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.

Noted.

The Planning Committee abides by the Council’s Planning Protocol 2017.  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.

Noted.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Basu and Councillor Barbara Blake.

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 13 below.

None.

None.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 15 January 2018 and 12 February 2018.

RESOLVED

·         That the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 15 January 2018 and 12 February 2018 be approved.

Proposal: Submission of reserved matters namely a) Scale, b) Layout, c) Landscaping, and d) Appearance of outline planning permission reference HGY/2016/2184 dated 21/12/2017 for 54 affordable residential units (Class C3) (12 x 1 bed, 24 x 2 bed and 18 x 3 bed units) in three blocks ranging in height from 4-stories to 5-stories

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Submission of reserved matters namely a) Scale, b) Layout, c) Landscaping, and d) Appearance of outline planning permission reference HGY/2016/2184 dated 21/12/2017 for 54 affordable residential units (Class C3) (12 x 1 bed, 24 x 2 bed and 18 x 3 bed units) in three blocks ranging in height from 4-stories to 5-stories

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

Rachel Donald addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She felt that the development would cause unacceptable harm to the community and surrounding buildings due to the loss of daylight and sunlight.  She informed the Committee thart she had commissioned a daylight and sunlight report which highlighted a number of discrepancies in the report in the application.  Ms Donald requested that the application be refused due to the loss of sunlight and daylight for surrounding properties.

Ben Burgerman, Legal Officer for the Council, informed the Committee that the right to light was not a material planning consideration.  He added that this application was for reserved matters, and the Committee could not consider areas that were decided at the outline stage.

The Committee noted the following in response to their comments and questions:

-           The cycle parking would be integrated within the blocks.

-           Ventilation systems would be installed, and this was as in all modern housing regardless of location.  This was not an expensive system to maintain.

-           There would be an environmental management plan to deal with the construction noise.

-           The 3 bed units had separate kitchen and living spaces, and the 1-2 bed units had combined kitchen and living spaces.

-           The balconies all projected on to Fairbanks Road, and had solid fronts.

The Chair moved that the application be granted, and following a vote, with seven members voting in favour and one abstention, it was:

RESOLVED

i           That the Committee GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning is authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives as set out below.

ii          That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning to make any alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended conditions as set out in this report and to further delegate this power provided this authority shall be exercised in consultation with the Chairman (or in their absence the Vice-Chairman) of the Sub-Committee.

CONDITIONS

COMPLIANCE: Time limit for implementation (LBH Development Management)

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.

COMPLIANCE: Development in accordance with approved drawings and documents (LBH Development Management)

2.            The approved plans comprise drawing numbers and documents:

Site plans:

16017_00_07_001 Planning  ...  view the full minutes text for item 178.

Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a part 1,3, 4,5,6,7 storey mixed use development comprising 25 Commercial Units (B1), music rehearsal space (Sui Generis), a café (A3), Commercial Pavilion (Sui Generis) (2446.9sqm), and 99 Residential Units (C3) including 12 apartments tethered to the commercial space, plus site access, landscaping, plant and other associated development. 

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a part 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 storey mixed use development comprising 25 Commercial Units (B1), music rehearsal space (Sui Generis), a café (A3), Commercial Pavilion (Sui Generis) (2446.9sqm), and 99 Residential Units (C3) including 12 apartments tethered to the commercial space, plus site access, landscaping, plant and other associated development. 

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

Suzanne Asher addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She argued that the development was in contravention of a number of policy areas, and was contrary to the development plan.  The development was out of character for the area, and the scale did not correspond with the two storey buildings surrounding it.  The size of the development would lead to a 75-100% loss of daylight and sunlight to the bedrooms of several properties in the surrounding area.

Shirley Vaughan addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  There were 80 homes in the local area which were opposed to the development.  The application was in contravention to planning policies and the Tottenham Area Action Plan.  She referred to the loss of commercial space, trees and open recreational space.  The development was unacceptable for the area.

Officers responded to questions from the Committee:

-           Tall builders were defined as 10 storeys and over.  This application complies with the definition of taller buildings.

-           The new recreation space would cover 1000sqm, with a higher quality provision rather than just a grassed area.

