Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Weber for whom Cllr Whyte was substituting and apologies for lateness were received from Cllr Hare.

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.  This being a special meeting of the Committee, under Part 4, Section B, Paragraph 17, of the Council’s Constitution, no other business shall be considered at the meeting.

There were no items of urgent business.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider receiving deputations and/or petitions in accordance with Part Four, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

None received.

The following item is likely to be the subject of a motion to exclude the press and public from the meeting as it contains exempt information as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1982); namely information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the Authority holding that information).

The Committee agreed to vary the agenda to take items 12 and 13 next.

RESOLVED

That the press and public present be excluded from the meeting as Item 13 contained exempt information, as defined in Section 100a of the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended by Section 12A of the Local Government Act 1985); namely information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the Authority holding that information).

To update Members of the current position in respect of the S106 Legal Agreement for Hale Village.

The Committee considered this item in private.

RESOLVED

That the three recommendations outlined in the report be agreed, subject to the slight amendment to recommendation 3 and an additional recommendation 4.

Reserved matters application in relation to outline consent no. HGY/2006/1177 and amended outline consent no. HGY/2007/2250 for Block N of the Hale Village Masterplan, including appearance, landscaping, layout, scale and discharge of conditions 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 42, 59 and 60.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission to discharge conditions 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 42, 59 and 60 (excluding basement), subject to revised Section 106 Legal Agreement.

The Committee agreed to vary the agenda to take items 10 and 11 next. 

The Officer presented the report and advised that block N was situated in the northern part of the former GLS Depot site, adjacent to Tottenham Hale station.  It was surrounded by proposed blocks NW and C, the proposed Linear Park and proposed Pavilions 3, 4 and 5. 

The detailed proposal included 100% affordable housing and each of the 176 units would meet or exceed Haringey’s own Housing SPD standards and Housing Corporation space standards.  Private gardens would be provided for the ground floor family units where possible, although they would have access to the communal amenity within the block.  A 600 square metre crèche was also to be provided along with 166 cycle spaces. 

Block C was situated in the central part of the former GLS Depot site, adjacent to Tottenham Hale station.  It was surrounded by proposed blocks W (under construction), SW, SE, N Linear Park and Pavilion 2.  The consented basement for block C was under construction. 

The detailed proposal included 1,100 square metres of retail space, a 600 square metre health centre, 110 dwellings and 100% affordable housing.  All 110 units met the Housing Corporation space standards.  Balconies were provided for 97 flats and 1^st floor patio gardens were provided for 4 flats.  78 cycle parking spaces would be provided under block C1 and 103 spaces under block C2.  The Committee was asked to note that the height of the schemes would increase by one storey.

A local resident addressed the Committee to object that the increased height in block N would create a change in the visual aspect of the scheme.  The principal objection was in relation to the proposal to divide sections of the scheme by tenure, it was considered that mixed tenure created social cohesion.  Consideration had been given to the email from Newlon Housing Association in relation to their request for separate tenures and it was felt that these arguments were for administrative convenience.  The Committee was requested to insist that the schemes were for mixed tenure developments.

Cllr Reith also addressed the Committee in relation to the proposal to separate the tenures.  She expressed concern that this would set a divisive precedence for this site and it was insisted that the scheme remain a mixed development of people living side by side.

The applicant responded to the concerns raised in respect of the tenures and advised that in relation to the blocks these were agreed at the outline stage and across the whole Village.  The socially rented buildings were located in blocks C2, generally social rented units would need family sized accommodation and therefore the intermediate and social rented units would share amenity space.  The scheme was a mixed community and would have various tenures.  There was a strong preference for separation, occupants would not be segregated or ghettoised and over time the community would change by a natural progression of growth.

In response to questions raised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 418.

To consult the Planning Committee about proposed changes to the powers delegated to Planning Officers.

The report was presented to the Committee by the senior project lawyer who advised there were three areas to the report.  The proposal to extend the powers of the Assistant Director and Heads of Development Management to enter into Section 106 Agreements was not put forward to the Committee as detailed in the report as this had now been deferred pending a separate discussion at Member level.

