Agenda item

1)    Demolition of existing building and construction of one 23 storey building with single basement, one 7 storey building and 4no. 3 storey townhouses comprising residential (private and affordable) use, with 875sqm of market (sui generis) or A2, A3, B1 flexible commercial floorspace at ground floor, servicing yard and associated landscaping.

 

2)    Non-material amendment following a grant of planning permission HGY/2012/0915 for the installation of a new public art wind screen to Seven Sisters Road.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1) grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement and subject to referral to the Mayor for London.

 

2) grant non material amendment subject to conditions.

The Chair adjourned the meeting for a short period to allow Committee members sufficient time to read through documents tabled by the objectors as part of their representations.

 

[meeting adjourned 19.28 – 19.40]. 

 

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for a) the demolition of the existing building and construction of one 23 storey building with single basement, one 7 storey building and 4no. 3 storey townhouses comprising residential (private and affordable) use, with 875sqm of market (sui generis) or A2, A3, B1 flexible commercial floorspace at ground floor, servicing yard and associated landscaping and b) a non-material amendment following a grant of planning permission HGY/2012/0915 for the installation of a new public art wind screen to Seven Sisters Road.

 

The report set out details of the proposals, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to a) grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement and subject to referral to the Mayor for London and b) grant a non material amendment subject to conditions.

 

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report. An addendum to the report had been circulated to the Committee on 6 May setting out details of additional representations received since the publication of the agenda and further clarification on the affordable housing position.

 

A number of objectors addressed the Committee on behalf of Seacole Court and Page Green Resident’s Associations and raised the following issues:

·         Little consideration had been given to the impact of the scheme on residents of Seacole Court, a housing association block adjacent to the site.

·         Consultation with local residents had been negligible.

·         Residents from Seacole Court had written to the Council, Grainger and Circle Housing Association seeking clarification on the scheme proposed but had received either no response or standard letters.

·         Seacole Court residents were now anxious about the future of their homes linked to a reference within the officer report under a wider masterplan to the potential future redevelopment of the block by the applicant.

·         The location proposed for the wind screen was unclear on the Council website and would result in narrowing of the pavement in the vicinity leading to risks to personal safety.

·         Issues were raised with the notification process for the Committee meeting, with not all respondents to the consultation having received notification and notices displayed onsite advised as being unreadable. It was considered that the Committee meeting had been pushed through with undue haste.

·         The scheme would result in significant overlooking to Seacole Court, of particular concern with vulnerable disabled residents and families living there.

·         The overshadowing study undertaken grossly understated the degree of overshadowing including through the omission of houses in the Earlsmead and Pembroke Road area, a focus on the three hours either side of noon when shadows were at their shortest and the truncation of images with long shadows such as at winter solstice. Shadows from the scheme would cover the Page Green Conservation Area for over 6 hour a day, with some properties completely losing afternoon sun. An additional 10 amenities in the area would also suffer from overshadowing.

·         The images provided by the applicant were distorted and perspectives not correctly applied thereby misrepresenting scale, particularly the impact of the tower. The artists impressions de-emphasised elements of the design and misleadingly used multiple perspectives in the same image. The document circulated by the objectors set out revised images rescaled based on the canopy height of significant trees adjacent to the site. 

·         Insufficient time had been allowed for full consideration of the plans for the wind screen and it was misleading to connect it to the Apex House scheme as opposed to clearly identifying it as an amendment to the Wards Corner permission. Despite the screen, the amenity space at Ward’s Corner would still suffer from a wind tunnelling effect due to the tower causing discomfort for pedestrians and rendering the area only suitable for pedestrian transit contrary to London Plan policies.

 

Cllrs Diakides, Gunes, Rice and Vanier addressed the Committee in their capacities as local ward councillors and raised the following issues:

·         Certain elements of the scheme were welcomed such as the delivery of new mixed tenure housing which included an affordable housing element, space for the relocation of the Seven Sisters Market, increasing footfall in the area to the benefit of local businesses and general regeneration improvements to the local vicinity.

·         The linking of the scheme to the non material amendment to the adjacent Wards Corner planning permission was misleading.

·         Installation of the proposed wind screen and the residual wind vortex would result in a loss of amenity space.

·         The development would cause significant overshadowing to Page Green properties resulting in the loss of over 2 hours afternoon sunlight.

·         The images provided within the agenda pack were misleading and distorted to reduce the visual impact of the scheme.

·         The Council’s consultation on tall buildings had yet to be completed. 

