Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Schmitz, for whom Cllr Wilson was substituting.

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 new items of urgent business. A revised version of the minutes of the previous meeting, held on 5^th December 2011, had been circulated in advance of the meeting in relation to agenda item 5.

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member’s judgement of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct.

There were no declarations of interest.

To consider receiving deputations and/or petitions in accordance with Part Four, Section B, Paragraph 29 of the Council’s Constitution.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 5^th December 2011.

The Sub Committee considered the revised version of the minutes of the 5^th December 2011 meeting, which replaced the version originally included in the agenda pack to include the conditions attached to those planning applications granted.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 December 2011 be approved and signed by the Chair.

Additional third story comprising 3 x one bedroom units and formation of additional 2 x one bedroom units at lower ground floor.

The Sub Committee resolved to vary the order of the agenda to take agenda item 10 next, followed by item 9 and then items 6 and 7.

The Sub Committee considered a report, previously circulated, regarding an application for planning permission at 58 Jameson Lodge, Shepherds Hill, N6. The application set out details of the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses and analysis of the application. The report recommended that permission be granted, subject to conditions. An appeal decision in respect of a previous application on the site had been circulated for the information of Sub Committee Members. The Planning Officer gave a presentation outlining the key aspects of the report and responded to questions from Sub Committee Members.

In response to a question regarding the difference between the application which had previously been refused and the current application, the Planning Officer advised that the previous proposal extended over the entire roof area and it was felt that this would be visually intrusive in relation to neighbouring Panorama Court, while the current application for the development of the roof area was set back on the side facing Panorama Court. It was confirmed that the proposals for the lower ground floor had no planning history. It was further confirmed that the proposal did not include any expansion of the existing parking area.

Cllr Paul Strang, Ward Councillor, and three local residents addressed the Committee in objection to the proposal, and raised the following points:

• The needs of and impact on local residents were not taken into account;
• There were no feasible refuse arrangements proposed, and current arrangements were inadequate for existing occupants of the site;
• The proposal did not incorporate a mix of different-sized units, to reflect the housing needs in the area;
• The proposal would result in loss of sunlight to at least one nearby residence;
• No consideration had been given to the impact on the Conservation Area – the proposed addition to the roof would make the building much higher than surrounding buildings and the contrasting materials proposed would be incompatible with the Conservation Area environment;
• Parking arrangements would be inadequate to cope with increased occupation of the site;
• There was concern that this could lead to ‘development creep’;
• There would be a loss of communal space as more residents were required to share the same outdoor amenity and there would be a loss of access to potential internal storage space, although this was currently not used under the terms of the current leaseholds;
• The proposal represented over-development of a small site;
• The scheme would be visually intrusive and should be set back further at the roof level;
• Disturbance during construction of the scheme would cause significant distress to existing residents;

In response to questions from the Committee to the objectors, the following issues were covered;

• Residents were concerned that there would be an application to expand the parking area in future, resulting in a loss of existing soft landscaping;
• There were concerns that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

Permission is sought for the permanent use as a Police Patrol Base (Sui Generis).

The Committee considered a report, previously circulated, which set out the application for planning permission for permanent use of premises as sui generis (police use)  at Units 1 and 2 Quicksilver Place, Western Road, N22 6UH. The report covered details of the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses and analysis of the application. The Planning Officer gave a presentation outlining key points of the application, and responded to questions from the Committee.

In response to a question from the Committee regarding land use in this area, it was confirmed that outside of the major Heartlands development proposed for the area north of Clarendon Road and south of Coburg Road, other applications in the area were being considered on a site-by-site basis. There was a focus on not impacting on the growth of cultural businesses in the Chocolate Factory vicinity. It was confirmed that the Committee had the option to grant permission for a time-limited period, but that this was not recommended by officers and that valid planning reasons would be required if such a decision were to be taken.

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report and it was:

RESOLVED

That application HGY/2011/1415 be approved, subject to conditions.

Conditions:

1. The permission hereby granted shall not endure for the benefit of the land but shall bepersonal to the Metropolitan Police Authority only, and shall be upon the Metropolitan Police Authority ceasing to use the land the use shall be discontinued and shall revert to the authorised use as General Industrial (B2).

Reason: Permission has only been granted with respect to the special circumstances of the applicant and would not otherwise be granted.

2. The development hereby authorised shall be carried out in complete accordance with the plans and specifications submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the approved details and in the interests of amenity.

REASONS FOR APPROVAL

The proposal is approved on the grounds that the use would not interfere with the regeneration of Haringey Heartlands and has successfully been in operation for the last 6 years without causing detriment to the amenities of any local residents by way of noise and disturbances. In addition there is a clear need to retain the patrol base as this would help to meet the need for Police Facilities as identified in the Community Infrastructure Plan. As such the proposal is in compliance with Policies UD3 'General Principles', ENV6 'Noise Pollution' and EMP1 'Defined Employment Areas' of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan.

Section 106: No

To advise the Sub Committee on Appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during November 2011.

The Sub Committee considered a report on appeal decisions determined by the Department for Communities and Local Government during November 2011 of which 3 (25%) were allowed and 9 were dismissed.

NOTED

To inform the Sub Committee of decisions made under delegated powers by the Head of Development Management and the Chair of the above Sub Committee between 21^st November 2011 and 18^th December 2011.

The Sub Committee considered a report on decisions made under delegated powers by the Head of Development Management and the Chair of the Sub Committee between 21 November and 18 December 2011.

NOTED

To consider any items admitted at item 2 above.

There were no new items of urgent business.

13 February 2012, 7pm.

Monday, 13 February 2012, 7pm.

 It was reported that it was intended that this meeting be used for consideration of three applications in respect of the Tottenham Hotspur development at Northumberland Park and that a special meeting would be scheduled for consideration of other planning applications for this month. A guidance note on declarations of interest in respect of the Spurs applications would be circulated to Members in advance of the meeting, and Members were encouraged to contact officers in Legal Services for advice on this issue if needed.

The meeting closed at 20:40hrs.