Agenda, decisions and minutes

North Planning Committee - Wednesday, 16th September, 2020 6.00 pm

Venue: VIRTUAL - Live on the Council's YouTube channel: Hillingdon London. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services  Telephone 01895 250636 or email (recommended):  democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

65.

Apologies for Absence

Decision:

Apologies were received from Councillor Melvin. Councillor Tuckwell was present as her substitute.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Melvin. Councillor Tuckwell was present as her substitute.

66.

Declarations of Interest in matters coming before this meeting

Decision:

Councillor Dhot declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Item 7, Land to the side of 17 Woodside Road, in that he had been contacted by the applicant. Councillor Dhot confirmed that he had not entered into discussion with the applicant, and would remain in the meeting and take part in the discussion and voting for the item.

Minutes:

Councillor Dhot declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Item 7, Land to the side of 17 Woodside Road, in that he had been contacted by the applicant. Councillor Dhot confirmed that he had not entered into discussion with the applicant, and would remain in the meeting and take part in the discussion and vote for the item.

67.

To sign and receive the minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 129 KB

Decision:

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 August 2020 be approved as a correct record.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 August 2020 be approved as a correct record.

68.

Matters that have been notified in advance or urgent

Decision:

It was confirmed that Agenda Item 8, Telecommunications at Jun Bridle Road and Cheney Street, Bridle Road, Eastcote, had been withdrawn by the applicant prior to the meeting.

Minutes:

It was confirmed that Agenda Item 8, Telecommunications at Jun Bridle Road and Cheney Street, Bridle Road, Eastcote, had been withdrawn by the applicant prior to the meeting.

69.

To confirm that the items of business marked Part 1 will be considered in public and that the items marked Part 2 will be considered in private

Decision:

It was confirmed that Items 1-10 would be considered in public, while Item 11 would be considered in private.

Minutes:

It was confirmed that Items 1-10 would be considered in public, while Item 11 would be considered in private.

70.

Land to the rear of 18 Moor Park Road, Northwood - 21577/APP/2020/1792 pdf icon PDF 237 KB

Erection of a detached 5 x bed dwelling with associated parking and amenity space with new crossover to Grove Road.

 

Recommendation: Refusal

Decision:

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Minutes:

Officers introduced the application, and highlighted that a previous application for the erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings, with two new vehicle crossovers onto Grove Road, had been refused in January 2020.

Officers confirmed that the application was contrary to policy DMH6 of the Local Plan Part 2, as the application would result in the loss of the residential rear garden, and the impact of the proposed dwelling on the immediate locality was considered to be detrimental to the character and appearance of the surrounding street scene. The proposed infilling of the gap would also appear out of character with the pattern, scale and form of development within the surrounding area. The proposal also failed to make adequate provision for the retention and long-term protection of off-site trees.

For these reasons, the application was recommended for refusal.

A written submission was read to the Committee on behalf of petitioners objecting to the application, key points of which included:

 

·         This was the second application made on this piece of land in the last two years. This application was for a 5 bedroom dwelling that could easily be made into a 6 or 7 bedroom dwelling through use of the additional rooms (as shown in the plans).

·         The application was contrary to policy DMH6 and BE13 and BE19 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2, and BE1 of the Hillingdon Local plan Part 1, and would result in the loss of gardens that were important to local character, that were used to provide safe and secure amenity and play space, that supported biodiversity, and that helped to reduce flood risk and the effects of climate change.

·         The application did not adhere to policies stating that backland development must be more intimate in mass and scale and lower than frontage properties, and that trees, shrubs and wildlife habituate must be retained.

·         The application’s references to construction of a new house at 1A Grove Road had no merit, as the property at 1A was a new house built on a plot that had previously held a residential property. In contrast, the application sought to erect a new house in an area where no houses had previously been built.

·         The proposed development would fail to harmonise with the character and appearance of the street scene.

 

The Committee supported the refusal reasons as set out, and the officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

 

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

71.

Land to the side of 17 Woodside Road, Northwood - 29754/APP/2020/1397 pdf icon PDF 263 KB

Erection of a detached two storey 4 x bed house with associated parking and amenity space including the demolition of existing double garage

 

Recommendation: Approval

Decision:

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Minutes:

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the addendum, confirming that a proposal for a detached dwelling in this plot had been considered under a pre-application submission in April 2020 Subject to details, the Council's Conservation Officer considered the proposed separate dwelling more suited to the site than the previously approved extension.