-           There was no affordable housing in the development, as this was an employment led application.  In order for the employment space to be provided, it would not be viable to include affordable housing.  The 40% affordable housing target was borough wide, and this development would be included as part of the wider area action plan.

Councillor Diakides addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He stated that the ward councillors and local residents wanted regeneration and investment in the area but that this was not suitable.  The proposal breached most planning policies and was opposed by local residents. 

Councillor Vanier addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She stressed the issue of residents on Ashby Road being overlooked, the loss of privacy and loss of light, and stated that she did not believe that this had been addressed strongly enough. 

The Chair referred to pages 118 and 119 of the report and clarified that there were four people who had written in support of the application.

Officers responded to questions from the Committee:

-           The scheme did not contravene planning policies, and officers had recommended that the scheme was compliant.

-           Access to open space was part of the s106 agreement, and would be fully accessible 24 hours per day in perpetuity.

Nick Hartwright spoke on behalf of The Mill Co. Project in support of the application.  He explained that the important thing about the scheme was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 179.

Proposal: Submission of Reserved Matters, namely a) Layout, b) Scale, c) Appearance and d) Landscaping pertaining to Outline Permission ref. HGY/2016/0828 for mixed use redevelopment to comprise the demolition of existing buildings/ structures and associated site clearance and erection of new buildings / structures to provide 144 residential units, employment uses (Use Class B1 and B8), retail uses (Use Class A1 and A3), community uses (Use Class D1) associated access, parking and servicing space, infrastructure, public realm works and ancillary development.

NB: This reserved matters application also deals with the layout and location of the employment use, which under the outline planning consent is located at the rear of the site and adjacent to Block 4. The layout now changes where the employment use is located at the front of the site on ground floor and first floor of block 1. The amount of commercial floorspace does not increase but as consented under the outline planning consent. A substation will be located in its place to the north west of the site.

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Submission of Reserved Matters, namely a) Layout, b) Scale, c) Appearance and d) Landscaping pertaining to Outline Permission ref. HGY/2016/0828 for mixed use redevelopment to comprise the demolition of existing buildings/ structures and associated site clearance and erection of new buildings / structures to provide 144 residential units, employment uses (Use Class B1 and B8), retail uses (Use Class A1 and A3), community uses (Use Class D1) associated access, parking and servicing space, infrastructure, public realm works and ancillary development.

NB: This reserved matters application also deals with the layout and location of the employment use, which under the outline planning consent is located at the rear of the site and adjacent to Block 4. The layout now changes where the employment use is located at the front of the site on ground floor and first floor of block 1. The amount of commercial floorspace does not increase but as consented under the outline planning consent. A substation will be located in its place to the north west of the site.

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

NK Guy addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He believed that community concerns had been dismissed by planning officers in the report, and stated that the increase in housing would lead to accidents on the road, as there was no pedestrian crossing available.

Ursula Riniker addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She considered that the high rise, high denisty development was not acceptable to the area.  The buildings next to the development were two storey houses, and to put six storeys next to them was excessive.  She referred to the 2m high flumes which had not been included in the outline permission and stated that these would create an unacceptable eyesore as well as further polluting the area.  She requested that the Committee refuse the application.

Officers responded to questions from the Committee:

-           The development had outline planning permission for three to six storeys across the site.

-           It was a good idea to have the majority of the development to be fenced with controlled access due to the convoluted development.  The fencing was desinged to be open with landscaping, and a high degree of visible permeability, which was a change to the current fencing.

-           The location had not been identified as having raod safety issues.  A zebra crossing and upgrades to existing islands near to the petrol station had been negotiated.

Councillor Adje requested clarification on a number of points: the location of the social housing units; the set-up for kitchen  / living space in the family units; and the creation of the cross roads at Devonshire Gardens.  In response, officers confirmed that the affordable housing would be located in one block at the back of the site.  The reason for this was that Haringey Council were purchasing the properties, and wanted to keep all of the properties in the same block  ...  view the full minutes text for item 180.

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.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To advise the Planning Committee of decisions on planning applications taken under delegated powers for the period 29 January – 23 February 2018.

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

To consider any items admitted at item 4 above.

None.

20 March 2018

20 March 2018.