Application Number: LBC/06/0029 Ward: Cockfosters Date of Registration: 6Th September 2006

PLANNING COMMITTEE - 30th November 2006

Application Number: LBC/06/0029 Ward: Cockfosters Date of Registration: 6th September 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: DE BOHUN PRIMARY SCHOOL, GREEN ROAD, LONDON, N14 4AD

Proposal: Replacement of boundary fence fronting Green Road with railing fence and gates and new internal railing fence (revised scheme).

Applicant Name & Address:

De Bohun Primary School DE BOHUN PRIMARY SCHOOL GREEN ROAD LONDON N14 4AD

Agent Name & Address:

Construction Technical Services, London Borough of Enfield ARLINGTON HOUSE 79, HIGH STREET ENFIELD EN3 4EN

Recommendation: That listed building consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. No development shall commence until revised details of the copingstone incorporating an overhang beyond the face of the brick piers have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved detail.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory external appearance and to protect the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building.

2. The development shall not commence until details of the external finishing materials to be used 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 and to protect the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building.

3. C53A Time Limit - Listed Building Consent

Site and Surroundings

De Bohun Primary School consists of two predominantly two-storey buildings located to the north side of Green Road. The surrounding area is residential. The school is situated on an area of Metropolitan Open Land and together with the existing boundary wall on Green Road, is Grade II listed

Amplification of Proposal

Permission is sought to replace the existing wooden picket fence along the boundary with Green Road. The proposed boundary treatment consists of black metal railings and gates measuring 1.75m in height, supported by brick piers (1.25m high x 0.55m wide x 0.55m deep), topped by a copingstone, which sits flush on top. The main entrance gates consist of a vehicular access gate and a pedestrian access gate.

An application for planning permission is considered elsewhere on this agenda under reference TP/06/1700.

Relevant Planning Decisions

TP/05/1180 - an application for the replacement of the boundary fence fronting Green Road with railing fence and gates and new internal railing fence was refused in November 2005

Consultations

Public:

Consultation letters have been sent to 19 neighbouring properties. Notice was also placed on display at the site and published in the local press. No letters of objection have been received

External:

English Heritage raised no objection subject to the rationalisation of the pier design being secured by officers.

Internal:

Education, Children's Services and Leisure supported the proposal, stressing the urgent need to repair the fence in order to maintain the safety of pupils.

Conservation Advisory Group:

The Group raised no objection in principle subject to satisfactory details being secured by officers.

It was noted that on the plans originally submitted with the application that the design of the piers was asymmetrical and irregular (size and height), and that the finishing / coping detail was inappropriate. Concern that inappropriate signage would be subsequently affixed to the wall or railings was expressed.

Revised drawings were submitted by the applicant in response to these concerns but in accordance with the resolution, have not been referred back to the Group

Relevant Policy

London Plan

Policy 4C.10: Historic environment Policy 4B.11: Heritage conservation

Policy 4B.7: Respect local context and communities Policy 3D.9: Metropolitan Open Land

UDP Policy

(I) GD1 - Regard to surroundings (I) GD2 - Development to improve the environment (II) GD3 - Aesthetic and functional design (I) C1 - Preservation and enhancement of buildings of historic interest (II) C17 - Development of listed buildings (II) C11 - Preservation of buildings with historic or architectural importance (II) C12 - protection of buildings with historical or architectural importance (II) O5 - Suitable developments in and around Metropolitan Open Land

Interim UDP Amendments

(II) SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Policy Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment

Analysis

Principle

As highlighted by the Director of Education, Children's Services and Leisure, the existing railings and gates are in a dilapidated state with some posts missing. It is acknowledged that this results not only in an aesthetically poor frontage for the school harming the setting of this Grade 2 listed building but also gives rise to safety issues for the children inside. The replacement of the existing railings is therefore highly desirable and no objection is raised in principle to this. The visual acceptance of these proposals is considered elsewhere on this agenda by the corresponding application for planning permission. Here, however, acceptability will be dependant on the size, design and materials of the proposed replacement and their impact on the special architectural and historic character and appearance of the Grade 2 listed building.

Impact on Special Character and Appearance of the Grade 2 listed building.

The School dates from 1936 and it is considered to be " an important example of 1930s Middlesex County Council school building in this Dutch-inspired version of modernism, part of a group of grade II listed buildings of similar design in the area. As with most listed buildings, the essence of its special interest lies in the balance between its plan form, massing, materials, detailing and setting, in the context of its development and importance within its social and historical background" In particular, the listing refers to a pair of iron gates at the front in the art deco style.

The originally submitted proposals were considered unacceptable, primarily in respect of the design of the piers, a view supported by English Heritage. Revised plans were then requested with piers of a more consistent and symmetrical way, and topped with an appropriate copingstone.

The revised proposals, showing taller brick piers finished with a coping stone, is considered to be an improvement on the original design. However, there is still some concern that the copingstone

sits flush on the piers when it should ideally project beyond the face of the piers. To address this minor aspect, a condition is recommended requiring the submission of a revised detail for the pier cap.

Subject to the above, it is considered that the replacement of the existing concrete railings by the use of railings and brick piers would be acceptable and would not harm the special architectural and historic character or appearance of the Grade 2 listed building or the gates.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A sustainability assessment is not required an application of this nature or size.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is considered that listed building consent should be granted subject to condition for the following reasons:

1 The proposed railings, brick piers and gates, due to their size, siting and design, do not harm the special architectural and historic character of the Grade 2 listed building, or it setting within the visual amenities of the street scene having regard to Policies

Application Number: LBE/06/0023 Ward: Cockfosters Date of Registration: 11th October 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: OAKTREE SCHOOL, CHASE SIDE, LONDON, N14 4HN

Proposal: Single storey side extension to school to provide additional teaching rooms together with new steps and ramp access to play fields and erection of wall adjacent to caretakers house.

Applicant Name & Address:

Education, Children Services & Leisure, London Borough of Enfield Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Agent Name & Address:

Paul Wilkinson, A D Architects 63-65, Fore Street Hertford Herts SG14 1AL

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations) 1992, planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C57 Sustainability

3. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings:

Oaktree School comprises a single storey building located within a mixed use area, on the western side of Chase Side, south of Cat Hill roundabout. The main access to the school is from Chase Side. To the north and west of the site is the Cat Hill campus of Middlesex University whilst to the south is open space. Opposite are Chicken Shed Theatre and the Bramley Road Sports Ground.

Amplification of Proposal:

Permission is sought for a single storey side extension to the school to provide additional teaching rooms together with new steps and ramp access to playing fields, and the erection of a wall adjacent to the caretakers house.

The school is a mixed day-school for pupils with a range of complex needs, including social, emotional and behavioural difficulties linked to their learning. It provides for pupils aged 7-19, but the school’s emphasis has begun to move towards the older children. Consequently, there is a

need for additional facilities catering for the needs of these older age groups. There would be no increase in pupil numbers and staff numbers would also remain the same, with additional staff only required in response to individual child needs, in line with current practice.

Relevant Planning History:

TP/98/1392 – a single storey infill extension was approved in December 1998

TP/01/0866 – a single storey extension to staff room was approved in July 2001.

TP/01/1781 – a detached single storey building for soft play area was approved in February 2002.

Consultations:

Public

Consultation letters have been sent to 10 neighbouring properties. Any responses received will be reported at the Meeting.

External

None.

Internal

None.

Relevant Policy

London Plan

The following policies of the London Plan (GLA) – Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London (2004) are also relevant:

3A.21 Education Facilities 4A.7 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 4A.9 Providing for Renewable Energy 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction 4B.7 Respect Local Context and Communities

UDP Policies:

Interim UDP Amendments:

(II) T19 Cycle parking (II) SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Statement 1 - Delivering Sustainable Communities

Analysis:

The proposed single storey building would be sited to the south of the existing school and attached to the main school building by a covered walkway, 2 metres wide, extending the depth of the building. The extension would provide additional teaching space and a kitchen for the existing children at the school.

The caretakers house is to the south of the proposed extension, and the boundary wall enclosing the garden area would be rebuilt closer to the house to facilitate space for the extension. The caretaker has no objections to this as the main area of amenity space is to west of the house and is unaffected by the proposals.

A tree is also being removed to enable the new wall to be installed, but this tree does not significantly contribute to the visual amenities of the area and given the number of other large trees in the immediate surroundings, including on the street frontage with Chase Side, does not warrant protection through a tree preservation order..

To the rear of the extension, steps and a ramp access to the playing field are being provided to comply with DDA and Building Regulations. There are no objections to this.

The extension is needed in order to facilitate an enhancement of the existing facilities. It does not therefore, involve any increase in staff or pupil numbers and thus, does not generate any additional traffic or parking requirement.

The extension will not have an adverse impact on any surrounding residential occupiers, as it is located within the school and not close to any other buildings. Visually, there are no objections to the extension as the design fits in with the external appearance of the existing school.

Sustainable Design and Construction:

The submitted sustainability form has received an excellent grade attaining a score of 84%.

Conclusion:

In the light of the above, it is recommended that planning permission is approved for the following reasons:

1 The proposed single storey extension, due to its size, siting and design, will not detract from the residential amenities of neighbouring and nearby residential properties or from the visual amenities of the surrounding area having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (II)GD2, (II)GD3, (II)CS2 and (II)CS3 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2 The proposed extension, due to the absence of any increase in pupils and staff associated with the development, will not give rise to conditions on the adjoining highways that

would be prejudicial to the free flow and safety of vehicles and pedestrians having regard to Policies (II)GD6 and (II)GD7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

3 The proposed development will improve the teaching facilities available to children within the Borough consistent with Policies (II)CS1 and (II)CS3 of the Unitary development Plan.

4 The sustainability measures identified in the sustainability assessment form submitted on 29th August 2006 are considered to be sufficient to meet the requirements of Interim Policy (II)SDC1 of the UDP, therefore achieving a suitable level of sustainable design and construction.

9 LBE/06/0023

Application Number: LBE/06/0024 Ward: Edmonton Green Date of Registration: 15th September 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: PYMMES PARK, VICTORIA ROAD, LONDON, N18 2UG

Proposal: Construction of new wall and entrance gates to existing walled garden

Applicant Name & Address:

Head of Park and Open Spaces, London Borough of Enfield Parks Business Unit P O Box 52 Civic Centre Enfield EN1 3XY

Agent Name & Address:

Michael Stock, Upsilon Consultancy Ltd 68, Cranbourne Avenue Wanstead London E11 2BQ

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations) 1992, planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C07 Details of Materials

2. C17 Details of Landscaping

3. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings

The site is within Pymmes Park and is located near the southern boundary of the park. The site comprises an existing walled garden, the walls of which are Grade II Listed, and were constructed in the late 17th Century. Over recent years the gardens have been re-ordered to reflect the design of the garden from records dating back to the 1920s. A new principal entrance to the garden was formed in recent years and currently comprises a metal gate set into railings.

Amplification of Proposal

Permission is sought to construct a new fourth wall to enclose the garden and new entrance gates to the principal access to the gardens along the northern boundary. The existing metal railings and gates will be removed and replaced by a section of brick wall with wrought iron gates in the same position as the existing gates. Physical access to the garden will not be affected and the existing alignment of the path will be retained.

Relevant Planning History

LBC/01/0021 - an application for the removal of the existing lower wall and wire fencing and completion of fourth side of walled garden was withdrawn in November 2005

LBC/01/0017 - Conversion of fourth side of listed walled garden. Withdrawn Sep 2004.

Consultations

Public

A notice was displayed at the site and a notice was published in the local press. No responses have been received.

Internal

Conservation are satisfied with the proposals.

External

English Heritage has authorised the Local Authority to determine the application. Transport for London have no objection.

Relevant Planning Policies:

London Plan

The following policies of the London Plan (GLA) – Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London (2004) are also relevant:

Policy 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 4B.7 Respect local context and communities Policy 4B.10 London’s Built Heritage Policy 4B.11 Heritage Conservation Policy 4B.12 Historic Conservation Led Regeneration Policy 4C10 Historic environment

UDP Policies

(I)GD1 Development to have appropriate regard to its surroundings. (II)GD3 Aesthetic and functional design. (I)C1 To ensure areas, sites and buildings of historic interest are preserved or enhanced. (II)C16 Listed Buildings.

Interim UDP Amendments

None relevant

Other Material Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance 15 “Planning and the Historic Environment”

Analysis

The existing walls surrounding the garden are a Grade II Listed Building therefore it is essential to ensure any new development does not adversely affect the setting of the listed walls.

The proposed wall will replace the existing metal railings and gates at the northern entrance to the garden. The proposed new wall abuts the existing brick wall which is approximately 3.5 metres in height. The new wall reduces in height to approximately 3.0 metres and continues around the north eastern corner of the garden to the gates where is abuts a lower existing wall approximately 1.6 metres high. This lower wall will be retained.

Two buttresses are proposed on the garden side of the new wall and are required to support the wall. The design of the buttresses is in keeping with the design of existing buttresses within the garden. It is also proposed that the buttresses will be obscured through planting though no details of planting have been submitted with this application. The bricks to be used will be of a similar colour and texture of the existing walls however an exact match will not be possible due the age of the existing walls.

The proposed wrought iron gates are located in the same position as the existing gate and are simple in design. The design of the gates has been developed in consultation with English Heritage and Council’s Conservation Officer who are satisfied with the proposal. It is considered that the gates are an appropriate design and due not detract from the setting of the listed walls.

It is considered that the proposed wall and gates are an appropriate form of development and sympathetically relate to the existing listed garden walls.

Sustainable Design and Construction

Due to the nature of the work proposed, a sustainability assessment is not required

Conclusion

In light of the above, the proposal is considered to be acceptable for the following reason:

The proposed new wall and entrance gates, due to their size, siting and design, results in a sympathetic form of development which would not detrimentally affect the setting of the Listed wall or its special architectural and historic character having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (II)GD3, (I)C1 and (II)C16 of the Unitary Development Plan.

13 LBE/06/0024

Application Number: LBE/06/0025 Ward: Town Date of Registration: 28th September 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: New River Footbridge, Between, Tenniswood Road & Ladysmith Road, Enfield, EN1 3LX

Proposal: Removal of existing footbridge and erection of new footbridge with 1.8m high parapets, alterations to steps on east side, removal of steps on west side and provision of access ramp approach on east and west side, enclosure of ramps by 1.8m high palisade fence and re- siting of maintenance gates.

Applicant Name & Address:

Highway Services - ESS&P, London Borough of Enfield PO BOX 52 Civic Centre Silver Street Middx EN1 3XD

Agent Name & Address:

Mr Raymonde De La Salle, LB of Enfield- Structures & Watercourses PO BOX 52 Civic Centre Silver Street Middx EN1 3XD

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General) Regulations 1992 planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED.

