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.

RESOLVED

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

Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs Basu, Doron and Ryan. Cllrs Gunes and Rice substituted.

Enlargement of the 4 existing flats by creating a third floor extension.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

The Chair advised that the item had been withdrawn from the agenda due to the applicant being unable to attend the meeting.

Demolition of existing building, construction of new road and construction of a lower ground, first, second and set back third storey building comprising of 31 new residential flats and 150 sq.m. of new office space.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the demolition of the existing building, construction of a new road and construction of a lower ground, first, second and set back third storey building comprising of 31 new residential flats and 150 sq.m. of new office space. 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. The planning officer advised of an amendment to the recommendation set out within the report which should read ‘to grant permission subject to conditions, a S106 legal agreement and S278 and S38 legal agreements’.

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

The Committee raised the following points in discussion of the application:

·         Clarification was sought on how the differing ground levels between the proposed communal garden space and the gardens on the adjacent Lido Square properties would be managed. It was advised that the communal garden would be at a raised level atop the car park and would be provided with a landscaping screen to reduce overlooking plus a stepped down approach using a 1.5m strip of land plus boundary treatment to bridge the gap between the different garden threshold levels.

·         Clarification was sought on the width of the new road and access arrangements for refuse vehicles. Officers confirmed that the road at 5.5m width would be compliant with Manual for Streets standards and although the design was at preliminary stage, would constitute an improvement on the current access road. The new road would be able to accommodate refuse vehicles.

·         The Chair expressed disappointment over the low level of affordable housing proposed and sought clarification on the proposed associated review mechanism. Officers advised that the contribution had been independently assessed as being at the maximum reasonable level, primarily a factor of the construction costs associated with the new road. Officers proposed an amendment to the affordable housing review mechanism set out within the report, to base the assessment on the build costs of the scheme, including construction of the new road, instead of the customary sale values in the area. The legal officer advised that the proposed s106 legal agreement Heads of Terms as set out within the report would require amendment to reflect the proposed change to the review mechanism and proposed that it be delegated to officers to set out the detailed terms.

The applicant provided further details of the extensive two year design process undertaken for the scheme including the production of outline plans for two schemes, with and without construction of a new road. The scheme incorporating the road had been progressed due to the associated benefits of opening up the rear of the site as well as improving the vicinity. A separate application, currently at pre-application stage, was being developed for the regeneration of the depot site to the rear and which was projected at the current time to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

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.

The following comments were made on applications:

2 Canning Crescent N22

It was requested that consideration be given to offering Homes for Haringey the opportunity to manage the onsite affordable housing units if a registered social landlord could not be found.

Tottenham Hotspur stadium redevelopment and 44 White Hart Lane

Cllr Bevan requested that discharge of a number of conditions under the approved application including details of match day road sweeping contributions and the community involvement programme come back before the Committee. The Head of Development Management advised that these elements were not conditioned but were s106 obligations and as such had been approved as part of the determination of the application by the Committee on 16 December. Revisiting this element would require a review of the whole decision. The Legal Officer urged the Committee to exercise extreme caution in discussions on potentially reopening a decision within a public meeting with no supporting papers and without the presence of the applicant or interested parties. He requested that any outstanding issues in this regard should be taken up outside the meeting with senior planning officers. Additionally, the Chair identified that the issues raised would fall within the remit of the resident business liaison group to be established for the scheme as well as the local area management plan and group, thereby providing the opportunity for local people and ward councillors to provide input.

Land of Brook Road N22

Clarification was sought on whether this was part of the Heartlands scheme and if such, concern over the principle of permitting residential development when it was considered that originally this area had been outlined for employment land use. Clarification was also sought on how this application linked into the Wood Green Area Action Plan. Officers identified that the proposal for the site was at very preliminary stage and had yet to be assessed by planners. An update would be sought and provided to the Committee at the next meeting.

191-201 Archway Road

Confirmation was sought as to whether the application, including the revised BRE report, would be considered at the 28 January meeting. Officers advised that the application would be submitted to a January or February Committee.. 

To advise the Planning Sub Committee of decisions on planning applications

taken under delegated powers for the period from 23 November to 18 December 2015.

The Committee considered a report setting out decisions on planning applications taken under delegated powers for the period from 23 November to 18 December 2015.

1-18 and 33-44 Summersby Road N6.

Concerns were raised on Homes for Haringey putting forward proposals for uPVC replacement windows and doors to properties within a Conservation Area. Officers advised that the planning service was generally robust in outlining the unacceptability of uPVC windows and doors within Conservation Areas and would be working with HfH going forward on plans for the estate. The Head of Development Management agreed to discuss with Cllr Carter his outstanding questions regarding the estate outside of the meeting. 

28 January

28 January 2016.