Issue - meetings

Replacement of vacant car sales centre with a 3 storey mixed used development comprising of 1 x 1-Bed Apartment, 7 x 2-Bed Apartments and 1 x 3-Bed Apartment, with associated ground floor undercroft car and cycle parking and ground floor commercial space Use Class E.

Recommendations: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused

Replacement of vacant car sales centre with a 3 storey mixed used development comprising of 1 x 1-Bed Apartment, 7 x 2-Bed Apartments and 1 x 3-Bed Apartment, with associated ground floor undercroft car and cycle parking and ground floor commercial space Use Class E.

Officers introduced the application.

A written representation was received from the lead petitioner.

In the planning application it stated that Chestnut Avenue was “a quiet road used for access to a residential area beyond the railway line and Northwood Recreation Ground containing a playing field and park.” This statement was disputed by Watkins Close residents, who did not agree that Chestnut Avenue was a quiet road; it was a busy suburban avenue with access and egress only via the main Pinner Road. It also served a members’ private gym; a football and social club; a cricket and social club; a bowling club; and a cemetery. None of which have been referenced and all of which produced a great deal of traffic at this busy junction. Residents, of which there were over a hundred, were constantly battling the odds to gain a parking space close to their homes. In Watkins Close the dwellings were built on what was previously a Council car and lorry park. People had long memories, and many still felt they had a right to park in resident-only spaces in the private close, and regularly blocked residents’ entrances. Unfortunately, as social housing tenants there were no electronic gates to keep unwelcome visitors out. Parking was a contentious issue the length of Chestnut Avenue with residents at the bottom having issues with visitors to the football club and gym. A recent funeral procession, leading to the cemetery, had held up traffic in the area for half an hour, due to the volume of guest vehicles attending. Mourners had abandoned their vehicles wherever they chose, without consideration for others.

The commercial space was not required and not welcome as this would cause further issues with parking. It was naïve for the proposal to assume that any visitors would cycle to a commercial space and not require vehicular parking: what about lorries unloading deliveries? This space would be put to better use by allocating further parking for the residents, to lessen the impact on the immediate neighbourhood.

A further contentious issue was the commotion and noise of constructing the new build. Many residents now worked from home daily and there were concerns around disruption to working days. In Watkins Close, residents already contended with trains and whistles, traffic and sirens coming from both sides; they would now have to cope with construction disturbance too.

The fact that there are less than ten dwellings had been noted as this avoided the necessity for affordable housing. It was understood that it was all about profit, but those profiting did not have to live with the results. It was quite clear that these flats, once built, would be sold off to property investors who would then be able to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21