1. The proposal provides for improvement to the river crossing in accordance with Policy (I)T7 and the bridge design is satisfactory and it would have appropriate regard to its surroundings having regard to Policy (I)GD1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Site and surroundings

Footbridge over the New River connecting Tenniswood Road and Ladysmith Road.

Proposal

The existing footbridge will be removed and replaced with a new footbridge incorporating ramped accesses enclosed by 1.8 metre high Palisade fencing.

Relevant planning history

None

Consultation

Public

26 properties in Tenniswood Road and Ladysmith Road were consulted. One responses have been received making the following observations:

• Could the palisade fencing be used to fence the bridge itself which would be more aesthetically pleasing, allow a fuller view of the river, be less prone to graffiti and provide openness as an aid to security • Measures need to be taken to prevent use as a motor cycle route

Relevant UDP Policy

(I)GD1 Appropriate regard to surroundings (I)T7 Improve facilities and conditions for pedestrians and cyclists

Analysis

The application proposes the improvement of the crossing and the bridge design proposed is considered to be satisfactory having regard to its appearance in the locality.

Reasons for granting planning permission

16 LBE/06/0025

Application Number: LBE/06/0026 Ward: Town Date of Registration: 16th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: CHACE COMMUNITY SCHOOL, CHURCHBURY LANE, ENFIELD, EN1 3HQ

Proposal: Erection of a 3 storey building north of existing building with link bridge at 2nd floor level for use for 6th form classrooms, art and drama centre and dining hall together with awning over external dining area and to north elevation of existing building and with new vehicular access from Churchbury Lane and provision of 12 car parking spaces.

Applicant Name & Address:

Director of Education, LB of E - Education, Childrens Services PO Box 56 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield

Agent Name & Address:

Mr Geoff Evans, White Young Green Richmond House Walkern Road Stevenage Hertfordshire SG1 3QP

Recommendation: That planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the following condition(s):

1. C06 Details of Phasing of Construction

2. C07 Details of Materials

3. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

4. C10 Details of Levels

5. C11 Details of Enclosure

6. C12 Details of Parking/Turning Facilities

7. C14 Details of Access and Junction

8. C17 Details of Landscaping

9. C18 Details of Tree Protection

10. C19 Details of Refuse Storage

11. C21 Construction Servicing Area

12. C22 Details of Const. Vehicle Wheel Cleaning

13. Development shall not commence until a construction methodology has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction methodology shall contain:

i. Details of construction access and vehicle routing to the site. ii. Arrangements for vehicle turning and servicing areas. iii. Arrangements for the parking of contractors vehicles. iv. Arrangements for the storage of materials. v. Hours of work.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities of nearby residential properties and to ensure access does not prejudice the free flow and safety of traffic and pedestrians along the adjoining highways.

14. C25 No additional Fenestration

15. C41 Details of External Lighting

16. C57 Sustainability

17. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings

Chace Community School is bounded by Tenniswood Road to the north, Churchbury Lane to the east, and Silver Street to the west.

The school has been extensively developed in the past, with the most recent improvements being to the parking area fronting Churchbury Lane.

The site of the proposed development is on a portion of the school field fronting Churchbury Lane. This area of the school field is not actively used for any organised sports, as the formal playing pitches are located further within the school grounds.

Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a 3-storey building north of the existing 3-storey school building with a link bridge at 2nd floor level for use for 6th form classrooms, art and drama centre and dining hall together with awning over external dining area and to north elevation of existing building. The proposal also involves a new vehicular access from Churchbury Lane and provision of 12 car parking spaces.

The proposed building will be sited between 23m and 29m from Churchbury Lane and 8m north of an existing school building. It will be approximately 28.5m wide, 44.25m deep, approximately 10.5m in height to the top of a parapet wall, and approximately 11.6m in height to the top of the roof lights.

The ground floor will contain the kitchen/dining area, toilet facilities, offices, x3 drama rooms and x1 performing arts room. The first floor will contain the plant space and the double height space for the facilities on the ground floor. The second floor will contain x4 art rooms, toilet facilities, a dark room, kiln room, 6th form classroom, and various offices and study rooms, and the link bridge to the existing block.

The link bridge between the buildings will be sited on the second floor. It will be approximately 6.3m above ground level, spanning a gap of approximately 8.1m. The provision of the link bridge will also entail the remodelling of a 50sqm section of the corridor of the existing block immediately adjoining the bridge.

A paved dining area, 10m wide, is proposed for the west elevation (Churchbury Lane) of the new building. Over this, a detached awning is proposed, which will be approximately 24.1m in length, it will be between 5m and 6m in width, and approximately 5.2m in height. The awning will be of a translucent tensile fabric.

A detached awning is proposed for the existing building that will be approximately 19.8m in length, it will be between 5m and 6m in width, and approximately 5.2m in height. The awning will be of a translucent tensile fabric.

The proposed new vehicular entrance will be approximately 29m south of the junction with Tenniswood Road and will provide access to 12 new parking spaces, including x1 disabled parking bay,

Relevant planning history:

• LBE/05/0031 - Formation of new car parking area at front together with alterations to existing car parking layout. – GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS – 13/12/2005

• TP/05/1781 - Change of use from a caretakers house to mixed use as a safer neighbourhood unit (sui generis) / education (D1) and installation of four cycle lockers at rear – NOT YET DETERMINED

• LBE/04/0013 - Demolition of existing single storey classrooms and ancillary rooms to south elevation and erection of two storey building to provide a Special Educational Needs Inclusion Unit. – GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS – 14/07/2004

• LBE/99/0014 - Single storey temporary dining room building. – GRANTED WITH CONDITIONS – 16/12/1999

Consultation

Public

Letters sent to167 neighbouring properties in addition to the statutory site and press publicity. One letter of objection has been received from 195 Churchbury lane raising the following points:

− The school is a horrible 1960s building and the new block would be of a similar appearance. − Design is badly thought out for local residents and pupils. − The eyesore plus car park will stretch to Tenniswood Road. − This section of Churchbury Lane would become more intimidating. − Residents from No.193 upwards would lose their view of the open playing fields. − Established trees and shrubs would be removed. − Question the need for a new car park. − Three vehicular entrances within a short span of road is not well designed and not safe. − The new giant car park has attracted more cars. − New building should be sited to the west and stay within existing school block. − Loss of much needed green play fields.

Internal

None.

External

Any comments received will be reported to Committee

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3A.21 Education facilities Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction

Unitary Development Plan

(I)CS1 Provision of community services (II)CS2 Siting and design of buildings (II)CS3 Community facilities (I)GD1 Regard to surroundings (II)GD3 Aesthetics and functional design (II)GD6 Traffic (II)GD7 Car parking standards (II)H8 Privacy (II)T16 Access for pedestrians and people with disabilities (II)T18 Pedestrian priority

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations

PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development

Analysis

Principle of development

The proposed development is considered necessary as an essential school facility to provide improved facilities for the school. No additional students are proposed.

Amenity issues

The proposed building will be of the same height as the existing school buildings. The nearest residential dwelling on Churchbury Lane is approximately 42m away while the nearest dwelling on Tenniswood Road is approximately 57m distant. It is considered that the distances to the neighbouring residential properties are sufficient to not impact on the amenities of the occupiers of those properties.

Moreover, whilst the height of the building will lead to it being visible in the surrounding area, along the Churchbury Lane frontage there are various species of trees between 5m and 8m in height that are to be retained, and which will help to screen the building.

Impact on surroundings

The proposed structure is quite different in terms of its overall appearance and roof design, from the existing buildings on the site. However, the proposed design does integrate well with the existing pattern of development and again, the screening from the vegetation along Churchbury Lane will help to minimise the impact on the surrounding area.

Landscaping

One tree within the school grounds, one street tree and a portion of the front boundary hedge will be removed in order to accommodate the new vehicular entrance. Additional trees will be planted within the school grounds. The loss of the flora is outweighed by the benefits of a new segregated vehicle entrance and the replacement planting.

A suitably worded condition would be placed on any approval to ensure that the retained trees are protected during the construction period.

Transportation / Vehicular issues

The proposed vehicular entrance will segregate delivery vehicles from the staff car parking area and from pedestrian areas. This is an improvement over the existing situation and will be of a benefit to pedestrian safety.

Churchbury Lane is a heavily parked street, reduced to a single lane when cars are parked on either side of the road. The proposed parking area is a dedicated parking area for the dining hall staff who currently park on the street or within the existing staff parking area, depending on availability. Access will be via a controlled gate, controlled from within the school. The proposal will result in the loss of one on-street parking space but will result in x12 vehicles being removed from the road and accommodated within the school grounds. The reduction of on-street parking is welcomed in this heavily congested area.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A Sustainability Assessment form has been completed and submitted with the application a satisfactory score has been achieved.

Conclusion

It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons.

1. The proposed development due to its design, size and siting would not detract from the character and appearance of the surrounding area nor would it unduly affect the amenities or privacy of adjoining or nearby residential properties having regard to Policies (II)CS2, (II)CS3, (I)GD1, (I)GD2, (II)GD3 and (II)H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The development does not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (II)GD6 and (II)GD7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development improves facilities at Chace Community School having regard to Policies (II)CS1 and (II)CS2 of the Unitary Development Plan.

23 LBE/06/0026

Application Number: LBE/06/0028 Ward: Enfield Lock Date of Registration: 19th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: 138, ORDNANCE ROAD, ENFIELD, EN3 6BY

Proposal: Two storey side extension and disabled access ramp to side/ rear.

Applicant Name & Address:

Housing Professional Services, LBE (Project Management) PO Box 60, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XN

Agent Name & Address:

Narendra Gajjar, Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Note to Members This application is reported to Committee, as it is Council owned property.

Recommendation: That planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the following condition(s):

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

3. C10 Details of Levels

4. C14 Details of Access and Junction

5. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

6. C25 No additional Fenestration

7. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings The application site comprises a 2-storey semi – detached dwelling located on the northern side of Ordnance Road, with a large garden to the side and rear. The surrounding area is predominantly residential.

Proposal The proposal involves a two storey side extension with a gable-ended roof and the addition of a disabled access ramp to the side/rear of the property. There is currently no off street parking provision.

The proposed extension will provide 2 additional bedrooms bringing the total number of bedrooms to 5 and a ground floor level access shower room. The proposed extension will be approximately 3.2 m in width, 8.2 m in depth, 5.6 m to the eaves and 8.6 m in height to the ridge of the gable ended roof. No fenestration is proposed to the flank wall of the extension.

Relevant planning history:

None.

Consultation

Public

19 neighbouring properties were consulted for a period of 21 days. Any comments received will be reported at the meeting.

Internal

None

External

None

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3C.16 Tackling congestion and reducing traffic Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction

Unitary Development Plan

(I) GD1: - Regard to surroundings (II) GD3: - Aesthetics and functional design (II) GD6: - Traffic (II) GD7: - Car parking standards (II) GD8: - Site access and servicing (II) H8: - Privacy (II) H12: - Extensions to residential property (II) H14 -Terracing (II) H18 - Disability and planning standards

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development

PPG3: Housing PPG13: Transport

Analysis

Principle of Development

The principle of a 2 storey side extension is considered to be acceptable.

Amenity issues

The proposed extension maintains a distance of approximately 3.4 m at first floor level from the side boundary of the property. In addition this side boundary is approximately 9 m from the rear of the nearest affected residential property at 1, Manly Dixon Drive. A new ramp access and handrail is proposed to provide disabled access to the rear of the proposed extension. This is not considered to detract from the appearance of the property and has regard to Policy (II) H18 of the Unitary Development Plan.

It is considered therefore that the proposed extension will not unduly impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining residential properties, in terms of loss of light, privacy or outlook, nor will it be out of keeping and character with the street scene, having regard to Policies (I) GD1, (II) GD3, (II) H8 and (II) H12 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Transportation

There is currently no parking provision on site for the existing 3-bed dwelling. With the provision of two additional bedrooms it is not unreasonable to expect the provision of some off street parking. If applying UDP standards, a 5-bed dwelling should provide 3 parking spaces. The proposed scheme however provides 1 off street parking space. This is considered acceptable in the light of PPG13 and the additional provision is an improvement on the existing.

Sustainable Design and Construction

The applicant has completed the Sustainability Advisory Leaflet. The applicant has demonstrated that he has incorporated some energy minimising and water conservation measures within the development .In terms of efficient resource use low – toxicity materials are to be specified.

Conclusion

The proposed development is of a form and design that is considered to be acceptable: It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons.

1. The proposed development due to its size and siting does not unduly affect the amenities of adjoining or nearby residential properties having regard to Policies (II) H8 and (II) H12 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The proposed development due to its siting and design does not detract from the appearance and character of the street scene having regard to Polices (I) GD1 and (II) GD3 and of the Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development does not prejudice the provision of on site parking nor would it lead to additional parking and therefore, does not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (II) GD6 and (II) GD7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

27 LBE/06/0028

Application Number: LBE/06/0029 Ward: Enfield Highway Date of Registration: 19th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: 36, BRIMSDOWN AVENUE, ENFIELD, EN3 5HZ

Proposal: Demolition of single storey building at rear and erection of 2-storey side extension with disabled access ramp at side.

Applicant Name & Address:

Housing Professional Services, LBE (Project Management) PO BOX 60, CIVIC CENTRE Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XN

Agent Name & Address:

Narendra Gajjar, Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Note to Members

This application is reported to Committee as it is a Council owned property.

Recommendation: That planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992, following the expiration of the consultation period and subject to the following condition(s):

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

3. C10 Details of Levels

4. C14 Details of Access and Junction

5. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

6. C25 No additional Fenestration

7. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings

Application site comprises a 2-storey end of terrace dwelling located on the eastern side of Brimsdown Avenue, with a substantial garden to side and rear. Running along the rear of the

properties on the eastern side of Brimsdown Road is the London Liverpool Street to Cambridge railway line.

Number 34 Brimsdown Avenue is located to the south. There is currently a separation of approximately 18m between the flank walls of the two properties. Number 38 Brimsdown Avenue is located to the north.

Proposal

Permission is sought for the demolition of a single storey building at rear and the erection of 2- storey side extension with disabled access ramp at side.

The proposed extension will contain a bedroom on the ground floor and a disabled access shower/ wc, while the first floor will contain two bedrooms. The proposed extension will be 3.3m wide, approximately 7.55m deep, 5m in height to the eaves, and 7.6m in height to the ridge of a hipped roof. Fenestration will include windows for the ground and first floors on the front and rear elevations, and a door on the flank elevation to provide access off the proposed access ramp.

Relevant planning history:

None.

Consultation

Public

Letters were sent to 8 neighbouring properties. Any comments will be reported to Committee.

Internal

Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

External

Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3C.16 Tackling congestion and reducing traffic Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction

Unitary Development Plan

(I)GD1 Appropriate regard to surroundings (II)GD3 Aesthetics and functional design (II)GD6 Traffic (II)GD7 Car parking standards (II)H8 Privacy (II)H12 Extensions to residential properties (II)H14 Terracing (II)H18 Disability and planning standards

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG3 Housing PPG13 Transport

Analysis

Principle of development

The principle of a two-storey side extension is considered to be acceptable.

