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.

Cllr Patterson identified in relation to item 10, Alexandra Palace and Park, that he was a member of the Alexandra Palace Statutory Advisory Committee and as such had received a presentation on the Go Ape proposal. The Chair advised that this item had been deferred to the next Committee meeting on 14 March due to an error in the sending out of notification letters.

Cllrs Beacham and Bevan identified in relation to item 7, St Lukes Woodside Hospital, that they had attended a recent public open day held by the applicant. 

To confirm and sign the minutes of the Planning Sub Committee held on 11 and 28 January.  

RESOLVED

·         That the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 11 and 28 January be approved.

A s73 planning application for the variation of Condition 2 (plans and specifications) and Condition 41 (occupancy) attached to planning permission HGY/2013/2379 and an application for a Deed of Variation to the s106 Legal Agreement.

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions and subject to the variation of the terms of the original s106 Legal Agreement

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for a s73 application for the variation of Condition 2 (plans and specifications) and Condition 41 (occupancy) attached to planning permission HGY/2013/2379 and an application for a Deed of Variation to the s106 Legal Agreement. 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 variation of the terms of the original 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 an addendum report, circulated in advance of the meeting, which set out an additional representation from the applicant, Hanover Housing Association, outlining the reasons for the variation sought to the consented scheme. It was further updated that a stage 1 response had been received from the Greater London Authority since the publication of the agenda confirming that they had no objection to the variation application on the grounds it raised no strategic issues.  

Officers reminded the Committee of the grounds for refusal of a previous s73 application determined by the Committee in December 2015, particularly concerns over proposed changes to the pepperpotting of affordable housing units across the site. In light of this, it was advised that proposals relating to the relocation of affordable housing units had been omitted from the current s73 application.

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

·         Further details were sought on the cohousing concept for part of the scheme. The applicant explained the primary objective was to support the establishment of a mutual support community and to this end, the first option to purchase the cohousing units would be given to an established community group, Cohousing Woodside, at 10% discount off market value.

·         Clarification was sought as to whether the proposal to reclassify 4 of the cohousing units from over 55s dwellings to family units was to enhance their sales values. The applicant responded that the removal of the age restriction would not enhance the sales value of the units and in fact due to the change, an increased education contribution was now due from the applicant under the s106 agreement. The four units in question were three storey and as such were considered more suited to family housing.

·         The Committee sought assurances on the impact of the proposal to relax restrictions imposed under the consented scheme on the occupation of market sale units until completion of all the affordable housing units and whether this was policy compliant. The applicant explained that this change was sought to allow occupation as construction stages of the scheme were completed to avoid blighting of the site, particularly as the affordable housing units were to be pepperpotted across the scheme. The applicant’s commitment to delivering the affordable housing units was reiterated. Officers advised that the Council did not have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

New stair to existing caretaker's building to facilitate change of use from former caretaker's flat to educational spaces

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for a new stair to the existing caretaker's building to facilitate the change of use from the former caretaker's flat to educational spaces. 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 raised the following points in discussion of the application:

·         Clarification was sought on whether disabled access would be provided to the converted educational space. Officers advised that there was no lift to that part of the building but this was considered acceptable due to the limitations of adapting an existing building and as the new space only constituted a small part of the school, the remainder of which was DDA compliant.

·         It was questioned whether consideration had been given to glazing the rear wall of the stairs. It was advised in response that a metal clad solid wall was required to this elevation to ensure compliance with Building Regulations and provide structural support to the staircase.

·         Further details were sought on the design of the doorway to the front of the staircase. Officers advised that this would be the original portico brought forward from the existing building to help retain character. 

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report and it was

RESOLVED

·         That planning application HGY/2015/3467 be approved subject to conditions.

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 following approved plans and specifications:

APS 01 - APS 03, APS 04 Rev A, APS 05 Rev A, APS 06 Rev A.

Reason: In order to avoid doubt and in the interests of good planning.

3.   Notwithstanding the information submitted with this application, no above ground development shall take place until a specification and/or manufacturers details for the glass curtain walling and fixtures are submitted to, approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In order to retain control over the external appearance of the development in the interest of the visual amenity of the area and consistent with Policy SP11 of the Haringey Local Plan 2013 and Saved Policy UD3 of the Haringey Unitary Development Plan 2006.

INFORMATIVE: 

Hours of Construction Work: The applicant is advised that under the Control of Pollution Act 1974, construction work which will be audible at the site boundary will be restricted to the following hours:-

- 8.00am - 6.00pm          Monday to Friday

- 8.00am - 1.00pm          Saturday

- and not at all on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

Continued use of the existing building as an Archery Clubhouse (D2 use) and changes to the elevations of the existing clubhouse building including re-cladding, the creation of a south facing pavilion, relocation of air conditioning units to the west elevation, installation of an access ramp (amended description) (updated documents)

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

The Committee considered a report on the application to grant planning permission for the continued use of the existing building as an Archery Clubhouse (D2 use) and changes to the elevations of the existing clubhouse building including re-cladding, the creation of a south facing pavilion, relocation of air conditioning units to the west elevation, installation of an access ramp. 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 attention of the Committee was drawn to a tabled addendum setting out an additional representation received since the publication of the agenda from Catherine West MP in support of the application.

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

·         The temporary planning permission covering the current structure had expired and as such should be removed and the application to convert to a permanent structure refused.

·         An application for a permanent clubhouse had been refused by Planning Committee in 2013, an application not substantially different to the current.

·         The height restriction imposed on the current clubhouse had been exceeded but no enforcement taken on the grounds that it was a temporary structure.

·         The applicant had not engaged sufficiently with local people in bringing forward plans for a permanent building.

·         The new clubhouse would be 40% larger than the previous structures onsite and was disproportionate to the Club’s needs. 

·         Planning officers at one of the consultation events had commented that the plans for a permanent structure required further development.

·         The clubhouse was unsuitable for the site in terms of height, design and siting. The square and bulky design would not make a positive contribution to the Significant Local Open Land (SLOL) and would block views across the field.

·         A precedent would be set for the development of SLOL.

·         Concerns were expressed that the extension of the clubhouse opening hours to 11pm would result in noise disturbance to neighbouring properties particularly as the function of the building would be extended beyond storage to include office space.

·         The siting of the building blocked access to the car park meaning cars were parked at the end of neighbour’s gardens.

·         If the Committee were minded to accept the application, it was requested that additional conditions be added; for the planning permission to be temporary for two years to allow further consultation on designs for a permanent structure; use of the building to be limited to Class D1; opening hours to remain as current; for use to be limited to the Aquarius Archery Club and permanent removal of the two storage portacabins secured.

Representatives for the applicant addressed the Committee and raised the following points:

·         Concerns raised by the neighbours had been addressed under the current plans following the hosting of three consultation events.

·         The plans were supported by Catherine West MP.

·         There were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

Construction and operation of a Go Ape high ropes course

RECOMMENDATION: grant permission subject to conditions.

This item was deferred to the next Committee on 14 March.

To advise the Planning Sub Committee of decisions on planning applications

taken under delegated powers for the period from  21 December 2015 and 19 February 2016.

The Committee considered a report setting out decisions on planning applications taken under delegated powers for the period from 21 December 2015 and 19 February 2016.

Officers agreed to provide an update to Cllr Mallett on the Marston Cabinets site on Downhills Park Road.

RESOLVED

·         That the report be noted.

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:

Tottenham Hotspurs Stadium: a progress update was sought on the setting up of the resident liaison group. Officers advised that the s106 agreement had just been signed off for the scheme and would now progress to Secretary of State consideration. The establishment of the resident liaison group would now progress, with a draft constitution currently with officers for approval.

Apex House: clarification was sought on when this application would come before Committee for determination. Officers advised that hopefully it would come to 16 March meeting [post meeting note – this has now been deferred, date to be confirmed].

163 Tottenham Lane: concerns were raised that the new block constructed to the rear of the site would create a daylight/sunlight issue to this scheme due to come forward. Officers acknowledged that this issue would need to be addressed in the application coming forward.

Former Brantwood Autos, Brantwood Road: concerns were expressed over proposals for a waste transfer station. Officers advised that discussions were ongoing with the applicant as elements of the plans were not acceptable at the current point. It had been advised at pre-application stage that a sealed building construction would be key to the acceptability of the transfer station element.

Meridian Water: officers updated that a planning application had recently been submitted to LB Enfield and their planning service would consult with Haringey ward councillors and residents in the vicinity of the site as part of the determination process.

Cross Lane N8 and Cross House: in response to a question regarding the link between these two applications, officers confirmed that they covered the same site but were two separate proposals. 

RESOLVED

·         That the report be noted.

Planning Committee 14 March

Special Planning Committee 16 March

14 March