Agenda and draft 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 referred to the notice of filming at meetings and this information was noted.?? 

Cllr Emery welcomed members of the committee, welcoming back Councillors Bevan, Amin Jameson and Carlin who were previous members of the committee. He noted that through members knowledge and understanding of Haringey, they could truly shape the borough and reflect the needs of the residents that they served. 

Cllr Bevan, vice chair of the committee, flagged that he was the design champion for the council and encouraged members to engage with Urban Design Learning and New London Architecture. 

The Planning Committee abides by the Council’s Planning Protocol 2025.  A factsheet covering some of the key points within the protocol as well as some of the context for Haringey’s planning process is provided alongside the agenda pack available to the public at each meeting as well as on the Haringey Planning Committee webpage.

The planning system manages the use and development of land and buildings.  The overall aim of the system is to ensure a balance between enabling development to take place and conserving and protecting the environment and local amenities.  Planning can also help tackle climate change and overall seeks to create better public places for people to live, work and play.  It is important that the public understand that the committee makes planning decisions in this context.  These decisions are rarely simple and often involve balancing competing priorities.  Councillors and officers have a duty to ensure that the public are consulted, involved and where possible, understand the decisions being made.

Neither the number of objectors or supporters nor the extent of their opposition or support are of themselves material planning considerations.

The Planning Committee is held as a meeting in public and not a public meeting.  The right to speak from the floor is agreed beforehand in consultation with officers and the Chair.  Any interruptions from the public may mean that the Chamber needs to be cleared.

The Chair referred to the planning protocol and this information was noted.

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from?Cllr Hodges and Cllr Brands.

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 11 below.

There were no items of urgent business.

A member with a disclosable pecuniary interest or a prejudicial interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered:

(i) must disclose the interest at the start of the meeting or when the interest becomes apparent, and

(ii) may not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must withdraw from the meeting room.

A member who discloses at a meeting a disclosable pecuniary interest which is not registered in the Register of Members’ Interests or the subject of a pending notification must notify the Monitoring Officer of the interest within 28 days of the disclosure.

Disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests and prejudicial interests are defined at Paragraphs 5-7 and Appendix A of the Members’ Code of Conduct

There were no declarations of interest.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 5^th March as a correct record.

RESOLVED

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 8^th March as a correct record.

The following items are pre-application presentations to the Planning Sub-Committee and discussion of proposals.

Notwithstanding that this is a formal meeting of the Sub-Committee, no decision will be taken on the following items and any subsequent applications will be the subject of a report to a future meeting of the Sub-Committee in accordance with standard procedures.

The provisions of the Localism Act 2011 specifically provide that a Councillor should not be regarded as having a closed mind simply because they previously did or said something that, directly or indirectly, indicated what view they might take in relation to any particular matter.  Pre-application briefings provide the opportunity for Members to raise queries and identify any concerns about proposals.

The Members’ Code of Conduct and the Planning Protocol 2016 continue to apply for pre-application meeting proposals even though Members will not be exercising the statutory function of determining an application.  Members should nevertheless ensure that they are not seen to pre-determine or close their mind to any such proposal otherwise they will be precluded from participating in determining the application or leave any decision in which they have subsequently participated open to challenge.

It was explained to members, by the Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement, that the purpose of pre-application briefings was set out in the Planning Protocol within the Council’s Constitution. The main purposes were: 

• To enable Members to provide observations that supported high-quality development through the pre-application process and helped avoid potential delays at later stages. 

• To enable Members to highlight strategic Council and local planning objectives and requirements set out in planning policy and guidance that were particularly relevant to a proposal. 

• To ensure Members were aware of significant schemes prior to their formal consideration by the Planning Sub-Committee. 

• To support more informed and effective decision-making when applications were subsequently presented to the Planning Sub-Committee for determination. 

Retention and alteration of the Former Lotus Motor Racing Car Factory, the demolition of all other buildings and structures on site, and the construction of a mixed-use development, comprising Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis), flexible industrial floorspace (Classes E(g)(iii) and B8), and a café / community use (Classes E, F1 and F2), alongside the delivery of a service road, a landscaped public square, public realm improvements and ancillary works

Valerie Okeyi, Principal Planning Officer, introduced the report for retention and alteration of the Former Lotus Motor Racing Car Factory, the demolition of all other buildings and structures on site, and the construction of a mixed-use development, comprising Purpose Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) (Sui Generis), flexible industrial floorspace (Classes E(g)(iii) and B8), and a café / community use (Classes E, F1 and F2), alongside the delivery of a service road, a landscaped public square, public realm improvements and ancillary works. 

