Enfield Draft Housing and Growth Strategy for Public Consultation v2
Comments are due by October 21st.
News
Update on Southgate Office Village
From Cllr Derek Levy:
Dear All –
Since I last wrote to you at the back end of July, the Planning Team has spent an extensive amount of time poring through the fine detail of the SOV application, reviewing this against policy, and taking into account the significant objections and more general comments raised not just by those of you who had corresponded via me directly, but also the many others who went directly to Officers or used the Planning Portal – when it worked, that is.
In addition, and as part of the entire robust assessment process, there have been regular, extensive, and ongoing discussions/negotiations with the developer by Panning Officers to reflect the concerns that Officers and residents both would have had with the scheme as it existed at the time. This has resulted in a variety of detailed modifications to the scheme, with revised drawings coming forward which themselves now need to be considered.
I am not going to comment or speculate as to how these will be received by local residents and stakeholders, and/or how acceptable they will be deemed by you; indeed even the three Councillors have yet to see these in detail, as they weren’t available to us when we held our review meeting with the lead Officers last Thursday afternoon. But I am here to share with you what happens next:
1: The Officers were in the process last week, and have been since, in reviewing the latest iteration of the scheme. As I said last time, these things are always a moveable feast, and can be so right up to the point at which the final version of a proposed scheme is brought to Planning Committee.
2: It was the intention the that of all goes well, and there are no significant interruptions, they would hope to be in a position by this time next week, to put the scheme out to as second and further consultation.
3. There is no statutory need to do so, but I insisted that given the scale, scope, extent, and degree of local interest in the scheme, and in the interests of openness and transparency, such a consultation should be undertaken to ensure residents are fully engaged in the process.
4: The consultation will last for three weeks, just like in June/July and as would be the case were this to be a statutory requirement. In addition, I also insisted (and the Officers agreed) that letters should and will go to precisely the same addresses as were consulted last time – and which itself, again at my/our insistence, took in a more extensive radius that is laid out in policy.
5: I further asked that some simple but clear narrative should accompany the consultation papers to explain what are the key changes, how these were arrived at, and why, in order to give a context beyond the very basic nature of the scheme in what will be its present form.
6: It is impossible, for all sorts of reasons to be precise on timing, but it is currently anticipated that the Application could well be considered and determined at the mid-January Planning Committee. But even that is conditional upon what happens between then and now.
7: This means the role of the Planning PANEL becomes even more critical. It will always be a pivotal moment. As you know, I established at the outset and insisted that there really must be a Planning Panel in this case. This is the pivotal public meeting at which the widest possible views can be canvased and expressed. I won’t repeat here the nature of a Planning Panel, but it my from belief that from a resident perspective, this session is far more important to you and for you than the Committee meeting itself (where you are heavily time and otherwise constrained). This was spelt out at length in my previous update.
8: If consultation letters do go out at the back end of next week and early next, this will take things to the end of October. After that, all the feedback needs to be gathered and assessed, alongside the ongoing assessment of the scheme, whilst negotiations with the developer and other meetings between Officers and key stakeholders need to be factored in.
9: Should this time frame play out, all the indications are that the Planning Panel will be convened between the middle and end of November. An indicative date has been pencilled in, but it would be imprudent for me to share that now because there are still so many variables that cold impact upon that, and occasion a further push back in the timetable.
10: In normal circumstances, one would seek to have a 6-8 week period between Panel and Committee in order for all parties to assimilate, process, accommodate, and make changes to proposals and reports in readiness for final presentation to and discussion at the Committee, whenever that should occur.
11: In summary, indicatively, and possibly still subject to change – but nothing will happen sooner, and could only become later still:-
- 2nd Consultation ….. the last three weeks of October
- Planning Panel …. No earlier than 18th November
- Planning Committee …. Mid-January 2020
As soon as I am confident that Officers have a clearer picture that all is going to the currently intended schedule, I shall get back in touch with you to confirm the date for the Planning Panel, and then share with you some advice as how best to approach that meeting to ensure that all the key concerns you have with the expressed and fully articulated, with clarity on each of the issues and with the minimum of duplication and repetition. After all, the general nature of the objections are already more than well known, and overegging the obvious pudding will serve no useful purpose.
It will be about seizing the moment, proper and organised mobilisation of voices, and making the most of the opportunity afforded to you by the occasion – at which you will be in direct dialogue with the Applicant, their professional advisers (architects and designers etc), some members of the Planning Committee (who need to be on listening mode to avoid any hints of predetermination) and of course the Officers from the Planning Authority who will be able to make observational and policy related comments on the night, and minute the entre proceedings.
I have known Planning Panels lead to significant last minute and often critical changes in Applications, which is why I place such faith in them as being a major forum for residents and their advocates to influence opinion and make a difference.
Kind regards
Councillor Derek Levy
LB Enfield: Southgate Ward
Planning application for the redevelopment of Southgate Office Village
Members should be aware of the proposed Southgate Village development on Chase Road next to the Hart pub backing onto Park Road and the railway line by M&S. This is a plan to rebuild Southgate Office Village as a mixed office and housing development, with several tall buildings, including a 17-storey tower.
