Agenda and draft minutes

Conservation Advisory Group - Tuesday, 10th March, 2020 7.00 pm

Venue: Conference Room, Civic Centre, Silver Street, Enfield, EN1 3XA. View directions

Contact: Andy Higham 

Items
No. Item

1.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (if any)

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Brown, from Anne Bishop Laggatt (Enfield Federation of Tenants and Residents Associations) and J Dougharty (Southgate District Civic Trust).

 

The chair welcomed new members. 

2.

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

Membersof the ConservationAdvisory Groupare invitedto identify any disclosablepecuniary,other pecuniaryor non-pecuniaryinterests relevantto itemson theagenda.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest. 

3.

MINUTES of the Previous Meeting pdf icon PDF 253 KB

To confirm the Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Group that took place on Tuesday 14 January 2020. 

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 January 2020 were agreed as a correct record with the following addition: 

 

Andy Higham (Head of Development Management) had said that no environmental impact statement was required on the Southgate Office Island Village.  Minute 11 (11.1). 

 

 

 

4.

Presentation on Proposals for Arnos Grove Underground Station Car Park

To receive a presentation on the proposals for Arnos Grove Underground Station Car Park. 

Minutes:

The group received a presentation from Connected for London representatives on their proposals for a development at Arnos Grove Underground Station.

 

The following points were highlighted:

 

·         The Arnos Grove Underground Station was a Grade II listed building.

·         The proposals relate to the car parks surrounding the building.  A planning application was due to be submitted this month. 

·         The proposal was part of a joint venture between Grainger and Transport for London involving seven Transport for London sites including Arnos Grove and Cockfosters in Enfield. 

·         The properties were to be built as 162 build to rent homes.  Forty percent would be affordable.  Any money made would reinvested in the transport network. 

·         The development would include a range of amenity spaces including a gym.  It would be highly managed and include a concierge service.  They would also have access to sustainable travel and there would be no need for car parking spaces. 

·         It was a sensible and sustainable design.  Heritage advisors had been involved from the start and consultations with the Twentieth Century Society and also Historic England had taken place. 

·         The proposals involved four buildings.  Those adjacent to the station would have fewer storeys so that the view of the drum shape of the  tube station against the sky would remain.  There would also be a public square with a single storey café.

·         The materials to be used were simple and robust with references to Art Deco apartment buildings of the period.  Brick would be two colours.  A white contrasting brick band.  There would also be steel balconies with a sold appearance.  A sample panel will be provided. 

·         The three-storey building to the right was in scale with the historic high street.

·         As the site falls away at the back there will be a wooded triangle garden accessible to all residents. 

2.         Comments from CAG members

 

2.1            In principle the Enfield Society were supportive.  The local group thought that the colours of the brick work would be critical and that detailing was important. 

2.2            Concern about the lack of detail on the gable wall fronting the street on the three-storey building. 

2.3            CAG was advised that all the apartments would be rental properties.  They would all have internet cabling which should avoid issues with satellite dishes.

2.4            Concerns were expressed about long term maintenance responsibilities.

2.5           The ugly bus stop and taxi rank exchange in front of the station building is a source of concern to CAG.  Assurances were sought from TfL and Enfield that this area would be renewed and properly integrated into the completed works.  Further details are due to be discussed and it was hoped to use some Community Infrastructure funding to resolve. 

TfL commented further following questions from CAG members;

 

2.6            A small corner of the site had been left to enable Transport for London to build step free access to the station in the future if they had the funding.  Although this was a difficult site in which to create step free access and was a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Heritage Briefing

To receive a briefing on heritage matters. 

Minutes:

Christine White (Heritage and Urban Design Manager) presented the heritage briefing which had been circulated earlier in the day. 

 

She highlighted the following: 

 

·         The National Heritage Lottery Fund Call for Projects closed on the 14 February 2020.  Over 150 project ideas were put forward. 

·         Officers are sifting through the ideas to put them into 3 categories.  Those that are most promising will be supported to obtain lottery funding.  This should be done within 6 months. 

·         Two at risk heritage assets were the Charity Hall and School House in Edmonton and the Clarendon Arch in Bush Hill Park. 

·         Officers were working with the owner, the London Historic Building Preservation Trust (LHBPT), the Enfield Society and Historic England to help develop a project for use of the Charity Hall and School House.  Funding had been obtained for viability work.  There were also complex legal issues.  Negotiations were also taking place with the Live in Guardians organisation, to enable people to live in the buildings on a temporary basis. 

·         Officers from the Council, Thames Water, Historic England and the Enfield Society met on site to consider options for the Clarendon Arch.   The grade II listed building was at risk because of the amount of vegetation growth.  There were complex issues because of multiple land owners.  It was hoped that Thames Water would be able to clear some of the vegetation including ash saplings.  There were also plans to improve access and to better display information about the historic structure. 

·         There is an update on the changes to the Local Plan.  They were now looking at the evidence base. Christine will circulate the link. 

·         The Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission had released a report “Living with Beauty” with guidelines advising the Government on how to achieve high quality design.  There are 44 recommendations in 8 policy areas. 

·         Enfield will be taking part in Open House Weekend on 19 and 20 September.  The Council is grateful for the support of the Enfield Society.  Ideas for property openings should be put forward next month.

 

Responses to Queries from CAG members

 

·         Viability work on proposals for Broomfield House was almost complete.  The working group will be reporting back in the next few months. 

