site to the north are residential streets namely Ivy Chimneys Road and Bridge Hill. The land to the south and south-east currently comprises of open fields adjacent to the M25 motorway. To the east of the site is residential development and a railway line running north south. Similarly, the land to the west of the site is residential.”

“The site is not within a Conservation Area, nor does it contain any listed buildings or features of historic interest. It is wholly within Flood Zone 1, where there is a low probability of flooding.”

Officer report

Planning history and allocation

The site has no recorded planning history but is part of an allocated residential area covered by an endorsed strategic masterplan and design code.

“As discussed above this site is a small parcel of land currently acquired by Mount Street Developments to the north of a much larger allocated site within the Council’s adopted Local Plan. As part of the site’s allocation the South Epping Strategic Masterplan (SESMA) and an associated design code has been produced and formally endorsed by the Council.”

“Along with the parcel of land subject to this planning application the wider Strategic Masterplan site comprises a large area of land to the east currently in the ownership of Bellway Homes and a second large area of land to the west controlled by Barwood. There is a further small parcel of land to the north which is similar in size to this application site owned by Landvest Developments.”

Officer report

What consultees said

Most consultees raised no objection, while ecology officers sought updated biodiversity calculations after the application boundary was enlarged.

“ECC Ecology-No objection was raised to the original planning submission subject to conditions in regard to sensitive lighting, biodiversity enhancements, ecology monitoring and BNG. However, following the re-location of the red line plan which made the site larger ECC Ecology have submitted a holding objection requiring updated BNG calculations.”

“Officer Comment-The development is not a major application that would normally trigger a requirement to consult ECC place services on landscaping. EFDC Tree and landscape officer has been consulted and has raised no objection subject to similar conditions suggested by ECC in their response.”

Officer report

What people said

Seventeen objections raised concerns about congestion, infrastructure, ecology, drainage, design, wildlife, access, pollution, construction and residential amenity.

“The area is already congested. • There is insufficient local infrastructure such as GPs and schools. • Insufficient information provided with respect to ecological impacts, land drainage, flood risk and contaminated land. • The density of the development would be unacceptable. • The scale of the houses does not reflect the character of the area. • The car ports are too high and unnecessary. • Negative impact on trees. • Loss of green space and wildlife.”

“Epping Town Council- ‘This proposal whilst set on land behind Bridge Hill, is still an overdevelopment of the residential street. This application would have an adverse impact to this street that is already under the strain of heavy through local and school traffic. Committee acknowledge the neighbours’ strong objections to this application, and an in person collective representation was heard, with valid safety concerns for both pedestrians and road users.”

Officer report

Who spoke

The committee heard from an objector, an Epping Town Councillor, the applicant’s agent and a ward councillor.

What members changed

Members discussed the planning merits and agreed to add a condition requiring electric vehicle charging posts.

“Committee members discussed the planning merits of the application. Cllr Morris proposed, and Cllr K Williamson seconded that an additional condition on EV charging posts be added to the application. This was agreed by the Committee.”

Minutes

The committee vote

The committee agreed the additional condition and approved the application with that addition.

“The application for the above site with the additional conditions were APPROVED.”

Minutes

The final decision

Planning permission was approved with the additional conditions, while the requested delegation of the Section 106 agreement was noted after the vote.

“It was noted that it was requested that Section 106 be delegated to Officers, however the vote had occurred.”

Minutes