The tower blocks would be visible for miles around. The development would be likely to attract a transient renting population rather than families. It would create a precedent for similar developments on other nearby sites such as Marks and Spencer.
Southgate District Civic Trust will be holding a public consultation day on June 22nd, 9.30 to 3pm at St Andrew’s Church and anyone interested is invited to attend. Following this meeting, Civic Voice will produce a planning brief to represent the community’s view on the development.
Southgate District Civic Trust flyer_SOV_2019_A5
Consultation on draft recommendations for ward boundaries in Enfiled
Draft recommendations for new wards, ward boundaries, and ward names for Enfield Council have now been published.
Comments on those recommendations are invited.
Consultation closes on 5 August 2019.
Pinkham Way
Please click on the link below to see some stunning photographs of the wildlife living on the Pinkham Way site.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/64663114@N03/sets/72157626961990241
The deadline for signing the petition to preserve the site is April 10th. If you wish to sign, details can be found at http://www.pinkhamwayalliance.org/
It’ll be a great help to PWA if supporters don’t make individual submissions. The reason is that, since this is the pre-public examination consultation, anyone who submits has the theoretical right to appear at the hearings, and all those who exercise that right will need a copy of other submissions including PWA’s.
Ahead of the 2012 hearings, so many individual submissions had been made that PWA had to spend £1200 printing multiple copies of responses!
An update on Pinkham Way
Last October, Haringey’s Regulatory Committee, under its remit to examine complex planning issues, considered the draft North London Waste Plan (NLWP). After reading and hearing evidence from PWA, and questioning officers, a cross-party majority of members, unwhipped, recommended to Cabinet that the Pinkham Way site be removed from the plan. To put it very mildly, this decision sent Council dovecotes a-flutter. The Cabinet meeting scheduled for a few days later was postponed for two months to ‘give time to line up support’. Cabinet members made alarmist and wholly inaccurate comments that Haringey would be forced to prepare its own waste plan if it didn’t approve the NLWP (ie if it exercised its right to remove the site). When the matter finally came to Full Council on January 31st, the Council could only ensure approval by whipping Labour members. So what did that meeting actually approve? One thing only, that the draft plan should be sent forward for a six-week public consultation that’ll begin shortly. Later this year or early in 2020, an independent Planning Inspector will examine the NLWP’s soundness. It goes without saying, of course, that anyone has the right to make a response to the consultation. For those who don’t wish to, PWA will as usual prepare its own submission, which, under a long-standing agreement with the NLWP, we’ll invite you to support after studying detailed bullets of the main points. If you’re making your own response, you’re more than welcome to use these if you feel they’re helpful. To study the NLWP documents, please go to: http://www.nlwp.net/document-centre/
Enfield: health and wellbeing survey
Residents are invited to give their views on health and wellbeing issues by completing a survey:
This is your opportunity to stress the importance of keeping our parks open and accessible (or any other health related issues).
Local Plan and Draft Heritage Strategy
Enfield Council has published its draft Local Plan and draft Heritage Strategy, which are available to view on the Council’s website.
Comments on the drafts are invited up to the end of February.
Proposed Changes to Enfield Waste Collection
Enfield Council is proposing to make changes to the waste collection service and residents are invited to comment on the proposals.
Click on the link above for the chance to have your say about the proposedchanges
From SGA committee
Walker School Development
A drawing of the proposed development can be seen here:
SGA has sent in the following comments:
We wish the scheme to go ahead successfully replacing the existing outdated school facility however it is important that the replacement is designed with future needs in mind considering that it will be there for possibly 60 years. It is worth considering this building as an important piece of townscape which could enrich the sequenced approach to Southgate Green and set an example to school children of the future .It should be a place of learning that they would enjoy visiting and remembering.
We would have expected the applicant to carefully consider the environmental sustainability of a school and are disappointed to see that a sustainable solution has not been considered. Green roofs, walls, suds drainage, solar panels ,ground source heat pumps etc.
The Council as client appears to be setting a low design bar and the application submitted is a pallid attempt and provides an unsatisfactory replacement. The site is at the core of Southgate Green within the conservation area .The building needs to contribute to the streetscape and to compliment the views towards The Green and Christchurch.
We are not convinced that the scheme submitted is the only possible approach .
The study group considers that alternative approaches could be considered for example to make the box like mass appear to be a number of smaller vertical units or to allow the box mass to be undisguised without being out of place but fitting in.
Taking each in turn the applicant might look to explore articulation of the facade at first and second floor ,around windows and openings. having different planes would help eg, brick bays brought forward or recessed. Exploration of relief in the facades with windows forming part of a relief composition.
Windows could be projected in bay format perhaps using colour as a flag, they could be suitably detailed (reveals especially) to a standard befitting a conservation area.
The first floor could perhaps be expressed as special ,perhaps a different brick pattern ,banding or colour contrast, there are many examples of contemporary brickwork design which could be referred to expressing a sense of individuality and place.
A simple well proportioned façade with modestly and varying and receding planes in different colours giving an overall pattern pleasing to the eye could be explored.
In short not good enough at present
Any comments should be made ASAP at: