Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Reece, for whom Cllr Wilson was acting as substitute.

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 at item 16 below.

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.

Cllr Waters declared a personal interest as Ward Councillor for agenda item 14 – Woodside High School.

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

There were no deputations or petitions.

To confirm and sign the Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 12 April 2010.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 12 April 2010 be agreed and signed by the Chair.

To advise the Committee on Appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during March and April 2010.

The Committee considered a report that detailed the outcome of appeal decisions made by the Department of Communities and Local Government during March and April 2010.

The Committee noted that the figures for the planning appeal decisions determined during April 2010 ought to read 2 (40%) were allowed and 3 (60%) were dismissed.

In response to a question from the Committee regarding lessons learned from the appeal in respect of Chadwell Lane, the Assistant Director, Planning and Regeneration, confirmed that a number of lessons had been learnt from this case.

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted. 

To inform the Committee of decisions made under delegated powers by the Head of Development Management and the Chair of the above Committee between 22 March 2010 and 23 May 2010.

The Committee considered a report that set out the decisions made under delegated authority by the Head of Development Management and the Chair of the Planning Committee between 22 March 2010 and 23 May 2010.

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.

To advise the Committee of performance statistics on Development Management, Building Control and Planning Enforcement since the 12 April 2010 Committee meeting.

The Committee considered a report that provided an overview of performance statistics for Development Management, Building Control and Planning Enforcement since the previous meeting on 12 April 2010.

In response to a question from the Committee regarding the definition of major applications, it was clarified that 10 or more units of accommodation or 1000 square metres or more of floor space constituted a major application. The Assistant Director, Planning and Regeneration, confirmed in response to a further question from the Committee that the statistics report covered all applications, which constituted a mixture of those determined by delegated authority and the proportionally small number of cases considered by the Committee.

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.

Report of the Head of Legal Services to update the Planning Committee on the outcome of Planning Enforcement prosecutions from 1 March 2010 to 31 May 2010 and ongoing cases. These represent referrals from the Planning Enforcement Department to the Corporate Legal Service.

The Committee considered a report on the outcome of Planning Enforcement prosecutions from 1 March 2010 to 31 May 2010 and ongoing cases. It was clarified that the report covered those cases where a summons had been issued.

Cllr McNamara entered the meeting at 19:20hrs.

In response to a question from the Committee regarding whether referrals to the Corporate Legal Service were affected by budgetary constraints, it was reported that budgets were monitored closely on a monthly basis with the Legal Service to avoid unforeseen costs. The Assistant Director, Planning and Regeneration, confirmed that enforcement action was not affected by budgetary constraints, but that staffing levels did have an impact. The Committee asked whether prosecutions were cost neutral, in response to which it was reported that most costs were recovered but that it was not entirely cost neutral to prosecute.

It was agreed that the Assistant Director, Planning and Regeneration, would provide information on the costs recovered during 2009/10 to Cllr Schmitz, as requested.  

RESOLVED

That the content of the report be noted.

Demolition of existing double garage and erection of a 2 storey 5 bedroom single dwelling house with new garage.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application, the consultation, the site and its environment, planning history and all the relevant planning factors and policies.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report outlining the key points and took questions from members of the Committee. The Committee asked about the recent change in designation of residential gardens by the Government, such that they were no longer defined as “previously developed land” in PPS3 Housing, known as brownfield sites. The Assistant Director, Planning and Regeneration, confirmed that gardens were no longer designated brownfield sites but were not classed as protected either. It was clarified that the Committee should use the robust policies and guidelines already in place, as well as standard statutory planning constraints, to determine the application.

Mr Ibbotson, Chair of the CAAC, addressed the Committee in objection to the application on a number of grounds including the siting of the proposed building, which ignored the sweep of the road, the dominance of the proposed design, the fact that the building would be visible from the road, as the trees screening it were seasonal and the proposed removal of trees. It was reported that the main objection was the design, which was felt to be incongruous and which failed to observe or enhance the Conservation Area. It was reported that the CAAC supported good quality design in the area, but strongly objected to the design presented.

Mr Perry, a local resident, spoke in objection to the application and reported that the main objection of local residents was the size of the proposed building as a proportion of the plot and the overdevelopment this represented. Further concerns were expressed regarding hydrology, and the impact the basement would have on the surrounding watercourses. Mr Perry circulated some correspondence he had had with the author of the recent study carried out by Arup Geotechnics in which the author had indicated that there was the possibility of a significant impact on neighbouring properties, and that full analysis should be carried out before a design was undertaken. Mr Martin, a local resident, also addressed the Committee in objection to the application and expressed concerns regarding light pollution, as the atrium of the proposed design would in effect become a 2-storey light box, which would have a significant impact on neighbouring properties.

The Committee asked whether the conditions proposed addressed the objectors’ concerns in relation to hydrology issues, in response to which Mr Perry reported that they did not, as the full assessment which the author of the Arups report indicated was essential, given the nature of the soil in the area, had not been carried out before the design was undertaken. In response to a question from the Committee regarding the proposed condition that the materials used be approved by the Local Authority, Mr Ibbotson confirmed that this did not address his concerns, as an indication of the materials to be used was clear from the plans, and he  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing double garage and erection of a 2 storey 5 bedroom single dwelling house with new garage (revised).

RECOMMENDATION: Grant consent.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application for conservation area consent, the site and surroundings, planning history and all relevant planning factors and policies.

RESOLVED

That application reference HGY/2009/2122 be approved.

Conditions:

1. The demolition hereby permitted shall not be undertaken before a contract for the carrying out of the works for redevelopment of the site has been made and planning permission granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides.

