Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED

·         That the Chair’s announcement regarding the filming of the meeting for live or subsequent broadcast be noted.

Apologies were received from Cllr Patterson for whom Cllr Sahota substituted.

The Chair identified that an objection to the application had been submitted on behalf of the Tottenham Labour Party. Cllrs Akwasi-Ayisi, Basu, Bevan, Carroll, Gunes, Mallett and Rice individually confirmed their membership of the Tottenham Labour Party but declared that none of them had been party to discussions on the application and/or contributed to the submission of the subsequent objection.

One of the objectors to the application alleged that a number of Planning Committee Members had previously expressed views in support of the provision of housing on the St Ann’s site. The Legal Officer advised that the Localism Act allowed for Planning Committee Members to hold a view on an application provided they retained an open mind in determining the application based on its merits. It was identified that no Member of the Committee had made a declaration on holding a predetermined view of the application.

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 16 February.

RESOLVED

·         That the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 16 February be approved.

Demolition within conservation area and construction of residential buildings, conversion of retained buildings and outline applications.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions and a s106 Legal Agreement.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for demolition within a conservation area and construction of residential buildings, conversion of retained buildings and outline applications. 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. The attention of the Committee was drawn to a tabled addendum setting out a number of minor amendments to the report, details of further representations received since the publication of the agenda including submitted petitions, and an additional condition prohibiting the erection of satellite antenna.

Officers outlined to the Committee the rationale behind the hybrid application approach and the underpinning residential enabling development principle of the scheme to secure a capital receipt to facilitate the redevelopment and reprovision of health services onsite. The impact of this approach on the subsequent affordable housing contribution calculated at 14% was set out.

A number of objectors addressed the Committee and raised the following points regarding the application:

• The application contravened schedule 1 of the Unitary Development Plan and draft Site Allocations Policy awaiting adoption. 

• The new residential units would have a significant impact on school place demand in the area.

• The scheme did not comply with the Council’s 50% affordable housing target or the London Plan and was located in an area with an existing shortage of affordable housing for local people including key workers.

• Greater consideration should have been given by the applicant, the Barnet Enfield and Haringey (BEH) Mental Health Trust, to alternative innovative, long terms approaches to secure the future of the site and allow it to be retained as public land for the benefit of the local community such as the construction of new social housing funded by Council borrowing.

• The Trust had presented the sell off of part of the site as the only solution to austerity cuts.

• Sufficient engagement had not been undertaken with the Haringey Needs St Ann’s campaign group during the consultation exercise.

• Evidence had not been provided by the Trust to support the basic premise that the site was surplus to requirements.

• The mental health services currently provided onsite had been subject to managed decline and were insufficient to meet current demand.

• There was an under provision of GP services in the wider area and increasing coverage should have been considered as part of the scheme. 

• New investment was welcomed for the site but concerns were raised that the scheme would not address the needs of the local community by restricting the proportion of land allocated for health services thereby risking that capacity would be insufficient to meet future demand based on growth projections for London, in particular the number of inpatient beds provided

• The land values used  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

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.

The Committee considered an update on major planning proposals in the pipeline.

Clarification was sought on whether a further application for the Spurs stadium scheme covering the provision of additional seating would come before the Committee. Officers advised that Spurs had not to date submitted an application.

RESOLVED

·         That the update be noted.

To advise of decisions taken under delegated powers between 1 February and 28 February 2015.

The Committee considered an update report on applications determined under delegated powers between 1 and 28 February 2015.

RESOLVED

·         That the report be noted.

Special Planning Committee on 25 March, 7pm.

Special Planning Committee 25 March.