Agenda and minutes

Please note this meeting may be filmed or recorded by the Council for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internet site or by anyone attending the meeting using any communication method.  Although we ask members of the public recording, filming or reporting on the meeting not to include the public seating areas, members of the public attending the meeting should be aware that we cannot guarantee that they will not be filmed or recorded by others attending the meeting.  Members of the public participating in the meeting (e.g. making deputations, asking questions, making oral protests) should be aware that they are likely to be filmed, recorded or reported on.  By entering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings.

The Chair of the meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming or recording, if in his or her opinion continuation of the filming, recording or reporting would disrupt or prejudice the proceedings, infringe the rights of any individual, or may lead to the breach of a legal obligation by the Council.

The Chair informed the Committee that the meeting would be live streamed on the Council’s website.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Basu, Hinchcliffe and Peacock

Apologies for lateness were received from Councillors Bevan and Stone.

None.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meetings held on 6, 14 and 31 July 2020.

Note: Minutes of the meetings 6 and 31 July 2020 to follow.

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meetings held on 6, 14 and 31 July 2020 be approved as a correct record.

A report on the work of the Planning Service during July to September 2020.

Rob Krzyszowski, Interim Assistant Director Planning, Building Standards & Sustainability, introduced the report, as set out in the agenda. Each service head would introduce their section of the report.

Dean Hermitage, Head of Development Management, Enforcement and Planning, introduced the section of the report entitled Development Management, as set out in the agenda. Mr Hermitage amended the figure for the number of cases on-hand at the end of August 2020, which should have been 447 and not 513. He explained that there had been a peak in the number of enforcement complaints received during the lockdown period, as well as a backlog of sites.

Members of the Committee raised the following questions and observations on the report and appendices:-

·                In response to a question regarding the threshold for the overturns for refusals, it was explained that the threshold should remain at 10% or below. It was noted that it would currently take two or more losses to take the figure above the threshold.

·                The planning statistics for major applications were reported every quarter to MHCLG (The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) and every Council was also required to publish these on their website.

·                In response to a question regarding enforcement figures, it was explained that the service currently served on average around 90-110 notices per year. This meant that the Council had the 10^th highest number of notices served of any other local authority last year, and the 5^th highest the year before that.

·                It was confirmed that member training on conservation areas would be added to the list of future training topics.

·                Mr Hermitage would speak to the enforcement team to ensure that members were being sent out the results of enforcement cases, where requested, and would also follow up any of those requested personally by Councillor Bevan. It was confirmed that the two appeal sites pending related to the hardware store application on West Green Road and the demolition of a large 1920s house in Highgate.

·                With regard to the correct site address being given for the Bridge Castle Museum site, it was stated that some sites were subject to registered addresses, however Mr Hermitage agreed to take this away and look into the matter.

·                It was confirmed that the timescale for the determination of planning applications was dependent on the type of planning application. Minor and other applications was 8 weeks, Majors were 12 weeks and those with an environmental impact assessment took 16 weeks. The majority of applications were determined within the target of 56 days. It was noted that major applications that took a long time to determine, such as the new Tottenham Hotspur Football Ground, would have an impact on these figures. It was also confirmed that there had been no leeway given for any delays caused by Covid-19.

·                Reference was made to paragraph 5.12 of the report and it was confirmed that 10 council homes out of the 111 homes in total related to applications where the Council was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The New Local Plan - First Steps Engagement consultation document (Appendix A) is the first step in preparing the New Local Plan and provides the opportunity for residents, businesses and other local stakeholders to shape the New Local Plan from the beginning, identifying key issues and challenges the borough faces and preferences for various possible options.

Rob Krzyszowski, Interim Assistant Director Planning, Building Standards & Sustainability, introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

Bryce Tudball, Planning Policy Team Manager, outlined the report and the appendices, as set out in the agenda.

Members of the Committee raised the following questions and observations on the report and appendices:-

·                It was felt that the images used on pages 58 and 128 of the gun shop were inappropriate.

·                A number of minor mistakes in the word processing of the document were identified, which needed to be amended.

·                Pages 69 – the opportunity for new leisure and cultural provision listed on page 70 should also be listed on page 69.

·                It was believed that the green space referred to on the map on page 117 was Muswell Hill golf course.

·                The number of wards identified on page 203 should be 9 and not 8 as listed.

·                It was important to be consistent with the use of either old or new Wards.

·                It was felt that the image used for the cycle superhighway should be more inclusive.

·                Could an update be given on Cross Rail 2 as it was felt that a lot of the information was based on this.

·                Pages 49 and 55 – it was felt that the colours used made it difficult to read the information in the various panels.

·                Page 97 – the use of the image used on this page could be contentious.

·                Some of the language used was not accessible for every reader. It was felt that the document was too large and should be structured in a way on the website that it could be split up into sections, to be make it more accessible.

·                Members questioned who would carry out the consultation work.

·                Page 50 – did all of the borough’s parks have a green flag now?

·                Page 51 – it was suggested that the jobs statistics from June 20 are dated and may not reflect the latest position. It was requested that the document provide more up to date information if available.

·                Page 86 – The map only identified one tube station but did not reflect the nearby tube stations in neighbouring boroughs.

·                Page 87 – The Odeon cinema had changed to an Everyman cinema around 3 years ago.

·                Page 100 – it was unclear how the Council’s proposal to secure affordable housing from developments of all size fits with the Government’s consultation proposal to increase the affordable housing threshold.

·                Page 101 – it was important that developers build affordable housing rather than accept payments in lieu; this also applies to securing carbon neutral developments rather than accepting offsets.

·                Page 203 – it was questioned where the information was sources regarding the level of deprivation in the borough.

·                It suggested that the RNLB could be used to ensure that the document was accessible.

·                Page 301 – was the BMG survey up to date?

·                Look at the issue of car free developments and workmen and women not being able to park their vans.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

This report provides information on the content of both consultations, sets out the Council’s response to the Changes to the current planning system (which was submitted in advance of the closing date of 1 October 2020), and invites comment on the Council’s draft response to the Planning for the Future White Paper which must be submitted by 29 October 2020.

Rob Krzyszowski, Interim Assistant Director Planning, Building Standards & Sustainability, introduced the report, as set out in the agenda.

Members of the Committee raised the following questions and observations on the report and appendices:-

·                In response to a question regarding the proposed changes to the current planning system and whether the Government had given a timescale for this, it was explained that the proposal was to bring some secondary legislation later this year. It was however felt that this was optimistic and that full implementation could not be achieved by the end of this year.

·                Reference was made to some information in appendix A also being included in appendix B, especially around the determination of affordable housing. In response it was confirmed that this would be made clear in both appendices in the final version.

·                Concern was raised regarding the levy and whether it would disadvantage Haringey. In response, it was explained that further detail was required from the Government to understand the impact of the proposals. Mr Tudball added that the service would not agree with a standardised national levy, which would disadvantage Haringey due to the differing values across the country and London. This point had been made clear in their response.

RESOLVED that:

A)        The response to the changes to the current planning system consultation, which was submitted on 1 October 2020, be noted.

B)        The Regulatory Committee provide comments on the draft response to the Planning for the Future White Paper ahead of its submission by 29 October 2020.

None.

14 January 2021

11 March 2021

14 January 2021