Reason: In order to ensure that the site is not left open and vacant to the detriment of the character and visual amenities of the locality.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

The proposal complies with the aims of Policy CSV1 'Development in Conservation Areas', CSV7 'Demolition in Conservation Areas' and Supplementary Planning Guidance 1a 'Design Guidance and Design Statements' of Haringey Unitary Development Plan.

Section 106: No

Partial demolition of existing vacant factory building and conversion into 9 x two bedroom flats.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions and to a section 106 legal agreement.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application, the consultation, the site and its environment, planning history and all relevant planning factors and policies.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report outlining the key points and took questions from the Committee. In response to a question from the Committee, it was confirmed that density figures had not been calculated for this application, as it related to an extant building. It was confirmed that the proposed units complied with the Council’s policies on size.

The Committee asked about the commercial area to the north of the site, and it was reported that it was anticipated that this area, the majority of units in which were currently vacant, would gradually become mixed-use, incorporating live/work units. The Committee asked how the Council would enforce the obligation for a caretaker to be employed to ensure the bins were put out to enable waste collection, in response to which it was confirmed that this would be a condition of the planning permission and that, if it was not complied with, the Council would take action against the owners or occupiers of the property.

The Committee asked whether the large wall to the rear of the property would impact on residents in Grove Road. It was reported that no objections had been received from residents in Grove Road as a result of the consultation. The wall was a distance of 20m from the rear walls of properties in Grove Road, and it was felt that the application would not lead to adverse overlooking.

RESOLVED

That, subject to conditions and a section 106 legal agreement, application reference HGY/2010/0090 be approved.

Conditions:

EXPIRATION TIME

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.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH PLANS

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.

WASTE STORAGE

3. A detailed scheme for the management of waste collection shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the building.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance to the building and to safeguard the amenity and appearance of the locality.

4. An enclosure for dustbins in accordance with guidance issued by the Local Planning Authority shall be provided prior to the occupation of the building as flats. Details of design, materials and location of the dustbin enclosure shall be agreed in writing prior to the occupation of the building.

Reason: In order to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

Demolition of existing two storey teaching block and construction of new two storey teaching block with associated hard and soft landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application, the consultation, the site and its environment, planning history and all relevant planning factors and policies.

The Planning Officer gave a summary of the report, highlighting key issues.

RESOLVED

That, subject to conditions, application reference HGY/2010/0800 be approved.

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.

INFORMATIVE: This consent shall be read in conjunction with the consent for planning reference HGY/2008/0655 and the conditions attached thereto shall continue to apply in all respects other than as modified by the conditions of this planning permission.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL 

The scale, design and siting of this additional block (Block W) and the associated changes to the layout and landscaping to the rest of the school site are considered acceptable in the context of the site, the retained and previously approved buildings and the surrounding area. This new block will provide a high quality education facility and a building of good environmental performance and sustainability. As such the proposed development accords with strategic planning guidance and policies as set out in the Adopted Haringey Unitary Development Plan (July 2006); in particular the following G1 'Environment', G2: 'Development and Urban Design', G9 'Community Wellbeing', UD2 'Sustainable Design and Construction', UD3 'General Principles', UD4 'Quality Design', ENV2 'Surface Water Runoff' and OS17 'Tree Protection, Tree Masses and Spines' and supplementary planning guidance 'PG1a 'Design Guidance and Design Statements', SPG4 'Access for All - Mobility Standards', SPG5 'Safety by Design', SPG8b 'Materials', SPG8c 'Environmental Performance' and SPG9 'Sustainability Statement Guidance'.

Section 106: No

Demolition of existing steel framed workshop and office building and erection of 2 storey terrace of 5 x three bedroom units with private gardens. Refurbishment of existing building to the rear and conversion to form 3 x two bedroom units.

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

Cllr Peacock declared a personal interest as Ward Councillor in respect of this item.

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which gave details of the application, the consultation, the site and its environment, planning history and all relevant planning factors and policies.

The Planning Officer presented a summary of the report, highlighting the key issues, and took questions from the Committee. The Planning Officer advised the Committee that the total contribution amount given in the report under Recommendation 1 should read £67,500 and that under recommendation 8, Permitted Development, the condition should read “….no development otherwise permitted by any part of Class A, B, D & E of Part 1 of that order shall be carried out on site.” It was also reported that plan number 10-01-07 should be “revision B”.

The Committee asked whether officers were satisfied that everything had been done to secure a tenant for the site and to retain the employment area. The Planning Officer advised that the Council had been given a report on the initiatives the agent had tried, and that businesses potentially affected by the Spurs development had also been contacted to see if they were interested in occupying the site. It was reported that the Council were aware of the constraints of the site and that the advice of the agents and the Council’s own understanding of the nature of the site meant that they were satisfied that appropriate measures to secure a tenant had been undertaken.

In response to a question from the Committee regarding possible parking pressures, it was reported that any parking created by the proposal would likely be comparable with the previous employment use, and may in fact reduce the level of parking pressure in the area.

RESOLVED

That, taking into account the changes to the report advised above, that the total contribution amount given in the report under Recommendation 1 should read £67,500, that under recommendation 8, Permitted Development, the condition should read “….no development otherwise permitted by any part of Class A, B, D & E of Part 1 of that order shall be carried out on site.”  and that plan number 10-01-07 should be “revision B”, and subject to conditions and a section 106 legal agreement, application reference HGY/2010/0862 be approved.

Conditions:

IMPLEMENTATION

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.

EXTERNAL APPEARANCE / SITE LAYOUT

3. .Notwithstanding the description of the materials in the application, no  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business.

Monday, 12 July 2010, 7pm.

Monday, 12 July 2010 at 19:00hrs.

The meeting closed at 21:10hrs.