·         Concerns were raised over the deliverability of the affordable housing contribution as the level put forward was considerably higher than that of similar schemes that had recently come before the Committee.

·         The formulas used to calculate affordable rent dependent on the size of dwelling would disproportionately disadvantage tenants in the smaller one bed units.

·         Concern was raised over the car free designation of the scheme in light of the issues relating to this that had arisen at nearby Hale Village.

·         The scheme constituted significant overdevelopment of the site resulting in a very high density development which exceeded density standards.

·         The design was mediocre and out of keeping with the area, exacerbated by the tall tower which was considered a monstrosity being over 400% taller than any other building in the area. The scheme would not enhance the Conservation Area and would not have been considered acceptable had the site been located to the west of the borough instead of Tottenham.

·         The scheme would not provide any social housing units and the affordable housing units rent levels remained very expensive for local people. 

·         The capacity at nearby Seven Sisters underground station would not be sufficient to accommodate the additional passenger numbers generated from the scheme.

·         Overlooking and overshadowing would be caused to neighbouring properties. The overshadowing report was misleading and not comprehensive.

·         The wind screen proposed was visually ugly and would only partially mitigate issues with wind tunnelling.

·         A considerable level of opposition to the scheme had been raised by the local community, with only 11 responses submitted in favour of the application.

·         Not all residents had been notified of the Committee meeting.

·         It was requested that the application be deferred to allow further consultation to be undertaken with local residents.

 

The Committee raised the following issues in consideration of the representations made by the objectors:

·         Clarification was sought on concerns raised that a large proportion of objections made by residents had been discounted in being classified as non-material planning considerations. Officers advised that all consultation responses received had been considered and summarised within the report but emphasised their duty to clearly identify to the Committee those objections that legally were not material to the determination of the application. The vast majority of objections raised however were material planning considerations including concerns around design, impact on neighbours etc and as such a full officer response to these had been provided within the report.

·         Further clarification was sought on the reasons for the inclusion of the application for a non material amendment to the Wards Corner planning permission. Officers advised that the two linked applications had been listed together in the interests of transparency. The wind screen would only come forward with the progression of the Wards Corner development in order to mitigate the combined wind impacts arising from the two schemes together.

·         Assurances were sought over the consultation process followed in light of concerns raised by Seacole Court residents. Officers confirmed that the Council policy on consultation had been followed, with over 1100 letters sent out and notification of the Committee meeting emailed to respondents.

·         Further details were sought in response to concerns expressed by objectors regarding the future of Seacole Court under the wider emerging Tottenham Area Action plan. Officers advised that the housing association as landlord was responsible for engaging with their tenants regarding their aspirations for the scheme going forward. The objectors identified that Circle Housing had undertaken some informal consultation with residents but that no definite future redevelopment plans had been outlined.

·         The Committee sought clarification from the conservation officer regarding the consultation response received from Historic England on the impact of the scheme on the Conservation Area. It was advised that although Historic England had identified some harm caused by the scheme to the established historic environment, this had not been quantified. In the view of the conservation officer, the scheme would have an impact but not to the detriment of locally listed or listed buildings in the vicinity. In addition, the building design overcame the limited harm caused by the scale of the development and helped recognise the importance of Seven Sisters as a key transport node within the Conservation Area.

·         Clarification was sought from the objectors as to whether their concerns included the impact of the scheme on traffic in the area. The objectors responded that the application fell down on all levels but due to timing restrictions, residents had not had the time to cover all their objections in detail.

·         In response to a request, the objectors provided further clarification on the charts and images provided within their tabled representation and outlined the perspective issues with the images provided by the applicant.  

·         The Committee sought assurances that the impact of the scheme on Seven Sisters tube station would be manageable. The transport officer advised that an assessment had been made of the additional trips generated as a result of the scheme. The current capacity of the station was sufficient to accommodate the increased demand, with no material impacts that could not be mitigated through station management. Additionally, TfL had raised no objections to the scheme.

·         The objectors were asked to clarify the main material planning considerations forming the basis of their opposition to the scheme. In response, it was identified that these included the wider impact of the wind vortex, the impact on existing trees in the area, the high number of objections from local people and concerns over viability, with the developer projected to only break even leading to a temptation to raise rents on an annual basis.

·         Plans were queried to improve the cycling infrastructure in the area. Officers advised that TfL’s Cycle Superhighway 1 had recently been implemented adjacent to the site, increasing connectivity of the cycle network through a two way cycle lane to the Tottenham High Road frontage. Cycling would also be monitored as part of the travel plan secured under the s106 agreement.

