Agenda and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

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 19 below.

There were no items of urgent business.

NOTED

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.

see PC213/214 below

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 received.  The Committee were advised of

To confirm and sign the Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 6 May 2008.

The Chair asked if there were any comments from the Committee.

Councillor Weber referred to PC186 – Wood Green Supplementary Planning Document and that the 2nd bullet point should also include businesses as well as users as both would be affected by the SPG.

The Chair then MOVED and it was:

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting of the Planning Committee held on 6 May 2008 be signed as an accurate record of the proceedings subject to the following amendment:

PC186 – pages 19/20 – insertion of the word ‘businesses’ in 2^nd bullet points on both pages to read ‘users at night time and businesses’   

To advise the Committee on Appeal decision determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during April 2008

The Committee noted the outcome of 12 appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during March 2008, of which 6 (50%) were allowed and 6 (50%) were dismissed. 

The Committee was asked to note that there were 3 enforcement appeals which were allowed – 51 Lausanne Road, N8 0HJ,  107 & 107A Northview Road, N8 7LR, and 82 Denton Road, N8 9NT.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

To inform the Committee of decisions made under delegated powers by the Heads of Development Control (North & South) and the Chair of the above Committee between 14 April 2008 and the 18 May 2008.

The Committee was asked to note the decisions made under delegated powers by the Heads of Development Control (North and South) and the Chair of the Planning Committee determined between 14 April 2008 and 18 May 2008.

The Chair also reminded the Committee that all Members received notification in writing of any applications within their Wards in respect of proposed delegated decisions and at the point of notification were able to submit their views etc within 14 days.

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

To advise the Committee of Performance Statistics for Development Control and Planning Enforcement Action since the 6 May 2008 Committee meeting.

The Committee was asked to note the performance statistics on Development Control and Planning Enforcement Work since the previous Planning Committee of 6 May 2008.

The Committee were advised that 3 out of 3  major applications were determined within 13 weeks (100%),  and 44 out of 53 cases (83%) of minor applications were determined within 8 weeks.  In respect of other applications 125 out of 138 cases (91%) were determined within 8 weeks which was above the Haringey target.

Councillor Hare asked whether it was possible to receive figures for major/minor applications on a 12 month rolling programme, in the same manner as the 12 month appeals figures were recorded.

The Committee were advised that this information could be supplied at future meetings.

There being no questions from the Committee it was :-

RESOLVED

That the report be noted.

To confirm the following tree preservation orders:

1. Land situated Rookfield Close Open Space
2. Outside 2 Rookfield Avenue, N10
3. Land situated outside 37 Cranmore Way, N10

The Committee were advised of the details of 3 recommended tree preservation orders (TPOs) for land situated at Rookfield Close, outside 2 Rookfield Avenue, and land situated outside 37 Cranmore Way, London N10.

The Committee sought clarification as to the visits of the Arboriculturalist and whether the visits conducted were on an individual basis.  In response officers advised that in this particular instance the visits had been carried out at the request of the Residents Association, and was not part of  not a wider remit.

Following further discussions it was suggested by the Chair that when the Arboriculturalist carried out individual visits in future that they also survey the surrounding area to identify if there were other possible TPOs required.

RESOLVED    

i.                    That Tree Preservation Orders be confirmed under Section 198 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 to the following trees located at:

a.      Land situated at Rookfield Close Open Space, London N10 (T1; Coast Redwood);

b.      Outside no 2 Rookfield Avenue, London N10 (T1;Yew);

c.      Outside 37 Cranmore Way, London N10 (T1;Yew);

ii.                  That officers be requested to ensure that when investigating individual requests for tree preservation orders (TPOs) in future, the surrounding area be surveyed to ascertain whether there was a requirement for other TPOs being served.

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, the applicant and supporters will be allowed to address the Committee.  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. 

Demolition of existing garages and erection of 3 storey building comprising 1 x three bed, 4 x two bed and 4 x one bed flats with commercial use (A1 / A2) at ground floor level, offices at first floor level and parking at basement level. (Revised Scheme)

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

In a brief introduction of the report the committee were advised that a petition had been submitted from 52 residents of Rostrevor Avenue objecting to the proposals, and also detailed submitted reasons of objection.

