Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Cllrs Akwasi-Ayisi, Basu, Gunes and Stennett. 

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Special Planning Sub Committee held on 31 March and Planning Committee held on 7 April.

RESOLVED

·         That the minutes of the Special Planning Committee held on 31 March and Planning Committee on 7 April be approved. 

To advise the Committee 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. 

The Committee considered an update report on major proposals currently in the pipe line including those awaiting the issue of decision notice, applications awaiting determination and proposals at pre-application stage.

Clarification was sought on the reasons behind the delay with 159 Tottenham Lane. It was advised that this was due to the design for the rear elevation going through a number of iterations and ongoing discussions around viability.

RESOLVED

·         That the update be noted.

To advise of planning application decisions taken under delegated powers between 1 April – 31 May 2014. 

The Committee considered a report informing of planning application decisions taken under delegated powers from 1 April to 31 May 2014. This would be a regular report to Planning Committee in line with the new reporting arrangements under the revised planning protocol.

Cllr Carter sought clarification on the number of flat conversions regularised in Harringay ward by virtue of retrospective permission granted under delegated powers. Officers agreed to provide these figures to him after the meeting.

In response to a question, officers advised of limitations to the level of detail that could be provided within the report to further expand on the delegated decisions made due to the sheer number of applications but that officer delegated reports for each decision were available on the Council website.

RESOLVED

·         That the report be noted.

Construction of 1 x two storey, two bed dwelling to rear of property with rooms at basement level.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the construction of a 1x 2 storey, two bed dwelling on thesite. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission subject to conditions.

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report. The Committee’s attention was drawn to a table addendum clarifying a number of errors to separation distances provided within the plans.

A local resident addressed the Committee in objection to the application and raised the following points:

·         The location of the site within a conservation area and the subsequent importance of gardens and sights lines was considered to be one of the most important grounds for objection against the application.

·         The development would constitute ‘garden grabbing’ and would set a precedent for similar developments in the area, many of which had only modest size gardens.

·         The number of design iterations the application had been subjected to had caused confusion to local residents.

·         The development would reduce amenity space to number 38 Dagmar Road.

The applicant’s representative addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         The design represented a creative, high quality approach to the provision of new housing which was permissible due to the end of terrace plot.

·         Pre-consultation had been undertaken with the planning service which had resulted in a number of alterations such as the removal of a first floor etc in order to address planning issues raised.

·         In response to concerns from the Committee regarding the potential for future hydrological problems associated with the basement construction, confirmation was provided that a basement impact assessment had been undertaken and that Thames Water had raised no objections in response to the application. 

Members raised concern regarding the maintenance of the timber cladding proposed for the exterior of the development to prevent it becoming unsightly as it aged. Officers confirmed that the use of a hard wearing Scandinavian timber was proposed, samples for which the Council would need to approve in order to discharge the condition.

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report and it was

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2013/1420 be approved subject to conditions.

Applicant’s drawing No.(s) 291-02B, 02.1A, 03A, 04B, 05B, 06, 07D, 08A, 09B, 10C, 12C, 13A, 14B and 18 dated May 2014.

Subject to the following condition(s)

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.

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

Reason: In order to avoid doubt and in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Alteration to position of small wall of main building, soft landscaping to surroundings and installation of wooden climbing frame.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the alteration to position of a small wall of the main building of an indoor play centre located within the grounds of Alexandra Palace, soft landscaping to surroundings and installation of a wooden climbing frame. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission subject to conditions.

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

The Committee sought clarification on the permissions required for the bouncy castle sometimes used at the play centre. Officers confirmed that the planning application only covered permanent structures and that no permanent permission had been granted for the bouncy castle. The applicant was however permitted to have the bouncy castle in place for up to 28 days a year as a temporary structure. 

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report and it was

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2014/0589 be approved subject to conditions.

Applicant’s drawing No.(s) 213003/LDIN/P/E and 211007/LDIN/P/P

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.

2.         Notwithstanding the information submitted with the application, the development hereby permitted shall only be built in accordance with the following revised plans: 

213003/LDIN/P/E, 213001/LDIN/P/P Rev 1 June 2014, 213002/LDIN/EI/E, 213002/LDIN/EI/P, 214002/LDIN/CFP/P, 214001/LDIN/CFEI/P, 214008/LDIN/P/E&P, 214008/LDIN/P/E&P, 214007/LDIN/EI/E&P  and 211007/LDIN/P/P

Reason:  To avoid doubt and in the interests of good planning.

3.         The external materials to be used for the proposed wall relocation shall match in colour, size, shape and texture those of the existing building.

Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory appearance for the proposed development, to safeguard the visual amenity of neighbouring properties and the appearance of the locality consistent with Policy 7.6 of the London Plan 2011, Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

4.         Details of the exact area to covered in artificial grass/ Astroturf including a sample of the artificial grass/ Astroturf and method statement shall be submitted to LPA prior to the commencement of works on site.

Reason: In order to safeguard the look and amenity of natural grassland consistent with Policy 7.17 of the London Plan, Policy SP11 and SP13 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 and OS4 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

5.         The Astroturf, rubber mats and climbing frame hereby approved must be completely removed from the site once the use ceases and the parts of the land previously covered by the Astroturf must be restored to its natural grassland condition.