The following was noted in response to questions from the Committee: 

• The applicant advised that car ownership amongst students was expected to be very low. This approach had been developed in consultation with Transport Officers and the Greater London Authority (GLA). No student car ownership was anticipated due to the site’s accessibility and public transport connections. 

• One parking space was proposed for wheelchair users and accessible drop-off purposes. The applicant stated that residents would generally not be expected to own cars whilst living in the development. 

• In relation to affordable housing, the applicant advised that 35% of the 518 purpose-built student accommodation rooms would be provided at affordable rents in accordance with GLA requirements, equating to approximately 181 rooms. 

• Members noted that 10% of rooms would be wheelchair accessible whilst only one Blue Badge parking space was proposed. The applicant acknowledged this and advised that the number of accessible parking spaces would be reviewed further as the proposal progressed. 

• The applicant advised that all its developments typically included community space at ground-floor level. These spaces were generally made available to community interest companies (CICs) and charities either rent-free or at heavily discounted rates. 

• A community organisation had not yet been identified for the space, although discussions with potential operators were ongoing. 

• The applicant advised that the space would be available free of charge for community events at certain times, with discounted rental arrangements applying at other times. 

• In relation to transport impacts, the applicant confirmed that engagement had taken place with Transport for London (TfL) during the pre-application process and that further discussions would continue as the application progressed. 

• The applicant advised that neighbouring buildings on the opposite side of the railway were 14 storeys in height, whereas the proposed development would be 16 storeys, making it two storeys taller. 

• Secure cycle storage would be provided to the rear of the workspace area, with separate and secure access arrangements for students. 

• The applicant advised that London Plan policy allowed developments retaining industrial capacity on industrial sites to follow the Fast Track Route where 35% affordable housing was provided. The GLA had agreed with the applicant’s methodology during pre-application discussions. 

• As the proposal would aim to meet the 35% affordable housing threshold, the applicants considered that no viability assessment would be required and the affordable provision would be secured through a Section 106 Agreement. 

• The applicant confirmed that calculations relating to industrial capacity included the service yard, which would be reserved solely for industrial users. This approach had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To advise of major proposals in the pipeline including those awaiting the issue of the decision notice following a committee resolution and subsequent signature of the section 106 agreement; applications submitted and awaiting determination; and proposals being discussed at the pre-application stage.

John McRory introduced the report for the item, the following was noted in response to questions from the committee: 

• YMCA application on Tottenham lane would come to the committee shortly as a briefing item. 

• Members queried why some of the proposals had been ongoing for some time. Officers were encouraging developers to sign section 106 agreements; there is need for were a lot of negotiations, which can cause delays.  

• Questions were raised regarding a preapplication proposal at Finsbury Park  for a theatre and the impact on the appearance of the corner of Finsbury Park. Officers explained that there were policy constraints with this preapplication. 

RESOLVED

To note the report.

To advise the Planning Committee of decisions on planning applications taken under delegated powers for the period 1/02/2026 – 30/04/2026.

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee: 

• It was noted that there are team managers for the East and West, and that John McRory is the Major Applications Team Manager. Team managers, along with their deputies, have an overview of all decisions being made within their respective areas. Through one-to-one meetings with officers, team managers maintain awareness of how similar cases have been dealt with in comparable locations, ensuring consistency across the board. However, it was emphasised that each application is considered on its own merits. 

• It was explained that some applications involving legal agreements are brought to Planning Sub Committee for decision, while others—typically smaller schemes—are determined by officers. A range of planning obligations could be secured as part of the planning process (generally via a S106 legal agreement), including the delivery of affordable housing, transport improvements, and specified levels or types of employment. 

• Where applications are reported to Planning Sub Committee for decision, the heads of terms of any legal agreement are presented for Members’ consideration and agreement. At that stage, the Committee resolve to grant consent. The case is then returned to officers to negotiate the finer details of the agreement. This involves ongoing discussions between officers and the applicant to finalise the terms and complete the legal agreement. It was confirmed that the agreed obligations would not change in substance, and that this stage addresses only the detailed wording and finalisation. 

• It was further noted that Planning Sub Committee reports typically include a recommendation to grant consent subject to conditions and completion of a legal agreement within a specified period of time. Where the agreement has not been completed by the specified date, officers have delegated authority to refuse permission for the reasons set out in the report to Planning Sub Committee  

RESOLVED

To note the report.

There were no new items of urgent business.

To note the date of the next meeting as 6^th July.

It was noted that the date of the next meeting was 27^th July.