Agenda and minutes

Councillor Simon, Chair, welcomed all attendees and explained the order of the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors  Barry, J. Charalambous and Peter George (Assistant Director – Regeneration And Environment).

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 meetings held on:

·         Tuesday 19 December 2017 – TO FOLLOW

·         Tuesday 23 January 2018.

AGREED the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 19 December 2017 &  23 January 2018 as a correct record.

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

RECEIVED the report of the Assistant Director, Regeneration and Planning.

AGREED that the order of the agenda be amended to accommodate those in attendance. The minutes follow the order of the meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

WARD:  Ponders End

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Sharon Davidson, Planning Decisions Manager, clarifying the proposal.

2.    Neither TfL nor Network Rail have raised an objection to this application but both have objected to the Reserved Matters application 17/04748/RM in that both bodies wish to see that part of the site comprising Phase 2 (i) reserved for a construction depot required in connection with potential works to Ponders End Station and the four tracking of the line in association with Crossrail 2 proposals. Therefore, there is an implied objection to the principle of the development of Phase 2A(i) and legal advice has been sought on the weight that the Council needs to give to the objection in determining this application.

3.    Since the report was published, Counsel has further  advised as follows:

‘neither TfL nor Network Rail objected to the London Borough of Enfield (Alma Estate Regeneration) Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) 2016, confirmed by the Secretary of State on 15.12.17 which authorised the acquisition of land including the triangle of land.

The justification for the acquisition of the land was part of the case presented to the Inspector and Secretary of State, and included substantial building proposals in line with the Outline permission(OPP).’

4.    Planning officers’ response to points raised and members to note the following:

·         The absence of objections by Network Rail and TfL to the CPO

·         The absence of objections by Network Rail and TfL to the OPP

·         The justification for the acquisition of the triangle site advanced by the Council in the recent Alma Estate CPO inquiry and accepted by the Secretary of State.

·         The GLA had confirmed no objection and that the application does not raise any strategic planning issues further to those previously considered in respect of the outline application.

·         One further objection from Mr D South, and the objections raised:

a.    When Phase 1A was granted planning permission, he was never made aware at all workshops that outline planning for Phase 2A had been included.

b.    The main objection to Phase 2A is no social housing has been included. The builders are trying to merge phase 1A and 2A to overcome this.

c.    Negotiations took place on Phase 1A regarding a community chest that had taken months to conclude. If the two phases are merged, the community loses a chest for Phase 2 (still to be negotiated) and the Council will lose out on a section 106 payment themselves.

5.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers.

6.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

AGREED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

WARD:  Ponders End

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Sharon Davidson, Planning Decisions Manager, clarifying the proposal.

2.    Legal advice on Network Rail and TfL objection as set out and reported under item 6 (17/04670/VAR).

3.    Objection from Mr D. South as set out and reported under item 6 (17/04670/VAR).

4.    The deputation of Ricky Powell (Chair – Alma Road Residents Association).

5.    The response of Tricia Patel, Agents – Pollard Thomas Edwards.

6.    Planning officers’ response to points raised.

7.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers.

8.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

AGREED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report with the final wording delegated to officers and to be issued following completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

WARD:  Ponders End

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Sharon Davidson, Planning Decisions Manager, clarifying the proposal.

2.    Planning officers’ response to points raised.

3.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers.

4.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

AGREED that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions set out in the report with the final wording delegated to officers and completion of a Deed of Variation to the Section 106 agreement.

To receive a Supplementary Paper for this application.

(TO FOLLOW)

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Andy Higham, Head – Development Control, clarifying the application, that was originally reported at the 27 June 2017 Planning Committee.

2.    This application was originally reported to a meeting of the Planning Committee on 27 June 2017. At that meeting members resolved to defer the decision as they were concerned that the proposed development to provide 4 additional dwellings was to make no contribution towards Affordable Housing. The application was considered acceptable in all other respects.

3.    At the meeting of the Planning Committee on 19 December 2017, officers provided an update on the viability for this proposed development following the completion of a second independent viability review. This second review confirmed the scheme could not support any up front affordable housing contribution. It was recommended that the Council should seek agreement to a deferred contributions mechanism, based on outturn costs and values, so that if improvements in viability result in a profit being generated, this could trigger the payment of affordable housing contributions.

4.    Following discussions, the Agent has confirmed that the Applicants have agreed to a contribution of £80k, to be made upon commencement of the development.

5.    Given the independent viability assessments, it is considered that the offer based on the accepted scheme viability is reasonable.

6.    The Committee voted on the proposal to approve the officer recommendation – 7 votes in favour, 2 against

AGREED that planning permission be granted subject to conditions and Section 106 agreement.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions and the signing of an appropriate Section 106 agreement to secure the potential financial contributions towards off site affordable housing provision and the other contributions outlined in paragraph 6.7.1 of the report.

WARD:  Enfield Lock

NOTED

1.    The introduction by David Gittens, Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers.

3.    Members requested amendment to Condition 23 to require submission of a Community Use Strategy to ensure the re-provided social club fulfils a wider community need within use class D, and use in accordance with that strategy.

4.    The support of the majority of the committee for the officers’ recommendation: 8 votes for, 1 vote against.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report and amendment to Condition 23.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD: Bush Hill Park

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Kevin Tohill, Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    This item was considered alongside Item 7 – 17/04488/RE4.

3.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers.

4.    Following late representation from the Environment Agency in relation to environmental and flooding conditions, delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management to finalise conditions for deemed consent, in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992.

5.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

AGREED that planning permission be deemed to be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report, Environment Agency conditions and a condition regarding details of boundary treatment.

Reason:  Members concerns about the appearance of the wire mesh fence proposed notwithstanding the landscaping and the limited benefit towards noise attenuation. Discussion focussed on a more substantial structure, possibly a wall which would attenuate noise and visible screen the A10.

Note: It was requested that when details pursuant to this condition are submitted to be discharged, Chair, Vice Chair, Opposition Lead and Cllr Lappage to be consulted.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Bush Hill Park

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Kevin Tohill, Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    Considered alongside Item 6 – 17/03256/FUL

3.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers, including the re-positioning of the existing football pitch and the loss of 14 tennis courts.

4.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions and completion of Section 106 agreement.

WARD:  Edmonton Green

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Kevin Tohill, Planning Decisions Manager.

2.    The unanimous support of the committee for the officers’ recommendation.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report and completion of Section 106 Agreement.

NOTED

1.    It was expected that two committee meetings would be required in March: Thursday 1 March 2018 and Tuesday 20 March 2018.