The Committee were advised that the proposal site consisted of 2 individual buildings currently part used as a garage and workshop, and was sited on the southern end of a block that fronted the High Road between Norfolk and Rostrevor Avenue’s. The rear of the site abutted the rear garden of No.1 Rostrevor Avenue.  The Committee were informed that the adjoining roads were residential in nature consisting of 2 storey terraced houses many of which had been substantially extended in the form of ground floor rear extensions and loft conversions in the form of full width dormers front and rear. This was an acceptable feature within the South Tottenham area.

The Committee were further advised that on the western/opposite side of the High Road near the junction with St Ann’s Road – north of the application site was the very prominent church of St Ignatius also the primary school of the same name. The site was situated within the designated South Tottenham High Road Conservation Area and had also been designated as an Area of Community Regeneration – Haringey East.  The site was not within an area of archaeological importance or an area subject to flooding. The eastern side of the High Road was on the higher section of the main road – the road falls way westward and northward toward St Ann’s Road.

The Committee were advised that planning permission had been refused in 2007 for erection of a part 4/5 storey building comprising a mix of one, two, three and four bed self contained flats with commercial units at ground floor level with parking at basement. The proposal was also dimissed on appeal.

The current proposal was seeking planning permission for erection of a 3 storey building comprising 4 x one bed, 4 x two bed, and 1 x three bed self contained flats with office accommodation at first floor and commercial units at ground floor level with parking in the basement area. The commercial unit was capable of being split into 3 separate units and was serviced not from the High Road but from the basement area where parking for the scheme would  also be provided. The basement area would be accessed from an access point on Rostrevor Avenue.

In response to points of clarification from the Committee as to the comments of the Planning Inspector officers advised that the main points of concern were in relation to the impact of the 5 storey height on  the Listed building on the opposite side of the road, and the Inspecor had stated that the height and mass of the proposed building on the appeal site especially the 5-storey part at the corner junction with Rostrevor Avenue, would not relate satisfactorily to the nearby lower buildings on the Eastern side of High road or the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 207.

Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing garages and erection of 3 storey building comprising 1 x three bed, 4 x two bed and 4 x one bed flats with commercial use (A1 / A2) at ground floor level, offices at first floor level and parking at basement level.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant consent.    

The Committee was asked to consider Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of existing garages and erection of 3 storey building comprising 1 x three bed, 4 x two bed and 4 x one bed flats with commercial use (A1 / A2) at ground floor level, offices at first floor level and parking at basement level.

RESOLVED

That Conservation Area Consent be granted for the demolition of existing garages and erection of 3 storey building comprising 1 x three bed, 4 x two bed and 4 x one bed flats with commercial use (A1 / A2) at ground floor level, offices at first floor level and parking at basement level.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2008/0594

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 09/06/2008

Location: 16-52 High Road N15 6LS

Proposal: Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing garages and erection of 3 storey building comprising 1 x three bed, 4 x two bed and 4 x one bed flats with commercial use (A1 / A2) at ground floor level, offices at first floor level and parking at basement level.

Recommendation: GTD

Decision: GTD subject to conditions

Drawing No’s: 7117/02, 03, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107

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 proposed design and re-developmentof the site accords with policies HSG2 Change of use to residential, EMP4 Non Employment Generating Uses, UD3 Quality Design, UD6 Waste Storage, HSG 8 'Density Standards' of Haringey Unitary Development Plan.

Section 106 No

Demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (Amended Scheme).      

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to Section 106 Legal Agreement.          

The Committee were advised that the application site was located on Fortis Green, which was situated off Fortis Green Road.  The site was located on the road that lay between East Finchley and Muswell Hill.  Part of the site was on Spring Lane, the site was also situated in the Muswell Hill Conservation Area.  Presently the site was a two-storey detached redundant Health Clinic built in the early 70’s.  Adjacent to the site was Twyford Court - a residential block comprising of three-storeys plus mansard roof.  Opposite the site are more residential buildings named ‘The Gables’ that comprises of three-storeys.  To the rear of the site were Firemans cottages of single family dwelling houses comprising of three-storeys.

