Agenda, decisions and minutes

None.

None.

None.

None.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 October 2018 be approved as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 24 October 2018 be approved as a correct record.

None.

None.

It was confirmed that all items were marked as Part I and would therefore be considered in public.

It was confirmed that all items were marked as Part I and would therefore be considered in public.

Erection of two storey building to include 4 x 2 bed self contained flats with associated parking and amenity space, involving demolition of existing outbuildings

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Erection of two storey building to include 4 x 2 bed self contained flats with associated parking and amenity space, involving demolition of existing outbuildings

Officers introduced the report, and asserted that the proposed development was out of keeping with the scale of neighbouring properties, was not in keeping with the layout and appearance of the street scene, and that the separation distance of 15m from bedroom windows of existing flats to the proposed units would result in a loss of privacy to future occupiers of the proposed flats.

Furthermore, the applicant had not provided evidence that sufficient parking, servicing and delivery arrangements or refuse collection facilities could be provided on site.

The addendum was referred to, which highlighted that 20 letters of support had been received, and that an objection from the Eastcote Conservation Panel had also been received.

The application was recommended for refusal.

A petitioner address the Committee in objection to the application. Points included:

·         The refusal reasons set out in the officer’s report were strong, and supported by the petitioner.

·         The petition had obtained 83 objections, not 43 as specified in the report.

·         The objection from Eastcote Conservation Panel included environmental issues, such as loss of trees.

·         There was one parking spot currently granted by lease. This parking spot was used by the owner of a large vehicle who had difficulty with the current layout of the site, highlighting how difficult things would be if the application were to be approved.

·         The site was not suitable for residential accommodation.

The agent for the application addressed the Committee. Points included:

·         Given the location of the site in the urban area, in conjunction with the fact that it was previously developed land, there was no objection to the principle of its development.

·         Housing was in short supply in the borough, and creating new homes was crucial to addressing this growing demand.

·         The site was in a sustainable location with easy access to local shops and services, as well as being a short walking distance from public transport.

·         Development in the manner proposed was consistent with prevailing guidance.

·         The design of the proposal would enhance the appearance and amenity of what was a deprived local area.

·         The officer’s assertion that the prevailing character of the area being single story buildings did not take into account the two storey buildings on Field End Road.

·         With regard to internal and external space, the proposed houses exceeded recommended standards, and sunlight and daylight levels were also acceptable.

·         With regard to concerns of overlooking from upstairs bedroom windows of the properties along Field End Road to the proposed terraces of units three and four, the second-floor windows of the flats were set back from the first floor which itself inhibited downward views. In addition, it was unlikely that bedrooms and terraces would be used at the same time given their relative prospective uses, and the terraces would be protected by glass privacy screens.

·         The issue of the 15m distance between properties was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 109.

Demolition of 5 & 6 Firs Walk, 6 No. new dwellinghouses with associated car parking, new access arrangements from Foxdell and removal of existing access from Firs Walk at No's 5 & 6 Firs Walk and land to the rear of No. 25 Dene Road (Outline application with some matters reserved)

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Demolition of 5 & 6 Firs Walk, 6 No. new dwellinghouses with associated car parking, new access arrangements from Foxdell and removal of existing access from Firs Walk at No's 5 & 6 Firs Walk and land to the rear of No. 25 Dene Road (Outline application with some matters reserved)

Officers introduced the report, highlighting that the application site was located in an area of special local character. It was asserted that the application would result in a cramped development that would be harmful to the character and appearance of the street scene. In addition, the proposed turning head was adequate to address highway safety concerns, but would result in an unacceptable level of noise and light pollution to future occupiers.

As the application was considered to fail to maintain the open and verdant character and appearance of the surrounding area, it was recommended for refusal.

A petitioner addressed the Committee in objection to the application. Points included:

·         The application site was within an area of special local character, which included gardens and trees that were well established.

·         The proposal sought to demolish two attractive properties and gardens, and squeeze in 6 detached properties that would be out of character with the surrounding area.

·         113 residents had signed the petition, and 24 letters of objection had been received by the Council.

·         Hillingdon was meeting its housing targets.

·         The application included access via private land that was not included in the purchase of the site.

·         The officer’s report cited many strong reasons for refusal, and the recommendation should be upheld.

Members agreed that the application was out of character with the surrounding area and moved the officer’s recommendation. This was seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Demolition of the existing side extension with a smaller single storey side extension

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to the Head of Planning, Transportation and Regeneration agreeing additional wording to strengthen Condition 3: Materials.

Demolition of the existing side extension with a smaller single storey side extension

Officers introduced the report, and asserted that the application sought to make changes that met the recommendations of an appeal regarding a side extension that was built without planning consent. The changes were deemed to have no detrimental impact on the architectural composition of the building, and was recommended for approval.

Members were mindful that the use of materials should be controlled, and suggested that delegated authority be given to the Head of Planning, Transportation and Regeneration to agree the strengthening of Condition 3: Materials.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to the Head of Planning, Transportation and Regeneration agreeing additional wording to strengthen Condition 3: Materials.

Erection of detached kiosk building to contain water tanks and switch board with extension to the existing bunded area

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

Erection of detached kiosk building to contain water tanks and switch board with extension to the existing bunded area

Officers introduced the report and application, which was recommended for approval.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

General purpose agricultural building with associated hardstanding and soft landscaping.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.

General purpose agricultural building with associated hardstanding and soft

landscaping

Officers introduced the report and application, which was recommended for approval.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved.