Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Shehryar Ahmad-Wallana, with Councillor Raymond Graham substituting.

Councillor Janet Duncan declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of item 7 - Application 24351/APP/2016/1304 - 45 Frays Avenue, in that she lived on the road. Councillor Duncan confirmed that she would leave the room when this application was brought before the Committee.

Resolved -    that the minutes of the meetings held on 24 November and 13 December be agreed as a correct record.

None.

It was confirmed that items marked Part I would be considered in public, and items marked Part II would be considered in private.

Change of use from single dwelling house (Use Class C3) to 6 person House of Multiple Occupancy (Use Class C4).

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be deferred to a future meeting of the Committee, to allow sufficient time for Members to view the site in person, and for Planning officers to resolve uncertainty over useable amenity space.

Change of use from single dwelling house (Use Class C3) to 6 person House of Multiple Occupancy (Use Class C4).

Planning permission was sought for a change of use from a single family dwelling house to a house in multiple occupation (Use Class C4) to accommodate 6 persons. The addendum sheet was highlighted. Members were informed that, subject to the imposition of conditions including limiting the occupancy to 6 persons, the development would not result in an unacceptable loss of residential amenity to occupants of neighbouring dwellings. In addition, the proposal did not raise any highway safety concerns, and a site supervision condition was imposed to ensure the proposed use did not have adverse impact on the amenity of neighbours.

The development had been amended through discussion which had resulted in increased lounge space, further cooking and preparation facilities, and had identified sufficient on-site car parking. As a result, the proposal would deliver a standard of accommodation suitable for the purpose applied for, and the application was therefore recommended for approval, subject to an additional condition relating to the provision of a crossover to be implemented prior to occupation, and maintained thereafter.

A petitioner spoke in objection to the application. Concerns highlighted included the potential change of character to the local, family area, the potential for antisocial behaviour due to the nature of the occupants suggested as tenants, parking problems following the proposed increase in occupants within the dwelling, and the suitability of the dwelling for disabled occupants. Antisocial behaviour had previously been seen at the site, following the occupation by a previous tenant, for which the Police had been requested to intervene. Members were informed that many local residents were unhappy with the proposed HMO at the application site.

The applicant addressed the Committee, confirming that significant improvements had been made to the property since purchase, as outlined in the report. Since its purchase, the property had stood empty, with one exception following an approach from the NHS disabled unit to temporarily house a disabled person. Reference was made to previous criminal incidents within and outside the property, and the applicant asserted that these should have no bearing on any decision relating to the future of the property. Members were advised that the applicant would be working with the NHS upon request, potentially to house victims of domestic violence, and that mature and well behaved tenants would be sought. These could include families or students.

Councillor Richard Mills addressed the Committee as Ward councillor for Brunel, on behalf of local residents objecting to the application. Councillor Mills highlighted the proposed increase in occupants from 3 to 6 persons, without a corresponding increase in bathroom facilities. In addition, the living area per person within the property would be significantly reduced, particularly bedroom sizes, and a lack of privacy for a ground floor occupant was cited, as the ground floor bedroom would be opening directly onto the lounge area. There was no provision outlined within the proposal that would accommodate wheelchair  ...  view the full minutes text for item 175.

Two storey, 4-bed detached dwelling with habitable roofspace (incorporating a rear dormer and front/side rooflights), parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front, involving demolition of existing bungalow.

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    (a)       that the application be approved; and

(b)       that the Head of Planning be delegated authority to add a condition setting out the maximum building height, relevant to neighbouring properties.

Two storey, 4-bed detached dwelling with habitable roofspace (incorporating a rear dormer and front/side rooflights), parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front, involving demolition of existing bungalow.

Officers introduced the report, confirming that the application had been presented to the Committee on the 13 October 2016, with a recommendation for approval, but was deferred to enable further details to be sought in respect of the impact to the adjoining occupiers and the proposed inset dormer windows.

