Agenda and minutes

1.    Councillor Levy, Chairman in the absence of Councillor Simon welcomed everyone to the meeting and read a statement regarding the order and conduct of the meeting.

2.    Councillor Savva acted as Vice Chairman for the meeting.

Members of the Planning Committee are invited to identify any disclosable pecuniary, other pecuniary or non pecuniary interests relevant to items on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest.

To receive the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on Tuesday 24 June 2014.

AGREED the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on Tuesday 24 June 2014 as a correct record.

To receive the covering report of the Assistant Director, Planning, Highways & Transportation.

4.1       Applications dealt with under delegated powers. (A copy is available in the Members’ Library.)

RECEIVED the report of the Assistant Director, Planning, Highways and Transportation (Report No. 35).

AGREED that the order of the agenda be varied to accommodate members of the public in attendance at the meeting. The minutes follow the order of the meeting.

To receive the report of the Assistant Director (Regeneration, Planning and Economic Development).

SENT TO FOLLOW

RECEIVED the report of the Assistant Director (Regeneration, Planning and Economic Development).

NOTED

1.    If Members had any queries they should e-mail the contact officers direct.

2.    Following a discussion by members, the following queries were raised:

·         Healthcare funds of £1,092,976, not yet received, how would this money be allocated i.e. NHS, GP surgeries

·         Request for member training on what can or cannot be spent regarding Section 106 monies and how would residents have input on how this money is spent.

·         Presentation issues as regards the spreadsheets, requirement for a more detailed report. Members felt there were presentation issues with the report.

·         Further queries to be sent to Joanne Woodward and Anthony Wilson.

3.    A larger print version of the annexes was available in the Members’ Library.

4.    Members noted the contents of the report and its annexes.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to S106 Agreement and conditions

WARD:  Southgate Green

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    The response by the Group Leader – Transport Planning & Policy to concerns raised by members regarding the impact of local parking by the new development.

3.    The response of the Planning Decisions Manager to issues raised.

4.    Additional items reported:

a.    Para 6.3.32 – Traffic & Transportation had confirmed that the proposed loading bay could be used for disabled parking outside the allocated loading times. They also advised that single yellow lines could be used by blue badge holders. Whilst it was always preferable to secure dedicated disabled car parking, it is not possible for the reasons set out in the report to provide such parking in this instance. It is also considered that any disabled occupants would buy into the development in the knowledge of the parking arrangement that would exist.

b.    Para 6.5.7 - TfL had confirmed that there was no objection in principle to relocating the bus cage. This matter would be secured through the Section 106.

c.    Para 6.7.6 – The level of affordable housing set out in the report (para 6.7.4) was the minimum level of provision that would be secured. Discussions are on-going with the applicant to secure additional provision and as today’s date the provision had increased to 18 affordable inits – 7 rent and 11 shared ownership. However, this needs to be tested against the Section 106 contributions that were being sought. Members are being asked to give officers delegated authority to continue discussions on this issue, to secure no less than the level of provision set out in the report, and also the other issues identified at para 6.8.1 through a Section 106 Agreement.

d.    Conditions 6,8,9 and 13 as set out in the report were not in fact required as they are either covered by other conditions or the obligations to be secured through the Section 106 Agreement.

5.    Following a debate, a vote was taken and members resolved to accept the officers’ recommendation by 6 votes, 1 against and 2 absentions.

AGREED that, subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the obligations as set out in the report, the Head of Development Management/the Planning Decisions Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions set out in the report.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Enfield Lock

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    The application was for a minor material amendment to P13-01333LBE which had already been previously granted.

3.    The response by the Group Leader – Transport Planning & Policy to concerns raised by members regarding parking issues.

4.    Following a debate the officers’ recommendation was unanimously approved.

AGREED that in accordance with regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1992, planning permission be deemed to be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Jubilee

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    The response by the planning Decisions Manager addressing member concerns regarding car parking and contaminated land on the site.

3.    Following a debate the officers’ recommendation was unanimously approved.

AGREED that in accordance with regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1992, planning permission be deemed to be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Town

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    Officers had attended a site meeting on the 21^st July 2014, to discuss the issues identified in the report, regarding the long term health of the trees on the northern boundary and how they would be affected by the proposed 4.5m high fence.

3.    The report identified the need for some further minor design amendments to the proposed new building. These had not yet been finalised and therefore an additional condition is recommended to require these.

4.    The comments of Dennis Stacey, Chairman of Conservation Advisory Group.

5.    Response of the Planning Decisions Manager to issues raised.

6.    Following a debate the officers’ recommendation, including an additional condition, was unanimously approved.

AGREED subject to an additional condition requiring that the floodlights be finished in a colour to be agreed and not have a galvanised finish (green suggested as per fencing), that planning permission be granted subject to conditions set out in the report.

Additional planning condition to secure amendments to the scheme:

“Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development of the changing room pavilion shall take place until revised elevations have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The revisions shall include, but not be limited to, a reduction in the depth of the proposed flat roof and the insertion of real or dummy windows to the elevations of the building to provide greater articulation. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of the Enfield Town Conservation Area”.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Palmers Green

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    The officers’ recommendation was unanimously approved.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Southbury

SENT TO FOLLOW

NOTED

1.    Introduction by Head of Development Management.

2.    The application proposed 3131 sq. metres of internal mezzanine floor space to Unit 1a of the Great Cambridge Road Retail Park. An extant planning permission had approved 2090 Sq. metres for the same unit, therefore the proposal would be for an additional 1041 Sq. metres. It was solely the effect of this additional floor space upon which the acceptability of the current application would be determined.

3.    The comments of Dennis Stacey, Chairman of Conservation Advisory Group.

4.    Response of the Head of Development Management to issues raised.

5.    Following a debate the officers’ recommendation was unanimously approved.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

Monthly decisions on Town Planning Application Appeals.

(The update will be provided at the meeting.)

NOTED that the update on decision relating to Town Planning Appeals would either be circulated to members or be combined with appeal information for the next meeting.