In relation to Section 247 powers to submit holding objections in respect of proposals in other Boroughs and to authorise stopping up or diversion of highways in Haringey to enable planning permission to be implemented was considered by the Committee.  It was noted that the proposed changes would fill a gap in the current scheme of delegation.

The officer highlighted the extent of the powers delegated to officers to determine planning applications set out in the appendix attached to the report.  There were no changes proposed in the categories of applications except for the final category in the appendix.  This matter deserved to be referred to the Planning Committee because currently there was an automatic reference to the Committee of any policy compliant application subject to a single objection regardless of the weight of that objection.

The Committee considered the proposed changes in final category and agreed that “an objection from a single Ward Councillor or a local community body or a local residents association” would trigger referral to the Committee.  The reference to objections from “at least 10 individual local residents” would be deleted and that whenever there were objections from local residents, whatever their number, the Chair of the Planning Committee could still ask the Assistant Director of Planning and Regeneration to refer the application to the Committee.

RESOLVED

That the amendments to the scheme of delegation to officers as set out in the Appendix to the report be noted and approved and referred to full Council for adoption as amendments to the Constitution, to include the minor amendment to the final category as detailed:

“Applications above the thresholds or outside the categories (a) to (o), where recommended for approval, which are policy compliant, where there have been objections from a single Ward Councillor and/or a local community body and/or a local residents’ association, are excluded from this delegation and will be referred to the Planning Committee for determination”.

Demolition of detached single family house and erection of new two storey dwelling house with rooms in the roofspace and at basement level (AMENDED DESCRIPTION)

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.                     

The Committee was advised that this proposal involved the demolition of a detached single family house and erection of a new two storey dwelling house with rooms in the roof space and at basement level.  The property was a detached property with a bay frontage similar in form, design and appearance to the semi-detached properties along Connaught Gardens. 

The scale, bulk, mass and design of the existing building was in keeping with the overall street scene.  The property was not within a conservation area and as such had no statutory protection against its demolition.  The new building footprint and envelope broadly matched that of the existing building, apart from the new conservatory extension, larger side and rear dormers.  The overall design and form of the building would reflect the design and appearance of the existing properties, its relationship with neighbouring properties and the character of the surrounding area.  The proposed replacement building, as viewed from the street, would replicate that of the existing frontage and as such would be sensitive to the distinctiveness and character of the street.

The proposed  development had taken careful consideration in terms of layout and design to ensure that the daylight, sunlight, privacy and amenity of neighbouring occupiers would not be adversely affected.  It was considered that the proposal would not be detrimental to the privacy of people using Queens wood.

The proposal would involve the removal of a not very large bay laurel tree which was not visible from the road and as such was of low amenity value and did not warrant TPO protection.  A sustainability checklist had been completed and submitted with the application.

The officer also reported on a number of additional letters of representation received from residents of Connaught Gardens and Lynne Featherstone MP, who commented that the Edwardian House was in good condition and could be refurbished.

Local residents objected to the unnecessary demolition of an Edwardian building.  The house made a positive contribution to the streetscape, was not in poor condition and it was considered that demolition of the exiting house was a waste of material.  In comparison the proposed building would have a negative impact as it was larger and would cause disruption to adjacent narrow roads by construction vehicles.  The new building would be visible from three sides, the dormer windows were overly large along with the excessive number of windows.  Light spillage from the proposed property would have a negative impact to the area and the proposal contributed to over development.

Cllr Bloch objected to the application on three grounds:

1. The extent of the objections to the scheme – 87 individual objections lodged.
2. The objections received from the Friends of Queens Wood, which represented 160 households.
3. That this house was not on a secluded street, was considered to be a prominent fixture for people walking in the woods, that the application was not in the public interest and should be refused.

A local resident addressed the Committee in full support of the application and stated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 420.

Retention and extension of existing property to provide 2 x three bed semi detached houses and erection of 2 x 3 bed detached houses, 4 car parking spaces with associated landscaping. (AMENDED ADDRESS & DESCRIPTION)

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Officer presented the report and advised the Committee that the proposal was similar to an application considered in 2003. 

The application site was a narrow, rectangular piece of land located in Tile Kiln Lane.  The site was currently occupied by a vacant, two storey dwelling known as the former Water Board Cottage.  The application site was located within the Highgate Conservation Area and the Archway Road Restricted Conservation Area.  A scheme in 2003 for a total of four new houses was provisionally agreed at the Planning Committee.

It was considered that the proposal would not adversely detract from the character and appearance of the area.  Overall the proposed development had taken careful consideration of layout, design to ensure that daylight, sunlight, privacy and amenity of neighbouring occupiers would not be adversely affected.  The proposal included four car parking spaces.

The Committee was also informed that further objections had been received in response to the revised scheme.  An objector who had made representations emphasised that one of the units directly opposite his property would cause over looking to his property and obstruct his views.

The Officer further explained to the Committee that it was proposed to vary condition 7, to include an arboriculturalist method statement to protect the trees on the embankment and the oak tree on the side of the site.

The Committee enquired whether the proposed application was larger than that submitted in 2003 and in response was advised that the current proposal was slightly larger.

Cllr Neil Williams addressed the Committee and objected to the application on the basis that the proposal was a too extensive group of buildings on a very narrow lane.  There would be insufficient access for emergency vehicles and pedestrian safety would be compromised.  The key issue of concern was pedestrian safety and the previous development had been resisted in the past by the planning inspectorate.  It was considered that the Lane was unsuitable for further development.

The applicant in response to the objections raised clarified to the Committee that the proposal was a minor amplification of the 2003 application.  The site had a long planning history and therefore previous issues had now very seriously been taken into account.  The key issue in relation to this application was traffic and management.  The applicant had worked extensively with Haringey’s transportation officers on the important issue of safety for the pupils at the School.

The Committee viewed the plans.

Members requested the following additional condition be included, that landscaping and additional trees be planted on the site.  The officer reaffirmed the variation to condition 7, an aboriculturalist method statement be provided and some screening to building A.

The Chair moved a motion to grant the application subject to conditions, the variation to condition 7 and the additional condition. 

RESOLVED

That the application be granted subject to conditions, the variation to condition 7, that an aboriculturalist method statement be provided.  To include a condition that landscaping and additional trees be planted on the site, screening be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 421.

Demolition of 7 existing temporary detached bungalows and erection of a two / three storey development of 7 houses (3 / 4 bed) including one wheelchair house, 11 (1 bed / 2 bed) flats and associated parking and external works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement.                           

The Committee was advised by the Chair that there were no objectors to this application and enquired whether Members had any questions to ask of the officers.  In response the Committee were in agreement to the recommendations and on a motion by the Chair it was.

RESOLVED

That the application be granted subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2008/1293

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 17/03/2009

Location: 1 - 13 Herbert Road N15

Proposal: Demolition of 7 existing temporary detached bungalows and erection of a two / three storey development of 7 houses (3 / 4 bed) including one wheelchair house, 11 (1 bed / 2 bed) flats and associated parking and external works.

Recommendation: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Decision: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Drawing No’s: 370/1/pr, 02/pr Rev F, 03/pr, 04/pr, 05/pr, 06, 07, 08, P198/001 Rev B & P198/002 Rev A.

Conditions:

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 complete accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  

Reason: In order to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details and in the interests of amenity.

3.       Notwithstanding the description of the materials in the application, no development shall be commenced until precise details of the materials to be used in connection with the development hereby permitted have been submitted to, approved in writing by and implemented in accordance with the requirements of the Local Planning Authority.          

Reason: In order to retain control over the external appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area.

4.       A scheme for the treatment of the surroundings of the proposed development including the planting of trees and/or shrubs shall be submitted to, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, and implemented in accordance with the approved details.         

Reason: In order to provide a suitable setting for the proposed development in the interests of visual amenity.

5.       Details of a scheme depicting those areas to be treated by means of hard landscaping shall be submitted to, approved in writing by, and implemented in accordance with the approved details. Such a scheme to include a detailed drawing of those areas of the development to be so treated, a schedule of proposed materials and samples to be submitted for written approval on request from the Local Planning Authority. 

Reason: In order to ensure the development has satisfactory landscaped areas in the interests of the visual amenity of the area.

6.       That the levels of all thresholds and details of boundary treatment be submitted to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 422.

Monday 6 April 2009.

Monday 6 April 2009.