Agenda and minutes

None.

Councillor Carol Melvin declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 8 – 54 Hallowell Road, Northwood. Councillor Melvin withdrew from the meeting during the discussion and did not take part in the decision of the application.

Councillor David Payne declared a personal and prejudicial interest in item 6 – 41 Rusdene Road, Eastcote. Councillor Payne withdrew from the meeting during the discussion and did not take part in the decision of the application.

None.

The minutes of the meeting held on 30^th April 2009 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Committee agreed that all of its business would be conducted in public with the exception of item 11, which was considered in Part 2 as it contained exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985). 

Erection of a five bedroom detached house with integral garage (amendment to 51162/APP/1999/2320 dated 7th July 2000 - Erection of a five bedroom house) (Retrospective Application)

RECOMMENDATION: Approval

Officers directed the Committee to the addendum sheet, which informed them With regard to the withdrawal of permitted development rights, members will be aware of the appeal decision relating to the rear conservatory amongst other matters and the Inspectors conclusion that this was unacceptable. Should permitted development rights remain with the property than it is likely that such a structure would be permitted development and thus it is in order to control such matters that your officers would recommend that permitted development rights are withdrawn.

The officer’s recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

Representatives of a petition in objection to the development addressed the Committee.

In response to a query about overlooking, officers advised that there were no issues of overlooking, and explained that the proposal was for the two side windows to be obscure glazed on windows above level 1.

The officer’s recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to changes to conditions set out in the addendum sheet.

Two storey 3 bed detached dwelling with associated parking, installation of new vehicular crossover (involving demolition of existing dwelling)

RECOMMENDATION: Approval

Officers claifified that as the development of for a single dwelling, Condition 9 is not applicable and should be deleted.

Representatives of a petition in objection to the development addressed the Committee. The applicant spoke in support of the application.

The officer’s recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved subject to the removal of Condition 9.

Renovation and extension of existing youth club, to provide new accessible recreational spaces and facilities, including lounge, kitchen and cafe area, and to upgrade the existing facilities, including hall, dance studio, multi-media room and classrooms

RECOMMENDATION: Approval

In introducing the report, Officers directed the Committee to the addendum sheet (see conditions set out below).

The Committee queried the issue regarding the hours of use of the Youth Club. The report states the Youth Club would be out of use after 22:00. However, Members wanted clarification of whether this meant activities would cease at 22:00 or that that the building would be empty by that time. The Chairman requested Officers to provide this information to himself and the Labour Lead, and the decision made at the meeting would be carried following the receipt of this information.

Representatives of a petition in objection to the development addressed the Committee.

The Legal Advisor advised the Committee that placing an informative on the planning permission might highlight the importance of the management strategy.

The officer’s recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed, subject to changes highlighted in the addendum sheet.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved with changes as set out in the addendum and the below further changes:

Condition 4:

The premises shall not be used except between the hours of 08.00 hours and 22.00 hours, Monday to Saturday and at no time on Sundays and Bank Holidays and shall be vacated by all users including staff by 22.30.

Additional Informative:

The applicant should be aware that condition 2 requires a management plan to be submitted to and approved by the council and it is imperative that local residents are fully engaged in the formation and implementation of the management strategy.

Raising of eaves height, raising of dormer window to front, creation of new dormer window to rear, insertion of 3 roof lights, part single storey side extension to form chimney, new canopy to front. (Resubmission of 19443/APP/2008/2000)

RECOMMENDATION: Approval

In introducing the report, officers pointed out that the application was seeking to make very little change to the dwelling.

The officer’s recommendation for approval was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the application be approved.

Installation of a 11.5m high imitation telegraph pole mobile phone mast and ancillary equipment cabinet (Consultation Under Schedule 2, Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (As Amended)

RECOMMENDATION: Delegated powers subject to no further objections being received

This is a Consultation under Schedule 2, Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (as amended).  As such, the Local Planning Authority has to notify the applicant of their decision by the 23/6/09 (the date of the next North committee meeting) otherwise approval is given by default.

Representatives of a petition in objection to the development addressed the Committee.

The Legal Advisor advised the Committee that the issues over health could not be taken into consideration in this case, and directed Members to Planning Policy Guidelines 8, which state “Health considerations and public concern can in principle be material considerations in determining applications for planning permission and approval. The planning system is not the place for determining health safeguards. If a proposed mobile phone base station meets the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure it should not be necessary for a local planning authority to consider further the health aspects and concerns about them”

The Legal Advisor advised the Committee that Planning Policy Guidelines 8 also states “The authority should give clear reasons why it considers the evidence before it to be unsatisfactory. “

The Committee agreed that this point be delegated to the Chairman and Labour Lead to agree in consultation with officers. The following reason has been agreed:

The proposed development, including the large cabinets, by reason of its sitting and design would result in an incongruous and visually obtrusive form of development which would be out of keeping with the visual character of the adjoining street scene and surrounding Green Belt, detrimental to the visual amenities of the area.  Alternative solutions have not been fully investigated.  The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies OL5, BE13, BE37, and OE1 of the Hillingdon Unitary Development Plan Saved Policies September 2007 and Policy 3D.9 of the London Plan (Consolidated with Alterations since 2004).

A recommendation for refusal was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the application be refused based on the above reason.

To consider the expediency of Enforcement Action

PART 2

This report was considered in Part 2 because it contained exempt information as defined in paragraph 6 of the schedule to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.  The report contains information, which if disclosed to the public, would reveal that the authority proposes –

a)     to give under any enactment a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person; or

b)     to make an order or direction under any enactment (Paragraph 13 of the Schedule to the Act).

RESOLVED – That Enforcement Notice as recommended in the officer’s report be approved.

None.

None.

The meeting closed at 9.00 p.m.