Amenity issues

The design of the proposed extension integrates well with the existing dwelling and would not be out of keeping and character within the street scene. It is also considered that it will not unduly impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining residential property, particularly those of 34 Brimsdown Avenue, in terms of loss of light, privacy or outlook, as there is a separation from the flank wall of the proposed extension to the common boundary of approximately 6m, with a further 9m to the flank wall of that adjoining dwelling. The proposed extension is considered to comply with Policies (I)GD1, (II)GD3, (II)H8, (II)H12 and (II)H14 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Transportation

One parking space is proposed within the curtilage. Whilst this would not comply with UDP standards, the London Plan and PPG13 encourage Local Planning Authorities to relax parking standards. Moreover, there is currently no off-street parking provision, therefore any such provision is welcomed.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A sustainability advisory leaflet has been submitted with the application. The applicant has indicated that the development will incorporate some sustainability measures such as permeable paving, dual flush/low flush toilets, high performance glazing and timers for heating systems.

Conclusion

It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons.

1. The proposed development due to its size and siting does not unduly affect the amenities of adjoining or nearby residential properties having regard to Policies (II)H8, (II)H12 and (II)H14 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The proposed development due to its siting and design does not detract from the appearance and character of the street scene having regard to Polices (I)GD1 and (II)GD3 and of the Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development does not prejudice the provision of on site parking nor would it lead to additional parking and therefore, does not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free

flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (II)GD6 and (II)GD7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

32 LBE/06/0029

Application Number: LBE/06/0030 Ward: Enfield Highway Date of Registration: 20th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: 19, EASTFIELD ROAD, ENFIELD, MIDDLESEX, EN3 5UX

Proposal: Demolition of rear conservatory and single storey building and erection of a 2-storey side extension.

Applicant Name & Address:

Housing Professional Services, LBE (Project Management) PO Box 60, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XN

Agent Name & Address:

Narendra Gajjar, Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Note to Members

This application is reported to Committee as it is a Council owned property.

Recommendation: That planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED in accordance with Regulation 4 of the Town & Country Planning General Regulations 1992, subject to the following condition(s):

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C10 Details of Levels

3. C24 Obscured Glazing

4. C25 No additional Fenestration

5. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings

Application site comprises a 2-storey end of terrace dwelling located on the southern side of Eastfield Road, with a substantial garden to the rear. Running along the rear of the site are the playing fields of the school.

Number 21 Eastfield Road is located to the west. There is currently a separation of approximately 6.5m between the flank walls of the two properties. There is an alleyway between these two properties. Number 12 Eastfield Road is located to the east.

Proposal

Permission is sought for the demolition of a rear extension and the erection of a two-storey side extension.

The proposed extension will contain a bedroom and a kitchen on the ground floor, while the first floor will contain a bedroom and a bathroom.

The proposed two-storey extension will be 2.5m wide, approximately 7.65m deep, 4.6m in height to the eaves, and 7.25m in height to the ridge of a hipped roof. Fenestration will include windows for the ground and first floors on the front and rear elevations and on the first floor of the flank elevation.

Relevant planning history:

None.

Consultation

Public

Letters were sent to 23 neighbouring properties. Any comments will be reported to Committee.

Internal

Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

External

Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3C.16 Tackling congestion and reducing traffic Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction

Unitary Development Plan

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG3 Housing PPG13 Transport

Analysis

Principle of development

The principle of a two-storey side extension is considered to be acceptable. The proposed demolition of a rear single storey conservatory and bathroom is considered to be acceptable.

Amenity issues

The design of the proposed extension integrates well with the existing dwelling and would not be out of keeping and character within the street scene.

The first floor window on the flan elevation will be required to have obscured glazing to prevent loss of privacy. With the flank window obscured it is also considered that the proposal will not unduly impact on the amenities of the occupiers of the adjoining residential property, particularly those of 21 Eastfield Road, in terms of loss of light, privacy or outlook.

It is acknowledged that the first floor flank wall is built to the boundary and that Policy (II)H14 of the Unitary Development Plan requires separation to prevent terracing. It should be noted that between 19 and 21 Eastfield Road is an alleyway, and therefore the proposal satisfies Policy (II)H14.

The proposed extension is considered to comply with Policies (I)GD1, (II)GD3, (II)H8, (II)H12 and (II)H14 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Transportation

A four bedroom dwelling requires the provision of 2 car parking spaces. The proposal does not provide any car spaces. Whilst this would not comply with UDP standards, the London Plan and PPG13 encourage Local Planning Authorities to relax parking standards. Lack of any off-street parking is common feature of the surround terrace houses, however, there is a reasonable amount of on street parking in the area and therefore it is considered acceptable.

Sustainable Design and Construction

Conclusion

It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons.

2. The proposed development due to its siting and design does not detract from the appearance and character of the street scene having regard to Polices (I)GD1 and (II)GD3 and of the Unitary Development Plan.

37 LBE/06/0030

Application Number: LBE/06/0031 Ward: Enfield Highway Date of Registration: 11th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: 10, MEADS ROAD, ENFIELD, EN3 5HR

Proposal: Single storey side extension.

Applicant Name & Address:

Project Management, Housing Professional Services PO Box 60, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XN

Agent Name & Address:

Narendra Gajjar, Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Note to Members

This application is reported to Committee as it is a Council owned property.

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

3. C10 Details of Levels

4. C14 Details of Access and Junction

5. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

6. C25 No additional Fenestration

7. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings

Application site comprises a 2-storey end of terrace dwelling located on the western side of Meads Road. There is a large garden at the rear with soft landscaping at the front. There is currently no off-street parking provision.

Number 8 Meads Road is located to the south and is separated from the application site by a driveway and garage. Number 12 Meads Road is located to the north of the site.

The surrounding pattern of development consists of 2-storey terrace dwellings, with parking provision at the front and large rear gardens.

Proposal

Permission is sought for a single storey side extension to provide two additional bedrooms. The proposed extension will be 3.275m wide, 7.6m deep, 2.5m in height to the eaves, and approximately 3.7m in height to the ridge of a mono-pitched hipped roof. Fenestration will include a window for each elevation.

Relevant planning history:

None.

Consultation

Public

Letters were sent to 5 neighbouring properties. Any comments received will be reported to Committee.

Internal

None.

External

None.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3C.16 Tackling congestion and reducing traffic Policy 4B.6 Sustainable design and construction

Unitary Development Plan

(I)GD1 Appropriate regard to surroundings (II)GD3 Aesthetics and functional design (II)GD6 Traffic (II)GD7 Car parking standards (II)H8 Privacy (II)H12 Extensions to residential properties

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG3 Housing PPG13 Transport

Analysis

Principle of development

The principle of a single storey side extension is considered to be acceptable.

Amenity issues

Transportation

Sustainable Design and Construction

Conclusion

The proposed development is of a form and design that is considered to be acceptable. Approval is recommended for the following reasons:

2. The proposed development due to its siting and design does not detract from the appearance and character of the street scene having regard to Polices (I)GD1 and (II)GD3 and of the Unitary Development Plan.

41 LBE/06/0031

Application Number: LBE/06/0032 Ward: Jubilee Date of Registration: 11th October 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: SALISBURY LOWER SCHOOL, TURIN ROAD, LONDON, N9 8DQ

Proposal: Erection of a new sports hall including gymnasium, creation of a floodlit multi-use games area (MUGA) incorporating (8) light columns 12m high, a five-a-side pitch, block paved playground, two football pitches involving the removal of six trees, provision of replacement planting together with 29 additional parking spaces.

Applicant Name & Address:

Director of ECS&L, London Borough of Enfield PO Box 50, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EM1 3XA

Agent Name & Address:

Andrew Plakides, LBE - Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Regulations) 1992 planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Prior to the commencement of development details for the phasing of development ( applications LBE/06/0032 & 33), including the provision of the sports hall, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority after consultation with Sport England. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details of both relevant applications.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory quantity, quality and accessibility of compensatory provision which secures a continuity of use( phasing provision) and to accord with Regional Sports Strategy/ UDP/Policy

2. C07 Details of Materials

3. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

4. C10 Details of Levels

5. C17 Details of Landscaping

6. C19 Details of Refuse Storage

7. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

8. C57 Sustainability

9. Details regarding the design, colour and appearance of the 8 floodlights including details of any potential light spillage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to their installation.

Reason : In the interest of visual amenity and to ensure satisfactory details are provided .

10. The proposed floodlights shall not be used after 9.30pm in the evening.

Reason : In order to protect the amenities of surrounding residents from light pollution.

11. Details regarding a replacement tree planting scheme to compensate for the removal of the trees shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include the siting, species ( which shall be semi mature) and number of trees to be planted. The trees shall be planted at the first available planting season and there after suitably retained.

Reason : In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure appropriate tree replacement planting.

12. Details regarding the design , siting and number of secure , covered and lockable cycle parking facilities shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that satisfactory cycle parking facilities are provided in line with Unitary Development Plan Standards

13. Details regarding a methodology for the removal of the six trees on the playing field shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to their removal.

Reason: To ensure the trees are removed in a satisfactory manner without adversely impacting on the adjoining residents.

14. The development shall not commence until a construction metodology has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction Metodology shall contain details of : 1. Arrangements for Vehicle Wheel cleaning 2. Arrangements for the parking of contractors vehicles 3. Details of construction and access routes 4. Details of storage of materials

Reason: In order to ensure that satisfactory details are provided and do ensure that the development does not adversely impact on the amenities of residents.

15. C11 Details of Enclosure

16. There shall be no vehicle access point in to the sports hall carpark from St Josephs road.

Reason : In order to protect the amenities of residents.

17. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings

Salisbury (Lower) School comprises of a large school building including a sixth form centre as well as a Delta Learning Centre together with sports field, all weather sports surface and tennis courts. The School is surrounded by residential development on all sides with Nightingale Road to the east, St Mary’s Road to the south and St Joseph’s Road and Elmsworth Close to the west. Turin Road open space also abuts the western boundary of the site. The main existing vehicle and pedestrian access into the site is from Turin Road although there is an emergency access which is used by the Learning Centre off Nightingale Road.

Salisbury School is currently a split site nine-form entry school of approximately 1,350 pupils plus sixth form over both sites (Lower & Upper). The school has recently operated with the first three year groups on the Lower site, including sixth form, which amounts to 810 pupils plus sixth form (approx 100) resulting in approximately 910 pupils overall on the Turin Road site. Salisbury Upper School is situated close by in Nightingale Road.

Amplification of Proposal

Permission is sought for the provision of a new sports hall building to provide indoor courts, gymnasium, fitness room equipment storerooms and changing room facilities for the school. The Sports Hall building would have a maximum dimension of 50m x 50m and would be sited in the western part of the site opposite the end of St Joseph’s Road. The building would be sited primarily on the old existing all weather court, although a part of the building is on the grass playing field. The building at its closest would be sited 15m away from the existing school chain link fence that abuts St Joseph’s Road. The maximum height of the building with its curved roof element is 10.32m.

A total of 29 new additional car parking spaces are also proposed next to the new sports hall.

In addition the scheme also involves a new Multi Games Area (MUGA) 70m x 51m together with eight 12 metre high floodlights enclosed by a 3.5m fence. Part of this new facility would be sited on the existing grass playing field. A new 5 aside pitch surfaced with Astroturf (37m x 18.5m) is also to be built on the school playing field with the remainder of the sports field accommodating two football pitches and running track in the summer. The siting of the senior football pitch will involve the removal of six hybrid black poplars, although replacement planting is proposed, some trees are also removed in the far south eastern corner of the site in connection with the other pitch.

The sports hall will be used by Salisbury school, although the hall will be available for ” extended school” use, i.e. early pre-school day and late after school day use, weekend and holiday sports club for local children and groups. The extended use also applies to the MUGA and Astroturf pitch.

There is also another application interlinked with this application ref: LBE/06/0033 for extensions, alterations & refurbishments of the existing school premises also on the agenda.

Relevant Planning Decisions

LBE/06/0017 – an application for the erection of a Sports Hall Building Gymnasium, creation of a floodlit multi use games area (MUGA) incorporating 8 lighting columns, a floodlight five a side football pitch incorporating 6 light columns, block paved playground area and two football pitches

together with 29 additional car parking spaces (Salisbury Lower School) was withdrawn in October 2006

LBE/06/0018 – an application for internal alterations to existing gymnasium to provide additional teaching rooms, erection of two storey extensions to main building, creation of hard surface tennis courts with a 3.5m fence enclosure and blocked playground, together with removal of detached garage and provision of additional 18 parking spaces (Salisbury Lower School) was withdrawn in October 2006.

Consultations:

Public

Consultation letters were sent to 615 neighbouring properties. Notices were also published in the local press and two were displayed around the site. Six letters of objection were received raising the following points in relation to this specific application

- Potential increased lighting levels from floodlights, their direction & how often they will be used - Increase in 140 pupils result in increased noise & disturbance - Overall increased noise levels - Concern how often facilities will be used after school & at weekends - Concern at what time parking facilities will be used - Loss of garage - Increased litter, Graffiti etc - Majority of children from outside the Borough - Concerned regarding removal of six trees approx 150 feet tall feel there should be a - Tree Preservation Order on them - Removal of trees will affect land & houses around i.e. subsidence & heave insurance implications - Trees form prominent landscape feature & contribute to landscape, visual & environmental quality & habitat for wildlife. - Trees healthy & loss significantly harm appearance of area - Replacement trees around site in no way compensate for loss of this group of mature trees - Request independent daylight/ sunlight report & vertical sky component analysis considers proposal exceeds the maximum shadow infringement sports hall too close to 150A St Josephs Road - Also refers to previous points in letter dated 5th Sept in connection with last application withdrawn which are still considered relevant to this current application, object to height of sports hall, impact on daylight/sunlight, sports hall too high & too close, floodlights too high & contribute to light pollution, ultimate objective to make facility available to others not belonging to school & out of hours, increased traffic & noise, anti social behaviour, removal of green fields - How will developer mitigate impacts on surrounding area in terms of noise, traffic, lighting, building heights & construction types, removal of natural screening

External

Sport England raise no objection in principle but view the applications as wholly and inextricably linked. They are concerned to ensure that the provision of proposals to enlarge the school building detailed in application LBE/06/0033 must not be at the expense of sports provision at the entire school and must be dependent on the successful delivery of proposals detailed on application LBE/06/0032.

Their primary concerns with respect to the development are that:

1. The school site must provide continuous access to sporting facilities and ancillary space, such as changing rooms, throughout any consented development works.

2. The proposed development should result in overall improved standard of facilities for sporting activities and provide the opportunity for increased participation.