·         Concerns were expressed regarding the logistics of managing such a large construction project located at a major traffic intersection. Officers confirmed that the applicant would be required under condition to submit a comprehensive construction management plan and which would potentially include consultation with local ward councillors.   

·         Assurances were sought over the overshadowing study undertaken in light on concerns raised by the objectors that the analysis was misleading and didn’t reflect seasonal changes. In response, officers advised that they were satisfied with the analysis undertaken using standard BRE methodology including the calculation of shadow path lengths using a standard 3D digital rendering of the tower covering the different seasons. The shadows cast had been assessed against BRE standards based on the duration and extent of shadows and were considered to be acceptable.

·         In response to a question, officers confirmed that Seacole Court as well as the Apex House site, was included within the emerging Area Action Plan for Tottenham.

 

The Cabinet Member for Housing and Regeneration addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         The scheme would provide significant benefits through the delivery of new homes and which would include a number of in demand 3 and 4 bed units, as well as a level of affordable housing higher than that previously achieved for schemes on Council land. The balance of units would be allocated for private rent, a tenure in demand in the borough, particularly when managed by a respected provider and constructed to a high standard.

·         The provision of the affordable rent units would be secured in perpetuity through the s106 legal agreement and the land contract.

·         Additional regeneration benefits included the creation of new jobs, modern commercial units and an option for the potential relocation of Seven Sisters Market

 

Representatives for the applicant addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         The plans had been developed by an award winning team of architects.

·         Although it was recognised that the acceptability of the height of the tower was subjective, the site was able to accommodate a tall building due to its unique nature including as a major transport hub. The scheme would have a positive impact in terms of providing architectural interest.

·         Public benefits of the scheme would include the provision of a public square, road and street frontage improvements and the provision of new housing including 39% of units set at affordable rent. 

·         Consultation on the scheme had been undertaken over a two year period including the hosting of events with stakeholders. Changes had been made to the design plans following comments received during the consultation.

·         The residential units would be managed by the Grainger Trust, an experienced landlord, with a dedicated property management team providing an end to end lettings service and offering tenancies of up to five years.

·         The impact of the scheme on historical assets in the area had been fully assessed and deemed acceptable in terms of harm to the Conservation Area. No objection had been raised by Historic England.

·         Assurances were provided that the images and photographs provided within the agenda pack were visually and optically correct.

·         It was advised that although the scheme would result in a degree of harm to views from the Page Green scheme, this was deemed to be less than substantial due to the considerable separation distances involved.

 

A supporter of the application from Seven Sisters market addressed the meeting and raised the following points:

·         The market supported approximately 50 employees plus a similar amount in the local supply chain.

·         The scheme provided an opportunity for early relocation of the market, avoiding the need for traders to move twice once the Wards Corner scheme progressed.

·         Consultation on the plans had been undertaken with the market traders.

 

The Committee raised the following issues in consideration of the applicant’s and supporter’s representations:

·         Clarification was sought as to whether amenity spaces and facilities within the development would be accessible to all tenants irrespective of tenure. The applicant confirmed that this would be the case including to the gym, resident’s lounge etc.

·         Clarification was sought on the reasoning behind the selection of a 23 storey tower. The applicant advised that Council policy identified a circa 20 storey building for the landmark site, with the GLA also referencing a building of a similar height. A taller building also allowed for the provision of greater public realm space to the ground floor whilst delivering a high level of new housing. 

·         Further details were sought on the urban characterisation study undertaken. Officers outlined that this study evidenced the suitability of the site for a single tall building of around 20 storeys to provide urban design benefits as a landmark and wayfinder to mark the important transport hub.

·         Concern was raised on the potential for the application to set a precedent regarding the acceptability of tall buildings within the borough. Officers advised that the site was unique in terms of being suitable to accommodate such a tall building and therefore would not set a precedent.

·         Further assurances were sought over the accuracy of images provided within the agenda pack following the concerns raised by the objectors. Officers advised that the applicant had used standard industry compliant shadowing software used nationally by planners and had supplied all the technical information underpinning the photographs. Overall, officers were satisfied over the methodology used to generate the images and had additionally applied their own rationale to assess that the images were reasonable.

·         Assurances were sought that the affordable housing units would continue to be provided in perpetuity and would not be rescinded in the future. Officers outlined the protections in place relating to this including the land disposal contract signed on the basis of this level of affordable housing plus the s106 agreement obligations incorporating rent calculations for these units.

