Agenda item

Noted that this was a pre-application for Reserved Matters relating to an existing outline planning permission approved in 2009. The Committee was given a brief summary of the feedback from the Quality Review Panel (QRP), which had looked at it earlier in the day and for which formal notes were not yet available. The summary QRP feedback was:

-       The parameters of the masterplan as set out in the approved outline planning permission were restrictive; delivering a quality scheme would be challenging within these constraints.

-       An increased number of cores was recommended.

-       There should be more intense focus on the public realm, and greater consideration given to the public square at the north of the site.

-       More consideration should be given to the use of small open spaces and whether these could be used as gardens for the ground floor flats. Consideration should also be given to duplex units at ground floor level.

-       More thought was required in respect of the parking strategy.

Cllr Stephen Mann addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor for this pre-application, and raised the following points:

-       Engagement between the developers and residents through the residents and business liaison group had been positive and it was hoped that this would continue.

-       This was a large development in an area with already congested roads and thought therefore needed to be given to the parking strategy and transport arrangements.

-       Residents understood that open space would constitute 30% of the development, and it was hoped that the new ‘pocket park’ would be in addition to this. It was also hoped that delivery of the pocket park could be guaranteed by means of the Section 106 agreement.

-       Consideration was needed for how the open spaces would be maintained, and it was suggested that this could also be addressed as part of the Section 106.

-        

The following points were raised by the Committee:

-       Further details were required regarding school places and health services and how these would be delivered. These were covered under the Section 106 agreement for the previously approved outline scheme. Discussions would need to be held with the Education Service regarding how they envisaged the s106 funding being allocated to deliver the number of additional school places required. In terms of health provision, it was reported that the outline scheme included a space for use as a health facility, and that this would be offered to the CCG in the first instance.

-       In response to a question about bicycle parking, it was reported that this was planned for 100% of units, so around 1,050.

-       The Committee asked about the likely dwelling mix and it was reported that this was 75.6% private and 24.4% affordable. Of the private accommodation, the mix was estimated as 50% 1 bed units, 40% 2 bed units and 5% 3 bed units, and for the affordable housing, the mix was estimated as 15% 1 bed units, 43% 2 bed units, 32% 3 bed units and 10% 4 bed units.

-       The Committee asked about the links with Alexandra Palace; although development was constrained by the parameter plans, it was intended that the £0.5m contribution towards open space would include some contribution within Alexandra Park and would also seek to create a sense of linkage with Alexandra Palace. Negotiations were also taking place with Thames Water regarding the potential use of the pedestrian tunnel under the railway to give access from Wood Green to Alexandra Palace through the site.

-       It was noted that the proposed pressure reduction system, subject of a current s73 application to be determined shortly, would be surrounded by a 2m high brick wall, incorporating decorative detailing.

-       It was noted that the layout, number of blocks and heights was the same as granted in the outline planning permission. The developers outlined the proposals for three distinct zones within the prescribed layout, and how these would be treated architecturally.

-       The Committee asked why a completely new application had not been submitted. The developers advised that they wished to complete the outline application already granted by means of getting reserved matters consent, but that they would also subsequently consider the potential for developing a new and improved scheme.

-        The Committee asked about plans for local employment at construction stage, and it was reported that this was provided for in the section 106 agreement.

-       In terms of timescales, it was reported that a Development Management Forum was planned for May, and that the application was also likely to be submitted in May.