LBH essentially say that none of what we pointed out as possible flaws in the application would be considered valid by LBH Planning Dept.
…now we wait for the Mayor. Here’s the full text from LBH; below the pdf version linked:
Emma Williamson Assistant Director Planning Service
Hornsey Town Hall Appreciation Soc.
By e-mail only
Date: 22nd August 2017
Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)
Re: Planning Application and Applications for Listed Building Consent (Ref:HGY/2017/2220) at Hornsey Town Hall, The Broadway, N8 9JJ
Thank you for your letter of 20th August 2017 concerning the above applications.
In your letter you request that the above applications be referred to the Mayor of London for determination under section 7 of The Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008 (“the Order”), and you set out the reasons why you consider that referral is necessary.
The Local Planning Authority (“LPA”) has considered the application against the Order, as with all major planning applications we receive. As you are aware, the Order sets out detailed criteria as to which categories of application are referable to the Mayor; those being the types of applications which are most likely to be of strategic importance and therefore of interest to the Mayor.
I have considered each of the points you raise and respond below using the same numbering system as in your letter for ease of reference.
1. The planning application proposes 146 residential units (flats) which is below the threshold of 150 set out in Category 1A of the Schedule attached to the Order. As you note, the application also includes a hotel (use class C1) totalling 67 rooms, however this does not fall within the definition of “houses or flats” (use class C3) as prescribed in the Order. The LPA must consider the application as submitted. Should further changes to the disposition of uses be proposed the LPA will consider them at that point. The planning application is therefore not referable under category 1A.
2. I agree that Hornsey Town Hall is an important and historically significant building and is much loved locally. This is reflected in its listing (Grade ll*). This however does not require it to be referred to the Mayor. The proposed development has also been screened for Environmental Impact Assessment (26″˜” July 2017) and found not to be an EIA development. Details of the EIA Screening can be found on the Council”™s website under reference HGY/2017/2009.
3. In terms of Category 3E of the Schedule attached to the Order. you note that both the hotel and other non-residential uses exceed 2,500sqm (acknowledging the hotel-use supports my response to point 1 above). Development over this threshold that does not accord with one or more provisions of the development plan is referable. The Local Planning Authority considers that the development accords with the provisions of the development plan (subject to the application of development management standards and a full and proper assessment of the application) and as such the proposed development is not referable.
In terms of the other points you raise:
(1) affordable housing targets are borough-wide targets. and the application-specific viability assessment is being reviewed;
(2) in terms of affordable housing, the borough is performing well over the plan period. In any case, the development is not considered a Category 1A development;
(3) the OJEU process has no bearing on the determination of the planning application and is not a material planning consideration;
(4) the LPA remains impartial in its decision-making and must only take into account planning policy and any other relevant material planning considerations. It is acceptable in law for the Council, acting as the LPA, to determine a planning application in which it has a significant financial interest. The Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 govern the process. Of course, any councillors that have given strong views on the applications or have been involved in making formal Council decisions with regards to the sale of the site may be precluded from sitting on the Planning sub-committee when the application is to be determined. I note your reference to Crouch End ward councillors in this regard. Cllr Doron (a ward councillor and a member of the Planning sub-committee) has advised that he will not sit on the committee when the applications are to be determined.
(5) The Mayor”s latest SPG does not affect the categories governing referable development which is set out in the Order. Similarly, matters of contention that may arise with the content of the applicant”s viability report do not necessitate referral to the Mayor. The LPA will ensure a full and proper assessment of development viability is carried out and has commissioned BNP Paribas to provide specialist advice on the matter.
I have considered all the points that you raise but maintain the LPA”™s position that
the applications are not referable to the Mayor of London.
I would like to thank you for your interest in the matter and for prompting this
additional review of the applications against the Order.
I hope my response clarifies matters.
Dean Hermitage MGeog MA MRTPI
Head of Development Management
Cc: Greater London Authority (Assistant Director for Planning)
Director of Regeneration. Planning and Development Lyn Garner