·         Further information was requested about Southgate House, a listed grade II building. 

6.

Planning Applications for Discussion pdf icon PDF 8 MB

To receive a list of planning applications for discussion.  Appendix B. 

Minutes:

North View, Trent Park, Cockfosters Road, Barnet, EN4 0PS (REF: 19/0414164/HOU)

 

This was a proposal for a two-storey side extension with new entrance to the side for a late 19th century/early 20th Century semi-detached cottage commissioned by the Bevan family to house estate workers within the Trent Park conservation area.  The cottage has already been extended.  The meeting noted that the cottage dimensions of the original building had long been surpassed. The proposed design extends the property in a sympathetic style to the original.

 

SUPPORTED

 

72 Vicars Moor Lane, London N21 2QH (REF: 20/00221/LBC)

 

This was a proposal for a single storey rear extension and enlargement of basement to a Grade II listed, mid late 19th century terraced town house within the boundaries of the Vicars Moor Lane Conservation Area. 

 

NOTED

 

1.            A previous application had been refused because insufficient information had been received.

2.            Information on the impact of the proposals on the heritage fabric of the building was still lacking. 

Following discussion, the majority agreed to support the application but subject to receiving heritage details on the impact of the existing fabric of the building. 

 

SUPPORTED with conditions regarding the impact on the existing fabric. 

 

34-38 Church Street, Enfield, EN2 6BA (REF: 20/00304/FUL)

 

This was a proposal for a second and third floor extension to provide 6 additional self-contained flats on top of an early 20th century building in the Enfield Town Conservation area. 

 

Bridget Pereira showed the meeting a revised front elevation showing enlarged windows in the upper level.

 

CAG were concerned over the lack a heritage statement and the lack of any details regarding materials. The site is in the centre of Enfield Town conservation area and should they felt be shown more respect.

 

CAG asked for a comprehensive heritage statement and a palette of proposed materials.

 

SUPPORTED subject to material detail. 

 

Land Between 8 and 10 Little Park Gardens, Enfield, EN2 6PQ

 

This was a proposal for the part subdivision of 8 and 10 Little Park Gardens and the erection of a detached two storey single family dwelling house next to a later 1880’s detached villa in the boundaries of the Enfield Town Conservation Area. 

 

NOTED

 

1.            A previous application had been objected to by CAG and, subsequently, refused.

2.            Very little appeared to have changed in this new application.

3.            The photomontages do not, in CAG’s view, show the correct distances between the proposed house and that of its neighbours (particularly No 10).  

4.            The new house was out of proportion with its setting.

5.            It infilled the space between the existing houses and blocks key views (e.g. the attractive side elevation of No10).  

6.            The proposed design is out of character with the conservation area. 

7.            The design is a mixture, both modern (upper level) and traditional (ground floor) and is not in keeping with the conservation area.

OBJECTION

7.

CHAIR'S FEEDBACK FROM PLANNING COMMITTEE

Toreceivefor informationfeedbackfrom previous Planning Committees. 

Minutes:

Since CAG’s last meeting there have been no applications put before the planning committee that have been on CAG’s agendas.  

8.

CONSERVATION OFFICER'S UPDATES AT CASES DISCUSSED AT PREVIOUS CAG MEETINGS pdf icon PDF 92 KB

To receive an update on cases discussed at previous CAG meetings.  Appendix C

Minutes:

RECEIVED and noted. 

9.

Conservation Areas, Listed Building Applications and Appeals Determined

To receive information about conservation areas, listed building applications and appeals determined. 

Minutes:

There has been a problem in the production of the weekly list.  This will be circulated once the system is working properly.

10.

OPEN SESSION

Toenablemembers of the ConservationAdvisoryGroup to bringup urgentmatters not covered elsewhere on theagenda

Minutes:

1.            Old Park Road and Enforcement Issues

 

The Lakes Estate representative had contacted enforcement about, apparent, unauthorised work on a house in Old Park Road. The notification was a mistake (temporary works). The enforcement officer had advised the owner that the source was a neighbour’s complaint. This has caused much angst in the locality.  

 

Andy Higham advised that enforcement officers should never identify complainants. He would reinforce that policy.

 

2.            Weekly List

 

The lists were not produced in alphabetical order which made it hard to search for particular applications.  This was due to a problem in the system following an upgrade and would be rectified as soon as possible. 

 

3.            103 Chase Side – Shop Front

 

The shopfront next to 103 Chase Side, which is in the conservation area, had been demolished. This has raised doubts as to what has been approved regarding Chase Side Medical Centre.  Andy Higham agreed to investigate. 

 

4.            CCTV Cameras in Cannon Hill to enforce 20mph zones

 

A camera had been installed without any consultation and in the opinion of the the Southgate Study Group in the wrong place. 

 

5.            Cockfosters Underground Station Car Park Development 

 

Andy Higham advised that there was no requirement for a development of this size to have an environmental impact statement.  This does not mean that these issues will not be covered within other sections of the application.  CAG members requested that the developers be invited to make a presentation to CAG.

11.

CALENDAR OF MEETINGS pdf icon PDF 7 KB

To note the calendar of meetings for 2019/20 and that the date of the next meeting will be Tuesday 7 April 2020. 

Minutes:

Post meeting note: – CAG’s April meeting has been cancelled owing to the Covid 19 pandemic.

 

The meeting schedule for Enfield Council’s 2020/21 year is now in preparation. Members will be advised further.