·         Concern was raised over the potential for fly tipping within the public square element of the development. Officers advised that the applicant had submitted a waste strategy for approval and which covered measures such as the provision of bins stores including to the commercial units, waste tracking systems plus CCTV and 24 hour security cover.

·         In relation to concerns over the management of health and safety during construction works, it was advised that a Construction Management Plan would be in place covering the management of dust, noise etc from the site. The development would be part of the Considerate Constructors Scheme. Consultation arrangements would also be set up with neighbours to allow any issues to be raised at an early stage.

·         Management arrangements for the affordable housing units were questioned. The applicant confirmed that although the units would be pepperpotted throughout the tower and the 7 storey block, they would be under the same overall management as the private rented units despite them being held as separate legal entities.

·         Clarification was sought on the tenancies to be issued for the residential units. The applicant advised that inline with the tenure blind approach, lifetime tenancies would not be offered for the affordable housing units. Five year tenancies would be offered as was standard for housing associations since 2011.

·         Concerns were raised that not all windows within the scheme would comply with relevant BRE criteria. The applicant advised in response that 81 windows failed on paper to meet this standard which related to the availability of light to neighbouring properties but that the rate of compliance was high for a scheme of this size in a dense urban environment.    

·         The Committee sought assurances from the applicant on their long term commitment to the provision of the private rented units. The applicant confirmed that disposal of the units was not anticipated within a 35 year time period.

 

 

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report and it was

 

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2015/2915 be approved subject to conditions as listed below and subject to a s106 legal agreement and subject to referral to the Mayor for London.

·         That planning application HGY/2016/0990 be approved.

 

1.    The development hereby authorised must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission, failing which the permission shall be of no effect. Reason: This condition is imposed by virtue of the provisions of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent the accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

 

2.    The development hereby authorised shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and specifications:

1584-G100-P-SITE-001, 1584-G200-P-RF-001, XE-E-001, XE-N-001, XE-NW-001, XE-S-001, XE-SW-001, XE-W-001, P-DEM-001, P-00-001 rev. C, P-MZ-001, P-01-001 rev. C, P-02-001 rev. C, P-03-001 rev. C, P-04-001 rev. C, P-05-001 rev. C, P-06-001 rev. C, P-07-001 rev. C, P-09-001 rev. C, P-18-001 rev. C, P-20-001 rev. C, P-22-001 rev. B, P-B1-001, P-RF-001 rev. C, P-D-00-001 rev. C, P-D-MZ-001, P-D-01-001 rev. C, P-D-02-001 rev. C, P-D-03-001 rev. C, P-D-04-001 rev. C, P-D-05-001 rev. C, P-D-07-001 rev. C, P-D-09-001 rev. C, P-D-18-001 rev. C, P-D-20-001 rev. C, P-D-22-001 rev. C, P-D-B1-001, P-D-00-002 rev. B, P-D-01-002 rev. B, P-D-02-002 rev. B, P-D-03-002 rev. B, P-D-05-002 rev. B, E-E-001, E-N-001 rev. B, E-NW-001 rev. C, E-S-001, E-SW-001, S-AA-BB-001, S-CC-001, S-DD-001 rev. B, S-EE-001, S-FF-001, S-GG-001, S-HH-001, S-JJ-001, S-KK-001, S-LL-001, DET-001, DET-002, DET-003

Reason: In order to avoid doubt and in the interests of good planning.

 

3.    Notwithstanding the information submitted with this application, no development (excluding demolition) shall take place until precise details and samples of the external materials (including mortar) to be used in connection with the development hereby permitted be submitted to, approved in writing by and implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Local Planning Authority and retained as such in perpetuity.

Reason: In order to retain control over the external appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area and consistent with Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

4.    Notwithstanding the information submitted with this application, no development (excluding demolition) shall take place until detailed drawings, of all elevations have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority including 1:20 plans of the brick panels, balcony and canopy details and window reveals the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details retained as such in perpetuity.

Reason: In order to retain control over the external appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area and consistent with Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

5.    No development (excluding demolition) shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include: proposed finished levels or contours; means of enclosure; car parking layouts; other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas; hard surfacing materials; minor artefacts and structures (eg. furniture, play equipment, refuse or other storage units, signs, lighting etc.); proposed and existing functional services above and below ground (eg. drainage power, communications cables, pipelines etc. indicating lines, manholes, supports etc.); retained historic landscape features and proposals for restoration, where relevant.