3. Any loss of sports pitches and playing field space must be outweighed by the overall quality of new external facilities and indoor sports hall.

It is considered that the proposed development meets the terms of exception (E5) set out in their planning policy statement A Sporting Future for playing Fields of England. In view of this Sport England has no objection to application LBE/06/0032. However, the sports hall should meet with their access standards and the submission of an access statement should be provided in due course and be subject to a condition.

It is essential that the applications be linked by condition, as the provision of continuous sports must be guaranteed considering the school site is undergoing several phases. Sport England would like to ensure that sports facilities are adequate for the school before enlargement. A condition controlling this aspect is recommended

Enfield Sports Advisory Council comment that they would object to the development unless it could be shown that there is a balancing enhancement in recreational facilities both for the school and community. If planning permission is granted they would wish to see a condition that ensures the facilities provided by the project are available outside normal school hours and during holidays for community clubs and organisations.

Any response from Metropolitan Police, Thames Water and the London Fire and Emergency Planning will be reported at the meeting

Internal

The Councils Arboriculturalist comments that the trees are 6 specimens of hybrid black poplar reaching up to about 20 metres in height. They are an impressive visual feature within the school’s ground. Despite their size the trees are only about 30 years old and in the early phase of maturity. Without regular maintenance to control their size, which is disfiguring to their appearance, these trees are quite unsuited to areas where people regularly congregate (the trees stand between two existing football pitches), they are particularly vulnerable to branch breakage. Indeed this is already evident as broken branches can be observed littering the ground beneath the trees. It is not recommended that TPO is placed on the trees for the following reasons their potential ultimate size and relationship to existing features (football pitches), their existing condition (Vulnerability to branch breakage as is evident by the amount of broken branches, which litter the ground beneath the trees, the need for regular disfiguring maintenance to control their size).

If the trees are to be removed advise that replacement planting should take place to compensate for their loss. This is particularly important within the site, as a number of trees planted as part of the original landscape proposals have been lost over the years.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction

Policy 3A.21 Education Facilities Policy 3D.5 Sports facilities Policy 4A.7 Energy Efficiency Policy 4B.7 Respect local context & communities

UDP Policies

(I) GD1 New Developments to have appropriate regard to surroundings (II) GD2 Development to be appropriately located (I) GD2 New developments to improve environment (II) GD3 Aesthetics and design (II) GD4 Daylight & sunlight (II) GD6, 7 and 8 Traffic, parking and servicing (II) C38 Resist developments result in loss of trees of amenity value (II) C39 Replacement planting (I) CS1 Community services (II) CS2 Siting and Design of buildings

Interim UDP Amendments

(II) SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction (II) T19 Cycle Parking

Other Policy Considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable development PPG 17 Sport and Recreation PPG13 Transport

A Sporting Future for playing fields of England (Sport England)

Analysis

The Principle

The provision of a new sports hall building, creation of a multi games Area (MUGA) with floodlighting, together with five-aside Astroturf pitch to create an overall improvement and enhancement in school sporting facilities is considered acceptable in principle having regard to Policy PPG17 (sport & recreation), policies (I) CS1 and (II) CS2 of the Unitary Development Plan and policy 3A.21 of The London Plan.

The main issues of consideration are whether the loss of part of the sports pitches/ playing field as a result of the development are be outweighed by the overall quality of new external facilities and indoor sports hall provided as well as an over all improved standard of facilities for sporting activities and the opportunity for increased participation. The second issue of consideration is the impact of the scale of the proposed new sports hall building and other facilities provided on the amenities of adjoining residents and the surrounding environment.

Comments of Sport England and the Impact of the new sports hall/ MUGA and Astroturf pitch on the school playing fields

The new sports hall building, multi-games area and five a side Astroturf pitch are to be built partly on the existing school playing fields. Sport England is a statutory consultee on development proposals affecting playing fields and their general policy is to oppose the granting of planning

permission for development which would lead to a loss of or prejudice any part of a playing field unless specific circumstances apply. One of the specific circumstances set out in Sport England’s policy on planning applications for development on playing fields (Policy E5) is that: The proposed development is for an indoor or outdoor sports facility, the provision of which would be of sufficient benefit to out weigh the detriment caused by the loss of the playing field.

Sport England has advised that the proposed development meets the term of this exception (Policy E5). The proposed sports hall provision, multi games area and two football pitches represents a substantial boost for sports provision on the site allowing for participation in inclement weather on the proposed MUGA and sports hall. The proposed changing facilities are also significantly more generous than the existing accommodation and will present the opportunity for improved access for all. Consequently, Sport England raise no objection

The other application on the agenda LBE/06/0033 for internal alterations and extensions to the school would as part of the application also involve the conversion of the existing gymnasium in to additional teaching accommodation. An overall phasing conditions for the works as a whole on both applications including the provision of the new sports hall will be imposed to ensure the continued satisfactory provision of sporting facilities for the school.

Although the sports hall, MUGA and five aside pitch are for use by Salisbury school, these facilities will be available for “extended school use” i.e. early pre school day and late after school use, weekend and holiday sports clubs thus helping increase community participation in sport.

Impact of siting of sports building on residential amenities

With regards the impact of the new sports hall on the residential amenities of properties particularly in St Joseph’s Road, this latest application now re-sites the new sports hall 15m away from the chain link school boundary fence; in the previous application withdrawn the distance was only 5m.

Whilst objections to the siting & height of the new sports hall has been raised from the occupier of 150 (A) St Josephs Road in terms the proximity of the new sports hall to this property, there would be a distance of approximately between 23m to 23.8m to the new sports hall from the flank wall of the property; the property is split in to Flats 150 & 150 A St Josephs Road. On the flank elevation of these two properties that would face the new sports hall there are two front doors and 4 windows as well as roof lights, which serve both 150 & 150 (A) St Joseph’s Road. It is considered that the siting of the sports hall is of sufficient distance away from these properties as well as 129 St Joseph’s Road which has one window on its side flank elevation, so as not to adversely impact on the amenities/outlook an light of these properties. The elevation of the sports hall that would face St Joseph’s Road would have a blank elevation apart from 6 high level window and 1 door. These would not impact on the residential amenities of properties. Moreover, it is considered 13 to 26 Elmsworth Close: a block of flats that backs on to the playing fields, would not be adversely impact on by the sports hall.

The overall maximum height of the building has also been reduced to 10.3 m compared with the previous application of 11.4 m which was withdrawn following concerns expressed by officers.

It is not considered that the height of the building would significantly impinge on the residential amenities and outlook of properties in St Joseph’s Road to justify refusal. Additional landscape planting is also proposed along the boundary inside the chain link fence along St Josephs Road to help soften the impact of the building, and which would be conditioned. The general design and appearance of the sports hall itself is considered acceptable having regard to Policies (I) GD1, (I) GD2 and (II) GD3 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Siting of floodlit Multi Use Games Area, all weather Astroturf pitch & two football pitches on sports playing field

It is not considered that the siting of these facilities on the school playing fields would adversely impact on the residential amenities of surrounding residents and would provide valuable improved overall sporting facilities for the school. With regard the floodlighting of the multi games area with eight 12m high floodlights, it is acknowledged that concern has been raised by some residents regarding their height & illumination. However, it considered that the siting of the flood lights, 90 metres distant, is sufficiently away from residential properties in St Mary’s Road and St Josephs Road. This distance reduces to 55m in respect of the rear gardens of properties in Nightingale Road but again, it is considered that their presence would not adversely prejudice residential amenities through excessive light pollution or visual intrusion. An appropriate condition will be imposed regard the use of the floodlights. No floodlighting is proposed on the Astroturf pitch.

Loss of trees

The proposal would also involve the removal of a group of six large hybrid black popular trees situated on the school playing fields behind the rear gardens of 155 to 169 St Mary’s Road. A full size football pitch would be located on the playing fields which would include the area were the trees are situated. It is acknowledged that the trees form a visible feature in the school grounds and that some residents have raised concerns regard their removal.

The trees are only about 30 years old and in the early phase of maturity. Without regular maintenance to control their size, which would be disfiguring to their appearance, these trees are particularly vulnerable to branch breakage and are quite unsuited to areas where people congregate. Thus the placing of a Tree Preservation Order on the trees is not considered appropriate in this instance and accordingly their removal is not considered unreasonable in this particular case. The applicant’s propose a replacement tree planting scheme to compensate their removal which would include more appropriate species & better siting of the replacement trees. This would be subject to a planning condition. In addition some trees and bushes in the far south- eastern corner of the site are also removed where the smaller size football pitch is to be located.

Taking the above circumstances into account, it is considered that the proposal has appropriate regard to Policy (II) C39 of the Unitary Development Plan.

Traffic and parking

A total of 29 additional new parking spaces are proposed with this application together with cycle parking and 18 additional spaces with application LBE/06/0033. Overall between the two applications there would be an additional 47 spaces, which combined, with the existing 44 spaces is considered acceptable having regard to the Councils parking and servicing standards and PPG 13. There would be no direct vehicular access from St Joseph’s Road in to the sports hall car parking area. Access to the new car parking spaces would be via a new internal access road within the school site alongside the open space linking into the existing school access via Turin Road .It is not considered that the siting of the car parking area would adversely impact on the amenities of adjoining residents in terms of adverse noise and disturbance.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A sustainability assessment was submitted with the application and achieved a good score to comply with Policy (II)SDC2

Conclusion:

In light of the above, the proposal is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

1.The proposed school sports hall by virtue of its siting, design, height and appearance would have appropriate regard to its surroundings as well as not adversely impacting on the general residential amenities including outlook /sunlight of adjoining residents in particular those in St Joseph’s Road having regard to Policies (I) GD1, (I) GD2, (II) GD1, (II) GD3 (II) GD4 and (II) CS2 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The proposed new Sports Hall, Multi Games Area and Astroturf pitch subject to appropriate phasing details would contribute to improving the schools overall sports facilities having regard to policy (I) CS1 of the Unitary Development Plan, Policy 3A.21 of the London Plan, PPG 17 Sport & Recreation as well as complying with Sport England’s policy statement a sporting future for playing fields.

3. The siting of the multi games area (with floodlights), five aside Astroturf pitch together with two football pitches would have appropriate regard to their surroundings as well as enhancing the schools sporting facilities and would not adversely impact on the amenities of adjoining residents having regard to Policies (I) GD1, (II) GD1, (I) GD2 and (II) CS1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

4. The proposal provides satisfactory on site parking and cycle provision arrangements having regard to Policy (II) GD7 and Planning Policy Guidance Note 13.

5. The sustainability measures identified in the sustainability assessment form submitted on 11th October 2006 are considered to be sufficient to meet the requirements of Interim Policy (II) SDC1 of the UDP, therefore achieving a suitable level of sustainable design and construction.

51 LBE/06/0032

Application Number: LBE/06/0033 Ward: Jubilee Date of Registration: 11th October 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: SALISBURY LOWER SCHOOL, TURIN ROAD, LONDON, N9 8DQ

Proposal: Internal alterations to existing gymnasium to provide additional teaching rooms, erection of three 2-storey extensions to main building, refurbishment of existing teaching accommodation, creation of hard surface tennis courts with a 3.5m fence enclosure, block paved playground, removal of detached garage, provision of additional 18 parking spaces, internal access / service road, to allow for a potential increase of an additional 140 pupils.

Applicant Name & Address:

Director of ECS&L, London Borough of Enfield PO Box 50, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EM1 3XA

Agent Name & Address:

Andrew Plakides, LBE - Construction Technical Services PO Box 50 Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Regulations) 1992 planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Prior to the commencement of development details for the phasing of development ( applications LBE/06/0032 and LBE/06/0033) including the provision of the sports hall shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority after consultation with Sport England.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory quantity, quality, quality and accessibility of compensatory sports facilities, which secure continuity of phasing to accord with Regional Sports Strategy/UDP/Policy.

2. C07 Details of Materials

3. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

4. C17 Details of Landscaping

5. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

6. C57 Sustainability

7. Details regarding the design, siting and number of secure covered and lockable cycle parking facilities shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason To ensure satisfactory cycle provision facilities are provided in line with Unitary Development Plan Standards.

8. C19 Details of Refuse Storage

9. Details regarding the design, size and external appearance of the replacement single garage shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to construction.

Reason: To ensure the submission details for consideration.

10. C12 Details of Parking/Turning Facilities

11. C11 Details of Enclosure

12. The development shall not commence until a construction methodology has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The construction methodology shall contain the following: 1. Arrangement for Vehicle Wheel cleaning 2. Arrangement for parking contractor's vehicles 3. Details of construction of access routes 4. Details of storage of materials

Reason : To ensure the submission of satisfactory details and to ensure the development does not adversely impact on the amenities of residents

13. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings

Amplification of Proposal

Permission is sought for the construction of three two-storey extensions to the existing school building to provide additional general teaching space accommodation, laboratories, offices, medical room and staff room, internal alterations to the existing gymnasium to provide additional teaching accommodation as well as internal alterations/refurbishment to some existing

classrooms. The proposals are in conjunction with an initiative to combine the Lower and Upper Schools on to one site i.e. the lower school, and taking into account a reduction in the number of forms of entry from 9 to 6, overall there would be a potential increase of an additional 140 pupils

A new slightly re-orientated hard surfaced tennis court would replace the existing tennis courts enclosed by 3.5m fence and a new block paved playground area is also proposed. The removal of a detached garage, together with the provision of an additional 18 parking spaces, internal access/services road is also proposed.

There is also a another application interlinked with this application ref: LBE/06/0032 for a new Sports Hall, Multi Games Area & five aside Astroturf pitch which is considered elsewhere on this agenda.

Relevant Planning Decisions

LBE/06/0017 – an application for erection of a Sports Hall Building Gymnasium, creation of a floodlit multiuse games area (MUGA) incorporating 8 lighting columns, a floodlight five a side football pitch incorporating 6 light columns, block paved playground area and two football pitches together with 29 additional car parking spaces (Salisbury Lower School) was withdrawn in October 2006.

LBE/06/0018 - an application for internal alterations to existing gymnasium to provide additional teaching block, erection of two storey extensions to main building, creation of hard surface tennis courts with 3.5m fence enclosure and blocked playground, together with removal of detached garage and provision of additional 18 parking spaces (Salisbury Lower School) was withdrawn in October 2006.

Consultations:

Public

- Increase in 140 pupils result in increased noise levels & disturbance - Overall increased noise levels & traffic - Concern how often facilities will be used after school and at weekends - Concern at what time parking facilities will be used - Loss of garage - Increased litter, graffiti, unsocial behaviour etc - Majority of children from outside Borough - How will developer reduce impacts on surrounding area and residents in mitigating noise, traffic, lighting, building heights, removal of natural screening

External

Their primary concerns with respect to the development are that:

1.The school site must provide continuous access to sporting facilities and ancillary space, such as changing rooms, throughout any consented development works.