The Committee were advised that an application for demolition of existing building and erection of a part four/part five storey building comprising of clinic at ground floor level, 6 x 3 bed and 3 x 2 bed flats with 10 parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse and private amenity space, was refused on the 24/01/2008 and was the subject of appeal as yet not determined.

The Committee were informed that the proposal was for the demolition of the existing clinic building and erection of a four storey building with community clinic on the ground floor and 2 x 1 bed, 4 x 2 bed and 3 x 3 bed.  The proposal also included 9 off-street car parking spaces, a bicycle store and 180m² of private amenity space and 90m² private space on the roof.  The proposed building would comprise of a clinic and lobby area on the ground floor, on the first floor there are 4 units, 2 x 1 bed, 1 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed flats.  The proposed second floor would have three units 1 x 3 bed, 2 x 2 bed and the third floor two more units 1 x 3 bed and 1 x 2 bed.  The proposed building would have two entrances on the ground floor, one for the residential units and one for the clinic.  The proposed materials would be red brick to match the local brickwork with double glazed aluminium framed windows, with some stone detailing and façade.

A Local Residents addressed the Committee and objected to the application on the basis that:

• that the size of the development was large for the site in question, the development should be set back from the road further than intended
• that if the application were permitted then the planned design of the south west corner would require redesigning so as to have a curbed effect
• there was no apparent safe guards to the proposed roof terrace and the terrace would be visible from the street and seen by people walking or sitting on a bus, and also conditions needed to be imposed as regards barbecues and the hanging of washing on the proposed roof terrace or balconies
• the proposed community clinic required explanation of exactly what its function would be, and whether the proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 209.

Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (Amended Scheme).

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee was asked to consider Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space. 

RESOLVED

That Conservation Area Consent be granted for the demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (AMENDED SCHEME)

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2008/0500

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 09.06.2008

Location: 150 Fortis Green N10 3PA

Proposal: Conservation Area Consent for demolition of existing building and erection of part four / part five storey building comprising community clinic at ground floor level and 2 x one bed, 4 x two bed and 3 x three bed flats above with 9 car parking spaces, bicycle store, refuse space and private amenity space (AMENDED SCHEME).

Recommendation: GTD

Decision: GTD

Drawing No’s: PL.08.689.01 - 11 incl., 15 - 20 incl.

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 under planning permission reference HGY/2008/0499) has been made and planning permission granted for the redevelopment for which the contract provides.

Reason: In order to protect the appearance of the conservation area.

Section 106, No

Erection of single storey extensions to front and rear of existing library building.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.                     

At this point in the proceedings - 20.30hrs - the Committee adjourned for 15 minute and reconvened at 20.45hrs.

In a brief introduction officers advised the Committee that Coombes Croft Library occupies the ground floor of a mixed use five storey property on the corner of Tottenham High Road and Brereton Road. The block is effectively L shaped. The upper stories of the building are in residential use. The property lies within North Tottenham Conservation Area and dates from the 1950’s. To the rear of the property is a private residential courtyard, with a small children’s play area. It is understood that access to this area is restricted for the use of the occupants of the surrounding residential properties. Opposite the library on the High Road are a range of mixed use buildings, with retail properties on the ground floor, some of which are boarded up.

The library benefits from a forecourt area at its entrance, created by the setback of the building. There is a large London Plane tree and a Cherry tree within this forecourt area. The library has ramp access and decorated metal gates at the entrance. The library itself has a distinctive design, consisting of block work walls, which have a panelling effect, with high level windows. The rear elevation of the library is of brickwork.

There being no objectors to the proposals the Committee then viewed the plans.

The Committee then sought clarification in respect of the housing behind the library courtyard and who owned the properties, and whether there could additional tree planting, together with placing TPO’s on the existing trees. In response officers advised that flats were Council owned, and that when consulted there were no objections received.  With regard to additional tree planting there may be some difficulties as the Moeselle tributary ran close under there and therefore there may be difficulties with roots embedding.  However there may be a possible solution of having planters instead though the Chair reminded officers and the Committee that the area at the front right belonged to EDF and there may well then be difficulties in ensuring synergy in terms of paving replacement matching existing.

