Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Andy Milne.

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 February 2015.

AGREED the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 24 February 2015 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. 200).

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Winchmore Hill

NOTED

1.  The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager, highlighting the differences between the current application and the scheme refused in December 2004.

2.  The receipt of an additional objection from Winchmore Hill Residents’ Association.

3.  The statement of Councillor Dinah Barry, Winchmore Hill Ward Councillor against the application.

4.  The deputation of Mr Brian Foyle on behalf of Winchmore Hill Residents’ Association.

5.  The response of Mr Peter Tasker, the applicant.

6.  Members’ discussion and questions responded to by officers.

7.  The officers’ recommendation was approved unanimously by the Committee.

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to S106 Agreement / Unilateral Undertaking and conditions

WARD:  Grange

NOTED

1.  The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager, highlighting a previous application dismissed at appeal, and differences from the scheme now under consideration.

2.  Impact of the proposed extension on the structural stability and condition of the existing building was not a material planning consideration and would be addressed through other controls, including the Building Regulations.

3.  An additional condition was recommended to require submission of a bat survey prior to commencement of development and a mitigation strategy to be agreed should this reveal bats are present.

4.  The deputation of Mr Simon Barker, resident of one of the flats within the property.

5.  The response of Mr Paul Cavill, Hertford Planning Service, agent for the applicant.

6.  The comments of Mr Dennis Stacey, Chairman of Conservation Advisory Group.

7.  Members’ discussion and questions responded to by officers. Concerns were expressed regarding impact on the adjacent conservation area and that the proposed development would be over-dominant in appearance.

8.  Following a debate, the officers’ recommendation was not approved by the majority of the Committee: 4 votes for, 4 votes against and 2 abstentions. In view of the tied vote, and noting that the majority of the Committee did not feel able to approve the application, the Chair gave his casting vote against the proposal.

9.  The proposal that planning permission be refused because the development would detract from the setting of the conservation area and cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area as a result of its height and design was supported by a majority of the Committee: 5 votes for, 3 votes against and 2 abstentions.

AGREED that planning permission be refused for the reason below.

Reason:  The proposed development, by reason of the design of the additional floor and resultant height of the building would result in the introduction of an overly dominant form of development detracting from the setting of the Grange Park Conservation Area and would cause significant harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding area. In this respect the development would be contrary to Core Policies 30 and 31 of the Core Strategy, Policies DMD 6, 8, 37 and 44 of Development Management Document, London Plan policies 7.1, 7.4, 7.6 and 7.8, as well as the National Planning Policy Framework (Sections 7 and 12).

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Ponders End

NOTED

1.  The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.  The officers’ recommendation was approved unanimously by the Committee.

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to S106 Agreement and conditions

WARD:  Enfield Highway

NOTED

1.  The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager.

2.  The officers’ recommendation was approved unanimously by the Committee.

AGREED that, subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement, the Planning Decisions Manager / Head of Development Management be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions set out in the report.

NOTED

1.  The next meeting of the Planning Committee will be held on Tuesday 28 April. The venue will be Rooms 2 & 3, Dugdale Centre, Thomas Hardy House, 39 London Road, Enfield, EN2 6DS.

2.  The Planning Panel meeting regarding Edmonton County School and the multi-use games areas (MUGAs) would be held on Thursday 9 April at Enfield Civic Centre, Conference Room. The Panel would be made up of three members: Councillors Levy, During and Chamberlain (chair).