Though the site was located in the Gatehill Farm Estate Area of Special Local Character, it was considered that the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling would respect the character and style of the Gatehill Farm Estate. The dwelling frontage would be 8.3m, though the plot was 20m at the rear, resulting in an average width of over 14m. The materials to be used in the construction had been conditioned to ensure they were of high quality. The Conservation Officer had confirmed that the proposal would set a good design precedent with the area. It was considered that the application would not result in an unneighbourly form of development and would provide a satisfactory living environment for future occupiers.

For these reasons, the application was recommended for approval, subject to the conditions set out in the report and as amended as shown on the addendum.

A written submission was read to the Committee on behalf of petitioners objecting to the application, key points of which included:

 

·         Over 150 residents had signed petitions objecting to the application, which was felt to be contrary to policy DHMB 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2, regarding width of new houses.

·         The proposed new dwelling had a frontage one third of the plot widths of the surrounding properties, and would not be of a similar scale, form or proportion as adjacent houses.

·         The application was also felt to be contrary to policy DHMB 5, which mandated that developments within Areas of Special Local Character should reflect the character of the area and its original layout. The proposed development would fail to harmonise with the existing street scene.

·         Allowing the development would set a harmful precedent for future developments within the Area.

·         Concerns remained over the protection of mature greenery and trees affected by the build, with the Council’s tree officers advising that they would be unable to check compliance moving forward.

·         The proposal would require contractors to work on top of the root protections areas of trees.

·         The report did not include comments or conditions relating to flood mitigation, or future development of the current property at the site.

 

A written submission was read to the Committee on behalf of the agent/ applicant and petitioners in support of the application, key points of which included:

 

·         In June this year, a planning approval had been granted by this Committee on the same site for a two storey side extension to the existing property at 17 Woodside Road. Since, then the current application had been submitted, with the Council’s own Conservation team stating that  ‘A separate dwelling would be more suited as it would better respect the original dwelling and would not result  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

72.

Telecommunications at Jun Bridle Road & Cheney Street, Bridle Road, Eastcote - 75666/APP/2020/2552 pdf icon PDF 250 KB

Installation of 20m monopole and 3 equipment cabinets, and associated ancillary works (Application under Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) for determination as to whether prior approval is required for siting and appearance).

 

Recommendation: Refusal

Decision:

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

 

Minutes:

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

73.

Land at Garage Block Southbourne Gardens, Ruislip - 72211/APP/2020/1728 pdf icon PDF 283 KB

Three storey building comprising 6 x 2-Bedroom flats with associated car and cycle parking and amenity space, involving demolition of existing garages

 

Recommendation: Approval + S106

Decision:

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved.

Minutes:

Officers introduced the report, and confirmed that the application sought only minor changes to a previously approved application, which included a 0.5m increase in depth of the front lobby at ground floor level only, and alterations to the approved roof, incorporating a small crown, set between the two side ridges.

The proposals were not considered to significantly increase the scale of the building or bring the built form above first floor level any closer to the neighbouring properties to that previously approved.

It was therefore recommended that the application be approved.

The Committee supported approval for the reasons set out, and the officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

 

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved.

74.

Hume Way, Ruislip - 54873/APP/2020/2457 pdf icon PDF 280 KB

Installation of a 20m monopole, 12 no. antenna apertures, equipment cabinets and ancillary reworks thereto (Application under Part 16 of Schedule 2 to the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (as amended) for determination as to whether prior approval is required for siting and appearance).

 

Recommendation: Refusal

Decision:

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Minutes:

Officers introduced the report, and confirmed that the proposal was considered to be an obtrusive form of development which would add visual clutter to the street scene, would not harmonise with the character of the area and would be detrimental to local visual amenities. 

This application was therefore recommended for refusal.

The Committee supported refusal for the reasons set out, and the officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

 

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

75.

Enforcement Report

Decision:

RESOLVED:

 

1.    That the enforcement action, as recommended in the officer’s report, was agreed; and,

 

2.    That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in the report, into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it issuing the formal beach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

 

This item is declared as exempt from publication as it involves the disclosure of information in accordance with Section 100(A) and paragraphs 1, 2 and 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), in that the report contains information relating to any individual, information likely to reveal the identity of an individual and information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.

Minutes:

RESOLVED:

 

1.    That the enforcement action, as recommended in the officer’s report, was agreed; and,

 

2.    That the Committee resolved to release their decision and the reasons for it outlined in the report, into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it issuing the formal beach of condition notice to the individual concerned.

 

This item is declared as exempt from publication as it involves the disclosure of information in accordance with Section 100(A) and paragraphs 1, 2 and 7 of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended), in that the report contains information relating to any individual, information likely to reveal the identity of an individual and information relating to any action taken or to be taken in connection with the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.