Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Alexander for whom Cllr Williams was substituting.

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 17 below.

None received.

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 judgement of the public interest.

Cllr Bevan declared an interest in respect of agenda item 16 as he was on the Board of The Lea Valley Park Authority, had no involvement with the planning committee of The Park Authority.  His position was that he genuinely believed that he had only a personal interest.  However, he decided not to take any part in the consideration of this application.  This was a matter of caution and to avoid any possible controversy concerning public perception on this application. 

To consider receiving deputations and/or petitions in accordance with Standing Order 37

None received.

To confirm and sign the Minutes of the PASC held on 9 July 2007.

PC36.

The Committee was advised that on page 9, paragraph 4, Officers had agreed to look into the cumulative effects of a number of small developments on an area as a whole and advise whether it was a reason to refuse an application.  Officers responded that although they did not recollect this a response would be given to the next meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED

1. That officers look into whether it was possible to refuse an application based on the cumulative effects of a number of small development on an area as a whole.
2. That the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 9 July 2007 were agreed and signed as a correct record. 

Appeal decisions determined during June 2007 and July 2007

The Committee noted the outcome of 38 appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during June and July 2007, of which 16 (42%) were allowed and 22 (58%) were dismissed.  The Committee was also informed that there had been quite a variety of decisions issued by the planning inspectorate e.g. 235 Archway Road and a day nursery were both dismissed however, 540 Lordship Lane was allowed on appeal.

The Committee noted that with respect to allowed appeals over a period of time the Inspectorate did not agree with the Committee’s opinion on the effects on the character of an area or the HMO effect on living conditions.  The Inspectorate had always allowed the appeals predominantly in the East to middle of the borough.  The Inspectorate did not seem to see this as significant and the Committee requested that this be looked at.  Officers responded by informing the Committee that living conditions were governed by the standards in the SPG3.  Recommended room sizes were only recommendations and were not cast in stone.  It was only in extreme cases that the Inspectorate would dismiss an appeal if the sizes were marginal the Inspectorate would allow the appeal.  The Officer further advised that it was possible to approach the Inspectorate where it could be demonstrated that a number of cases the Inspectorate had been lenient and request them to comment.  Unless there were errors in the Law there was not anything the Authority could do about the Inspectorate’s decisions.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

Decisions made under delegated powers between

The Committee was asked to note the decisions taken under delegated powers by the Heads of Development Control (North and South) and the Chair of the Planning Committee determined between 18 June and 12 August 2007.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

Performance Statistics for Building Control, Development Control and Planning Enforcement Action.

The Committee was asked to note the decision taken within set time targets by Development Control and Planning Enforcement since the 9 July Committee meeting.

Officers informed the Committee that the performance targets were generally met however, minor applications were below the Haringey target for July.  With respect to appeals against refusal of planning permission 33% of appeals were allowed on refusal and 67% of appeals were dismissed on refusal.   The Haringey target was 70% dismissals.

It was noted that Members had agreed and requested to see a rolling 12 month period of performance statistics.  Officers advised that this was being worked on and would be presented at the meeting following the next Committee.

RESOLVED

1. That a rolling 12 month period of statistics be provided at the meeting following the next Committee.
2. That the report be noted.

The Committee received a presentation on the Draft Lawrence Road Planning Brief (SPD) and Sustainability Appraisal.  Officers informed the Committee that the report detailed the outcome of the draft planning brief as a supplementary planning document. 

Lawrence Road was adjacent to Clyde Road to the north and West Green Road to the South and surrounded by the Clyde Road Conservation Area.  The original area was defined as an employment area.   As part of the UDP review research into the employment use of the area decided it should be changed to a mixed use employment and residential area.  The planning brief set out the framework for future development along the Road and set out a guide for developers in preparing planning applications.  As part of the planning brief a sustainability appraisal was carried out on the impact of the draft brief assessed in respect of its sustainability effects indicated a mixed use scheme would result in more sustainable forms of development.

On the 17 April 2007 the draft brief was presented to the Planning Committee.  The public consultation process in respect of the Draft Planning Brief commenced on 7 May 2007 and concluded on 18 June 2007.  Paragraph 11.4 detailed the main responses, 250 comments from 33 respondents were received.  The key issues raised as part of the consultation; planning, housing, density, conservation area, amenity space and crime in the area.  The Planning Brief was amended and took account of the public consultation exercise.  The Draft Brief included the protection of existing employment in the area of 300.

The Committee was asked to note the amendments to the Draft Lawrence Road Planning Brief and agree the amended Draft Lawrence Road Planning Brief and Sustainability Report be adopted by Cabinet as a SPD.

RESOLVED

That the recommendations outlined in the report be agreed.

The Committee was asked to note the observations sent to the LB of Hackney on behalf of the Committee relating to a planning application lodged in their borough.  The application proposed the redevelopment of the Woodberry Down Estate, involving the demolition of the majority of the existing buildings and their replacement with 4,644 new homes, retail, commercial, community floor space and new civic spaces.  The LB of Hackney had not reported the matter to their own Committee.