2.The proposed development should result in overall improved standard of facilities for sporting activities and provide the opportunity for increased participation.

3. Any loss of sports pitches and playing field space must be outweighed by the overall quality of new external facilities and indoor sports facilities

They seek the inclusion of an appropriate condition:

Prior to the commencement of details for the phasing of development, including the provision of the sports hall shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority after consultation with Sport England. The development shall be carried out in accordance with approved details of both relevant planning applications.

Enfield Sports Advisory Council comments that they would object to the development unless it could be shown that there is a balancing enhancement in recreational facilities both for the school & community. If planning permission where to be granted they request a condition that ensures facilities provided by the project are available outside normal school hours and during holidays for community clubs and organisations.

Any response from Metropolitan Police, Thames Water and the London Fire and Emergency Planning will be reported at the meeting

Internal

Any comments received will be reported at the meeting

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 3A. 21 Education Facilities Policy 3D.5 Sports Facilities Policy 4A.7 Energy Efficiency Policy 4B.7 Respect Local context and communities

UDP Policies

(I) GD1 New Developments to have appropriate regard to surroundings (II) GD2 Development to be appropriately located (I) GD2 New Developments to improve environment (II) GD3 Aesthetics and design (II) GD6, 7 & 8 Traffic, parking and servicing (I) CS1 Community Services (II) CS2 Siting and design of buildings

Interim UDP Amendments

(II) SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction (II) T19 Cycle Parking

Other Policy Considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG17 Sport and Recreation PPG13 Transport

A Sporting Future for Playing Fields of England (Sport England)

Analysis

The Principle

The principle of improved educational facilities for the school is welcomed having regard to Policies (I) CS1, (II) CS1 and Policy 3A.21 of The London Plan. The main issues of consideration are (i) the siting, design and appearance of the three two storey extensions, (ii) the alterations to the tennis courts, (iii) Conversion of the gymnasium to additional teaching accommodation in respect of still providing adequate replacement sporting provision facilities overall and (iv) the increase in pupil numbers, traffic and parking issues etc

Siting and Appearance of the extensions and replacement tennis courts

Two of the extensions are within the enclosed school courtyard and would not be visible from public view. The dimensions of the two 2 storey extensions within the enclosed courtyard are (30m x 8m and 13x 9m respectively) and each has a flat roof the maximum height of which is 7m .The other two-storey extension (17m x 8m) also with a flat roof 7m high whilst visible, when viewed from St Joseph’s Road, is considered acceptable in overall design terms and would not have any adverse affect on the residential amenities of residential properties which lie adjacent to the site.

The siting of the extensions has no adverse impact on the school playing fields

The design, siting and appearance of the three two storey extensions are therefore, considered acceptable in terms of their overall setting within the context of the school building.

Alterations to Tennis Courts and Other External Works

The proposal involves the provision of replacement tennis court (36m x 48m) with enclosed fencing around the court 3.5m high. The court is reoriented side ways between the sixth form Centre and Delta Learning Centre and would now abut the eastern boundary of the site (the fencing for the court would constitute part of the boundary fencing to the School). However, given the previous siting of a tennis court in this location, it is not considered the siting would have any more adverse impact on the general residential amenities of properties in Nightingale Road that currently experienced and is thus, considered acceptable.

The siting of new blocked paved playground is also acceptable. No objections are raised to the internal alterations to some of the existing classrooms.

Alteration of existing Gymnasium to provide additional teaching space and the comments of Sport England

The use of external space for the proposed extensions is of no consequence to land directly or indirectly used for accommodating external sports pitches or playing fields and therefore meets exception (E3) of Sport England’s Policy on land forming part of a playing pitch

The proposal also involves the conversion of the exiting Gymnasium to provide an area for drama, teaching & music. In isolation, this would effectively remove the existing indoor sports provision for the school which Sport England would normally object to on the basis that the proposal diminishes the overall provision of sporting facilities. However,.

However, the proposed new classroom accommodation will effectively remove the existing indoor sports provision of the school and this is of material concern unless new indoor facilities are provided on site that are enlarged and of substantially superior quality to the existing indoor sports facilities to meet the needs of the enlarged school. The proposals involve the creation of the new dedicated Sports Hall, MUGA and five-aside astro turf pitch (Ref: LBE/06/0032) and it is contended, these serve to meet and significantly enhance the existing sports requirement of the enlarged school

Notwithstanding this “improvement”, if viewed in isolation, Sport England would ordinarily object to the application on the basis that the proposal diminishes overall provision of sporting facilities and /or facilities ancillary to sport. The enlargement of academic accommodation at the expense of sports facilities on any school site is strongly resisted where it is proposed. However, as they have stated above, the creation of a dedicated sports hall on site would serve to meet existing requirements and those of the enlarged school.

Consequently subject to an appropriate condition regarding the phasing of development including the provision of the sports hall, no objection is raised to the loss of the existing indoor gym.

Increase in pupil numbers/ traffic/ parking

This proposal provides an additional 18 additional parking spaces, some of which are laid out around the caretakers house and involve the demolition of an existing garage together with a new replacement garage space. It is not considered that the siting of these parking spaces would adversely impact on the amenities of the resident at 35 St Andrews Road.

The school will be consolidating on this site as a six-form entry school rather than a split site 9 form entry as present. Consequently, despite combining the upper and lower schools, there will only be a potential maximum increase of approx 140 pupils including sixth form. The school has recently operated with the first three-year groups on the Turin site including sixth form, which amounts to provision for approximately 910 pupils maximum

An additional 47 spaces would be provided by both applications (LBE/06/0032 &33), which combined with the existing 44 spaces would result in a total of 91 spaces on site. It is considered that sufficient on site parking provision is provided within the site to cope with the potential increase of 140 pupils especially as there would be no further increase in staff numbers. Moreover, it is not considered that the potential increase in numbers would result in significant adverse highway impacts on the surrounding residential roads. There is currently a great deal of movement between sites Lower and Upper school, by both staff, pupils & vehicles this will cease following consolidation and will help to reduce unnecessary traffic movements.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A sustainability assessment was submitted with the application and achieved a good score to comply with Policy (II)SDC2

Conclusion:

In light of the above, the proposal is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

1. The proposed 3 two storey extensions, refurbishment of the existing teaching rooms together with the creation of a hard surfaced tennis court with 3.5m fence enclosure, internal access roads, additional parking spaces & layout and new garage by virtue of their siting, design and appearance would have appropriate regard to their surroundings, result in improved educational facilities, and would not adversely impacting on the amenities of surrounding residents having regard to Policies (I) GD1, (II) GD1, (I) GD2, (II) GD3, (1) CS1, (II) CS2 of the Unitary Development Plan and Policy 3A.21 of the London Plan.

2. Subject to Condition 1, the improved sporting provision facilities are provided by application LBE06/0032 to compensate for the loss of the existing gymnasium to additional teaching accommodation would be provided thereby addressing Policy (I) CS1 of the Unitary Development Plan, Policy 3A.21 of the London Plan, PPG17 Sport and Recreation as well as complying with Sport England’s policy statement: A Sporting Future for Playing Fields.

3. The proposal taking into account the extensions to facilitate the amalgamation of the lower and upper schools and reduction in the number of forms of entry, would provide satisfactory internal parking layout and servicing provision requirements within the site sufficient to avoid conditions arising prejudicial to the free flow and safety of traffic and pedestrians using the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (I) GD6, (II) GD7 and (II) GD8 of the Unitary Development Plan & having regard to Planning Policy Guidance Note 13.

4. The sustainability measures identified in the sustainability assessment form submitted on 11th October 2006 are considered to be sufficient to meet the requirements of Interim Policy (II) SDC1 of the UDP, therefore achieving a suitable level of sustainable design and construction.

59 LBE/06/0033

Application Number: LBE/06/0034 Ward: Bush Hill Park Date of Registration: 25th October 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: Ridge Avenue Library, Ridge Avenue, London, N21 2RH

Proposal: Infill extension below existing canopy to form accessible WC at ground floor level with external stair access.

Applicant Name & Address:

London Borough of Enfield, Childrens Education Services & Leisure PO Box 50, Civic Centre Silver Street Enfield EN1 3XA

Agent Name & Address:

Andrew Shepherd, Ingleton Wood LLP 10, Lake Meadows Business Park Woodbrook Crescent Billericay Essex CM12 0EQ

Recommendation: That in accordance with Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations) 1992, planning permission be deemed to be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings:

Ridge Avenue Library is a modern looking predominantly two storey building situated on the junction of Bury Street and Ridge Avenue. The surrounding area is residential with 85 Ridge Avenue abutting the southern boundary. A clinic abuts the eastern boundary.

Access to the library is from Ridge Avenue

Amplification of Proposal:

Permission is sought for the construction of a small infill extension to the eastern elevation of the library to create an entrance lobby and fully accessible toilet together with a metal escape staircase to maintain the fire escape route.

Relevant Planning Decisions:

None relevant

Consultations:

Public:

Consultation letters have been sent to 14 neighbouring and nearby properties. No letters of objection have been received

External:

None

Internal:

None

Relevant Policy

London Plan

The following policies of the London Plan (GLA) – Spatial Development Strategy for Greater London (2004) are also relevant:

Policy 3A.21 Education Facilities Policy 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction Policy 4B.7 Respect local context and communities Policy 4B.10 London’s Built Heritage

UDP Policies

(I)GD1 Development to have appropriate regard to its surroundings. (II)GD3 Aesthetic and functional design. (II)GD11 Development to be fully accessible to all sections of the community (II) CS2 Design of community buildings (II) CS3 Community Facilities

Interim UDP Amendments

(II)SDC1 – Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Material Considerations

PPS1 – Delivering Sustainable Communities

Analysis:

There is currently no toilet accommodation on the ground floor of the library and the proposed extension to accommodate a new accessible wc, is positioned to infill space below the existing canopy overhang of the library roof. Due to the staggered design of the library in this are, the infill extension would not effectively project beyond the existing building envelope.

The elevational treatment of this infill extension would be brick but subject to the use of materials, would be sympathetic to the overall appearance.

In the light of the above therefore, it is considered that there would be no adverse affect on the appearance of the library or the visual amenities of the surrounding area.

The extension would face the clinic which is to the east of the library. However, due to its size, design and siting, , there is no adverse affect on the light or outlook of this neighbouring building.

Retention of the existing fire escape adjacent to an existing mature tree is maintained (as is the tree) by constructing a metal staircase which can be installed without affecting the roots of this tree.

Due to the height of the extension which is raised above ground level to reflect the internal floor levels of the library, there is no objection from the Environment Agency regarding flood risk

Sustainable Design and Construction

Due to the size and nature of this facility, a sustainability assessment is not required

Conclusion

Accordingly, it is recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons:

1 The proposed development, due to its size, siting and design, will not detract from the visual appearance of the library or its appearance in the street scene nor would it affect the light and outlook enjoyed by the neighbouring clinic building having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (II)GD2, (II)GD3, (II)CS2 and (II)CS3 of the Unitary Development Plan.

63 LBE/06/0034

Application Number: TP/06/0427 Ward: Winchmore Hill Date of Registration: 16th May 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: 6, BOURNE HILL, LONDON, N13 4LG

Proposal: Change of use of petrol station and shop to a hand car wash facility with shop and customer seating area

Applicant Name & Address:

Mrs Androulla Michaelides 6, BOURNE HILL LONDON N13 4LG

Agent Name & Address:

Mr Tass Efstathiou 12, CORRI AVENUE LONDON N14 7HL

Note for Members:

This application was deferred by Planning Committee in September 2006 to enable a site visit to take place, together with a further assessment of the traffic flow and congestion on the surrounding roads and consideration of a letter from the Applicant outlining proposed alterations to the scheme. This application is now reported taking into account this additional assessment.

Recommendation: That subject to the completion of a S106 legal agreement to secure a financial contribution of £ 23,000 towards the provision of a zebra crossing and kerb improvements, the Assistant Director (Planning and Transportation) be authorised to GRANT planning permission subject to the following conditions:

1. The kiosk shall only be used for the sale of items relating to cars, i.e. batteries and cleaning products, plus hot and cold drinks and snacks for waiting customers only and shall not be used for general retail use within Use Class A1 of the Town a\an Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended)

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the free flow of traffic on the surrounding roads.

2. A management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority prior to the occupation of the site solely as a car wash, to include the management and control of visiting cars. The approved management plan shall adhere to thereafter unless permission is otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority.

Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the free flow of traffic on the surrounding roads.

3. The premises shall only be open for business between the hours of 9am to 7pm Monday to Saturday and 9am to 4pm on Sundays.

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of nearby residential properties.

4. C41 Details of External Lighting

5. Details of a scheme of surface water drainage shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved.

Reason: in order to prevent surface water run off onto the highway in the interests of general safety and the free flow of vehicles.

6. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings:

The site is located close to the junction of Hoppers Road and Bourne Hill and just to the west of the junction between Bourne Hill, Green Lanes and Hedge Lane. The application site is a Petrol Filling Station. The hand car wash operation occupies part of the forecourt although there is no formal delineation. Bourne Hill is heavily trafficked. The surrounding area is predominantly residential.

Amplification of Proposal

Permission is sought to change the use of the petrol station and shop to a hand car wash facility with shop and customer seating area. This is a revised scheme following on from previous refusals and enforcement action.

Relevant Planning History:

TP/05/1656 – an application for the use of part of petrol filling station for hand car wash together with installation of canopy, brick wall and noise insulating panels to boundary with 38 Hoppers Road (Revised scheme - retrospective) was refused December 2005.

TP/05/0562 – an application for use of part petrol filling station for hand car wash together with installation of canopy adjoining 38 Hoppers Road (retrospective) was withdrawn October 2005.

TP/03/1589 – an application for the retention of the car wash was refused in August 2004.

TP/89/1171 - an application for the redevelopment of site for petrol filling station was approved January 1991.

TP/85/1757 - an application for the erection of petrol filling station was approved February 1987.

Consultations:

Public:

Consultation letters have been sent to 37 neighbouring properties. Two responses were received (one was on behalf of 3 properties) raising some or all of the following points:

- The use is unauthorised, why is it still operating? - Highway safety concerns - Traffic problems – also from two childrens nurseries in St Johns Hall opposite

- Spray from the car wash goes onto the pavement, danger for pedestrians - Noise and disturbance - Impact on neighbouring properties, use is unsightly in residential area - Out of character with the area and environment - Enforcement notice should be complied with

External:

None

Internal:

Environmental Health have no objections to the application, subject to all works for the premises being carried out in accordance with the measures specified in report 1881/NIA and verified by RBA acoustics.

