Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Peacock for whom Cllr Adamou 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 14 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.

There were no declarations of interest received.

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

None received.

To confirm and sign the Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 6 April 2009.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 6 April 2009 be agreed and signed.

Demolition of vacant nurses homes and erection of 2 x four storey residential blocks with basement car parking, comprising 20 x one bed, 23 x two bed, 10 x three bed and 3 x four bed units, plus landscaping (Revised Scheme)

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

The Chair announced a variation to the agenda and it was agreed to take items 11, 12 and 13 next.

The Committee was advised that the site was part of the former Hornsey Central Hospital (now demolished).  The development site occupied approximately one third of the total hospital site.  The majority of the site had been redeveloped as a new polyclinic/health centre.

The Council and the Planning Inspectorate had accepted the principle of the site’s redevelopment for residential use.  The scheme showed a number of changes compared to the application dismissed on appeal in 2008, from a reduction in the number of units.  The density of the development (420 hrh) fell within the acceptable range of 200 – 450 hrh.  This scheme would provide 40% affordable housing.

The development would lie between Park Road Leisure Centre to the south and the new Health Centre and its car park to the north.  It was considered there were no adverse impacts on residential amenity or other surrounding uses in terms of loss of daylight, sunlight and privacy.  Overall the provision of amenity space was deemed to be acceptable and in line with Council policies.  On balance, the scheme was deemed to be acceptable in design terms; as the overall height stepped down between the polyclinic and the leisure centre and was slightly set back on the frontage compared with the appeal scheme. 

There were two main existing trees (Silver Maple and Ash) both were to be retained and further the line of conifers on the side boundary were also to be retained as they provided some screening.

The applicant had proposed 44 car parking spaces at basement level and 57 cycle parking spaces.

The Officer further advised that the Housing Service raised concern in relation to the tenure split of 45% social housing and 55% intermediate housing.  The head teacher at Highgate Wood School made representations with regard to the pedestrian park between the site and the leisure centre which was heavily used by pupils at the beginning and end of the school day.  It was considered to be a potential conflict  between the use by pupils and vehicles entering and existing the site however, this could be improved under the S106 Legal Agreement. 

The Committee were also informed that the applicants had considered the education contribution figure of £250K detailed in the report not justified and had proposed a revised figure of £150K.

Cllr Wilson entered the meeting at 7:12pm.

In response to a question from the Committee the Transportation Officer advised the Committee that a travel database used in relation to similar sites predicted a transport generation of 15 vehicles in and out of the site during the morning and 13 vehicles out in the evening. An improvement contribution would improve the access to ensure vehicles paid regard to pedestrians.  The Planning Officer further explained that the access was separate and that this issue had been considered at the previous appeal.  The Inspector did not dismiss the appeal on this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 446.

Retention of pub use at ground and basement levels, with refurbishment of upper floors to form 1 x three bed, 1 x two bed and 1 x one bed flats. Demolition of existing side extensions and erection of new 3-storey rear extension comprising 3 x one bed and 1 x two  bed flats.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions and subject to sec. 106 and sec. 278 Legal Agreement.

The Planning Officer presented the report and advised the Committee that the site comprised a 3 storey Victorian Public House, located on the corner of Nightingale Lane and Brook Road.  The immediate surrounding area was residential in character. 

The original scheme had been revised involving the following:

• The reduction of two units in order to lower the density on the site.
• The External appearance was changed by lining up horizontal features in the pub’s façade
• The use of brick to match the existing brickwork.
• The design of the front entrance of the new building to match the central door of the existing pub.

The density of the proposed development was approximately 375hrh which is well within the required range.  The proposed dwelling mix and room sizes were considered to provide a satisfactory standard or accommodation.  The size, bulk, and design of the proposed scheme was considered to fit in with the existing street and townscape.  The 3 storey extension block would not effect the privacy of the immediate properties.  The scheme provides 4 car parking spaces, 4 cycle spaces and a motorcycle space secured at basement level.

Amenity space was provided in the form of communal rear garden and recessed balconies on the extension block.  Also the scheme would provide a secured roof garden.

A local resident addressed the Committee and raised concerns about the information provided to the Committee in order to fully consider this application in respect of the impact the public house has on the community.  The public house was very busy at night and this had an impact on residents in terms of density and parking and caused pressure in the area.  Patrons of the public house frequently demonstrated anti-social behaviour.

