Agenda and minutes

Apologies had been received from Councillor Peter Curling with Councillor Jazz Dhillon substituting.

Councillor Brian Stead declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Item 8  103 Haig Road, Hillingdon as he had spoken to the petitioners about the application and left the meeting whilst the item was discussed.

There had been no items notified as urgent.

It was confirmed that the reports marked in part 1 would be discussed in public and those marked part 2 would be discussed in private

Reserved Matters (details of layout, scale, appearance, access and landscaping) in respect of the proposed terminal building and forecourt site, in compliance with condition 2 of planning permission ref: 62360/APP/2009/2232 dated 8/02/2010 : Variation of condition 27 of Outline Planning Permission ref: 62360/APP/2006/2942 dated 02/07/07 (Development of a replacement passenger terminal building in the Central Terminal Area)

Recommendation : Approval, subject to no objection from English Heritage

Reserved Matters (details of layout, scale, appearance, access and

landscaping) in respect of the proposed terminal building and forecourt site, in compliance with condition 2 of planning permission ref:

62360/APP/2009/2232 dated 8/02/2010 : Variation of condition 27 of Outline Planning Permission ref: 62360/APP/2006/2942 dated 02/07/07

(Development of a replacement passenger terminal building in the Central Terminal Area).

62360/APP/2010/648

The recommendation for approval subject to no objection from English Heritage or London Underground Limited, was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

Resolved

That subject to no objections being received from English Heritage or London Underground Limited, that delegated powers be given to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to grant planning permission subject to the g conditions and informatives set out in the officers report, addendum shee , and any additional conditions and/or informatives which may be required by English Heritage or London Underground Limited.

Erection of multi storey car park and alterations to road layout (Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 18 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995)

Recommendation : Approval, subject to no objection from English Heritage

Erection of multi storey car park and alterations to road layout (Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 18 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995).

62360/APP/2010/800

That the recommendation to raise no objection, subject to no objection being received from English Heritage or London Underground, was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

Resolved

That subject to no objections being received from English Heritage or London Underground Limited, that delegated powers be given to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to raise no objection subject to the  considerations set out in the officer’s report, addendum circulated at the meeting, and any additional considerations and/or informatives which may be required by English Heritage or London Underground Limited.

Erection of a part three, part four-storey Integrated Baggage Building (Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 18 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995)

Recommendation : Approval, subject to no objections from BAA Safeguarding.

Erection of a part three, part four-storey Integrated Baggage Building

(Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 18 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995).

27277/APP/2010/741

The recommendation to raise no objection was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

That no objection be raised to the application subject to the considerations set out in the officer’s report and Informative 8 being  amended as follows:-

'The applicant is encouraged to incorporate the highest levels of accessible design in accordance with the most recent applicable Best Practice.

Further, the applicant is reminded of the duties set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, with regard to employment and service provision. Whilst an employer's duty to make reasonable adjustment is owed to an individual employee or job applicant, the responsibility of service providers is to disabled people at large, and the duty is anticipatory. The failure to take reasonable steps at this stage to facilitate access will therefore count against the service provider, if/when challenged by a disabled person. It is therefore recommended that the applicant takes full advantage of the opportunity that this development offers, to improve the accessibility of the premises to people with mobility and sensory impairments.'

Erection of a part two storey, part single storey rear extension with 1 rooflight (involving demolition of existing attached shed)

Recommendation : Approval, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer’s report.

Erection of a part two storey, part single storey rear extension with 1 rooflight (involving demolition of existing attached shed).

66648/APP/2009/2793

In accordance with the Council’s constitution a representative of the petitioners addressed the meeting.

The petitioner made the following points:-

• Unacceptable loss of light to 101 & 105 Haig Road.
• Bedrooms not of a reasonable size.
• Extension would be in close proximity to 101 and 105, which would be overdominant.
• Proposal would have an impact on the private family life of adjoining neighbours
• The extension does not harmonise with the surrounding area
• The design and appearance would not be subordinate
• The extension would be domineering in character and dimension
• The proposed flat roof could be used as a balcony or fire escape.
• The parking is inadequate maybe not at present but may be an issue in the future
• There is no justification for the cost of the extension
• Windows although obscure glazed would still be opening and would cause privacy issues for adjoining property.

The agent/applicant did not address the meeting but submitted a letter that was attached to the addendum sheet circulated at the meeting.

