Agenda and minutes

Councillor Simon, Chair, welcomed all attendees, including Kevin Tohill, who is to be the new Planning Decisions Manager (North Area) and explained the order of the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Savva. Apologies for lateness were received from Councillor J. Charalambous.

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 22 September 2015.

AGREED the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 22 September 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. 100).

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.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Palmers Green

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager (South Area) clarifying the application site.

2.    The application proposed the demolition of the existing two storey rear addition and the rebuilding of a new extension of comparable scale and bulk for the provision of further office space.

3.    The widening of the extension would prevent vehicle access to the rear of the property, which currently exists, preventing access to the existing parking spaces to the rear. Traffic & Transportation were satisfied that there were sufficient spaces to the front of the property.

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

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

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Ponders End

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager (South Area) clarifying the application site which proposed the use of the mid terraced property as an HMO for a maximum of 4 people.

2.    The Council adopted policies sets certain criteria against which to assess such applications. The application met:

·         Sufficient dwelling size to accommodate 4 people.

·         Bedroom sizes met the minimum requirement of 8 sq.m for a single bedroom and the combined kitchen/living/dining area is 29.5sq.m above the minimum requirement of 27 sq.m.

·         Not to exceed 20% of conversion in any road – no other properties along the road had been converted.

·         Not lead to unacceptable noise and disturbance. The occupation of a maximum of 4 people was unlikely to be any different if the property remained in single family occupation. A condition is recommended limiting occupancy to 4, which is in place.

·         There would be minimal net change in demand for car parking compared to use as a single family dwelling.

3.    The statement of Councillor Don McGowan, Ponders End Ward Councillor, against the application, which was tabled and read out by Councillor Ayfer Orhan, Ponders End Ward Councillor.

4.    The statement of Councillor Ayfer Orhan, Ponders End Ward Councillor, against the application. All three Ponders End Ward Councillors opposed the application, including Councillor Doug Taylor (Leader of the Council).

5.    The deputation of Stephen Dupey (applicant).

6.    The comments of Dennis Stacey, Chair of CAG.

7.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers. Concerns were raised regarding the level of occupancy, anti-social behaviour and the lack of building control for an HMO property as opposed to a single occupancy house.

8.    The officers’ recommendation was supported by a majority of the committee: 9 votes for and 1 abstention.

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Highlands

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager clarifying the application site.

2.    Outline planning permission had already been granted for the redevelopment of the site to include the provision of a new hospital. This proposal sought to provide the temporary buildings on the site necessary to deliver this and to facilitate the redevelopment.

3.    In terms of tree protection (para 6.6.6.) the Tree Officer was concerned about the impact of the raised decking to the new café which could have an impact on the root protection zone of protected trees and the surfacing works associated with the green gym. This could be addressed through amendments to the extent of the raised decking/surfacing and therefore a condition requiring the submission of further details of this and appropriate tree protection measures is required (detailed below).

4.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers. Concerns were raised regarding the location of the café, the clock tower, green gym and tree protection.

5.    Following a debate, the unanimous support of the officers’ recommendation by the committee.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions within the report and the additional condition below:

Notwithstanding the plans submitted, development shall not commence on the erection of the temporary café building and associated decking or on the surfacing works for the green gym, until revised details of the extent of the decking/surfacing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (LPA). The works shall be completed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To safeguard the existing trees.

RECOMMENDATION:  Refusal

WARD:  Cockfosters

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager (South Area) clarifying the application site.

2.    Councillor Charalambous joined the meeting at 20:05 pm but was unable to vote on this item due to lateness.

3.    Planning permission was originally granted at Planning Committee in April 2015 for the erection of a two storey side extension, and a part single part two storey rear extension. The application now proposed a two storey rear extension 3.5m in depth on the boundary with No.71. This would not be compliant with the Council’s adopted policies.

4.    The deputation of Mr Ian Eggleton (Agent).

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

6.    The officers’ recommendation was supported by the committee: 9 votes for and 1 abstention.

AGREED that planning permission be Refused.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Bowes

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Head of Development Management clarifying the application site.

2.    The proposed conversion to HMO use was previously occupied as a 7 bed children’s home and would not involve a loss of single family accommodation.

3.    Figures at 6.10, of the report, show the number of converted properties in the street, which is over 50% which would make it difficult to argue harm to residential amenity.

4.    The standard of residential accommodation exceeded the floor space requirements of the London Plan.

5.    The provision of 1 car parking space. Due to low level of car ownership in the street, Traffic and Transportation noted that additional parking demand could be accommodated on street.

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

7.    The officers’ recommendation was supported by the committee: 7 votes for and 4 against.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions within the report and the amendment below to condition 2 to read:

The development hereby approved shall be laid out in accordance with the approved plans and the rooms identified on the approved plans as ‘office/store’ (first floor) and ‘store’ (Attic floor) shall only be used for those purposes and shall not be used for habitable purposes. There shall be no deviation from the number, size or mix of bedrooms without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Southbury

NOTED

1.    This application was debated at the same time as application ref: 14/04999/FUL, but a separate decision made for each application.

2.    Introduction by the Head of Development Management, summarising the proposals, and the planning history, and highlighting the key issues.

3.    The only item to report was to apologise for an error in the agent details which need to be removed.

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

5.    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.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Southbury

NOTED

1.    This application was introduced and debated in parallel with application ref: 14/04997/FUL, but voted on separately.

2.    Introduction by the Head of Development Management summarising the proposals and planning history.

3.    Car parking provision was considered acceptable although there was a requirement by TfL for 12 cycle parking spaces together with cycle changing facilities. Condition 10 would need to be amended accordingly.

4.    The only further item to report was to apologise for an error in the agent details which needed to be removed.

5.    The comments of Mr Dennis Stacey (CAG Chair).

6.    Members’ discussion and questions responded to by officers’. Members’ comments included:

a.    that the application would provide a welcome improvement to both sides of Lincoln Road.

b.    Concern regarding the mini model to the front of the building.

7.    The support of a majority of the Committee for the officers’ recommendation: 9 votes for, 1 against and 1 abstention.

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

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to S106 Agreement and conditions

WARD:  Cockfosters

NOTED

1.    Introduction by the Planning Decisions Manager, summarising the proposals, and the planning history, and highlighting the key issues.

2.    The use of the school house itself as a dwelling house was granted a lawful development certificate in September 2013. Planning permission was granted on appeal in August 2011 and the full appeal decision is appended to the report.

3.    The proposal provides for the retention of the two protected trees on the site.

4.    The application no longer includes solar panels to the roof given the objections raised by the Conservation Officer.

5.    Correction to the description was reported. The description of development as confirmed with the agent is “Erection of new residential dwellings”.

6.    The comments of Dennis Stacey, Chair of CAG.

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

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

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

NOTED that the provisional meeting date of 10 November  2015 would not be required for a meeting of Planning Committee. The next meeting would therefore be on 24 November 2015.

1.    There will be a site visit to the following 2 planning application sites, which are due to be determined on the 24 November 2015 Planning Committee meeting.

The sites visits will be taking place on Saturday 21 November 2015 to the following sites:

·         36 Walsingham Road, Enfield

·         18 – 20 Bush Hill, Enfield

           Councillors are asked to meet at 09:00am at the first address (36 Walsingham Road, Enfield) and can then move onto the second site, which is in close proximity to the first address.