Agenda and draft minutes

Please note this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method.  Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on.  By entering the ‘meeting room’, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual, or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair referred to the notice of filming at meetings and this information was noted.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillor Collett and Councillor Ibrahim.

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business.  (Late items will be considered under the agenda item where they appear. New items will be dealt with under item X below).

There were no items of urgent business.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider any requests received in accordance with Part 4, Section B, paragraph 29 of the Council’s constitution

There were no deputations/ petitions/ presentations/ questions.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee meeting held on 17^th October 2024 as a correct record.

RESOLVED

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Strategic Planning Committee held on 17^th October as a correct record.

Officers noted that following discussion in the previous meeting, the infrastructure funding statement would be bought to the next committee in July. In the meantime, officers would organise a meeting for members to catch up on this.

A report on the work of the Planning and Building Control services from October to December 2024.

National Planning Reform and Development Management -

Catherine Smyth, Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement introduced the report as set out in the agenda pack.

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee:

• The planning fee increase coming in, on April 1^st, is a national increase, however in the longer term the government would give the ability to set local fees.
• Performance on ‘Majors’, ‘Minors’ and ‘Others’ planning applications was very good, with 100%, 91% and 93% determined on time
• None of the 45 planning appeal decisions were overturned by the Planning Inspectorate
• There was pressure on the enforcement team, the number of HMO applications meant their case load had increased dramatically. Officers were in discussions with the HMO team, and it had been agreed that the HMO team would send planning officers a pack of information regarding each license request.
• The proposal of three to five members on the planning committee was quite small for a borough with as many residents as Haringey.
• Clarity was given that the years reported were financial years.
• Clarity was given that the ‘portal’ referred to was the planning webpages.
• The Government proposals for including unelected independent experts on Committees included them having a vote
• Officers were continuing to actively seek removal of redundant phone boxes where they are unnecessary street clutter
• Officers had not completed a Haringey Council response to Government proposals, but they had been feeding into industry responses through groups such as London Councils, the Local Government Association and The Royal Town Planning Institute. The issues and concerns raised by members were  the same as those officers had raised in these industry responses.
• Officers had an independent peer review last year and it was noted that Haringey had a well ran planning committee.
• Only approximately 1-2 applications per year in Haringey would meet the Government’s proposed new threshold for needing to be decided by ‘strategic’ Committees. Whilst that threshold may be appropriate for areas with new towns / urban extensions, it may not be appropriate for an urban borough such as Haringey
• There was general support for training for Committees
• Officers were happy to have a discussion with the cabinet member to discuss forming a Haringey specific response to Government proposals. This consultation is just an initial ‘working paper’ consultation, there will be further, more formal, consultations from the Government in due course as the proposals evolve.

Spatial Planning –

Bryce Tudball, Head of Spatial Planning introduced the report as set out in the agenda pack.

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee:

• In regard to the housing delivery test measurement, the government had an annual measurement. This looked at how housing delivery compared to housing targets and Haringey was performing well in this regard; the measurement over the last reported three years was 99%.
• Officers were proposing that their affordable housing targets and policies would be consistent across the entire borough. There would be no variation between the West,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

A report on the internal audit of the Planning Service.

Rob Krzyszowski, Assistant Director for Planning, Building Standards and Sustainability introduced the report as set out in the agenda pack.

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee:

·         With regard to the Authority Monitoring Report (AMR), up until four years ago, the GLA carried out monitoring via something called the London Development Database. This system pulled large amounts of data out of the planning portal and enabled officers to easily understand what was happening in the borough. The decision about five years ago to move from that to a new planning London data hub had some issues in terms of how the new system communicated with their own planning system; this took a further three years to resolve, at which point the team had a backlog of three years of planning information. The issues had now been fixed, so the team were in a position to move forward with that.

·         In addition, there was a vacant role in the team that officers were hoping to repurpose to be a full-time monitoring and data role.

RESOLVED

That this report be noted

The Council is required by law to prepare and maintain a Local Development Scheme (LDS). The LDS is a public document which identifies the documents that will comprise the Council’s Local Plan and the timetable for the preparation and revision of such documents. The Local Plan is the Council’s main planning document used to decide applications for planning permission for new buildings and development, and is also a spatial expression of the borough’s Vision. The Local Plan is subject to a legal requirement to regularly review it and keep it up-to-date.

This report proposes a revised LDS to replace the current outdated LDS published in November 2019. The updated LDS includes a detailed timetable for the production of the Council’s new Local Plan which will replace the existing Haringey Local Plan adopted in 2017.

Bryce Tudball, Head of Spatial Planning introduced the report as set out in the agenda pack.

• Officers had gone down the route of having a comprehensive Local Plan for the entire borough. There was a lot of work undertaken from 2013 to 2018 on the Wood Green Area Action Plan but this was delayed due to Crossrail 2. There was no longer work happening on that, which would have had significant implications for Wood Green, officers made the decision that Wood Green would be folded into the Local Plan.

RESOLVED

That this report be noted and agreed.

There were no new items of urgent business.

To note the dates of future meetings:

TBC

It was noted that the dates of the next meeting was tbc.