Soft landscape works shall include planting plans; written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment); schedules of plants, noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate; implementation programme].  The soft landscaping scheme shall include detailed drawings of:

Those new trees and shrubs to be planted together with a schedule of species shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development, excluding demolition.  Such an approved scheme of planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out and implemented in strict accordance with the approved details in the first planting and seeding season following the occupation of the building or the completion of development (whichever is sooner).  Any trees or plants, either existing or proposed, which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed, become damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with a similar size and species.  The landscaping scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and retained thereafter.

Reason: In order for the Local Planning Authority to assess the acceptability of any landscaping scheme in relation to the site itself, thereby ensuring a satisfactory setting for the proposed development in the interests of the visual amenity of the area consistent with Policy 7.21 of the London Local Plan 2011, Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

6.    No development shall start until an Arboricultural impact assessment, tree protection plan and Arboricultural method statement have been provided showing details of any pruning required to the existing and trees and details of the proposed foundations in connection with the development,  hereby approved and any excavation for services shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved scheme. No development shall start until all those trees to be retained, as indicated on the approved drawings, have been protected by secure, stout, exclusion fencing erected at a minimum  distance equivalent to the branch spread of the trees and in accordance with BS 3998:2010 and to a suitable height. Any works connected with the approved scheme within the branch spread of the trees shall be by hand only. No storage of materials, supplies or plant machinery shall be stored, parked, or allowed access beneath the branch spread of the trees or within the exclusion fencing.

Reason: In order to safeguard the root systems of those trees on the site which are to remain after building works are completed in the interests of visual amenity.

Reason: In order to ensure the safety and well being of the trees on the site during constructional works that are to remain after building works are completed consistent with Policy 7.21 of the London Plan 2011, Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

 

7.    All residential units within the proposed development shall be designed to Part M4 (2) 'accessible and adaptable dwellings' of the Building Regulations 2015 (formerly Lifetime Homes Standard) unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason:  To ensure that the proposed development meets the Council's Standards in relation to the provision of wheelchair accessible homes and to comply with Haringey Local Plan 2013 Policy SP2 and the London Plan Policy 3.8. 

 

8.    At least 10% of all dwellings within each tenure type shall be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair use (Part M4 (3) 'wheelchair user dwellings' of the Building Regulations 2015) unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason:  To ensure that the proposed development meets the Council's Standards for the provision of wheelchair accessible dwellings in accordance with Haringey Local Plan 2013 Policy SP2 and the London Plan Policy 3.8.   

 

9.    The development hereby approved shall be designed to Secured by Design Sections 2 and 3 Compliance unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the proposed development meets the Police standards for the physical protection of the building and its occupants. and to comply with Haringey Local Plan 2013 Policy SP11.

 

10.No impact piling shall take place until a piling method statement (detailing the depth and type of piling to be undertaken and the methodology by which such piling will be carried out, including measures to prevent and minimise the potential for damage to subsurface sewerage infrastructure, and the programme for the works) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in consultation with Thames Water.  Any piling must be undertaken in accordance with the terms of the approved piling method statement.

Reason: The proposed works will be in close proximity to underground sewerage utility infrastructure.  Piling has the potential to impact on local underground sewerage utility infrastructure. The applicant is advised to contact Thames Water Developer Services on 0800 009 3921 to discuss the details of the piling method statement.

 

11.Before development commences other than for investigative work:

A desktop study shall be carried out which shall include the identification of previous uses, potential contaminants that might be expected, given those uses, and other relevant information. Using this information, a diagrammatical representation (Conceptual Model) for the site of all potential contaminant sources, pathways and receptors shall be produced.  The desktop study and Conceptual Model shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. If the desktop study and Conceptual Model indicate no risk of harm, development shall not commence until approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

a)    If the desktop study and Conceptual Model indicate any risk of harm, a site investigation shall be designed for the site using information obtained from the desktop study and Conceptual Model. This shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to that investigation being carried out on site.  The investigation must be comprehensive enough to enable:-

§  a risk assessment to be undertaken,

§  refinement of the Conceptual Model, and

§  the development of a Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements.

The risk assessment and refined Conceptual Model shall be submitted, along with the site investigation report, to the Local Planning Authority.

         

b)          If the risk assessment and refined Conceptual Model indicate any risk of harm, a Method Statement detailing the remediation requirements, using the information obtained from the site investigation, and also detailing any post remedial monitoring shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to that remediation being carried out on site.

