Welcome and Legal Statement

Planning Committee - 17.4.2008

<AI1>

1050

WELCOME AND LEGAL STATEMENT

The Chairman welcomed attendees to the Planning Committee and introduced Nathalie Boateng, Legal representative, who read a statement regarding the order and conduct of the meeting.

</AI1>

<AI2>

1051

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

NOTED apologies for absence were received from Councillors Constantinides, McGowan, McGregor and E Savva.

</AI2>

<AI3>

1052

DECLARATION OF INTERESTS

NOTED that there were no declarations of interest from Members present in relation to any items on the meeting agenda.

</AI3>

<AI4>

1053

MINUTES

AGREED that the minutes of the Planning Committee meeting held on 25 March 2008 be confirmed as a correct record.

</AI4>

<AI5>

1054

Order of agenda

AGREED that the order of the agenda be varied to accommodate the members of the public in attendance at the meeting. The minutes follow the order taken at the meeting.

</AI5>

<AI6>

1055

TP/08/0017 - 740 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 6PR

NOTED

1.The main issue which had been raised by local residents opposed to the application was the number of food outlets in Hertford Road. Within the borough there were 203 licensed restaurants, 43 unlicensed restaurants, 238 cafes, 310 take-aways and 127 pubs/bars.

2.The receipt of written objection from Councillor Boast (Turkey Street Ward Councillor).

3.The submission by the Area Planning Manager of a plan showing take-away food premises within approximately 10 minutes walking distance of the application site.

4.The Area Planning Manager’s statement of relevant previous planning history and decisions.

5.The statement of Councillor Boast, Turkey Street ward councillor, including:

i.there were numerous retail outlets in the immediate vicinity selling food;

ii.take-away food shops generated litter;

iii.local residents had long standing concerns about the run-down state of the Hertford Road;

iv.the Council had recognised that the Hertford Road was in need of rejuvenation and permitting another take-away food shop would not uplift the area;

v.he urged the Committee to refuse the application.

6.Discussion in relation to local residents concerns regarding increased litter and the changing nature of the local shopping area. A condition to be included regarding additional litter bins.

7.Proposed conditions included restrictions on the hours of use and delivery.

8.Councillor Anwar’s proposal that the application be approved, supported by a majority of the Committee.

AGREED that planning permission be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report and the additional condition detailed below, for the reasons set out in the report.

Prior to the opening of the hot food take away premises hereby approved, agreement shall have been entered into to secure the provision of an additional litter bin outside the premises or if more appropriate, elsewhere within the vicinity, in accordance with detail to be agreed with the local planning authority.

Reason: in order to reduce litter and improve the appearance and quality of the residential environment.

</AI6>

<AI7>

1056

TP/08/0085 - 864-866 Hertford Road, Enfield, EN3 6UD

NOTED

1.The receipt of written objection from Councillor Boast (Turkey Street ward councillor).

2.It was an outline application and only details relating to scale, layout and means of accesses were to be considered at this stage.

3.The Area Planning Manager’s clarification of density of the development, amenity space and car parking, including:

i.elevation drawings were indicative and were not for approval at this stage;

ii. the window, on the top floor facing the rear gardens of properties fronting Broad Oak Avenue, indicted on the drawings was not required;

iii.this window would be omitted from the details of external appearance as required by proposed condition 2. However to reinforce this point additional conditions were recommended to provide that there should be no fenestration on this elevation and no recreational use of the flat roof.

4.The statement of Councillor Boast, Turkey Street ward councillor, including:

i.the withdrawal of windows on the 4th floor was welcomed;

ii.the proposed four storey development would overlook Broadoak Avenue and result in a loss of privacy for residents;

iii.the application was not in keeping with the surrounding buildings which were 3 and 2 storeys;

iv.he urged the Committee to reject the application or at the very least restrict its height to that of the houses in Broadoak Avenue.

5.Members’ concerns that the proposed development provided for one and two bed accommodation when more family sized accommodation was required in the borough.

6.General discussion on the merits of the application including mix of unit size, the height and bulk of the 4 storey block and consequent loss of light and privacy for residents in Broadoak Avenue.

AGREED that consideration of the application be deferred to enable further discussions regarding

a)Reducing the height of the rear block from 3 storey to 2/3 storey

b)Reducing the height of the front block from 4 storey to 3 storey

c)An increase in family sized accommodation mix of the proposal

Note: Members placed particular emphasis on concerns relating to the height of the rear block.

</AI7>

<AI8>

1057

TP/08/0163 - Central Library - Cecil Road, Enfield, EN2 6TG

NOTED

1.The Conservation Advisory Group (CAG) had considered the application. A number of issues had been discussed including:

i.the size of the extension compared to the existing building;

ii.the welcomed retention of the Carnegie building;

iii.the design concept to provide a clear identity between the existing and new buildings;

iv.the new solid stone wall;

v.the felling of trees and garden space.

However CAG had resolved to accept the design, subject to a review of the link and cornice with a view to enhancing the break between the old and the new.

2.Discussion in relation to the merits of the scheme including the felling of trees, the blank wall facing onto Cecil Road and the impact on the Conservation Area. Proposal to amend condition 1.

3.Councillor Simon’s proposal that the application be approved, supported by a majority of the Committee. (Councillor Buckland voted against the application.)