The Council’s observations included the relationship between this Borough and the Application Site.  The main issues that would affect this borough as a result of the proposed development were;

·        Density – would rise from 265 to 540 habitable rooms per hectare.  There was concern that this increase in residential density would impact upon existing community support facilities in Haringey, particularly in terms of secondary education. 

·        Education – No additional secondary provision was made within the application area. 

·        Transportation – There was concern that the inevitable supplementary traffic the development would generate would have an adverse effect on the capacity of Green Lanes and Seven Sisters Road. 

·        Visual impact – that tall storey buildings shown as the closest to Haringey would not adversely affect the existing amenity of the properties in this borough closest to the application site.

The Chair advised that Cllr Kober had requested her to comment on the consultation.  The LB of Hackney had not consulted on the application however, Haringey had notified local residents.  Cllr Kober requested that the Committee ask the LB of Hackney to extend their consultation so that local residents could respond.

Officers informed the Committee that any further comments could be informed in an addendum letter to the LB of Hackney.

RESOLVED

That the the observations made to the LB of Hackney be noted.

In accordance with Sub Committee's protocol for hearing representations; when the recommendation is to grant planning permission, two objectors may be given up to 6 minutes (divided between them) to make representations.  Where the recommendation is to refuse planning permission, normally no speakers will be heard.  For items considered previously by the sub committee and deferred, where the recommendation is to grant permission, one objector may be given up to 3 minutes to make representations.  Where the recommendation is to refuse permission, normally no speakers will be heard.

RESOLVED

That the decisions of the Planning Committee on the planning application and related matters be approved or refused with the following points noted.

Demolition of existing garages and erection of 9 x 3 storey houses (7 x 3 and 2 x 2 bed) and provision of 9 car parking spaces, cycle storage and associated works.

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

The Committee was informed that the proposal site consisted of a row of semi-derelict garages situated at the rear of number 1 Mount Pleasant Villas.  The site was located within the Stroud Green Conservation Area.  It was considered that the height, bulk and mass of the proposed houses would not appear over dominant and could barely be seen from the street.  The positioning, scale and design was considered not harmful to neighbouring occupiers in relation to potential loss of sun and daylight or loss of privacy.

The committee questioned officers on the hard surfaces and whether they would be permeable, the density figure of the proposed development and whether designing out crime had been considered by the developers.  Officers advised that the surfaces could be made permeable and that this could be added as a condition.  The density figure for the development was 250 habitable rooms per hectare which was within planning policy.

The Committee received objections to the proposed development from residents of Holly Park Estate whom objected on the grounds that residents were not consulted on this second application.     The proposed development would block out sunlight and there would be a loss of privacy.  The objections made by Thames Water were in the first proposed scheme but were not included in the report for this development.  There would also be a loss of nature and conservation area value.

The applicant responded by informing the Committee that they had consulted with the residents of Holly Park Estate about the changes they would be proposing to the new application.  A building survey had been carried out and there was no effect on the sunlight.  The Arboricultural officer’s report stated that the new proposed development could be constructed without damage to existing trees.  The proposed development would enhance the visual amenity as an ecological development of good design.

Cllr Butcher addressed the Committee and made the following comments regarding the proposed application. There was confusion around the two applications, there were a number of objections received from residents, objections to the building of an inappropriate number of units on the site, concerns about access, issues around why the garages fell derelict and that residents had raised concerns about overlooking.

The Committee raised several issues they wanted conditioned.  It was agreed to clarify the conditions before the decision to grant the application.   Conditions to be included where as follows:  That permeable surfaces be provided as part of the development, a communal satellite dish be provided and the tree cover should be retained in winter and strengthened with evergreen shrubbery. 

A wooden picket fence along the railway line to be installed in place of the wall as inconspicuous as possible.  Officers informed the Committee that the wall was not within the application site however, could be included as an informative and also that the gate at the entrance to the site the applicants were happy not to include again this would be an informative.

The Committee agreed to grant the application subject to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing garages and erection of 9 x 3 storey houses (7 x 3 bed, 7 x 2 bed) and provision of 9 car parking spaces, cycle storage and associated works.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee was asked to consider Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of existing garages and erection of 9 x 3 storey houses (7 x 3 bed and 2 x 2 bed) and provision of 9 car parking spaces, cycle storage and associated works.  The Committee agreed to grant Conservation Area Consent as planning permission for the application outlined in PC54  above was granted.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2007/0599

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 03/09/2007

Location: Site Adjacent 1 Mount Pleasant Villas N4

Proposal: Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing garages and erection of 9 x 3 storey houses (7 x three bed, 2 x two bed) and provision of 9 car parking spaces, cycle storage and associated works.

Recommendation: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Decision: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Drawing No’s: PP-01 - PP-06, PP-08a ,9a, 10a, 11a, 12a, 15a, 16a, 17a, 18a, 19a, 20a, 21a, 22a, 25a, -PP-27.