 

12.Where remediation of contamination on the site is required completion of the remediation detailed in the method statement shall be carried out and a report that provides verification that the required works have been carried out, shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the development is occupied.

Reason: To ensure the development can be implemented and occupied with adequate regard for environmental and public safety.

 

13.Prior to installation, details of the Ultra Low NOx boilers for space heating and domestic hot water should be forwarded to the Local Planning Authority.  The boilers to be provided for space heating and domestic hot water shall have dry NOx emissions not exceeding 40 mg/kWh.

Reason: To prevent an increase in local problems of air quality within an Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as required by The London Plan Policy 7.14.

 

14.Prior to installation details of the CHP boilers shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Evidence shall demonstrate the unit to be installed complies with the emissions standards as set out in the GLA SPG Sustainable Design and Construction for Band B. 

Reason: To prevent an increase in local problems of air quality within an Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as required by The London Plan Policy 7.14.

 

15.No works shall be carried out on the site until a detailed Air Quality and Dust Management Plan (AQDMP), detailing the management of demolition and construction dust, has been submitted and approved by the LPA.  The plan shall be in accordance with the GLA SPG Dust and Emissions Control and shall also include a Dust Risk Assessment.  Details of all plant and machinery to be used at the demolition and construction phases shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of each phase. Evidence is required to meet Stage IIIA of EU Directive 97/68/ EC for both NOx and PM.  No works shall be carried out on site until all Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) and plant to be used on the site of net power between 37kW and 560 kW has been registered at http://nrmm.london/. Proof of registration must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of any works on site. 

Reason: To prevent an increase in local problems of air quality within an Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as required by The London Plan Policy 7.14.

 

16.Prior to the commencement of any works the site or Contractor Company is to register with the Considerate Constructors Scheme.  Proof of registration must be sent to the LPA.

Reason:  In the interests of neighbouring amenity. 

 

17.An inventory of all NRMM must be kept on site during the course of the demolitions, site preparation and construction phases.  All machinery should be regularly serviced and service logs kept on site for inspection.  Records should be kept on site which details proof of emission limits for all equipment. This documentation should be made available to local authority officers as required until development completion.

Reason: To prevent an increase in local problems of air quality within an Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) as required by The London Plan Policy 7.14.

 

18.The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until a Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP) have been submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.   The servicing and delivery plan must also include a waste management plan which includes details of how refuse is to be collected from the site, the plan should be prepared in line with the requirements of the Council’s waste management service which must ensure that all bins are within 10 metres carrying distances of a refuse truck on a waste collection day.

Reason: To ensure that the development does not prejudice the free flow of traffic or public safety along the neighbouring highway.

 

19.Prior to the commencement of demolition works a Demolition Management Plan (CMP) and Demolition Logistics Plan (CLP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The Plans should provide details on how demolition works will be undertaken in a manner that disruption to traffic and pedestrians on Seven Sisters Road, Stonebridge Road and the surrounding residential roads is minimised. Vehicle movements shall be carefully planned and co-ordinated to avoid the AM and PM peak periods.

Reason: To reduce congestion and mitigate any obstruction to the flow of traffic on the transportation and highways network

 

20.Prior to the commencement of construction works (excluding demolition) a Construction Management Plan (CMP) and Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  The Plans should provide details on how Construction works (excluding demolition) will be undertaken in a manner that disruption to traffic and pedestrians on Seven Sisters Road, Stonebridge Road and the surrounding residential roads is minimised. Construction vehicle movements shall be carefully planned and co-ordinated to avoid the AM and PM peak periods.

Reason: To reduce congestion and mitigate any obstruction to the flow of traffic on the transportation and highways network

 

21.The development shall not be occupied until a minimum of 265 cycle parking spaces for users of the development, have been installed in accordance with the approved details.  Such spaces shall be retained thereafter for this use only.

Reason:  To promote sustainable modes of transport in accordance with Policies 6.1 and 6.9 of the London Plan 2011 and Policy SP7 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013. 

 

22.Evidence that each commercial element of the development is registered with a BREEAM certification body and that a pre-assessment report (or design stage certificate with interim rating if available) has been submitted indicating that the development can achieve the stipulated BREEAM level ‘Very good’ shall be presented to the local planning authority within 6 weeks of the date of this decision and a final certificate shall be presented to the local planning authority within 6 months of the occupation of the development.

Reason: To ensure that the development achieves a high level of sustainability in accordance with Policies 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.15 of the London Plan 2011 and Policies SP0 and SP4 the Haringey Local Plan 2013.

