Agenda item

The Committee considered a report seeking comments on planned amendments to four development plan documents (DPDs): Haringey’s Local Plan and preferred option drafts of the Development Management, Site Allocations and Tottenham Area Action Plan DPDs and the revised Local Development Scheme 2015-18. The documents were due for submission to Cabinet next week seeking approval to release the DPD documents for consultation under the statutory process and adopt the revised Local Development Scheme. 

The Committee expressed concern over the challenging new housing target proposed for the borough and its deliverability. Officers acknowledged that this increased figure would place a burden on communities, planning services and the Planning Committee. Should this quantum not be met however, central government via the Secretary of State had the power to take a greater role in the planning process through the appeals route, with decisions taken within the context of the overriding imperative of achieving national housing targets.

The Committee questioned the planned focus of future development to the east of the borough compared to the west. Officers advised that the proposed primary focus would be on Tottenham and Wood Green areas based on detailed assessments across the borough of development capacity, transport accessibility and the need to drive and support regeneration and investment.

Members expressed concern over the level of charging of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and that this would be insufficient going forward to mitigate the additional pressures on Council services arising from new development. Officers confirmed that the borough’s CIL charging regime would be reviewed before the end of the year.

It was requested that the wording of the Haringey Civic Centre site allocation plan be reviewed to avoid any presumption being implied regarding the future of the travellers site. Officers advised that a separate traveller’s needs assessment was being undertaken by the Council to look at housing needs within the community and which would feed into the final decision on the future of the site.

Clarification was sought as to whether the Council had withdrawn guidelines covering basement developments. Confirmation was provided that the guidelines were not currently policy adopted and were therefore subject to the review of supplementary planning documents. Incorporation within the Development Management Policy aimed to formalise arrangements and impose greater statutory weight.

An update was requested on the Hornsey depot development following the granting of planning permission. Officers confirmed they were working on the presumption that the site was deliverable and as far as they had been advised, was progressing, with marketing starting for the first phase of open sale residential units.

The Committee sought clarification on the rationale behind the allocation of only two sites within the borough suitable for the siting of tall buildings. Officers advised that these sites had been identified following completion of an urban characterisation study throughout the borough and assessment of the capacity of areas to change, existing sensitivities, transport accessibility and capacity and opportunities to complement existing regeneration approaches. Members raised concern over potential overshadowing from tall buildings as part of the Spurs redevelopment, particularly impacting the proposed school. Confirmation was provided that the potential existed for reprovision of the school elsewhere within the site as part of the ongoing regeneration.

The Committee questioned whether an independent advisor would be provided to assist and facilitate local communities in engaging with the consultation process. The Ass Director Planning agreed to looking into the feasibility of taking this request forward.

A request was made for officers to look into the potential of establishing a policy position prohibiting advertising on BT phone boxes in line with that made by LB Westminster and bringing forward estate renewal works for Tangmere and the Enterprise Centre on Broadwater Farm at the start of any regeneration works.

The resource demands associated with the Highgate Neighbourhood Plan were identified as an area of concern.

Concerns were expressed over the tone of some of the language used within the reports, in particular the Tottenham Area Action Plan which made references to a culture of intergenerational worklessness, depressed rents etc that could be misconstrued as well as errors in spelling and punctuation which required correction. Officers confirmed that further finessing was required in terms of language and copy editing of all of the documents before they progressed to consultation. 

The Committee expressed a degree of concern over the proposed 6 week public consultation period in light of the size of the documents under consideration. The potential was discussed of extending the period although it was noted the feasibility was restricted by the start of purdah at the end of March/beginning of April and the Council’s approved consultation policy which supported a 6 week consultation period. Members emphasised the importance of executive summaries of the plans being made available during the consultation period in order that the documents were as accessible as possible to members of the public. It was also requested that any maps within the documents be annotated with postcodes and road names to allow them to be more easily identified. 

Officers emphasised to the Committee that although the documents would proceed through two further stages of statutory consultation prior to final adoption, the first consultation period was the primary opportunity for Members and the public to contribute at a stage when the plans could be changed or altered.

The Committee questioned the degree of involvement Tottenham ward councillors had had in the drafting of the Tottenham Area Action Plan and requested that officers review engagement arrangements with local Members to ensure they had sufficient opportunity to feed in their views as part of the consultation.

The Committee discussed the proposed changes to Housing Policy SP2 with regards to the borough wide affordable housing target and the target for small schemes below 10 units. Officers provided advice that the basis for the proposed changes included evidence from the borough’s latest viability assessment and updated National Planning Practice Guidance and the imperative of putting forward an evidenced and economically viable policy position. Advice was also given on the implications of a potentially different emerging policy position in this regard in the determination of planning applications prior to the formal adoption of the Local Plan policies next year.

Cllr Carroll put forward a motion, which was seconded, to reject the proposed amendment to Haringey Strategic Policies, Housing Policy SP2, section 3.2 (alteration 49) to amend Policy SP2 (5) to reduce the borough wide affordable housing target from 50% to 40% for larger development sites and that this recommendation be reported onto Cabinet. Following a vote, the motion was carried.

Cllr Bevan put forward a motion, which was seconded, to reject the proposed amendment to Haringey Strategic Policies, Housing Policy SP2, section 3.2 (alteration 51) to delete Policy SP2 (7) (and any associated reference links to it) requiring schemes below the 10 unit threshold to provide 20% affordable housing on site or financial contributions towards affordable housing provision and that this recommendation be reported on to Cabinet. Following a vote, the motion was carried.

The Chair moved the recommendation of the report, subject to the amendments detailed above to the affordable housing targets for large and small developments and it was

RESOLVED

1.    That the annexed documents be noted and the comments of the Committee, including the two recommendations relating to affordable housing targets, be reported to Cabinet at the meeting on 20 January 2015.

2.    To recommend that Cabinet (subject to point 1 above) approve the annexed documents for consultation during a six week period currently scheduled for February to March 2015:

·         The Proposed Alterations to Haringey’s Local Plan: Strategic Polices (LPSP) which was adopted in 2013 (Appendix A);

·         The “preferred option” draft of the Development Management Development Plan Document (DM DPD) (Appendix B);

·         The “preferred option” draft of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (Sites DPD) (Appendix C);

·         The “preferred option” draft of the Tottenham Area Action Plan Development Plan Document (Tottenham AAP) (Appendix D); and

·         The Draft Sustainability Appraisal (Appendix E).

3.    To note that the versions of the LPSP, the DM DPD, the Sites DPD, the Tottenham AAP and the Draft Interim Sustainability Appraisal which are annexed to this report, are working drafts. These documents will be edited before being taken to Cabinet in January.

4.    To recommend to Cabinet (subject to point 1 above) that it adopt the revised Local Development Scheme (LDS) (Appendix F) for 2015-2018.

5.    To recommend to Cabinet (subject to point 1 above) that it note the draft Consultation Programme (Appendix G).