Meeting: 17/07/2025 - Hillingdon Planning Committee (Item 70)
70 18 & 20 Wilmar Close, Hayes - 67410/APP/2024/2641 
PDF 2 MB
Change of use of 2no. outbuildings to granny annexes
Recommendation: Refusal
Decision:
RESOLVED: That the application be refused.
Minutes:
Change of use of 2no. outbuildings to granny annexes
The Chair, Councillor Henry Higgins, left the room during the discussion and voting on this item as he had not been present at the meeting in April 2025 at which this item had previously been discussed. Councillor Adam Bennett assumed the role of Chair in his absence.
Officers introduced the application noting that the matter had previously been considered at Committee on 9 April 2025 but had been deferred for a site visit. It was reported that the site visit had taken place on 2 June 2025 at which time two noticeable issues had been observed. Members heard that, during the site visit, it had been noted that the internal layout and windows to the rear of the outbuildings were not consistent with the plans.
It was noted that the application had previously been recommended for approval subject to the omission of kitchen facilities in both outbuildings. However, it was confirmed that the current plans, which included a kitchen and all other amenities consistent with use as independent living accommodation, were in contravention of the Council’s outbuilding policy. Moreover, Members were informed that a condition of the proposed development was that it would be for the use of family members only. The current tenants had been due to vacate by 25 June but had still been in residence in early July.
For these reasons, the application was now recommended for refusal.
It was noted that a number of similar decisions had been overturned by the Inspectorate on appeal; however, the current application differed in that it featured two annexes to two properties with no clear boundary between them.
Members thanked officers for their thorough report and welcomed the update subsequent to the site visit. It was noted that there had been a long debate about the application when it had been considered by the Committee in April. It was hoped that, should be matter go to appeal, Inspectors would see it for what it was and dismiss it accordingly.
The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.
RESOLVED: That the application be refused.