Agenda item

Proposal: Demolition of all existing buildings comprising Selby Centre and the erection of four buildings. New buildings of 4 to 6 storeys to comprise of residential accommodation (Use Class C3); and commercial accommodation (Use Class E (a), (b), & (g)). With car and cycle parking; new vehicle, pedestrian, and cycle routes; new public, communal, and private amenity space and landscaping; and all associated plant and servicing infrastructure.

 

Philip Elliot, Principal Planning Officer, introduced the report. This scheme sought planning permission for demolition of all existing buildings comprising Selby Centre and the erection of four buildings. New buildings of 4 to 6 storeys to comprise of residential accommodation (Use Class C3); and commercial accommodation (Use Class E (a), (b), & (g)). With car and cycle parking; new vehicle, pedestrian, and cycle routes; new public, communal, and private amenity space and landscaping; and all associated plant and servicing infrastructure.

 

The following was noted in response to questions from the committee:

 

• On the decentralised energy network, there was still a planning policy requirement in the London Plan and in the Local Plan to connect to a heat network to meet low carbon requirements.

 

• In terms of garden waste, officers had notified the applicant that extra space should be made available so that if people wanted to use the ‘paid for waste collection service’ they could do so.

 

• Sprinklers were not an absolute requirement, especially given the height of the buildings.

 

• There were conditions attached to make sure that the new Selby Centre, would be built and operational so that the Selby Trust, who is a partner for the development, could move into the new premises prior to any work taking place on the Haringey side and demolition works on the existing Selby Centre site. There would therefore be a continuation of  service provision,, albeit within a new building of higher  b quality.

 

• The new Selby Centre is in Ball Lane playing fields, in LB Enfield's jurisdiction. A planning application had been made to Enfield Council and has received resolution to grant from their Planning Committee. Conditions attached to the   planning permission would mean that that building has to be constructed and operational before works commence on the existing Selby Centre building to build the new housing proposed.

 

• The reason for the delay from QRP to submission was because of the deliverability of the scheme. The scheme became undeliverable because of the funding and so there was a process of trying to make changes to the scheme and find different funding sources.

 

• The facility would be owned by Haringey Council, and they are proposing a long-term lease under the social value leasing policy with the Selby Trust.

 

• There had been discussions on this site for several years regarding the transport strategy. The transport consultant had measured the distance to the nearest station and this calculation was agreed by the Council.

 

• In regard to tenure and social mix, generally mixed tenure is expected in national and local planning policy. However, there are also requirements to meet housing need and that was best met through social rent homes, as evidenced in the national planning policy framework and Haringey strategic housing market assessment.

 

• In terms of lack of funding, that was related to the Sports Hall facility. The applicant was looking to raise funds for the housing elements of the site, looking at a mix of funding opportunities with governing bodies and with the Selby Trust fund raising themselves.

 

• It would be difficult to provide car parking for this scale of development because the local highway network would be put under considerable pressure. In this case, it would be similar to a lot of Council housing schemes approved recently, which were car free in line with policy.

 

Cabinet Member Ruth Gordon attended the committee and spoke in support of the application:

 

The aspiration from the very inception was that there would be a village of different amenities where people could come together. There would be a local school, workspace and sports facilities. The addition of the 200 homes in this scheme would be vital for reducing costs, but also for making sure that those 200 families get not only a roof over the heads, but a home that has got all of the environmental credentialsas well.

 

The Chair asked Catherine Smyth, Head of Development Management and Enforcement Planning to sum up the recommendation as set out in the report. The Chair moved that the recommendation be approved following a unanimous decision.

 

RESOLVED

 

2.1 That the Committee resolve to GRANT planning permission and that the Head of

Development Management and Planning Enforcement or the Director Planning &

Building Standards is authorised to issue the planning permission and impose conditions and informatives subject to the signing of an agreement in the form of a Director’s Letter providing for the obligations set out in the Heads of Terms below.

 

2.2 That delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management  and Planning Enforcement or the Director Planning & Building Standards to make any alterations, additions or deletions to the recommended heads of terms and/or  recommended conditions and informatives as set out in this report provided this  authority shall be exercised in consultation with the Chair (or in their absence the  Vice-Chair) of the Sub-Committee.

 

2.3 That the agreement referred to in resolution (2.1) above is to be completed no later than 30th May 2025 or within such extended time as the Head of Development Management and Planning Enforcement or the Director Planning & Building Standards shall in their sole discretion allow; and

 

2.4 That, following completion of the agreement(s) referred to in resolution (2.1)

within the time period provided for in resolution (2.3) above, planning permission

be granted in accordance with the Planning Application subject to the attachment

of the conditions.

 

2.5 Planning obligations are usually secured through a s106 legal agreement. In this

instance the Council is the landowner of the site and is also the Local Planning

Authority (LPA) and so cannot legally provide enforceable planning obligations to

itself.

 

2.6 Several obligations which would ordinarily be secured through a S106 legal

agreement would instead be imposed as conditions on the planning permission

for the proposed development.

 

2.7 It is recognised that the Council cannot commence to enforce against itself in

respect of breaches of planning conditions and so prior to issuing any planning

permission, measures would be agreed between the Council’s Housing and

Regeneration services and the Planning service, including the resolution of noncompliance with planning conditions by the Chief Executive and the reporting of

breaches to portfolio holders, to ensure compliance with any conditions imposed

on the planning permission for the proposed development

.

2.8 The Council cannot impose conditions on a planning permission requiring the

payment of monies and so the Director of Placemaking and Housing or

successor shall confirm in writing (through a ‘Director’s Letter’) that the payment

of contributions for the matters set out below shall be made to the relevant

departments at an agreed time.

 

2.9 The Director’s letter would secure obligations that would ordinarily be secured

through agreements under s106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and

s278 and s38 of the Highways Act 1980.

 

Summary of the heads of terms for the development are summarised below, with

more detail on obligations provided in the report:

 Affordable housing – 202 affordable council homes let at low-cost social rents

 Parking permit restrictions (Residents of the development shall be prevented

from obtaining on-street car parking permits)

 Traffic Management Order (TMO) amendments (£4,000)

 Travel plan monitoring (£15,000)

 Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) review and amendments

 Car club contributions

 Off-site highway works and highway improvements

 Stage 1 and 2 Road Safety Audit to be completed during the design stage of

the above works

 Monitoring of construction works (£15,000)

 Carbon offsetting contribution to be agreed prior to implementation (recalculated at £2,850 per tCO2 at the Energy Plan and Sustainability stages)

 Connection to District Energy Network (DEN) and backup/alternative solution

with deferred offset contribution if DEN not implemented

 Employment and Skills plan and measures to reflect Employment and Skills

requests

 Employment and Skills management and apprenticeship support contributions

 Obligations monitoring payment calculated in accordance with the monitoring

fee requirements of the Council’s Planning Obligations Supplementary

Planning Document (SPD) as well as a reasonable financial contribution for

monitoring Biodiversity Net Gain