Cllr Errol Reid addressed the Committee and declared a personal and prejudicial interest that he lived opposite the application site.   He considered that the report before the Committee was dangerously flawed in respect of the following reasons:

1. There was no prior consultation with local residents.
2. The W7 bus route was not within walking distance of the development.
3. The development would have an impact on existing traffic, parking in the area and this exacerbates traffic flow and would increase kerb side parking demand.
4. That the Committee had not been provided with the right information.

The Committee was requested not to grant this application.

The applicant addressed the Committee in response to objections and stated that the community as a whole was adverse to losing further public houses.  It was proposed that this public house would be refurbished, occupy the ground floor as it was set on a slope.  It was further proposed to add 4 car parking spaces on the site.  Time and effort had been put into the design of the building, using the same material to match the brickwork. 

Members enquired whether it was possible to provide a pastiche and in response was informed that the applicant’s had tried to merge the old with the new however, if you looked around London very few  ...  view the full minutes text for item 447.

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of 4 storey building comprising 366 sqm of retail (A1) floorspace plus Kingdom Hall (D1) on the ground floor, with 34 flats, (2 x one bed, 13 x two bed, 15 x three bed and 4 x four bed flats on the upper floors), plus 22 car spaces and 44 cycle spaces.

RECOMMENDATION: Grant permission subject to conditions and S106 Legal Agreement and agreements under S256 and S278 of the Highways Act 1980 relating to exchange of land and works to the highway.

The Committee was advised that the application site comprised the former Park Tavern public house and car park site.  The site was located next to Northumberland Park Railway Station and the surrounding area was generally residential.  This application site included the existing Kingdom Hall in Paxton Road directly to the north of the existing Tottenham  football stadium.

The location of retail floor space in this location close to the railway station and opposite and existing commercial terrace is considered acceptable and appropriate in terms of scale, character and function and would support the vitality and viability of the existing shops.  This proposal would create a number of local jobs, both full time and part time via the retail unit for the benefit of local people.

The scheme also proposed 34 new flatted units of between 1 and 4 bedrooms.  All units were affordable and as such the scheme would provide a significant number of new homes of good quality and specification.  The floor space of the proposed units complied with the Council’s standards.  Taking into account the mixed use nature of the scheme the density of the proposed development is approximately 533hrh and within the density range of 200-700hrh.

The scheme was considered acceptable in terms of the uses proposed, the scale of the development and the design, appearance and materials of the building.  The applicant had prepared a daylight/sunlight study to assess the effect of the development on the surrounding properties.  The application had also submitted a noise survey.

A children’s play space of 40 square metres was included in the central courtyard area which would be available to all residents.  The scheme incorporated a total of 22 car parking spaces, including 3 disabled spaces, of which 5 spaces are provided on street and 8 of these spaces are for use by the Kingdom Hall.

The Officer confirmed that a letter had been received from the Environmental Agency who did not object to the application subject to the inclusion of two extra conditions.

Meeting adjourned at 8:47pm for the Committee to receive legal advice.

Meeting reconvened at 8:52pm.

The Head of Planning advised the Committee that the application had been made by Spurs Plc to redevelop this site.  This application was separate from the stadium application and requested the Committee to consider the application on its merits.

In response to a query raised by the Committee the Transportation Officer advised the Committee that they had reviewed the transport assessment report however, without a proper travel survey it would not be possible to accurately assess the amount of increased traffic bearing in mind that traffic associated with the church already existed as the church was being relocated.  The Officer further advised that a condition could be included for a green travel plan to be submitted. 

An objector raised concerns in relation to the plan being oversized in height, bulk, the details over-scaled and inappropriate in its setting.  The design and  materials should improve the quality of the area and it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 448.

To advise the Committee on Appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during March 2009.

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

To inform the Committee of decision made under delegated powers by the Heads of Development Control (North & South) and the Chair of the above Committee between 16 March 2009 and 19 April 2009.

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

To advise the Committee of Performance Statistics for Development Control and Planning Enforcement Action since the 6 April 2009 Committee meeting.

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

To inform Members of planning enforcement performance for the last quarter and service issues.

This item was deferred to the next meeting.

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business.

Monday, 8^th June 2009, 7pm.

Monday 8 June 2009.

The meeting concluded at 10:05pm