Relevant Policy

London Plan

3C.1 Integrating Transport and Development 3C.16 Tackling Congestion and Reducing Traffic 4B.7 Respect Local Context and Communities

UDP Policies:

(I)GD1 New developments have regard to their surroundings (II)GD1 New developments are appropriately located (II)EN30 Take into account all matters relating to land, noise, air and water pollution (II)GD6 Traffic generation (II)GD7 Car parking standards (II)GD8 Site access (II)GD9 Traffic noise (I)T2 Accessibility Level (II)T17 Pedestrians (II)T18 Traffic movements & high pedestrian activity

Interim UDP Amendments

(II)SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Policy Considerations

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Communities PPG4 Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms

Analysis:

Background

The authorised use of the site is as a petrol filling station. The hand-operated car wash is unauthorised and currently operates alongside the petrol filling station function on the forecourt. The present proposal involves removing the petrol filling station element completely, leaving just

the hand car wash, as opposed to previous applications that have envisaged a dual use of the site.

The proposed scheme would have four bays for cars waiting to be washed, four bays for cars being washed, and two bays for cars drying. The shop would remain in the same place as existing, with a customer seating area in front of the shop.

Amenity Issues

The surrounding area is predominantly residential and the site bounds residential dwellings to the north and east. The impact of the proposal on general living conditions is therefore a material consideration especially in the light of the proposed opening hours: these are 9am to 7pm Monday to Saturday and 9am to 4pm on Sundays.

Activity is not constant during these hours and peaks would generally be expected during the weekend and at times of good weather. However, it is recognised that measures, including a perspex canopy and 3.6 metre high wall along the northern boundary with no. 38 Hoppers Road, will be introduced to ameliorate any concerns in this regard in terms of noise and spray. Overall, these measures include:

• a new 3.6 metre high wall along the boundary with 38 Hoppers Road • the placing of a canopy on top of this wall extending into the site • absorbtive panels affixed to the new wall • the erection of noise barrier, screening the car wash area from Bourne Hill • the housing of jet wash generator and car vacuum motor inside acoustic enclosures

Subject to these measures, Environmental Health has confirmed that there should be no undue impact on residential amenity. As a result, no objection is raised on this ground.

Parking and traffic generation

A number of traffic surveys have been carried out seeking to establish the impact of the proposal on the free flow and safety of traffic using this section of Bourne Hill.

The surveys demonstrate that in connection with the current use of the site, there was regular queuing to gain access to the site waiting for capacity in the washing bays often involving manoeuvring on to / over the highway. It was noted that an attendant was occasionally present moving vehicles on. These adverse conditions are exacerbated by the alignment of Bourne Hill along this section of the road, the junction with Hoppers Road and the level of on street parking which often exists.

The proposal would result in the removal of the petrol filling station and thus the conflict between movements associated with the hand car wash. However, it must be acknowledged that although capacity for the single use will increase, the potential would remain for conditions to arise on the adjoining highway which might be prejudicial to highway safety.

An attendant attempting to move vehicles on alone is not considered to be a long-term remedial measure for the parking /congestion issues associated with the use of the site. However, by the implementation of a Management Plan which could incorporate measures to control visiting cars by the use of barriers, an electronic display board and video surveillance so that the cars entering the site can be viewed from inside the office, this could help mitigate these issues. In addition, a zebra crossing is planned to the north west of the site, close to the junction with Hoppers Road. This would include zigzag white lines painted across the frontage of the entrance to the site restricting cars from waiting in this area. Also, by making good the footway that is between the

entrance and exit to the site, this would improve the safety for pedestrians. The cost of these works is £23,000 and the applicant has agreed to make the necessary financial contribution in recognition of the need to improve safety through these measures.

Taking the above matters into consideration, together with further on site observation, it is now considered that with the alterations to the scheme now proposed, including restricting the use of the kiosk to the users of the car wash and not passers-by, the highway concerns can be overcome. Consequently, no objection to the proposals is now raised on highway grounds.

Sustainability Design and Construction

An assessment is not required for a proposal of this nature.

Conclusion

It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to a S106 legal agreement, for the following reasons:

1 The proposed use of the site as a hand car wash would not give rise to conditions through an increase in noise, activity and general disturbance, that would be prejudicial the residential character and amenities of neighbouring and nearby properties or the surrounding area having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2, (II)GD1, (II)GD6, (II)GD7 and (II)GD8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2 The use of the site as a hand car wash taking into account the benefits secured through the S106 legal agreement, would not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of vehicular and pedestrian traffic on the surrounding highways having regard to Policies (II)GD6, (II)GD7 and (II)GD8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

69 TP/06/0427

Application Number: TP/06/1700 Ward: Cockfosters Date of Registration: 6th September 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: DE BOHUN PRIMARY SCHOOL, GREEN ROAD, LONDON, N14 4AD

Proposal: Replacement of boundary fence fronting Green Road with railing fence and gates and new internal railing fence (revised scheme)

Applicant Name & Address:

De Bohun Primary School DE BOHUN PRIMARY SCHOOL GREEN ROAD LONDON N14 4AD

Agent Name & Address:

Constuction Technical Services, London Borough of Enfield Charles Babbage House 1, Orton Grove Enfield EN1 4TU

Recommendation: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. No signage shall be attached to the railings and piers hereby approved unless consent is obtained from the Local Planning Authority under the Town and Country Planning (Control of Advertisement) Regulations 1992 (as amended)

Reason: in the interests of safeguarding the special architectural and historic interest of the listed building as well as its setting within the street scene.

2. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings

De Bohun Primary School consists of two separate buildings located to the north side of Green Road. The surrounding area is residential. The school is situated on an area of Metropolitan Open Land and together with the existing boundary wall on Green Road, is Grade II listed

Amplification of proposal

An application for listed building consent is considered elsewhere on this agenda under reference LBC/06/0029.

Relevant Planning Decisions

TP/05/1180 - an application for the replacement of the boundary fence fronting Green Road with railing fence and gates and new internal railing fence was refused in November 2005.

Consultations

Public:

Consultation letters have been sent to 19 neighbouring properties. Notice was also placed on display at the site and published in the local press. No letters of objection have been received

External:

English Heritage raised no objection subject to the rationalisation of the pier design being secured by officers.

Internal:

Education, Children's Services and Leisure supported the proposal, stressing the urgent need to repair the fence in order to maintain the safety of pupils.

Conservation Advisory Group:

The Group raised no objection in principle subject to satisfactory details being secured by officers.

Revised drawings were submitted by the applicant in response to these concerns but have not been reviewed by the Group

Relevant Policy

London Plan

Policy 4C.10: Historic environment Policy 4B.11: Heritage conservation Policy 4B.7: Respect local context and communities Policy 3D.9: Metropolitan Open Land

UDP Policy

(II) O5 - Suitable developments in and around Metropolitan Open Land

Interim UDP Amendments

(II) SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Policy Considerations

Planning Policy Guidance Note 15: Planning and the Historic Environment

Analysis

Principle

As highlighted by the Director of Education, Children's Services and Leisure, the existing railings and gates are in a dilapidated state with some posts missing. It is acknowledged that this results not only in an aesthetically poor frontage for the school, but also gives rise to safety issues for the children inside. The replacement of the existing is therefore highly desirable and no objection is raised in principle to this. Acceptability however, will be dependant on the size, design and materials of the proposed replacement and their impact on the visual amenities of school in the street scene.

Metropolitan Open Land

The designation of the site a Metropolitan Open Land (MOL) means that when assessing proposals, weight must be given to preserving the open character and appearance of the site. Whilst the proposed fence forms the boundary of the MOL, it is considered its design and open railings is appropriate to the aim of maintaining the open characteristic of the site.

Impact on Visual Amenity

Although the originally submitted proposals were considered unacceptable, primarily in respect of the design of the piers, a view supported by English Heritage, revised plans were requested with piers of a more consistent and symmetrical way, and to finish them with a copingstone.

The revised proposals, showing taller brick piers finished with a coping stone, is considered to be an improvement on the original design. However, there is still some concern that the copingstone sits flush on the piers when it should ideally project beyond the face of the piers. To address this minor aspect, a condition is recommended requiring the submission of a revised detail for the pier cap.

In addition, given the concerns raised by Conservation Advisory Group relating to the possibility that inappropriate signage would be fixed to the railings, a condition will also be imposed preventing the erection of signage unless otherwise approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Subject to this, it is considered that the use of metal railings supported by brick piers, would be acceptable and would not detract from the appearance of the school in the street scene.

Sustainable Design and Construction

A sustainability assessment is not required an application of this nature or size.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is considered that conditional planning permission should be granted for the following reasons:

1 The proposed railings, brick piers and gates, due to their size, siting and design, do not have an adverse impact on appearance of the school or the visual amenities of the wider street scene having regard to policies (I) GD1, (I) GD2 and (II) GD3 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2 The proposed railings, brick piers and gates, due to their size, siting and design, do not detract from the character and setting of the area of Metropolitan Open Land, having regard to Policy (II) O5 of the Unitary Development Plan.

74 TP/06/1700

Application Number: TP/06/1838 Ward: Turkey Street Date of Registration: 11th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: AYLANDS SCHOOL, KESWICK DRIVE, ENFIELD, EN3 6NY

Proposal: Erection of prefabricated classroom extension.

Applicant Name & Address:

Clifford Valentine AYLANDS SCHOOL KESWICK DRIVE ENFIELD EN3 6NY

Agent Name & Address:

Recommendation: That planning permission be GRANTED, subject to the following conditions:

1. C08 Materials to Match

2. C57 Sustainability

3. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and surroundings

School buildings within school grounds located within a residential area.

Proposal

The erection of a temporary single storey building, attached to an existing prefabricated single storey structure, for use as an art and drama facility.

Relevant planning history

LBE/95/0010 – Installation of temporary building to include two additional classrooms with ancillary facilities with provision of an additional 4 car parking spaces, granted with conditions on the 26th September 1995.

Consultation

Public

89 neighbouring properties were consulted as part of the notification process. One letter of objection has been received. The main points are summarised as follows –

• Concern about the possibility of additional disturbance from the school.

Internal

Environmental Health & Regulation – no comments.

Director of Education – no comments.

External

None.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

Policy 3A.21 Education facilities

Unitary Development Plan

(I) GD1 – Appropriate regard to surroundings (I) GD2 – Ensure all new development improve the environment (II) GD1 – New developments are appropriately located (II) GD3 – Aesthetics and design (II) GD6 – Traffic (II) GD7 – Parking provision (I) CS1 – Provision of community services (II) CS2 – Siting and design of buildings (II) CS3 – Community facilities

UDP Interim Amendments

SDC1 Sustainable assessment

Other Policy considerations

PPS 1 – Delivering Sustainable Communities PPG 17 – Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation

Analysis

The proposal is for the erection of a prefabricated building to be attached to the western flank of a similar prefabricated single storey structure, partly sited on the school’s playing fields. The proposed building is 7.3m in length x 7.5m wide x 4.15m in height, with a total floor area of 51.82 square metres.

Principle of development

Aylands School wish to enhance their facilities and offer a wider range of activities for their pupils. The existing situation is unsatisfactory as students currently use the assembly hall and the proximity of this hall to the classrooms result in general disturbance to other groups and classes. The principle of maintaining and improving this community facility is therefore acceptable.

Amenity issues

The nearest residential properties, are Waltham Gardens and Meadway to the south and the rear of the properties on Corbett Close to the north. The proposed buildings would be 39m – 44m from

the common boundary of the site with the adjoining Waltham Gardens and Meadway properties, and 43 metres from the properties in Corbett Close. The building will have no impact external to the site.

Impact on surroundings

With regard to policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2, and (II)GD3, the siting of this extension abutting the existing prefabricated buildings, and the continuation of the roof profile allows for a cohesive relationship between the two elements.

The development would project in a westerly direction, over part of the school’s playing field. However, the development would not impact on the existing sports provision.

Transportation

The development does not involve an increase in either students or staff on site and therefore there would be no increase in traffic associated with it. Accordingly, the current level of parking provision is considered acceptable.

Sustainable Design and Construction

Limited sustainable energy measures are to be incorporated into the design of the proposed new build. Out of 11 applicable measures in the sustainability assessment form, the proposal will implement 9 measures. This equates to 81.8%, a score comfortably above the minimum requirement of 50%.

Conclusion

Overall, it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the policies set out in the Unitary Development Plan. It is therefore recommended that planning permission be granted for the following reasons -

1. The proposed development due to its design, size and siting would not detract from the character and appearance of the surrounding area nor would it unduly affect the amenities of adjoining or nearby residential properties having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2 and (II) GD3 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The proposed development does not lead to a requirement for additional parking and therefore, does not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (II)GD6 and (II)GD7 of the Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development improves facilities at Aylands School having regard to Policies (II)CS1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

78 TP/06/1838

Application Number: TP/06/1845 Ward: Bowes Date of Registration: 25th September 2006

Contact: Andy Higham 020 8379 3848

Location: Private Playing Field, North Circular Road, Rear of, Cherry Blossom Close, and Melville Gardens, London, N13 6BN

Proposal: Redevelopment of site for residential development comprising 142 units (being 12 houses and 130 flats) together with open space for Sport and Recreation Use and associated infrastructure (Outline application - layout, scale and access).

Applicant Name & Address:

Fairview New Homes Ltd 50, LANCASTER ROAD ENFIELD EN2 0XA

Agent Name & Address:

Mr Ben Johnson, RPS Planning 1st Floor West Cottons Centre Cottons Lane London SE1 2QG

Recommendation: That, subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure the items set out in the report, the Assistant Director (Planning and Transportation) be authorised to GRANT planning permission, subject to the following conditions:

1. C02 Details of Buildings - Design

2. C03 Details of Development-External Appearance

3. C05 Details of Development - Landscaping

4. No more than 142 units (comprising 12 houses and 130 flats) shall be provided within the scheme and the proposed height of any building shall not exceed three/four storeys.

Reason: In order to have appropriate regard to the character of the surrounding area, and neighbours as well as having regard to density standards, amenity space provision and parking provision standards.

5. Details of the type, number and siting of secured covered and lockable cycle parking facilities shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the provision of satisfactory cycle facilities having regard to Unitary Development Plan standards.

6. Details regarding the proposed riverside walkway footway shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of

development.

Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and highway safety.

7. C07 Details of Materials

8. C09 Details of Hard Surfacing

9. C10 Details of Levels

10. C11 Details of Enclosure

11. C12 Details of Parking/Turning Facilities

12. C14 Details of Access and Junction

13. C16 Private Vehicles Only - Parking Areas

14. C18 Details of Tree Protection

15. C19 Details of Refuse Storage

16. C21 Construction Servicing Area

17. C22 Details of Const. Vehicle Wheel Cleaning

18. C41 Details of External Lighting

19. That all existing vegetation, trees and hedgerows and on the north, west and southern boundaries shall be retained and shown on any detailed landscape proposal plans to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Such trees and hedgerows shall be enhanced by good horticultural practice including pruning, fertilising and underplanting.

