Agenda item

1. 16-52 High Road N15 – Demolition of existing garages and erection of a part 4/part 5 storey building comprising 6 x 1 bed, 6 x 2 bed, 4 x 3 bed and 2 x 4 bed self contained flats with commercial units at ground floor level and parking at basement level.  RECOMMENDATION: Grant, subject to conditions and section 106 Legal Agreement

2. 16-42 High Road N15 – Conservation Area Consent for the above demolition. RECOMMENDATION: Grant Conservation Area Consent subject to conditions

3. R/O Palm Court, Lionel House, Maxwell House and Lawrence House, Palmerston Road N22 – Demolition of existing garages and erection of 2 x 2 storey blocks comprising 5 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed dwellings and 2 x 3 bed detached dwellinghouses with associated refuse and cycle storage.  RECOMMENDATION: Grant Permission subject to conditions and Section 106 Legal Agreement.

4. 24A Birstall Road, N15 – Erection of a two storey building comprising  4 x 1 bed and 4 x 2 bed self contained flats.  RECOMMENDATION: Grant Permission subject to conditions and Section 106 Legal Agreement. 

RESOLVED

That the decisions of the Sub Committee on the planning applications and related matters, as set out in the schedule attached to these minutes, be approved or refused, with the following points noted:

16-52 High Road N15

Officers informed the Committee that a site visit had now taken place.  The attached report was the same as that presented to the previous committee.  The proposal will not have an impact on street parking and provides affordable units.  The applicant would enter into a Section 106 agreement.  One objector spoke on behalf of local residents, representing JB Planning Associates, Chartered Town Planning and Surveyors who objected for the following reasons:

• The property building
• Density excess
• Five storeys is too high, large, bulky and in a  conservation area.
• Poor design which is out of keeping with two and three storey buildings in the vicinity.
• It would have an adverse effect on the area
• The access ramp will affect the street scene on Rostrevor Avenue.
• Will have a detrimental impact, overbearing, loss of outlook, light and visibility – 90 metres of visibility is not achievable because of the bend in the road.
• Safety of young children because of the exit to the road.
• Noise of vehicles using the underground car park.
• Operation of the security gates

Two supporters for the development responded on the safety of access on Rostrevor Avenue.  An in depth consultation had been carried out and discussions with Haringey highways.  Access from Rostrevor Avenue was deemed to be the most safest.  At the meeting with the Design Panel the safety was increased by the installation of a security gate.  There is also a provision to provide audio and visual signals at the entrance to the gates which would be sign posted.  The applicants had previously been to two pre application meetings and two post application meetings.  Comments received had been taken on board and incorporated within the scheme before the Committee.  Amenity space was recognised as being limited and the balconies had been enlarged at the design panel.  The general size of all the units was in excess of all the standards.

Members decided to refuse the application on the grounds of bulk, height,  mass in relation to residential amenity and the character and appearance of the locality.

16-52 High Road N15 (Conservation Area Consent)

Members were asked to consider Conservation Area Consent for the above demolition.  Members did not agree to giving consent because planning permission for the above application was not granted.

R/O Palm Court, Lionel House, Maxwell House and Lawrence House, Palmerston Road N22

Members noted that this application had been before the Committee previously however, this was a new scheme adjacent to Bowes Park Conservation Area.  The proposal included the demolition of existing garages and the erection of four blocks, in total four flats and two houses.  The density of the building was within the current density of 145.   There was also provision for bins and two way vehicle access.  It was suggested that the access be one way in and one way out.  There were sixteen letters of objections concerning traffic and parking.  The application would require a Section 106 agreement.  Officers also recommended that the application be subject to the following conditions:

1.      Hours of construction to standard working day:- 8am – 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am – 12noon Saturday

2.      Glazing on windows which face the East would require obscure glazing to be submitted and approved.

Two objectors spoke representing the residents of Palm Court and the Houses listed above.   They outlined their concerns regarding safety, access, existing drainage, parking, and loss of amenities and generally their views that the area would be over developed.  The main cause for concern was access to the site for refuse collection and emergency vehicles.   Refuse Vehicles were regularly unable to get into the site because they could not turn in due to parked cars on Palmerston Road and therefore refuse was not collected.  When vehicles were able to go down the southern access road, they damaged the windows in the flats adjacent.

The applicant spoke and summarised the position where the development to be approved i.e.  Access – Transportation had no objections to the loss of the garages.  Fire Officers had been spoken to and fire vehicles would not be required to access the site as fire hydrants would be installed.  Refuse vehicles currently visit the sire therefore no additional collection would be required due to this development.  Amenity – it was not the intension to touch this and would argue that the development attracts to the visual amenity.  Windows opening onto the access route is a current problem.

The applicant consented to the following conditions being imposed:

1. The hours of construction.
2. Obscure glazing to the none habitual rooms to the east .
3. On landscaping and boundary treatments.

Members felt it was prudent to delay the decision on this application for a site visit. 

Cllrs Haley, Hoban and Thompson joined the meeting at this point.

24A Birstall Road N15

Officers explained to members that this application would be subject to at Section 106 agreement with a contribution of approximately £40k.  The overall density was 95 above the limit and this figure was deemed to be acceptable. 

Members noted that the room sizes on the ground floor flats were below the required size standards.

Members agreed the application with conditions on:

1. A division of the party walls between the two properties on the roof.
2. Inset front doors to be provided.
3. Communal satellite dish to be provided to service all the proposed flats.