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 Tabois.

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.

None.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 9 July 2018.

Councillor Say requested that she be marked as present at the meeting, and Councillor James requested further clarification on minute item 215, and the central road.

The minutes of the meeting on 9 July would be presented for approval at the next meeting of the Planning Sub Committee.

Proposal: Demolition of existing car repair/servicing garage and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 storey building to provide 15 residential units with 5 car parking spaces including 1 wheelchair car parking space, 24 cycle spaces and ancillary servicing accommodation.

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for: Demolition of existing car repair/servicing garage and construction of a part 3, part 4 and part 5 storey building to provide 15 residential units with 5 car parking spaces including 1 wheelchair car parking space, 24 cycle spaces and ancillary servicing accommodation.

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

Officers and the Applicant’s Representative responded to questions from the Committee:

-           The existing permissions were fine as they were, however, the applicant for the site had changed since permission was granted.  The new applicant felt that the new application was appropriate for the site.

-           With regard to affordable housing, a viability assessment had been carried out on the original scheme which suggested that there would be no affordable housing contribution.  There would be a contribution made towards the opening out of the entrance to the underpass, and improving visibility and safety.

-           A noise assessment study had been commissioned and a report was available.

-           With regard to the report provided by the Police, it was the applicant’s understanding that in relation to the original application there were concerns with the lack of surveillance over the area.  The new application has four storeys overlooking the entrance to the underpass, which would provide more surveillance.

-           Car club spaces had not as yet been identified, the Council would work with the applicant and the car club provider to identify a suitable location within the vicinity.

-           Occupants of the properties would not be able to apply for a residents permit under any future CPZ applications.

-           Officers had originally recommended a late stage viability review, however the developer had not been keen to agree to this.  The Council’s Lawyer advised that a decision had been made by the Court in May against the Mayor’s policy of setting viability at 75%, and this had now cast doubt over whether Councils can impose 75% viability on developments.

-           Payments for loss of employment floor space would be allocated to support employment growth in the general vicinity.

-           If trees were removed, they would be replaced.

-           The approved 12 unit scheme would only provide a £80,000 public realm contribution.  The current application had been submitted as unviable however, the consultants had concluded that the scheme could afford to pay increased contributions, including £190,000 for affordable housing in addition to the £80,000 for the public realm improvements, and a number of smaller contributions.  Officers considered this to be a better position.

The Council’s Lawyer advised that as Councillor Hinchcliffe had left the meeting during discussion of the application, he would not be able to take part in the rest of the discussion, or vote on the application in accordance with paragraph 5.78 of the Planning Protocol.

Councillor Cawley-Harrison moved an amendment to the conditions: that the £80,000 contribution be used solely for the underpass and public realm works within the immediate vicinity of the development; and that play space is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 226.

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.

Members noted the report, and were advised by officers that they could be contacted outside of Committee meetings for any further information.

To advise the Planning Committee of decisions on planning applications taken under delegated powers for the period 25 June – 24 August 2018.

The report was noted.

To consider any items admitted at item 4 above.

None.

8 October 2018

8 October 2018.