27 affordable homes at 89-111 Dendridge Close, Enfield

“The Site comprises two land parcels, Site A to the south of Dendridge Close and Site B to the north, which are currently used as car parks. The car parks contain 114 parking spaces, 64 at Site A and 50 at Site B.”

“Site B has two statutory listed buildings located directly adjacent to the north. These are 120-122 Turkey Street and 138-140 Turkey Street which are Grade II listed. Site B also has two locally listed buildings in close proximity to the north, 116 and 118 Turkey Street.”

“The main planning issues raised by the Proposed Development are:”

“Land Use Principles • Housing and Affordable Housing • Residential Quality and Amenity • Design and Townscape • Heritage • Impact on Neighbouring Residential Amenity • Transport, Access and Parking • Habitat Regulations Assessment • Open Space, Landscaping and Trees • Biodiversity and Ecology • Sustainability and Climate Change • Noise and Air Quality • Contaminated Land • Fire Safety • Flood Risk and Drainage • Socioeconomics and Health • Waste and Recycling • Public…”

“The proposal results in ‘Less than Substantial Harm’ to some heritage assets. Environmental Health No objection, subject to condition securing matters related to contamination, noise and air quality.”

“Sustainable Drainage No objection, subject to condition securing discharge. Policy No objection. Sustainability No objection. Urban Design No objection, subject to legal obligation to retain architect. Property Services The land in question is Housing owned and as such, Property Services have no comment to make.”

“Concerns resulting from the construction period of any works, e.g. noise, dust, construction vehicles, hours of working are controlled under Building Regulations and would not substantiate a planning reason for refusal on this basis. Security Concerns: The proximity of the new buildings to existing properties raises security issues, particularly with back fences giving onto other homes and gardens.”

“The loss of value to a property would not substantiate a planning reason for refusal on this basis. Community Impact: There are worries about the strain on existing community facilities and the safety of children, particularly with increased traffic and reduced visibility in playgrounds.”

“In response to Members’ enquiries in respect of play space, officers replied that there would be boundary treatment, such as different pallets of materials, planting and street furniture, to separate the play space area from above each turning head and vehicles would not get to a speed that would cause an issue.”

“In response to Members’ questions relating to access, officers responded that they tried to resist gates for social cohesion reasons and the parking spaces were not allocated to residents. There was a secure by design condition, so some measures such as CCTV, bollards or lighting, could be attached to secure the site. There was no access issue for properties on Turkey Street resulting from the application.”

“The proposal having been put to the vote; Members voted:”