In response to further points of clarification the Committee were advised that section 106 only applied where a new build/development was happening and therefore in this instance there was no such development.   In respect of placing TPO’s on existing public trees this was generally not the normal practice as such and that this type of tree was generally well protected. However the Arboriculturalist would be consulted as to the feasibility of this.

The Committee also commented on the land issue and the Council owned land, and that a further tree be added to and balanced the existing London Plain tree, and that the trees being lost at the rear of the site be replaced with the same number, and also if the existing flower beds also be refilled.  The committee also commented on the tiles on the frontage being matched to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 211.

Amendment to approved scheme HGY/2004/1943 proposing replan for 18 dwellings (Blocks F, E, H and J), parking, access and associated landscaping.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee were informed that the application proposed an amendment to the approved scheme HGY/2004/1943 proposing a replan for 18 dwellings (Blocks F, E, H and J) along with the parking, access and associated landscaping area around these dwellings. The proposed changes to the approved sceme would result in a reduction in the total number of residential units on the site by two.  The part of the approved scheme that it proposed to alter was located in the north eastern corner of the site. The rest of the development would be constructed as per the approved 2004 scheme. In 2004 planning permission for the demolition of the existing buildings on the site and the construction of a new residential development comprising 128 residential units was granted. As part of this approved scheme an area (0.9 acres) of the former depot site was to be retained for employment purposes.

The site lay on the west side of Coppetts Road in the extreme northwest corner of the Borough. There were allotments across the road to the east. One of the entrances to St. Pancras and Islington Cemetery lay immediately to the north in the London Borough of Barnet. The Muswell Hill Playing Fields adjoin the application site to the Southwest and there is an existing residential development, a sports pavilion and educational facility to the south.The cemetery, allotments and playing fields are all designated as Metropolitan Open Land. The northern end of the site was very close to the North Circular Road. The former Lynx Depot site is slightly over 1.73 hectares in area.

Following the introduction of the report there being no points of clarification it was MOVED by the Chair and unanimously:

RESOLVED

That an amendment to the to approved scheme HGY/2004/1943 proposing replan for 18 dwellings (Blocks F, E, H and J), parking, access and associated landscaping be approved, and that the permission be subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement, as a Variation to the original S106 Agreement, to take account of the revised scheme, the small reduction in numbers of units, and small changes to the make-up of the Affordable Housing element within the development.

INFORMATION RELATING TO APPLICATION REF: HGY/2008/0718

FOR PLANNING COMMITTEE DATED 09/06/2008

Location: Former Lynx Depot Coppetts RoadN10 1JP

Proposal: Amendment to approved scheme HGY/2004/1943 proposing replan for 18 dwellings (Blocks F, E, H and J), parking, access and associated landscaping.

Recommendation: GTD

Decision: GTD

Drawing No’s: 51-1099-200, 201, 202, 204; 7534/T/01-02, 02-02; 51-1099-J-201, 202; 51-1099-F-203, 204, 205; 51-1099-BIN-201 & 51-1099-CYC-201.

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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 212.

Erection of double height space linking existing school block to a new Library space at first floor. Erection of extension to existing technology block, comprising two classrooms in single storey structure. Recladding to some areas of existing school facade. New landscaping with covered walkways and updated parking facilities.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions

The Committee were advised that the proposal was for the erection of double height space linking existing school block to a raised Library space (Proposed); erection of extension to existing technology block, comprising two classrooms of single storey structure; Recladding to some areas of existing school façade; and new landscaping with covered walkways and updated parking facilities. The works also included the the provision of a new external fire escape stair to the west end of Block A2. The proposed works had been amended from that which was originally proposed. These amendments were primarily in relation to the proposed tree removal and on-site car parking adjacent to Trulock Road. These aspects of the original scheme had now been removed.

The proposed development essentially included a mix of new build, remodelling and refurbishment to the two existing schools. A main design aspect of this development scheme had been the grouping of classrooms within departments to create a ‘hub’ and to foster ownership as well as circulation. Approximately 370m² of existing school buildings are to be demolished, with a new build area of 816m². The proposed works would result in a net increase of 6% of the existing floorspace of the two schools. Further, approximately 3772m² of the existing school was to be remodelled and 2041m² was to be refurbished.

