Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Raymond Graham with Councillor Brian Stead acting as substitute.

None.

None.

All items were considered in Part 1.

Demolition of 2 garages and the erection of building to accommodate a double garage and studio, adjacent to existing barn.

Recommendation: Refusal

Demolition of 2 garages and the erection of building to accommodate a double garage and studio, adjacent to existing barn

Officers introduced the report and provided a joint presentation on applications 32002/APP/2013/2732 and 32002/APP/2013/2733.

Members noted that Ickenham Manor was a large detached grade 1 listed house located within the Ickenham Conservation Area and was located within the Green Belt.

Officers explained that the application sought the demolition of two small concrete construction garages and the erection of a new building that would link onto the side of an existing wooden frame barn to accommodate a double garage and a work studio with its own enclosed outdoor space set to the side (south) of the new building.

Members noted that key considerations included whether or not the application affected the openness or caused harm to the Green Belt. In discussing the application, Members agreed that the application constituted a natural evolution of the site and did not pose a threat to the Green Belt. The unanimous view indicated by Members was that the application did not have  a significant impact/harm on the openness of the Green Belt. Legal advice was sought and the Officer confirmed that this was sufficient reason to overturn the Officer recommendation for refusal, as planning officers had previously stated that refusal reasons 2 and 3 could be dealt with by condition.

It was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote that the Officer recommendation was overturned and the application approved subject to the following conditions:

RES3 (time limit)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

RES4 (plans)

The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted plans, numbers:

Existing Site Plan (un-numbered)

Proposed Site Plan (un-numbered)

Existing & Proposed Floor Plan (un-numbered)

Planning, Design, Access & Heritage Statement

Proposed Ground Floor Plan (un-numbered)

Proposed Elevations (un-numbered)

Proposed Roof Plan (un-numbered)

and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

REASON:To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two Saved UDP Policies (November 2012) and the London Plan (July 2011).

RES7 (materials)

No development shall take place until details of all materials and external surfaces, , including details of balconies have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such.

Details should include information relating to make, product/type, colour and photographs/images. 

REASON: To ensure that the development presents a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy BE13 Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two Saved UDP Policies (November 2012).

NONSC: (use of outbuilding)

The outbuilding building hereby permitted shall not be used at any time other than for purposes set out in the application.  The outbuilding shall not be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 153.

Demolition of 2 garages and the erection of building to accommodate a double garage and studio, adjacent to existing barn (Listed Building Consent).

Recommendation: Refusal

Demolition of 2 garages and the erection of building to accommodate a double garage and studio, adjacent to existing barn (Listed Building Consent)

Officers introduced the report and provided a joint presentation on applications 32002/APP/2013/2732 and 32002/APP/2013/2733.

Subject to the decision taken in Item 5, Ickenham Manor House, 32002/APP/2013/2732, Members overturned the Officer recommendation for refusal and Approved the application subject to the following amendments:

RES3 (time limit)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

RES4 (plans)

The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted plans, numbers:

Existing Site Plan (un-numbered)

Proposed Site Plan (un-numbered)

Existing & Proposed Floor Plan (un-numbered)

Planning, Design, Access & Heritage Statement

Proposed Ground Floor Plan (un-numbered)

Proposed Elevations (un-numbered)

Proposed Roof Plan (un-numbered)

and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence.

REASON:To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two Saved UDP Policies (November 2012) and the London Plan (July 2011).

RES7 (materials)

No development shall take place until details of all materials and external surfaces, , including details of balconies have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such.

Details should include information relating to make, product/type, colour and photographs/images. 

REASON: To ensure that the development presents a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy BE13 Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two Saved UDP Policies (November 2012).

NONSC (archaeology)

No development shall take place until a scheme of archaeological investigation has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority (who shall consult with GLASS).  The scheme shall include:

A desk-based assessment using existing information to identify the likely effects of the development on the significance of heritage assets, including considering the potential for new discoveries and effects on the setting of nearby assets.

Proposals for an archaeological field evaluation, involving exploratory fieldwork to determine if significant remains are present on the site and if so to define their character, extent, quality and preservation. The proposals for the field evaluation shall involve one or more techniques depending on the nature of the site and its archaeological potential, including excavation of trial trenches.

Details for how archaeological remains are to be preserved in-situ within a development how this will be achieved. This shall involve details of a design and methods statement for groundworks, including monitoring of their condition and take remedial action in the event of decay.

There after the development shall be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved scheme. 
REASON: To ensure important archeological remains are not destroyed and to accord with policy BE3 of Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two Saved UDP Policies (November 2012).

NONSC  ...  view the full minutes text for item 154.

Replacement of existing 12.5m high monopole and one radio equipment cabinet with a new 12.5m high monopole with 2 equipment cabinets and ancillary works (Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995) (as amended)

Recommendation: Refusal

Replacement of existing 12.5m high monopole and one radio equipment cabinet with a new 12.5m high monopole with 2 equipment cabinets and ancillary works (Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995) (as amended)

Officers introduced the report and provided a presentation.

Members were advised that the application sought prior approval to an existing telecommunications site so that 4G could be provided to the area.

Members discussed the application and agreed that that the proposal was incongruous and visually obtrusive which would be out of keeping with the street scene and surrounding area.

It was moved, seconded and one being put to the vote that the application be unanimously refused.

Resolved –

That the application be refused, as set out in the Officer report.

Recommendation:

That the report be noted.

Officers introduced the report which set out financial information on s106 and s278 agreements in the North Planning Committee area up to 30 September 2013 where the Council has received and holds funds.

Resolved –

That the report be noted.