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 lateness were received from Councillor Bevan.

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.

None.

Councillors Christophides, J Mann and Waters informed the Chair that they were Trustees of Alexandra Palace and Park, who had submitted comments on HGY/2017/2886 and HGY/2017/3020. 

Councillor B Blake informed the Chair that she had chaired a community reference group in her capacity as St Anns ward councillor.  She did not vote, or express any views on application HGY/2018/0382.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 12 March 2018

TO FOLLOW

NOTED that the minutes of 12 March had not been circulated for approval and would be submitted to the next meeting.

Proposal: Demolition of existing building and erection of a 6-9 storey building providing 160 residential flats (Use Class C3), medical centre (Use Class D1), retail (Use Classes A1-A4) and a flexible retail / office unit (Use Classes A1-A4 and B1), plus associated infrastructure and landscaping works.

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Demolition of existing building and erection of a 6-9 storey building providing 160 residential flats (Use Class C3), medical centre (Use Class D1), retail (Use Classes A1-A4) and a flexible retail / office unit (Use Classes A1-A4 and B1), plus associated infrastructure and landscaping works.

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

Wakako Hirose spoke on behalf of LaSalle Investment Management in objection to the application.  She raised concerns in relation to the masterplan, and the short timescale of the consultation period, and stated that there was insufficient time available to consider the technical aspects of the document.  She request that the Committee defer the decision to allow further time for consideration of the masterplan.

In response to questions from the Committee, Ms Hirose explained that the masterplan showed a lot of public amenity space, which appeared to burden her client’s site in terms of infrastructure. 

Councillor Ahmet addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She referred to the 20% affordable housing, which had been accepted on viability grounds, but pointed out that this was not in line with the policy.  She also referred to traffic / highways and environmental factors and commented that officers needed to mindful of how to approach this strategically in the area.

In response, Emma Williamson explained that the Wood Green Area Action Plan was a portfolio approach and officers were working on how affordable housing would be funded in Wood Green.  There were some 100% affordable housing schemes in the pipeline.

Louise Overton, Planning Consultant, spoke in support of the application.  The application had been a result of four years of working with the project team and planning officers.  The site had presented difficult challenges, however the plans maximised the potential.  There would be 32 affordable homes, retail space and a medical centre.  The application had been reviewed by the Quality Review Panel on three occasions, who considered the designs to be successful. 

Officers responded to questions from the Committee:

-           Funding for the NHS facility had been secured in theory, however there was a process to be followed to approve the business plan.  If the process timetable was not followed, then this may affect the funding however the developer has committed to building the medical centre and renting the space to NHS GPs.

-           Affordable housing would be allocated to blocks four and one, however the building design would not differentiate between different tenures.

The Chair MOVED that the application be GRANTED and following a vote, with ten in favour, and no abstentions or refusals, it was

RESOLVED

i)          That the Committee GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Development Management or Assistant Director Planning is authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives subject to the signing of a section 106 Legal Agreement providing for the obligation set out in the Heads of Terms below and subject to receiving no objection from the Environment  ...  view the full minutes text for item 191.

Proposal: Partial demolition, change of use and extension of the Chocolate Factory buildings. Demolition of the remaining buildings and redevelopment to create four new build blocks ranging in height from three up to 18 storeys. Mixed use development comprising 10,657 sq.m (GIA) of commercial floorspace (flexible Use Classes A1, A3, B1, D1 and D2), 230 Class C3 residential units together with associated residential and commercial car parking, public realm works and access. This application is accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment.

Recommendation: GRANT

Clerks note: Councillor Bevan arrived at 20.00 and did not take part in the discussion or voting of this item.

The Committee considered an application for: Partial demolition, change of use and extension of the Chocolate Factory buildings. Demolition of the remaining buildings and redevelopment to create four new build blocks ranging in height from three up to 18 storeys. Mixed use development comprising 10,657 sq.m (GIA) of commercial floorspace (flexible Use Classes A1, A3, B1, D1 and D2), 230 Class C3 residential units together with associated residential and commercial car parking, public realm works and access. This application is accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment.