The Chair advised that she was declaring a personal and prejudicial interest in the item as her daughter was the assistant Head Teacher at the school.  The Chair advised that she would relinquish the Chair and take no further part in the discussion of the item, and left the proceedings.

Councillor Mallett also declared an interest in this item, and the following item as a Member of the BSF, and left the proceedings.

The Committee then viewed the plans.

Councillor Dodds took the Chair.

COUNCILLOR DODDS IN THE CHAIR

The Head of Legal Services representative clarified, when asked, that in the absence of the Chair the Vice or Deputy Chair automatically took the Chair if they were present.

The Committee then raised concerns in relation to the materials to be used as wood cladding and the need to ensure a negligible costs in terms of maintenance etc and whether the proposed wood material could be treated in coated fashion requiring less maintenance, together with the need to ensure the least amount of disruption to the school by the erection of scaffolding during school terms.  The Committee also commented on the issue of the proposed roof pitch and the need to ensure a pitched as opposed to a flat roof on all of the new build as this attributed a maintenance cost which would be borne by the schools themselves and would be an added expense both short and long term.  The wider landscaping of the site and relocation of the fish pond would be welcomed, and the car park could be landscaped with trees, as well as improving the frontage by additional trees/shrubs at the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 213.

Redevelopment of Woodside High School, to comprise demolition of part of existing central school block, erection of new two storey block fronting White Hart Lane, new three storey block at rear of site, covered walkways, parking and landscaping, and re-cladding of existing Block C. To incorporate Woodside High School, William C Harvey and Moselle Special Schools.

RECOMMENDATIONS: Grant permission subject to conditions.

Councillor PEACOCK ENTERED THE PROCEEDINGS AND COUNCILLOR DODDS RELINQUISHED THE CHAIR.

COUNCILLOR PEACOCK IN THE CHAIR

The Committee were advised that though there were no objectors  the Architect was present.  The Chair also advised that a Councillor in attendance as a Governor at the school would address the Committee.

In a brief introduction of the report officers advised the Committee that the application was for the redevelopment of Woodside High School, to comprise demolition of part of existing central school block, erection of new two storey block fronting White Hart Lane, new three storey block at rear of site, covered walkways, parking and landscaping, and re-cladding of existing Block C, and to incorporate Woodside High School, William C Harvey and Moselle Special Schools.  The Committee were adviosed that Woodside High School was situated on White Hart Lane. The site was bounded to the north by White Hart Lane, to the east and west by MOL playing fields and to the south by residential properties (Stirling Road). To the north of White Hart Lane was New River Sports Centre and Community Centre. The existing High School campus comprised of a mix of existing buildings, from 1 – 4 stories, with a range of age and condition. The original campus buildings were developed in the 1960’s.

The Chair then advised that Councillor Cooke would address the meeting.

In thanking the Committee for its indulgence Councillor Cooke commented that the planning application was the next process of the inclusive development of the existing schools and the inclusion of two special schools - William C Harvey and Moselle schools.  Councillor Cooke commented on the considerable amount of work undertaken by both the planners, and architect  and all those involved in bringing the proposals to this point and a huge amount of work with the 3 Head teachers, teachers and pupils, especially with the needs of both special schools and their inclusion on one campus, and that all concerned welcomed the proposals before the Committee and hoped that the Committee would grant the application.

The Chair thanked Councillor Cooke for his address.

The Committee then viewed the plans.

The Committee expressed concerns in regard to the new build roofs needing to be pitched, and reiterated the previous concerns in terms of maintenance and costs of the roof repair to the schools. Also the issue of the fencing on the boundary of the school being strengthened and in materials that could not be cut through needed addressing together with the overall  landscaping of the areas, especially around the frontage and the need for tree planting and shrubbery.

Officers responded that conditions and informatives could be added in terms of the boundaries.  With regard to the pitch of the new roofs the design of the roofs and their design was not in a sense a planning issue and a matter of design.

The Architect advised that there was work currently in hand to ensure the maintenance of the buildings, and they being in good repair for a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 214.

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

Nil Items.

Monday 21 July 2008.

21 July 2008