Agenda and minutes

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

Apologies for Absence was received from Councillor During.

Apologies for lateness was received from Councillor Hassan.

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

NOTED

1.    Councillor Simon declared a Non-Pecuniary interest  - He lived in Enfield Town Conservation Area, but the application did not affect his house – P13-03636PLA

2.    Councillor Pearce declared a Non-pecuniary interest - She went through the applicant’s correspondence, no pre-determination, she only listened to concerns as ward councillor – 16/00034/HOU.

To receive the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on Tuesday 23 February 2016.

AGREED the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 23 February 2016 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. 218).

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:  That subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the obligations as set out in the report, the Head of Development Management / a Planning Decisions Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions

WARD:  Grange

NOTED

1.    Development Management had received a letter from Solicitors representing a local resident and as there had not been time for officers’ to fully review the contents and decide whether it has any bearing on the assessment of the application to be determined before members of the planning committee.

2.    It was therefore proposed that the application be deferred and not considered at this meeting. A review of the letter will be appended to the Officers report when it comes before Planning Committee at the 26^th April 2016 meeting.

3.    The unanimous support of the committee to defer the application.

AGREED that the application is deferred to a future meeting.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to S106 to secure highway contributions and conditions

WARD:  Southgate

NOTED

1.    Introduction by Kevin Tohill (Planning Decisions Manager), clarifying the proposals.

2.    Letters were sent to 347 adjoining and nearby residents. Four responses were received which raised concerns, set out in the committee report.

3.    The nearest residential properties are those at Leigh Hunt Drive, Bourneside Crescent and Grange Gardens. The nearest blocks are at 25-42 Grange Gardens approximately 20 metres away (north east of the site), Bourneside Crescent approximately 20 metres away (north of the site) and 312-317 Leigh Hunt Drive approximately 50 metres away (south east of the site).

4.    Members and officers attended a committee site visit on Saturday 19^th March, 2016, viewing the site from the surrounding area and neighbours flat at 38 Grange Gardens.

5.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers regarding roof mounted equipment, screening measures for the closest residents and electric charge points.

6.    It was recommended that planning permission be granted subject to a Section 106 agreement to secure highway contributions. Officers requested authority be delegated to Head of Development Control and Decisions Managers to finalise and agree the Section 106 and the minor changes to the condition triggers to allow for staggered submissions (prior to commencement of development above ground).

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

AGREED that planning permission be granted subject to a Section 106 agreement to secure highway contributions, conditions set out in the report and the following:

1.    Condition 6 including control relating to roof mounted equipment.

2.    Condition added requiring mitigation measures for the closest residents.

3.    Signing of Section 106 (authority delegated to the Head of Development Control and decisions managers).

4.    Alterations to condition triggers to allow for staggered submissions (authority delegated to the Head of Development Control and decisions managers).

RECOMMENDATION:  That a deed of variation to the existing S106 be agreed in principle and delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management / a Planning Decisions Manager to issue the deed of variation subject to agreement on the wording of relevant definitions and clauses

WARD:  Highlands

NOTED

1.    The introduction by the Head of Development Management clarifying the proposals.

2.    The application sought permission for a deed of variation in respect of the Section 106 agreement linked to the outline planning permission for the redevelopment of the Hospital which the Committee had previously considered leading to outline planning consent being granted.

3.    The existing Section 106 agreement contained a number of obligations which limit the ability to occupy more than 69% of residential units before the transfers of land to a school provider and the school has been substantially commenced.

4.    This application had been submitted to remove the link between the residential and the delivery of the school. The land had now been acquired by the Council as Education Authority. The delivery of the 3FE school and any risk associated with this is therefore mitigated through this direct control over the land. Also, as part of the application, Planning had received commitments from the Council as Education Authority to the scheme, together with timescales for the construction programme. It is considered that this timescale is appropriate to ensure educational need is met. The need is already being met at a temporary school (The Ridgeway at Suffolk’s) which is delivering the current 1FE.