Reason: In order to safeguard the look  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Variation of condition 2 (plans and specifications) attached to planning reference HGY/2012/0214, to amended external elevations, design and materials of the previously approved scheme along with clarifying site levels reflecting accurate topographical survey information.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to the conditions of the previously approved consent and a deed of variation to the signed S106 agreement/ or new S106 agreement being first entered into.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the variation of condition 2 (plans and specifications) attached to planning permission HGY/2012/0214 to amend external elevations, design and materials of the previously approved scheme along with clarifying site levels. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission for the variation subject to conditions of the previously approved consent and a deed of variation to the signed s106 agreement or new s106 agreement being first entered into. 

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

Cllr Demirci addressed the Committee as a local ward Councillor and identified that although he did not have any objections to the scheme, concern had arisen regarding the applicant’s adherence to the Construction Management Plan conditioned under the original permission. In particular, the lack of provision of a dedicated wheel wash facility on site had resulted in dust and debris from the site being tracked down Imperial Road causing a nuisance to local residents and potentially blocking drains. Officers advised that condition 15 could be amended to explicitly require the provision and use of wheel washing facilities and the damping down of the site as part of dust management practices. Any continuing non-compliance issues could be addressed by the enforcement team if necessary.

The applicant acknowledged that there had been issues with dust and mud from construction traffic spreading to local roads due to the recent wet weather but that this had now been addressed through the completion of a new road surface on site and provision of a cattle grid arrangement to allow the washing of vehicle wheels prior to leaving the site.

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report including the amendment proposed to condition 15 as detailed above and it was

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2014/0558 be approved subject to conditions of the previously approved consent and a deed of variation to the signed s106 agreement or new s106 agreement being first entered into. 

Applicant’s drawing No.(s) 173-P-1- 001- Rev A,  173-P-1- 002- Rev A, 173-P-1- 003- Rev A, 173-P-1- 004- Rev B, 173-P-1- 005- Rev B, 173-P-1- 006- Rev B, 173-P-1- 010- Rev A, 173-P-1- 011- Rev A, 173-P-1- 012- Rev A, 173-P-1- 013- Rev A

TIME LIMIT

1.         The development hereby authorised must be begun not later than the expiration of 3 years from the date of 22^ND November 2012, 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.

PLANS

2.         Notwithstanding the information submitted with the application, the development hereby permitted shall only be built in accordance with the following approved plans: 173-P-1- 001- Rev A,  173-P-1- 002- Rev A, 173-P-1- 003- Rev A, 173-P-1- 004- Rev B, 173-P-1-  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

Demolition of existing building providing a 6 bedroom HMO (house in multiple occupation) and erection of a new building to provide 7 flats 3x1, 3x2 and 1x3 bed with amenity space, communal amenity space and covered cycle storage and refuse storage.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions and subject to sec. 106 Legal Agreement

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the demolition of the existing 6 bedroom house in multiple occupation at 2 Wakefield Road and erection of a new building to provide 7 flats with amenity space, communal amenity space and covered cycle and refuse storage. The report set out details of the proposal, the site and surroundings, planning history, relevant planning policy, consultation and responses, analysis, equalities and human rights implications and recommended to grant permission subject to conditions and subject to a s106 legal agreement.  

The planning officer gave a short presentation highlighting the key aspects of the report.

A number of residents addressed the Committee in objection to the application and raised the following points:

·         Notification of the Planning Committee meeting had been received late by local residents that had submitted written representation.

·         The current building on site was an eyesore, which the owner had allowed to deteriorate over time including association with drug dealing and use as a brothel and which had only been closed down through the action of local people in conjunction with the Police.

·         The design was out of keeping with the rest of the housing stock in the area and although it was recognised the current building required redevelopment, the design needed to be more sympathetic to the surrounding area. 

·         The applicant had made no attempts to engage with local residents in the development of the design for the scheme.

·         The new building would be too large in scale and height, double the depth of the current Victorian terraced housing in the vicinity and particularly dominating as a result of the considerable rear elevation.

·         Overshadowing and overlooking would be caused to neighbouring properties from both the windows and balconies proposed to the rear elevation.

·         The scheme represented overdevelopment of the site, with a significant increase in floorspace proposed from that approved under the previous application for 5 flats and which had been now been increased to 7 flats. The scheme would set a precedent in the area for the overdevelopment of sites.

·         Concerns were expressed that the green roofs proposed would not be adequately maintained and were likely to suffer from new occupants using them in an unauthorised way as additional amenity space.

·         Not all of the proposed flats met space and amenity minimum standards.

Cllrs Vanier and Diakides addressed the Committee in their capacity as ward Councillors and raised the following points:

·         Local residents felt that they had not been given enough time to prepare their case against the application due to late notification.

·         Redevelopment of the site was welcomed but the current application constituted overdevelopment and was out of scale and the design out of keeping with surrounding properties which could set a precedent in the area.

·         The building would potentially result in overshadowing to neighbouring properties.

·         Concerns were raised that the green roofs proposed would not be maintained.

·         The focus on the applicant appeared to be solely on extracting profit from the site to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

The next meeting is scheduled for 14 July.

The next scheduled meeting will be on 14 July.