Reason: To ensure that the important visual amenity of the existing trees and hedgerows is maintained and is not adversely affected by the proposed development hereby approved or any other activities associated with building works.

20. Details of a landscaped 'wildlife corridor' stretching along the length of the Pymmes Brook and measuring a minimum of 10m beyond the top of the bank (brink) of the Pymmes Brook in width shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority; such proposal shall include an appropriate scheme of long term maintenance and management and the works shall be carried out within one year following occupation of the development hereby granted consent.

Reason: To enhance the existing wildlife habitat of the area and the visual amenity of the development.

21. The development shall not commence until drawings showing detailed landscape proposals to include structure, design, species, size and spacing of plants and a written specification (including preparation of tree pits, tree ties, planting beds and grassed areas and details of outdoor furniture) and a Maintenance Plan have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The planting shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawing No. FMH 200/P/103 Rev. B and any landscape drawings to be submitted and approved as reserved matters by the Local Planning Authority and the

specification within the first season after completion or occupation of the development whichever is the sooner. The maintenance shall be carried out in accordance with the maintenance plan. Any planting which dies within 3 years of planting shall be replaced by the owner with new planting in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To provide a satisfactory appearance for the development and within the surrounding area.

22. No development approved by this permission shall commence until details of the proposed finished floor levels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Floor levels shall be set at a minimum level of 21.57mAOD.

Reason: To ensure that the development is subject to minimum risk of flooding.

23. There shall be no raising of existing ground levels on that part of the site lying within the area of land identified as within the flood risk area.

Reason: To prevent increased risk of flooding.

24. The development shall not commence until details of surface water drainage works have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The surface water drainage works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved detail.

Reason: To prevent increased risk of flooding and to improve water quality.

25. C52 Time Limit - Outline Permission

Site and Surroundings

The application site comprises 3.35 ha and is a former privately owned playing field, situated to the south of the North Circular Road in Palmers Green. The site was a sports playing field associated with the former Metal Box Factory that previously occupied an adjoining site.

To the east of the application site is a residential development comprising 158 units within 3 / 4 storey blocks at Cherry Blossom Close. Directly to the north of the site is a row of semi-detached and terraced housing fronting the North Circular Road, a number of which are now derelict / abandoned. To the northwest are the single storey garages of Birchwood Court. The western boundary of the site is defined by a footpath running along the boundary to a footbridge crossing Pymmes Brook. This footpath adjoins the backs of a mix of predominantly terraced and semi- detached housing at Melville Gardens. To the south of the site lies Pymmes Brook which separates the site from the allotments which back onto the dwellings on Princes Avenue

The site is generally flat, with a slight slope down towards Pymmes Brook. There are a number of large trees along the southern boundary of the site.

Proposal

Permission is sought for the redevelopment of the site for residential use comprising 130 flats and 12 houses, associated infrastructure together with open space for sport and recreation use. The application is submitted in outline with approval being sought for siting and access only. All other matters relating to design, external appearance and landscaping will be subject to reserved matters applications to be considered at a later stage.

The proposed residential use would occupy approximately 50% of the site. The residential part of the scheme comprises 12 houses, all 3 storeys in height, with private gardens located along the northern boundary of the site. Five blocks of flats are proposed to accommodate 130 flats comprising 10 x 1 bed flats, 110 x 2 bed flats and 10 x 3 bed flats. The two blocks of flats would be 3 storeys high and the three blocks of flats to the south are 3 and 4 storeys high. Car parking spaces are spread across the portion of the site set aside for residential use and provided at a rate of 130% of residential units (totalling 169 spaces).

It is proposed that approximately 50% of the site will be used for publicly accessible amenity space and a proposed sports pitch. A building accommodating changing facilities / pavilion is proposed on the northern boundary of the site adjacent to the sports pitch. In addition, 20 car parking spaces are proposed in conjunction with the sports pitch and will be accessed via Cherry Blossom Close. The publicly accessible open space includes a ‘riverside walk’ along the southern portion of the site, adjacent to Pymmes Brook. This would link into the development at Cherry Blossom Close ad the public footpath along the western edge of the site.

Relevant planning history

TP/96/1258 - Redevelopment of site by the erection of 158 dwellings in eleven 3 and 4-storey blocks, comprising 15 studio flats, 76 one-bed flats and 67 two-bed flats, together with associated access to Chequers Way and car parking – Approved – September 1997. This is the first phase of the development at Cherry Blossom Close and has been completed.

TP/04/2309 – Redevelopment of site for residential development comprising 142 flats, associated open space, landscaping and infrastructure (outline application – siting and means of access). Withdrawn July 2006.

TP/06/0975 - Redevelopment of site for residential development comprising 142 units (being 12 houses and 130 flats), associated infrastructure together with open space for Sport and Recreation Use (Outline application - siting and means of access). Withdrawn September 2006.

The is no other history relating to the redevelopment of this site.

Consultations

Public

Consultation letters were sent to 619 neighbouring properties. In addition, two notices were displayed at the site and a notice was published in the local press. In response, 8 letters of objection were received from the occupiers of the following properties:

• 64, 85 and 113 Cherry Blossom Close • 47 Mitchell Road • 6 The Haven, N14 • 8 and 10 Melville Gardens • 184 North Circular Road

In addition, letters of objection have been received from Cllrs Rodin and Georgiou and from the Wolves Lane and District Residents Association.

The letters received raised all or some of the following points:

Amenity issues:

• Loss of outlook and privacy • Loss of views across the open space • Noise and disturbance during construction • Loss of sunlight/daylight • Development will be an eye sore

Highway issues:

• Disturbance from increased number of vehicles using Cherry Blossom Close • Access should not be from Cherry Blossom Close • Increase in traffic problems (congestion and pollution) in the area • Public transport in the area, in particular the W4 bus, is at capacity • Lack of parking facilities for the sports pitch

Principle of development:

• The site should not be considered as a brownfield site • Loss of open space and playing fields • Potential for an increase in crime with more people living in the area • The area is already highly populated • The Council could build a leisure facility on the land • The Council should adopt the land for their own community use – reference to a DCMS publication ‘A Time For Play’ (2006) • Currently a shortage of green space in the area • Council’s Corporate Strategy seeks a ‘cleaner greener Enfield’ including access to open spaces • Empty houses on North Circular could accommodate any housing needs

Sustainability and environmental issues:

• Local schools and GPs are already oversubscribed; increasing the number of residents will significantly impinge of the quality of life for both current and future residents.

Other:

• Issues regarding responses to objection letters • Decrease value of home surrounding the site • Lack of consultation with the local community – the proposed development has been designed without regard for the local community

One letter of objection made reference to a petition submitted initially in response to application ref: TP/04/2309 and again for application ref: TP/06/0795. The petition was signed by 181 people in objection to any development of the former playing fields.

External

Environment Agency – An initial response from the Environment Agency has been received objecting to this application. However, it is noted that the Agency had supported the previous application for this development (ref:TP/06/0975) subject to condition. Further conversations with the Environment Agency have been held and they are in the process of reviewing their comments. Any further response from the Environment Agency will be reported to the Committee.

London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) – An initial response received states that the LFEPA is not satisfied with the information submitted with the application as the information does not show compliance with fire fighting access requirements. As this application is outline only specific details have not been submitted at this stage. However, the applicant has now provided the LFEPA with further information confirming compliance with relevant regulations. Any further comments received will be reported to the Committee.

Sport England – Is not a statutory consultee for this application. No comments received to date although a number of conversations have been held with a representative from Sport England. Any comments received will be reported to the Committee.

Transport for London - No objection in principle to the application as TfL considers that the development does not represent any additional risk to the safe operation of the Transport for London Road Network.

Any comments received from Metropolitan Police Service, Thames Water or the Enfield Disablement Association will be reported at the meeting.

Internal

Cleansing – No information on the location of bin stores has been provided.

Education – Have advised that a contribution of £162,000 is required for primary and secondary school places, as follows:

Primary 11 places x £10,372 per place = £114,092

Secondary 3 places x £15,848 per place = £47,544

Total £161,636

Housing (Professional Services) – is satisfied with the proposed development subject to the social housing being integrated across the site.

Leisure Services (Parks and Open Spaces) – support the application. The departments have liaised with Enfield Town Ladies Football Club and confirmed the Club is in agreement with the proposals. A number of issues including on-going maintenance and ownership of the pitch have been raised and it is requested these are dealt with.

Any comment received from the Regeneration Unit will be reported at the meeting.

Relevant Policy

The London Plan

3A.1 Increasing Supply of Housing 3A.2 Borough Housing Targets 3A.4 Housing Choice 3A.5 Large Residential Developments 3A.6 Definition of Affordable Housing 3A.7 Affordable Housing Targets

3A.8 Negotiating Affordable Housing 3C.1 Integrating Transport and Development 3C.21 Improving Conditions for Cycling 3C.22 Parking Strategy 3D.5 Sports Facilities 3D.7 Realising the Potential of Open Space 4A.7 Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy 4B.3 Maximising the potential of Sites 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction 4B.7 Respect local context and communities 4B.1 Design Principles for a Compact City 4B.6 Sustainable Design and Construction

Unitary Development Plan

(I) GD1 New developments have regard to their surroundings (I) GD2 New development improves environment (II) GD1 New developments are appropriately located (II) GD3 Aesthetic and functional designs (II) GD6 Traffic generation (II) GD7 Car parking standards (II) GD8 Site access and servicing (II) GD11 Access for people with disabilities (II) GD12 Areas at risk from flooding (II) H1 Increase in housing stock (II) H6 Size and tenure of dwellings (II) H7 Residential density (II) H8 Privacy and over-looking (II) H9 Provision of amenity space (II) T13 Creation or improvement of accesses (II) T16 Adequate access for pedestrians and disabled persons (II) T17 Priority for pedestrians (II) T19 Greater priority to the needs / safety requirements of cyclists. (II) T20 Consideration to cyclists with regards to road junction improvements / traffic management. (II) O7 Strategies for the development of green chains . (II) O8 Considering proposals adjacent to Pymmes Brook. (II) O9 Encouraging developers to contribute to the creation of further green chain links. (II) O10 Regard to the contribution of open land. (II) O16 Private recreational land. (I) EN3 Nature conservation (II) EN9 Development in sites of nature conservation importance (II) EN11 Wildlife corridors

UDP Interim Amendments

(II)T19 Cycle parking (II)SDC1 Sustainable Design and Construction

Other Policy considerations

PPS 1 Delivering Sustainable Development PPG 3 Housing

PPG 13 Transport PPG 17 Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation PPG 25 Development and Flood Risk

Analysis

Principle

The proposal seeks to establish the principle of residential use and open space/sports provision on the site.

The site was formerly the playing fields of the Metal Box factory which was located on the site of what is now Cherry Blossom Close. PPG17 seeks the retention of open space including private playing fields. In addition, the site is identified in the Proposals Map as an area of ‘Associated Open Space’.

The applicant’s supporting statement provides some history to the site. In particular it states that the former privately owned former playing fields have “not been used for a period in excess of 12 years and has been without any lawful public access” (p. 14 Planning Statement, RPS, September 2006). Due to the length of time the playing fields have not been used and have not had any lawful public access the site falls outside the remit of PPG17.

A number of objectors have objected to the proposal due to the loss of the former playing fields and the open space. However, due to the length of time the playing fields have not been in use and as the site has not been publicly accessible it is considered that the development of the site for residential purposes and open space/sports provision would not be contrary to the UDP or Government guidance.

The proposed residential use would increase the housing stock within the Borough, in accordance with Policies (I)H1 and (II)H1 of the UDP. In addition, the provision of publicly accessible open space and a sports pitch would add to the open space and sport provision in the Borough.

The potential for a more comprehensive development incorporating the properties fronting the North Circular has been discussed with the applicant. To ensure the sites fronting the North Circular do not become land locked with no form of access the Section 106 agreement includes a clause requiring the applicant to maintain vehicular and pedestrian access through the application site to the properties fronting the North Circular. This will ensure the future development potential of these sites is maintained.

In light of the above, no objection is raised to the principle of using part of the site for residential purposes with the remainder retained as publicly accessible open space.

Siting

Details of siting are included for consideration as part of this application. Whilst we are unable to consider matters of design/appearance, with the siting and indicative plans, we are able to give consideration to the scale of this development.

Impact on Character of Surrounding Area

Density

The proposal comprises a total of 450 habitable rooms. Given that approximately 50% of the 3.35 hectare site is proposed for the residential development and the remaining 50% is set aside as open space and playing pitch, density has been calculated on the basis of 50% of the site, 16,750sqm. This provides a density of approximately 267 habitable rooms per hectare (hrph). This density exceeds the maximum limit set out in Policy (II)H7 which provides a range of 150- 200 hrph, with a maximum of 240 being acceptable in some circumstances. Given the ‘suburban setting of the site The London Plan provides for densities of 250-350 hrph.

The assessment of appropriate density must also acknowledge PPG3 which encourages greater flexibility in the application of policies to promote higher densities on appropriate sites. As a result, a numerical assessment of density must not be the sole test of acceptability and must also depend on the attainment of appropriate scale and design relative to the character and appearance of the surrounding area, and the accessibility of public transport.

It is considered that although the density is higher than that provided for in the UDP such a density is appropriate on this site. This is due to the scale of development being considered appropriate in this location given the adjoining residential development on Cherry Blossom Close and the open space available on the site, outside the proposed development area. In addition, the site has reasonable access to public transport, as discussed later in this report.

Site Coverage

The proposal provides for approximately half the site to be developed for residential purposes. This area is relatively densely covered with residential buildings, the access road and car parking spaces. The remaining half of the site is set aside as communal open/amenity space and the proposed artificial turf pitch. The southern part of the site, adjoining Pymmes Brook, is set aside as a ‘riverside walk’. This walk would be accessible by the residents on the site and the public. Public access would be secured through a Section 106 agreement. Details of landscape treatment along the walk and in the open space will be subject to reserved matters.

Amenity space has been calculated using only the area set aside for residential development and does not include the sports pitch or the open space adjoining Pymmes Brook. The 12 houses all have private amenity space, with small front gardens and larger rear gardens. Amenity space provision for the houses is approximately 60-65% of the Gross Internal Area (GIA) and for the flats is approximately 35% of the GIA. The level of amenity space is below the requirement set out in Appendix A1.7 of the UDP which requires 100% for houses and 75% for flats.

Although the amenity space provision for the houses is below that required in the UDP it is considered that the amenity space provided does meet the other criteria in Appendix A1.7 which requires that each house has it’s own private rear garden, it is fenced or screened from adjoining properties, it consists of a single regular shaped plot. On this basis it is considered that the amenity space provision for the 12 houses is acceptable.