A provision has been made should the construction programme not be delivered for alternative measures to meet the need.

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

AGREED that a deed of variation to the existing Section 106 agreement be agreed in principle and delegated authority be granted to the Head of Development Management/Planning Decisions Managers to issue the deed of variation subject to agreement on the wording of relevant definitions and clauses.

RECOMMENDATION:  That subject to the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the obligations as set out in Section 6.9 of the report the Head of Development Management / a Planning Decisions Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions

WARD:  Chase

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Andy Bates (Planning Decisions Manager), clarifying the proposals.

2.    Permission was sought for the redevelopment of the site and that the scheme is anticipated to be the first of a two-phase development. The second phase to include land to the north (Redgates Nursery).

3.    Members’ debate and questions responded to by officers, including access to and from the site, impact of additional traffic on roads which Enfield is the Highways Authority for, the height of the development, density issues, on site contamination, internal noise levels, green wall proposal and a condition for a communal satellite system.

4.    The officers’ recommendation was supported by the majority of the committee: 10 votes for and 1 abstention.

AGREED that subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement to secure the obligations as set out in Section 6.9 of the report the Head of Development / Planning Decisions Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to conditions set out in the report and the following additional condition:

“Development shall not commence until details for the provision of a communal television system/satellite dish have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be undertaken in accordance with the approved detail.

Reason: In order to mitigate the possibility of numerous satellite dishes being installed on the buildings hereby approved in the interests of the visual appearance of the development, in particular, and the locality in general.

RECOMMENDATION:  Approval subject to conditions

WARD:  Winchmore Hill

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Andy Bates (Planning Decisions Manager) clarifying the proposals.

2.    Applications for development of this nature would normally be determined under delegated authority. However, the agent is retained by the Council’s Building Control team for occasional work and thus in accordance with the scheme of delegation, this application is reported to Planning Committee for consideration.

3.    Planning consent was sought for the demolition  of the existing ground floor bay window on the rear of the existing back edition and erection of a single – storey extension that infills the gap between the primary building and back addition of the site.

4.    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:  Winchmore Hill

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Andy Bates (Planning Decisions Manager) clarifying the proposals.

2.    Applications for development of this nature would normally be determined under delegated authority. However, the agent is retained by the Council’s Building Control team for occasional work and thus in accordance with the scheme of delegation, this application is reported to Planning Committee for consideration.

3.    Planning consent was sought for an extension of the roof at the side, to form a gable-end.

4.    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:  Cockfosters

NOTED

1.    The introduction by Kevin Tohill (Planning Decisions Manager), clarifying the proposals.

2.    A planning application of this nature would normally be determined under delegated authority. However, the agent occasionally works for the Building Control team within Development Management and in accordance with the scheme of delegation; the application is reported to planning committee for consideration.

3.    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 and the following additional informatives:

·         Notwithstanding the nature of the certificate which accompanied your application, this decision notice is issued on the understanding that there are no rights of way over the common passageway to the side of your property that would be affected by the implementation of the permission unless the prior agreement of the adjoining owner/occupier has been obtained.

·         Notwithstanding the nature of the certificate which accompanied your application, this decision notice is issued on the understanding that no gutters, footings or any other part of the development extends beyond the curtilage of the application premises, unless the prior agreement of the adjoining owner/occupier has been obtained.

·         It is also noted that the extension will be rendered/treated to match the external finish of the existing dwelling and this requirement is emphasized in the conditions of this planning permission. However, this permission in no way conveys any authority to enter upon the neighbour’s land to carry out works of construction or to render/treat the external walls of the extension. The applicant should, therefore, check to ensure that the neighbour will allow access for such work before commencing any construction. If access is refused, an alternative form of finishing material for the flank wall may need to be agreed with the planning department prior to any work on the extension commencing.

NOTED

1.    It was unlikely that the provisional date of 3 May 2016 would be required.

2.    The next meeting of the Planning committee would be Tuesday 26 April 2016.