Agenda item

RECOMMENDATION:

1.    That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, subject to NO OBJECTIONS being received from the Environment Agency, referral of the application to the Greater London Authority and the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the matters covered in this report, the Head of Development Management be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

2.    If an OBJECTION is raised by the Environment Agency, the Chair, Vice Chair and Opposition Lead will be consulted to determine if any changes required to address the objections require the scheme to be brought back to Planning Committee for decision.

3.    That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to finalise the wording of the S106 Agreement and agree the final wording of the conditions to cover the matters in the Recommendation section of this report.

Ward: Upper Edmonton

1.    The introduction by Karolina Grebowiec-Hall (Principal Planner), clarifying the proposals. An update report was circulated with amendments to the report including the assessment of flood risk, ecology, viability, and waste management as well as an update to the recommendation.

2.    The deputation of Matt Burn, who spoke against the officers’ recommendation, asking for deferral in order to address three main concerns. Firstly, if the Community Garden could be made permanent; secondly for the cycle and bin store distance issues to be addressed and thirdly to fully consult the London Fire Brigade regarding the safety of the single staircase design.

3.    The response from Sara Parkinson (Vistry).

4.    Members commented on the flood risk. Strong concerns were also raised regarding the safety of a single staircase design by several members. Cllr Chamberlain noted that while legally permitted, that was likely to change and that he felt that the technical safeguards were insufficient. The adequacy of play space, safety of roof garden, height, the function of waste services, no family sized units and the lack of response from the Fire Brigade and the education department was also raised. There were additional questions regarding the naturalisation of Pymmes Brook.  

5.    Officers explained the play space available is appropriate in relation to the number of children expected and the comments of Sport England had been addressed by the proposal. The wind conditions around the building can be dealt with by a planning condition to ensure there is appropriate mitigation. Sprinklers will be installed into the building. The arrangements for waste are set out in the update report. The collection of waste by the refuse collector will require a managed solution and the S106 Agreement will include a requirement for an Estate Management Plan that will need to cover this.

6.    Following questions from members, Officers confirmed that the application would provide 143 jobs during the construction period, including 45 apprenticeships. The non-residential floor space will be returned to Enfield Council for future allocation use.

7.    The new Section 106 will cover the provision of 2 bus stops in which crossing points will be considered. Condition 46 covers a waste management plan to ensure it works for the development and future residents.

8.    The Director of Planning and Growth confirmed that the flood risk had been under significant assessment over the past 9 months, and that the Environment Agency supported the recommendation. The Council’s LLFA officer and team also supported the recommendation of this application. In the very unlikely event there was an issue, the item would be referred back to the Planning Committee. The Legal Team consider this approach to be reasonable.

9.    On the basis that the proposal had a number of issues remaining to be resolved, a motion was proposed by Cllr Rye, and seconded by Cllr Chamberlain to defer making a decision against the officer’s recommendation to grant planning permission. This was on the basis that the application was deficient in resolving the flooding issue, management of waste, appropriate play space and fire safety, particularly the use of a single stairwell.  

10. The majority voted against the motion, with 6 against and 5 for. The motion was not carried.

11. The officer’s recommendation put before members was considered and then agreed with 6 votes for, 2 against and 2 abstentions. 

AGREED:

1.    If NO OBJECTION is received from the Environment Agency, following referral of the application to the Greater London Authority and the completion of a S106 Agreement to secure the matters covered in this report, the Head of Development Management shall be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to conditions.

2.    If an OBJECTION is raised by the Environment Agency but they request additional information and/or changes in order for their objection to be withdrawn,  and this is provided and/or agreed to be provided such that it leads to a withdrawal of the objection, the Chair, Vice Chair and Opposition Lead shall be consulted to determine if the changes required to address the objections raised by the Environment Agency require the scheme to be brought back to Planning Committee for further consideration.

3.    If an OBJECTION is maintained by the Environment Agency which cannot be resolved, or it is agreed with the Chair, Vice Chair and Opposition Lead following paragraph 2 above that the matter should be brought back to Planning Committee this item shall be referred back to this Committee for further consideration.

4.    That the Head of Development Management be granted delegated authority to finalise the wording of the S106 Agreement and agree the final wording of the conditions to cover the matters in the Recommendation section of this report.