AGREED that planning permission be granted in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, subject to the conditions set out in the report, as amended below, for the reasons set out in the report.

Alteration to Condition 1

The development shall not commence until details of the external finishing materials to be used including samples of the stonework for the Cecil Road elevation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory external appearance having regard to the special character and appearance of the building and is contribution to the Enfield Town Conservation Area.

Note: The discharge of this Condition and in particular the approval of the stonework to the Cecil Road elevation, shall be subject to consultation with Chairman of Planning Committee and Chair/Vic Chair of CAG.

</AI8>

<AI9>

1058

CAC/08/0004 - Central Library, Cecil Road, Enfield, EN2 6TG

AGREED that Conservation Area Consent be granted, subject to the conditions set out in the report, for the reasons set out in the report.

</AI9>

<AI10>

1059

TP/07/2392 - 44A The Mall, London, N14 6LN

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

</AI10>

<AI11>

1060

TP/08/0165 - 42 High Street, London, N14 6EB

AGREED to defer consideration of the application to permit wider notification of the Committee date following discussion with local residents concerned about the proposal.

</AI11>

<AI12>

1061

TP/08/0167 - Salisbury Lower School, Turin Road, London, N9 8DQ

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

</AI12>

<AI13>

1062

REVIEW OF PRIORITIES FOR PLANNING ENFORCEMENT INVESTIGATIONS (REPORT NO. 284)

RECEIVED the report of the Assistant Director – Environmental Protection and Regulation (Report No. 284).

NOTED

1.The report was introduced by John Lynch, interim Borough Planning Officer, highlighting that:

i.overall performance of the Planning Enforcement team had improved with a reduction in the backlog of planning enforcement investigations;

ii.the proposed prioritisation model for dealing with planning enforcement investigations provided an efficient process for issues to be addressed;

iii.continued co-ordination and co-operation between relevant departments would deliver improved service;

iv.the prioritisation model would be further reviewed to deliver a focus on the quality of outcomes.

2.Alan Shaw, Head of Environmental Crime, advised that:

i.the Environment, Parks and Leisure Scrutiny Panel and the Green Belt Forum had previously considered the Priorities for Planning Enforcement;

iithe following amendments were proposed to the changes detailed in the report:

a.Priority 1 – deletion of “within a conservation or Article 4 area”

b.Priority 2 – deletion of italicised text “Major building works recently commenced or substantially undertaken at resident properties (e.g., extensions, dormers) outside a Conservation or Article 4 area.”

3.Councillor Dreblow’s concerns regarding general understanding that hedgerows were included under the priority 1 of “felling and lopping of trees (the subject of a Preservation Order or in Conservation Area)”.

4.The list of priorities for planning enforcement was not exhaustive and appropriate and rapid interventions could be made should matters of urgency arise outside of the stated criteria.

5.The Chairman proposed that the priorities for planning enforcement investigations be approved on the basis that this was a work in progress and that a further report would be submitted shortly.

AGREED to adopt the priorities for planning enforcement investigations.

</AI13>

<AI14>

1063

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ANNUAL REVIEW 2007/08 (REPORT NO. 285)

RECEIVED the report of the interim Borough Planning Officer (Report No. 285).

NOTED

1.Julian Jackson, Head of Development Control, introduced the report and highlighted:

i.in 2007/08 3,994 planning applications had been registered, 3,285 of which were considered under the BV109 Performance Indicator;

ii.of the 3,825 BVPI 109 applications 219 (6.6%) were retrospective planning applications, of which 39.6% had been refused;

iii.overall 24.55% of planning applications had been refused;

iv.the borough’s performance on BVPI 109 was above the national target;

v.minor and other planning applications had also exceeded local targets which were set above national targets;

vi.40.88% of planning appeals had been allowed. There was no single reason for this and a review would be undertaken to put actions in place to improve performance;

vii.since April 2007 a charging scheme for pre-application enquiries on major development proposals had been operated which had generated a source of income for the Council;

viii.regular Developers and Agents Forums had been held throughout the year;

ix.the 2007/08 Design Awards had been successful in raising the profile of achieving good design in the borough.

2.Approximately 800 residents had attended Planning Committees and Panels over the past year.

3.On behalf of the Committee, the Chairman thanked Julian Jackson and other officers for their diligence and support to the Planning Committee. Councillor Simon endorsed these comments and added that the quality of reports submitted to the Committee had allowed the Committee to effectively debate each application.

4.The Chairman also thanked members for their support and commitment in determining planning applications without political party bias.

5.On behalf of the Committee, Councillor Simon thanked Councillor Prescott for his chairmanship of the Committee over the last year.

All business of the Planning Committee thus being concluded, the meeting ended at 9.20pm.

</AI14>

<TRAILER_SECTION>

</TRAILER_SECTION>

<LAYOUT_SECTION>

1064FIELD_ITEM_NUMBER

FIELD_TITLE

FIELD_SUMMARY

</LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

1065FIELD_ITEM_NUMBER

FIELD_TITLE

</TITLE_ONLY_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

</HEADING_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_TITLE

</ TITLED_COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

FIELD_SUMMARY

</ COMMENT_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

1065.1FIELD_TITLE

FIELD_SUMMARY

</SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

<TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

1065.2FIELD_TITLE

</TITLE_ONLY_SUBNUMBER_LAYOUT_SECTION>

- 1 -