The Ward Councillor addressed the meeting making the following points:-

• Supported the petitioners and the robust account for their reasons for the petition.
• There are no other extension in the vicinity.
• This is a large extension changing a 2 bedroom house to a 4 bedroom house.
• The adjoining property has a conservatory and there would be an impact for the occupiers.
• The plans do not give the situation on the ground and would ask members to defer the application for a site visit.

In answer to an issue raised in relation to the neighbouring conservatory officers advised that there was a conservatory next door and that when compiling the overshadowing diagram this was taken into account.

A member raised concerns in relation to the parking stating that the extension would double the size of the property and if other properties in the area did the same this would have an impact on the area.   Concerns were also raised in relation to the levels on the site.

Officers stated that the Council’s parking standards required 2 parking spaces for a new build, but the Council’s standards do not relate to the number of bedrooms.   The current proposal does not affect the current parking requirement.

It was suggested that a site visit would be useful on this application as there had been genuine concerns raised in relation to car parking arrangements & local parking situation, identify construction of and the relationship of the proposal to the neighbouring conservatory, observe the levels on site; and for additional information to be provided with regard to the existing and proposed levels of overshadowing.

It was moved and seconded that the application be deferred to enable members to make a site visit.  On being put to the vote the application was deferred for a site visit.

Resolved – That the application be deferred to enable members to undertake a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Erection of 3 two storey three-bedroom terraced dwellings with associated parking and new access road to include alterations to vehicular crossover, involving demoition of two storey side extension to No.16 (Outline application for approval of scale, access, appearance and layout)

Recommendation : Refusal

Erection of 3 two storey three-bedroom terraced dwellings with associated parking and new access road to include alterations to vehicular crossover, involving demolition of two storey side extension to No.16 (Outline application for approval of scale, access, appearance and layout.)

4942/APP/2009/2280

This application was withdrawn by the applicant.

Change of use from Sui Generis use (Builders Merchants yard etc) to Use Class A1 (Shops) at No. 6 & 12 and to Use Class B (Office) at No. 8 & 10 at ground floor, associated new shop fronts and alterations to elevations

Recommendation : Approval, subject to a Section 106 Agreement.

Demolition of existing building and erection of a new mixed-use development comprising of 136sq.m of Class B1 (Business) floorspace at ground level with 13 residential flats (7 two-bedroom, 5 one-bedroom and 1 studio) above, together with parking for 12 vehicles within an undercroft car park and access off Blyth Road 18/11/2009

62528/APP/2009/2502

In answer to an issue raised in relation to whether Code level 3 in regards to energy reduction was sufficient, officers advised that the applicant would need to also comply with the London Plan so Code level 3 was sufficient.

A member asked for condition 14 to be amended to require the parking to be allocated to the commercial use.  The amendment to Condition 14 was moved, seconded and agreed by the committee.

Concerns were raised as to whether there was suitable disabled access to the shower and accessible W.C. facilities for the  B1(a) unit.

Officers suggested that a condition should be added to ensure that details are submitted.  The addition of this condition was moved, seconded and agreed by the committee.

A member raised concerns about the non accessible Green Roof areas and how they would be maintained.

Officers advised that condition 4 could be amended to require details to be submitted on how areas would be planted.  Access for maintenance would be required through the units at some stage.

Members were unhappy with access being through the units and asked that condition 4 include details of how maintenance of these areas would be carried out.

It was moved, seconded and agreed that an informative be added for the applicant to consider providing food grinders to minimise the waste from the kitchens.

The recommendation for approval with condition 4 and 14 being amended, an additional 2 conditions and informative added was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

Resolved – That delegated powers be given to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to grant planning permission subject to the following:-

a) That the Council enters into an agreement with the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and/or Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 (as amended) and/ or other appropriate legislation to secure:

i) The provision of a contribution of £27,933 towards educational facilities.

ii) The provision of a contribution of £4,558.74 towards healthcare facilities.

iii) The provision of a contribution of £517.73 toward local libraries facilities.

iv) A contribution of £2,500 for every £1 million build cost to provide for construction training.

v) A cash contribution equal to 5% of the total cash contribution to enable the management and monitoring of the requirements of the legal agreement.

b) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparation of the Section 106 Agreement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed.

c) That officers be authorised to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the proposed agreement.

d) That if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Resolved

1.         That enforcement action as recommended in the officer’s report            was agreed.

2.         That the decision and the reasons for it outlined in this report be released into the public domain, solely for the purposes of issuing the formal enforcement notice to the individual concerned.