 

23.Prior to commencement of the development, save for demolition, full details of the single Energy Centre as set out in Appendix C of the submitted Energy Strategy, operational details of the heat network (pressures and temperatures), the location of the energy centre provision of space for future heat exchangers should the network not be delivered at this time.  and communal network future proofing measures, including details of the safeguarded connection between the energy centre to the public highway, that will be reserved for connectivity to the area wide network should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the completed development is future proofed to enable connection to an area wide decentralised energy network to comply with Policies 5.5 and 5.6 of the London Plan 2011 and Policies SP0 and SP4 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013.

 

24.The development hereby permitted shall be built in accordance with the Apex House: Energy Strategy (rev 2) By: Hoare Lea; Date: September 2015 and the energy provision shall be thereafter retained in perpetuity, no alterations to the energy or sustainability measures shall be carried out without the prior approval, in writing, of the Local Planning Authority.  For the avoidance of doubt this shall include, the location of the energy centre and site wide heating network operations; route for connections to the energy centre (the area identified for the heat exchangers) from the public highway and 40m2 of solar PV on the roof of the development (as drawn in Appendix D of the Energy Statement).

Reason: To ensure that a proportion of the energy requirement of the development is produced by on-site renewable energy sources to comply with Policy 5.7 of the London Plan 2011 and Policies SP0 and SP4 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013

 

25.The development hereby permitted (excluding demolition) shall not be begun until details of the design, implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  Those details shall include:

a)         Information about the design storm period and intensity, discharge rates and volumes (both pre and post development), temporary storage facilities, means of access for maintenance, the methods employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent flooding and pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;

b)         Any works required off-site to ensure adequate discharge of surface water without causing flooding or pollution (which should include refurbishment of existing culverts and headwalls or removal of unused culverts where relevant);

c)         Flood water exceedance routes, both on and off site;

d)         A timetable for its implementation, and

e)         A management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, management and maintenance by a Residents’ Management Company or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the sustainable drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.

Once approved, the scheme shall be implemented, retained, managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. 

Reason: To prevent the increased risk of flooding, to improve and protect water quality, improve habitat and amenity, and ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system.

 

26.No building or use hereby permitted shall be occupied or the use commenced until the sustainable drainage scheme for this site has been completed in accordance with the submitted details as shown on 14411/500/41 Rev B and SK05. The sustainable drainage scheme shall be managed and maintained thereafter in accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan.

Reason: To ensure that the principles of sustainable drainage are incorporated into this proposal and maintained thereafter.

 

27.The development hereby approved shall not be  occupied until such time as any necessary highway works, which includes if required, but not limited to, footway improvement works, access to the Highway, measures for street furniture relocation, carriageway markings, and access and visibility safety requirements have been carried out and completed. 

Reason:  In the interests of highway safety.

 

28.The development shall not be occupied until such time as the refuse and waste storage and recycling facilities shown on 584-G200-P-00-001 Rev A have been implemented. The refuse and waste storage and recycling facilities shall be permanently retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of the locality and to comply with Saved Policy UD7 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006 and Policy 5.17 of the London Plan 2011.

 

29.Details of the species and location of a 5 x replacement trees (20-25cm stem girth) shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority in writing before commencing the development hereby approved (excluding demolition), and shall be planted within the next planting season after the development hereby approved is completed.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to conserve the contribution of trees to the character of the area.

 

30.The design and installation of new items of fixed plant hereby approved by this permission shall be such that, when in operation, the cumulative noise level LAeq 15 min arising from the proposed plant, measured or predicted at 1m from the facade of nearest residential premises shall be a rating level of at least 5dB(A) below the background noise level LAF90.  The measurement and/or prediction of the noise should be carried out in accordance with the methodology contained within BS 4142: 1997. Upon request by the local planning authority a noise report shall be produced by a competent person and shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority to demonstrate compliance with the above criteria.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of nearby residential occupiers consistent with Policy 7.15 of the London Plan 2011 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

31.The development hereby permitted shall be built in accordance with the recommendations set out in section 6.1 - 6.4 of the extended phase 1 habitat survey and the proposed biological enhancements installed prior to the occupation of the proposed buildings and retained thereafter in perpetuity.

Reason: To ensure that the development will make a positive contribution to the protection, enhancement, creation and management of biodiversity) in accordance with London Plan Policies Policy 7.19 and Local Plan Policy SP13. 