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 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 proposed demolition is not contrary to Council policies, especially UD4 'Quality Design', CSV1 'Preservation and Enhancement of Conservation Areas', UD3 'General Principles', CSV1 'Development in Conservation Areas' and Supplementary Planning Guidance 2 'Conservation and Archaeology' of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan.

Section 106: Yes

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of single two-storey block comprising 3 no. four bedroom terraced houses, 2 no. three bedroom terraced houses, 4 no. two bedroom flats, 4 no. one bedroom flats, and provision of 11 car parking spaces and 12 bicycle stands.

The Officer informed the Committee that this application site was a backland site located behind a shopping terrace fronting Great Cambridge Road.  The site would bring about the re-use of what was currently under used land.  The scale, height and bulk of the development was considered to be in keeping with the existing residential developments in the surrounding area.  It was also considered that eleven car parking spaces was adequate for a development of this scale, that also included parking for twelve bicycles.

The Committee raised concern regarding the car park to the north of the site and suggested that the developer should plant trees there to improve the visual amenity.   The Officer assured the Committee that Section 106 money would be spent on the area surrounding the site and that the developer paid for landscaping.

Objectors addressed the committee and advised that in their petition they -had requested small bungalows be built on this site or a doctor’s surgery enclosed in a 12 – 15ft wall.  This request was not reflected in the proposed application, the houses were evasive and the land too small for extensive building.  The area already suffered with high noise levels from the Great Cambridge Road and White Hart Lane, there was high density in this part of the borough and the application did not consider the local infrastructure.

Cllr Santry addressed the Committee and requested a deferral of the application for the following reasons:

1. That the site location was unusual, accessed by a service road exceptionally narrow.  The site already had problems with dumped rubbish.  There was a lack of joint working between the local flat residents and the shop owners.
2. There was also issues around transport on the site that had not been addressed as there would be an increase of cars on the site.  There was also concern regarding how close the building was to the houses in Cavell Road.

Cllr Bull stated that the site was an eyesore that could be developed.  He requested the Committee to look at what was proposed.  Concern had already been raised about access to the site that was currently a rat run and traffic calming would not address this.  He requested the Committee to defer a decision on the application so that the developers could reconsider the proposal.

The applicant addressed the Committee and responded by stating that this was the second application presented to the Committee.  The current site was derelict, had been vandalised and was a place anti social behaviour had occurred.  The proposed application would be opening up the site.  With respect to noise this had been addressed as the scheme proposed was low rise and would make an improvement to the area.  The houses would be family units with individual gardens and that this was the best proposal that had been put forward.

The  Committee questioned why there was a change from the original proposal which was for houses only.  The proposed application included flats.  The applicant responded that they had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

Demolition of existing garages and erection of a two / three storey block comprising 1 x three bed and 2 x four bed houses and 2 x one bed flats, 1 x two bed flats, 3 x two bed flats and associated car park / external works.

The Committee was informed that this application had been considered in detail at the last meeting of the Committee held on 9 July 2007.  The details of the proposed application had not changed.

The Chair moved a motion to grant the application.  The application was granted subject to conditions and a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2007/1502

FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS SUB COMMITTEE DATED 03/09/2007

Location: Garages at Harold Road / Newton Road N15

Proposal: Demolition of existing garages and erection of a two / three storey block comprising 1 x three bed and 2 x four bed houses and 2 x one bed flats, 1 x two bed flats, 3 x two bed flats and associated car park / external works.

Recommendation: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Decision: Grant subject to conditions and Legal Agreement

Drawing No’s: 345/HR1 rev A, 2 rev C, 3 rev C & 4 rev C.

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, identifying those areas to be permeable, 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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

The Committee was informed that the proposed footbridge spans the River Lee navigation channels and links Hale Wharf on the east side with Millmead Road on the west.  The western side of the bridge comprised a narrow strip of the Lee Valley Regional Park, the Pymmes Brook and the towpath to the River Lee navigation.  The application site fell within the Tottenham International Master Plan area and the proposal was to create a bridge over the River Lee navigation channel.  The bridge would be fully accessible to pedestrians, limited mobility pedestrian and cyclists.

The Committee requested further conditions be added:

• That the Pymmes Brook Channel should be subject to naturalisation.
• That the bridge is high enough across the River Lee navigation.
• That anti graffiti materials were used.
• That a plan of how the bridge would be maintained across its length be submitted by the various parties

The Chair moved a motion to grant the application subject to referral to the GLA and subject to conditions.  The application was agreed unanimously.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2007/1400

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 03/09/2007

Location: Bridge over River Lee Navigation and Pymmes Brook, Hale Wharf, Ferry Lane N17

Proposal: Construction of a new footbridge across the River Lee Navigation and a 'green' bridge across Pymmes Brook and associated landscaping.

Recommendation: Grant subject to conditions and subject to GLA

Decision: Grant subject to conditions and subject to GLA

Drawing No’s: 1144-GAR1-099, 100

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 58.

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business submitted.

The next site visits will take place on Friday 28 September 2007 at 9:30am.

Monday 1 October 2007 at 7pm.

Monday 1 October 2007.

The meeting ended at 10:00pm.