Agenda item

Proposal - Planning Permission:Hybrid planning application (part Full/Part Outline) for the demolition of existing buildings & structures and redevelopment of the site for a residential led mixed-use scheme with up to 330 residential units (class C3), retail/café use (Use Class A1/A3), area of new public open space, landscaping and other associated works. Full details/permission is sought in respect of Block D, 867 and 869 High Road (Grade II listed) and proposed Block G to its rear. Outline permission is sought for the remainder of the site, with details of “scale”, “layout”, “appearance” and “landscaping” reserved in relation to proposed Blocks A, B and C and details of “appearance”, “landscaping” and “layout” only reserved in relation to Block E.

Proposal - Listed Building Consent: Listed Building Consent for Internal alterations and associated works to provide 6 x 2- bed flats at 867 and 869 High Road.

Recommendation: GRANT

The Committee considered an application for:

Planning Permission:Hybrid planning application (part Full/Part Outline) for the demolition of existing buildings & structures and redevelopment of the site for a residential led mixed-use scheme with up to 330 residential units (class C3), retail/café use (Use Class A1/A3), area of new public open space, landscaping and other associated works. Full details/permission is sought in respect of Block D, 867 and 869 High Road (Grade II listed) and proposed Block G to its rear. Outline permission is sought for the remainder of the site, with details of “scale”, “layout”, “appearance” and “landscaping” reserved in relation to proposed Blocks A, B and C and details of “appearance”, “landscaping” and “layout” only reserved in relation to Block E.

Listed Building Consent: Listed Building Consent for Internal alterations and associated works to provide 6 x 2- bed flats at 867 and 869 High Road.

Mr Paul Burnham addressed the Committee in objection to the application.  He considered that the development would be too expensive for people living in the area to afford.  There was a lack of family sized housing, and that it would drive local people out of the area.  He felt that explanation given that the registered providers had requested tenure segregation in the blocks was no true.

Richard Senna and Sean Bashforth, Applicant team, addressed the Committee.  The scheme was a result of a comprehensive pre-application process and was another chapter in the regeneration of Tottenham, and the club’s investment in the area.  Benefits of the scheme included new homes (35% of which were affordable), significant park space, a new play area for Brook House School, and would provide jobs for local people.  All housing would be tenure blind.

It was envisaged that the school playground could be used as both a playground for the school, and a space to be used by the community.  The school would have priority over the use, and if a sufficient management regime could not be reached then it would remain as a school space.  The Chair commented that this could be considered as part of the reserved matters if the application was granted.

Officers responded to questions from the Committee:

-           Parking spaces were distributed across the site.  A parking management plan was attached to the app, with details on how it would be allocated. 

-           It was not uncommon for public areas of developments to be adopted by the Council.  The s106 set out that a public space management plan needed to be submitted and approved.

-           A series of layouts which show how internal footprints could be laid out, which demonstrated that there was no need for any dwellings to have any north facing aspects.

-           The roof garden would be at the 9^th storey, not the top of the building.

-           It was not proposed to have any segregation of amenity space between housing tenures.

-           The Met Police crime design office had been consulted, and no particular concerns had been raised.  It was suggested that enclosed parking areas be secured by a design condition, so that the application would continue to be discussed with the Police going forward.

-           The area had been identified as a growth area, and in principle was appropriate for tall buildings.  The Masterplan framework acknowledged that tall buildings were appropriate for the site allocation.  Page 29 set out the proposed storey heights and although block B was taller than anticipated but the location was seen as suitable.

-           The design code set out the design guidance for the street.

-           The CIL rate paid would be the rate at the time of the reserved matters application.

-           The scheme had been tested in wind tunnel conditions and a wind assessment report was available which supported the application.

-           35% affordable housing was reasonable and was the maximum reasonable amount for the site.

The Chair moved that the application be approved, with the additional conditions and informatives as set out in the addendum, and following a vote with five in favour, three against and two abstentions it was

RESOLVED

i.          That planning permission be granted and the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning be authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives subject to referral to the Mayor of London for his consideration at Stage 2 and signing of a section 106 Legal Agreement providing for the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below and a section 278 Legal Agreement providing for the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms.

ii.         That the section 106 legal agreement referred to in resolution (i) above is to be completed no later than 1 May 2020 or within such extended time as the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning shall in her/his sole discretion allow.

iii.        That, following completion of the agreement(s) referred to in resolution (i) within the time period provided for in resolution (iii) above, planning permission is granted in accordance with the Planning Application subject to the attachment of the conditions.

iv.        That Listed Building Consent be granted and that the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director Planning is authorised to issue the Listed Building Consent and impose conditions and informatives.

v.         That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management or the Assistant Director of Planning to make any alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended heads of terms and/or recommended conditions (planning permission and/or Listed Building Consent) as set out in this report and to further delegate this power provided this authority shall be exercised in consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the Vice Chair) of the Sub-Committee.