 

32.The existing architects or other such architects as approved in writing by the Local Authority acting reasonably shall undertake the detailed design of the project.

Reason: In order to retain the design quality of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area and consistent with Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of The Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

33.Prior to the completion of the development hereby permitted, a shutter and signage strategy shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority all future proposal for shutters and signage shall be in accordance with this strategy.

Reason: In order to retain the design quality of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area and consistent with Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

 

34.Notwithstanding the Provisions of Article 4 (1) and part 25 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015, no satellite antenna shall be erected or installed on the building hereby approved.  The proposed development shall have a central dish or aerial system for receiving all broadcasts for the residential units created: details of such a scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the property, and the approved scheme shall be implemented and permanently retained thereafter.

Reason: In order to prevent the proliferation of satellite dishes on the development.

 

35. No external illumination of the external elevations to the building shall take place other than in accordance with a detailed building lighting scheme which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA,

Reason: To ensure that any external lighting of the building has regard to the visual amenity of the area including the character and appearance of the conservation area, the amenities of surrounding properties and the safety of users of the surrounding highway network.

 

36.Prior to the development of the building above ground level a scheme for the phased delivery and long term management of the private and public spaces within and adjacent to the building shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA. The development shall be carried out only in accordance with the approved landscape/public realm phasing and management scheme.

Reason to ensure that the development secures the delivery of appropriate landscaping and amenity space for future residents and makes provision for effective, safe long term management of each of the spaces to ensure continued utility and enjoyment of the spaces by occupiers and the improvement of the streetscape in accordance with the objectives (and public benefit) associated with the grant of this planning permission.

 

Informatives:

INFORMATIVE: In dealing with this application, Haringey Council has implemented the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) (Amendment No.2) Order 2012 to foster the delivery of sustainable development in a positive and proactive manner.

 

INFORMATIVE: CIL - Based on the information given on the plans, the Mayoral CIL charge will be £486,535 (13,872 sqm x £35) and the Haringey CIL charge will be £106,350 (7,090 sqm x £15). This will be collected by Haringey after/should the scheme is/be implemented and could be subject to surcharges for failure to assume liability, for failure to submit a commencement notice and/or for late payment, and subject to indexation in line with the construction costs index.

 

INFORMATIVE: Hours of Construction Work: The applicant is advised that under the Control of Pollution Act 1974, construction work which will be audible at the site boundary will be restricted to the following hours:-

- 8.00am - 6.00pm    Monday to Friday

- 8.00am - 1.00pm    Saturday

- and not at all on Sundays and Bank Holidays.

 

INFORMATIVE: Party Wall Act: The applicant's attention is drawn to the Party Wall Act 1996 which sets out requirements for notice to be given to relevant adjoining owners of intended works on a shared wall, on a boundary or if excavations are to be carried out near a neighbouring building.

 

INFORMATIVE: The new development will require numbering. The applicant should contact the Local Land Charges at least six weeks before the development is occupied (tel. 020 8489 5573) to arrange for the allocation of a suitable address.

 

INFORMATIVE: The London Fire Brigade strongly recommends that sprinklers are considered for new developments and major alterations to existing premises, particularly where the proposals relate to schools and care homes. Sprinkler systems installed in buildings can significantly reduce the damage caused by fire and the consequential cost to businesses and housing providers, and can reduce the risk to life. The Brigade opinion is that there are opportunities for developers and building owners to install sprinkler systems in order to save money, save property and protect the lives of occupier.  

 

INFORMATIVE: With regards to surface water drainage, it is the responsibility of a developer to make proper provision for drainage to ground, water course, or a suitable sewer.  In respect of surface water, it is recommended that the applicant should ensure that storm flows are attenuated or regulated into the receiving public network through on or off site storage.  When it is proposed to connect to a combined public sewer, the site drainage should be separate and combined at the final manhole nearest the boundary.  Connections are not permitted for the removal of groundwater.  Where the developer proposes to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames Water Developer Services will be required.  They can be contacted on 0845 850 2777.

 

INFORMATIVE: Thames Water will aim to provide customers with a minum pressure of 10m head (approx. 1 bar) and a flow rate of 9 litres/minute at the point where it leaves Thames Waters pipes.  The developer should take account of this minimum pressure in the design of the proposed development.

 

INFORMATIVE: Prior to demolition of existing buildings, an asbestos survey should be carried out to identify the location and type of asbestos containing materials.  Any asbestos containing materials must be removed and disposed of in accordance with the correct procedure prior to any demolition or construction works carried out.