Amenity space for flats is to provide both a visual setting for the buildings in the general streetscene and to provide space for passive or active recreation. Although the amenity space for the flats is below that required in Appendix A1.7 it is considered that the proximity of the flats to the open space provided as part of this application along the Pymmes Brook boundary balances the lower amenity space within the residential development part of this site. The amenity space around the blocks of flats provides a visual setting in the streetscene and for some recreation use, whilst the open space on the Pymmes Brook boundary of the site provides more opportunities for recreation use. As a result, the provision of amenity space is considered acceptable.

Height / Massing / Proximity to Boundaries

The proposal includes a mix of 3 and 4 storey buildings. The houses, which back onto the properties on the North Circular, are all three storeys in height, as are the two blocks of flats which also back onto these properties. It is considered that three storeys would be acceptable in relation to the existing two storey houses. The three storey houses are located between 12.5 and 13 metres from the northern boundary of the site. This is consistent with Appendix A1.7 of the UDP which seeks a minimum of 11 metres from the boundary for schemes with windows facing adjoining properties. The distance of the proposed houses from the boundaries will also ensure that the proposed scheme does not prejudice any future development of the adjoining sites.

The three storey blocks of flats have been designed so that the bulk of the building is located furthest from the northern boundary. At the closest point, the two blocks would be 6.5 metres from the northern boundary and at the furthest point, 12.5 metres. The height of the buildings at the closest point to the adjoining properties will result in some shadowing of the rear gardens of these properties. However, due to the scale of the buildings and the distance from the residential dwellings fronting the North Circular Road it is considered that the impact of any overshadowing would be minimal. As the bulk of the blocks are a minimum of 12.5 metres from the northern boundary it is considered that distances are considered to be acceptable for buildings with no flank windows.

The remaining three blocks of flats are a mix of three and four storeys. These building heights are considered to be acceptable given the scale of the adjoining residential development on Cherry Blossom Close and the large distances between the proposed buildings and the nearest residential dwellings on Princes Avenue to the south, being approximately 100 metres.

The siting of the proposed houses and blocks of flats are considered to be acceptable. The 12 houses are arranged in 2 blocks of 4 terraced houses and 2 blocks of 2 semi-detached houses. Each house has its own parking space with small garden to the front and a private rear garden.

The blocks of flats are sited to form courtyards, providing semi-private soft and hard landscaped areas along side internal parking areas. The height of the buildings at three and four storey is compatible with the surrounding residential development.

The relationship between the proposed buildings are considered to be acceptable to ensure that there would be no significant harm to the amenities of future occupiers. The siting of the buildings would ensure that there is no significant detrimental impact from restricted light or overlooking.

Impact on Neighbouring Properties

An Urban Design Statement prepared by RPS in September 2006 was submitted in support of this application. The statement outlines the design rationale for the proposed development. In particular the statement addresses the height of the proposed buildings in relation to surrounding residential buildings, Pymmes Brook and the open space to the south of Pymmes Brook.

The blocks of flats closest to the northern boundary of the site have flank elevations at a distance of 6.5 metres from the boundaries. However, the facing elevations are a minimum of 40 metres from the rear elevations of the houses fronting the North Circular. These distances will ensure no harm results through the siting of the flats with regards to overlooking and loss of privacy.

Objectors have raised concerns regarding loss of outlook, privacy and sunlight/daylight to their properties in Cherry Blossom Close. The first house in the row of proposed houses is sited approximately 12.5 to 19 metres from the nearest block of flats on the existing Cherry Blossom Close development. There is also a row of mature poplars located between the proposed and

existing developments at this location. Conditions can be attached to any permission requiring that any windows on the flank elevation of the house have obscured glazing to ensure there is no loss of privacy. It is considered that the distances between the buildings are sufficient and the heights of the proposed buildings are of a residential scale, therefore it is considered that the proposed development will not unduly harm the amenities of the neighbouring residential properties.

Objectors have also raised concerns about noise and disturbance during construction of the proposed development, however this is not a material planning matter and therefore cannot be considered.

Some objectors have raised concerns that the proposed development will lead to an increase in crime in the area. However, there is no evidence to support such claims. Indeed it is considered that the proposed development could lead to an increase in natural surveillance in the area with an increase in residents overlooking public and private amenity/open spaces.

Access / Traffic Generation

A Transport Assessment was submitted in support of this application. Vehicular access to the site is through the existing residential development on Cherry Blossom Close, off Chequers Way. This provides access to all residential accommodation and the proposed Artificial Turf Pitch on the western part of the site. The existing junction at Cherry Blossom Close and Chequers Way was designed with sufficient visibility splays to accommodate the proposed development. It is considered that the existing road can accommodate the increased vehicular movements generated by the proposed development.

The London Fire and Emergency Planning Association (LFEPA) is not satisfied with the information submitted, as it does not show compliance with access for fire fighting requirements. However, it is noted that the organisation supported the previous application for the same scheme. From discussions with the LFEPA it was apparent that they required further details from the applicant regarding the access road demonstrating compliance with the relevant regulations. No alternative emergency access to the site is required as the number of residential units accessed from Cherry Blossom Close is not in excess of 300.

Parking

Car parking for the residential development is provided at a level of 110%, approximately 156 car parking spaces in total. In addition, a further 20 car parking spaces are provided for the sports pitch. The 12 houses each have space for one on-site parking space. The spaces for the flats are distributed fairly evenly across the site with each block of flats having good access to car parking spaces. This level of provision is considered sufficient having regard to Policy (II)GD7 of the UDP and PPG13.

Details of cycle parking and bin storage will be required as a condition attached to any planning permission.

Affordable housing

The UDP (Interim Amendments) requires that at least 25% of all large housing schemes should be affordable housing. The London Plan has set a strategic target of 50% of all new homes to be affordable. London Plan Policy 3A.8 states that boroughs should achieve the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing when negotiating on private residential and mixed use schemes, having regard to borough-wide targets, the need to encourage residential development rather than restrain it and the individual circumstances of the site

The proposal provides for affordable housing at a level of 25%. This figure has been calculated using the Three Dragons Toolkit submitted by the applicant and is considered to be acceptable. The affordable housing provides for a mix of tenures, 39% of the affordable housing is 3-bed or larger and 10% of the units are wheelchair accessible. The affordable housing will be integrated across the site. The provision of affordable housing, in particular mix of unit sizes, has been negotiated with the Council’s Housing Department.

Open space provision

The site is adjacent to Pymmes Brook and is identified as a ‘Missing Link’ and ‘Wildlife Corridor’ in the UDP proposals map. Policy (II) O9 is particularly relevant as it encourages developers to contribute to the green chains and take any opportunities for the creation of further links. Also relevant is Policy (II) O8 which requires the LPA to carefully consider proposals in or adjacent to Pymmes Brook in order to safeguard its role as a green chain.

Approximately 50% of the site has been set aside for open space and sports provision in the proposed development. The proposal includes approximately 8,000 sqm of open/amenity space along the Pymmes brook boundary of the site. This includes a ‘riverside walk’ which would be accessible to the public. The footway joins with the existing footway at the south western corner of the property, which links with the North Circular and a footbridge across Pymmes Brook. At the south eastern corner of the site the footway joins an existing footway along the northern side of Pymmes Brook. Securing of public access and maintenance of this area will be addressed in the Section 106 agreement.

The open space covers an area the length of the site and varies from 13 metres to 48 metres in width. As this is an outline application for siting and access only, details of landscaping will need to be considered under conditions attached to any planning permission. In addition, a condition requiring details of a ‘wildlife corridor’ will also be attached to ensure the wildlife corridor along Pymmes Brook is maintained and enhanced. It is considered that the proposed open space will enhance the green chain and provide public access along Pymmes Brook, enhancing public access to open space in the area in accordance with Policies (II)O8, (II)O9, (II)EN9 and (II)EN11 of the UDP.

A number of objectors have said that the Council should purchase the land and develop it for community/leisure facilities. Although this is a valid suggestion to the Council, the current application is not for such a proposal, therefore it cannot be considered as part of this application. The Section 106 offers first refusal of the freehold to the London Borough of Enfield.

Sports Provision

The western part of the site includes an all-weather Artificial Playing Turf measuring 91 metres in length by 56 metres in width. To the north of the pitch is a proposed building for use as a pavilion/changing facility. 20 car parking spaces are provided for the proposed pitch.

The applicant proposes that the Enfield Town Ladies Football Club will own the leasehold to the pitch and be responsible for managing the pitch. The applicant also proposes to offer the freehold of this part of the site to the Borough. The Section 106 agreement will cover the management of the pitch (including the requirement to provide a management plan and community use) and the ownership of both the leasehold and freehold of the pitch.

Sport England has been consulted regarding this proposal although the organisation is not a statutory consultee due to the former playing fields being privately owned and not in use for more than 5 years. Sport England has verbally expressed concern about the amount of land being

used for residential development and would prefer to see a higher proportion being set aside for sports use however no formal comments have been received. Due to their non-statutory status minimal weight has been attached as part of the overall assessment.

Sustainable Design and Construction

The proposal aims to meet EcoHomes standards. On this basis it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with Policy (II) SDC1, Sustainable Design and Construction (Interim Amendments).

S106

This application will need to be the subject of a S106 picking up the many issues that have been highlighted throughout this report. A draft S106 has been prepared comprising the following:

• 25% affordable housing provision, including 2 x 1 bed flats, 20 x 2 bed flats, 10 x 3 bed flats and 4 x 4 bed houses. The tenure of the housing has been agreed with 25 of the units will be for social rent and 11 units will be shared ownership. The S106 will also ensure that the social housing is to be integrated across the site. • An education contribution of £162,000. • A contribution of £142,000 towards public transport and access to public transport. • Access and management of the riverside walk and adjoining open space. • Requirement for a management plan for the sports pitch. • Arrangements for the leasehold and freehold of the sports pitch. • Ensuring access through the site to the properties fronting North Circular Road is maintained to provide for potential future redevelopment.

Conclusion

In light of the above, the proposal is considered acceptable for the following reasons:

1. The use of the site for residential purposes would be compatible with the surrounding land uses and would not unduly detract from the amenities of adjoining and nearby residents whilst contributing to the supply of housing within the Borough having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2, (I)GD1, (II)GD3 and (II)H1 of the Unitary Development Plan.

2. The use of the site for open space and sports provision would be compatible with the surrounding land uses, retain the Pymmes Brook corridor and provide public access to open space corridor in accordance with Policies (II)O8, (II)O9 and (II)EN11 of the Unitary Development Plan.

3. The proposed development provides for satisfactory parking provision and access arrangements having regard to Policies (II)GD6, (II)GD7, (II)GD8and (II)H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

4. The proposed access from Cherry Blossom Close is considered to be adequate to serve the number of dwelling s indicated and does not give rise to conditions prejudicial to the free flow and safety of traffic on the adjoining highways having regard to Policies (II)GD6, (II)GD7 and (II)GD8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

5. The sustainability measures identified in the Planning Statement, due to the EcoHomes status, are considered to be sufficient to meet the requirements of Interim Policy (II) SDC1 of the UDP, therefore achieving a suitable level of sustainable design and construction.

6. The siting of the proposed development, having regard to the indicative heights of the proposed buildings, and the distances of the proposed buildings from adjoining properties, will not unduly detract from the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers and will not be out of keeping with or detrimental to the character and appearance of the surrounding area having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2, (II)GD3 and (II)H8 of the Unitary Development Plan.

93 TP/06/1845

Application Number: TP/06/1919 Ward: Turkey Street Date of Registration: 6th October 2006

Contact: David Snell 020 8379 3838

Location: DURANTS SCHOOL, 4, PITFIELD WAY, ENFIELD, EN3 5BY

Proposal: Erection of a 3m high perimeter fence to part of east elevation together with 3m high internal fence to one side of pedestrian path to side entrance.

Applicant Name & Address:

Lesley Smith, Durants School 4, Pitfield Way Enfield EN3 5BY

Agent Name & Address:

Recommendation: That planning permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. That the fencing shall be finished in green.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance.

2. T001 British Standard 3998

3. T002 Arboricultural

4. C51A Time Limited Permission

Site and Surroundings:

Durants school spans most of the length of Pitfield Way. The surrounding area is primarily residential in nature, with properties along Palmers Lane, to the south west, and commercial properties lining Hertford Road towards the north east.

Amplification of Proposal:

Permission is sought for the erection of a 3m high weld mesh perimeter fence to part of eastern boundary, measuring approximately 57.8m in length, together with 3m high internal fence to one side of pedestrian path to the side entrance. The fence is to be coloured green. The proposal will involve the removal of 4 trees which line the east boundary, these are 3 Holly trees, and 1 Tree of Heaven.

Relevant Planning History: None

Consultations:

Public: Consultation letters were sent to 12 neighbouring properties. No replies were received.

External: None

Internal: None

Relevant Policy:

The London Plan None

Unitary Development Plan (I)GD1 - Developments to have appropriate regard to surroundings (I)GD2 - Developments to improve environment (II)GD1 - Developments to be appropriately located (II)GD3 - General design considerations (I)EN1 - To protect and enhance the quality of the environment throughout the borough. (II)C35 - Protection to trees of significant public amenity

UDP Interim Amendments

Sustainable Design and Construction (Interim Amendment)

Analysis

Principle:

There is no objection in principle to the replacement of fencing as proposed.

Impact on Character of Area:

The proposed fencing on the east elevation would front onto the highway, Pitfield Way, and therefore would feature in the street scene. However, the proposal is sensitive to this in the choice of materials. The proposed fencing is an open mesh design, which will look less imposing than alternative boundary treatments, and it is similar to fencing that has already been replaced. In addition, a number of trees line this boundary and this landscaping would soften its presence on the street scene. The proposed fencing on the eastern side of pedestrian entrance is not as visible from the public footway as it is an internal fence, however this part of the site is at a higher level. Despite this, it is considered that the proposed fencing would not detract from the character and appearance of the street scene.

Impact on Adjoining Properties:

Given that this part of the boundary is not flanked by residential development, it is considered that there will be no impact to adjoining properties.

Impact on Trees:

4 trees are to be removed as part of the proposal, these trees are currently not protected. These trees are part of a group of trees that line the boundary fence and the erection of the proposed fence, given their close proximity to it, would mean that they could no longer be retained. The 3 holly trees to be removed are clustered close together and, though they appear healthy, are not

particularly attractive. The tree of heaven is a mature specimen which appears to be in good health. The siting of these trees along this boundary means that they do have a visual presence in the street scene. However, it is considered that the trees are not significant enough to justify TPO status. Furthermore, there are a number of other relatively large trees which would compensate for the loss of these trees. Nevertheless, a condition is recommended requiring the replanting of a tree to compensate for the loss of the tree of heaven.

Sustainable Design and Construction:

A sustainability form was not submitted.

Conclusion

The proposal is recommended for approval for the following reason:

1. Having regard to Policies (I)GD1, (I)GD2 and (II)GD3 of the Unitary Development Plan, the design, size and siting, of the proposed fencing would not have a detrimental impact on amenity, and has appropriate regard to the surrounding area.

97 TP/06/1919