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

Yousaf Ali Khan addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He was a current tenant at the Chocolate Factory and requested that the Committee ensure that studio spaces were made available long-term, with rent reviews capped at no more than 5%.  The purpose of the arts spaces was to provide affordable space for local artists at the core of the cultural quarter.

Yana Stajno addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  She requested a guarantee from the developers that the studio spaces would be rented to artists for £20per square foot as stated, and that these spaces would be permanent art spaces.  She added that the space being provided to art space was half the original space, and this would lead to a loss of diverse arts space.

Councillor Elliott spoke in objection to the application.  She raised concerns over the loss of provision of affordable workspace for artists.  The cultural heritage in Wood Green had grown over the past 20 years due to the artist space at the Chocolate Factory.  Collage Arts were requesting 2000sqm of space, and the offer from the developers was 1000sqm – half of the space required to retain the artists.

Councillor Ahmet spoke in objection to the application.  She informed the Committee of issues that had been raised by those affected by the development.  There were concerns that there would be a loss of community due to organisations being moved to other premises. 

Ian Dubber, applicant, spoke in support of the application.  This application was the result of three years of preparation, and had been presented to three Quality Review Panels.  The development would provide 230 residential units, 35% of which would be affordable.  There would be a number of jobs created at the construction phase and in the business space created.  The floorspace to be provided to Collage Arts would be provided at 35% discounted rent for 10 years and would be offered to artists first, as it was important that the cultural links were maintained.  The rents would be reviewed, but capped at 5%.  There was a fund for the relocation of businesses, and it would offer financial support for local relocation.  The developer owned four other buildings locally, and would support any moves locally in Wood Green.

The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 192.

Proposal: Erection of atwo-storey hospital building for mental health patients, which will provide 4 wards, for up to 70 mental health inpatients.

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Erection of atwo-storey hospital building for mental health patients, which will provide 4 wards, for up to 70 mental health inpatients.

The Planning Officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.  The 2015 application was a hybrid application, and the two elements had since been separated.

Helen, a local nurse and member of the St Anns Redevelopment Trust (START), addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  START had been involved in creating the masterplan for the development.  Their main objection was to the carpark and boundary wall and considered that the barrier would make it impossible to create a porous border between the hospital and housing.  There needed to be mutually beneficial plans in place so that the border was a shared resource.

In response, Emma Williamson informed the Committee that condition 5 stated the need for the Planning Service to approve boundary plans and have further discussions.

Andrew Wright, Director of Strategic Development - Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust – spoke in support of the application.  There was an urgent need for mental health wards at St Anns, and the current provision fell far short of NHS standards.  The design reflected visits to other units, and the input of patients and carers.  In relation to the boundary, there was an issue with the security of the site which was currently sealed at night, but the Trust would be willing to discuss options with the Planning Service.

The Chair moved that the application be granted and following a unanimous vote it was

RESOLVED

i.          That the Committee GRANT planning permission and that the Head of Development Management or Assistant Director for Planning is authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives subject to the signing of a section 106 Legal Agreement providing for the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below.

ii.         That the section 106 legal agreement referred to in resolution (i) above is to be completed no later than 25^th April 2017 or within such extended time as the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning shall in his/her sole discretion allow; and

iii.        That, following completion of the agreement(s) referred to in resolution (i) within the time period provided for in resolution (ii) above, planning permission shall be granted in accordance with the Planning Application subject to the attachment of the conditions.

iv.        That, in the absence of the agreement referred to in resolution (i) above being completed within the time period provided for in resolution (ii) above, the planning permission be refused for the following reasons:

1.    The proposed development in the absence of a legal agreement to work with the Haringey Employment Delivery Partnership would fail to support local employment, regeneration and address local unemployment by facilitating training opportunities for the local population. As such, the proposal is contrary to Local Plan Policies  ...  view the full minutes text for item 193.

To consider any items admitted at item 4 above.

None.