Since then, the applicant had revised the development by reducing its depth, had replaced the front inset dormer window with a rooflight, and replaced the rear inset dormer window with a more traditional projecting dormer. In addition, the revised plans now accurately showed compliance with the 45 degree rule in relation to windows that serve neighbouring properties. The application was located in an area of special local character, though as there was no cohesion with the design of existing properties within the area, it was felt that the proposed application would have no detrimental impact on the character of the area and the application was therefore recommended for approval.

A petitioner addressed the Committee in objection to the proposal. It was confirmed that, since the previous Committee meeting, the applicant had worked with local residents to address their points, though concerns remained. These concerns included the potential overdominance and overshadowing in relation to neighbouring properties due to the height and size of the proposed building, as well as the potential for a precedent to be set for future applications in the area, should permission be granted. The proposed height of the building, inclusive of flood prevention foundations, would exceed that of no. 47 Frays Avenue, whilst a kitchen extractor fan would discharge directly into patio doors of no 43 Frays Avenue. The vehicle crossover arrangement to the proposed new garages on the east side of the property would bring vehicle activity close to the living quarters of no. 43, and could result in a loss of green spaces and spoilage of newly created parking zones. For these reasons, it was requested the application be deferred until such time as a site visit could be undertaken to accurately assess the scale and effect of the planning proposal on the local area.

The applicant and agent then addressed the Committee. The applicant confirmed that they understood the local resident's concerns, though these concerns were not shared by all local residents, many of whom understood the family's need for an expanded family home. The agent confirmed that significant work had been undertaken to address the concerns of residents and of the Committee since the last meeting. The footprint of the building was significantly smaller than that of the proposed development previously, in an effort to reduce any overshadowing or overdominance. Overall, it was expected that the final height of the building would be somewhat higher than adjoining properties, though this was not expected to be a material difference, and was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 176.

Single storey detached outbuilding to rear for use as an ancillary granny annex

Recommendation: Refusal

Resolved -    That the application be refused.

Single storey detached outbuilding to rear for use as an ancillary granny annex

The Chairman confirmed that all Committee members had received an email that had raised an issue relating to the application that was not a material planning issue, and which therefore carried no weight.

Officers confirmed that application was deferred at the meeting of 13 October 2016 for the submission of revised plans, as the originally submitted plans showed trees on the land adjacent to the proposed building and it was not clear how these would be affected, alongside concerns around the size and height of the building and the impact this would have on neighbours.

Revised plans had been submitted, but as these failed to address all concerns raised previously, it was recommended that the application be refused.

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

Resolved -    That the application be refused.

Change of use of part of Unit 116 from retail (Class A1) to restaurant/Cafe (Class A3) to create four Class A3 units with High Street frontage, as well as external alterations

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Change of use of part of Unit 116 from retail (Class A1) to restaurant/Cafe (Class A3) to create four Class A3 units with High Street frontage, as well as external alterations

Planning permission was sought for change of use of part of Unit 116, Intu, which is currently occupied by Debenhams which falls within use class A1 (retail) to use class A3 (food and drink). An informative, as set out on the addendum, was highlighted.

As the proposed change of use would not result in demonstrable harm to the existing retail shopping provision and the benefits to the vitality of the centre would outweigh any harm, it was recommended that planning consent be granted.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Erection of a conservatory to Eliott Jaques Building.

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Erection of a conservatory to Eliott Jaques Building.

20:35 - Councillor Janet Duncan returned to the room prior to the officer introducing the report.

Planning permission was sought for the erection of a conservatory to the Elliot Jacques Building. Officers confirmed that whilst the site was within the Green Belt area, the development would have no impact on the Green Belt.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Erection of a conservatory to Bishop Hall Building.

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Erection of a conservatory to Bishop Hall Building.

Planning permission was sought for the erection of a conservatory to the Bishop Hall Building. Officers confirmed that whilst the site was within the Green Belt area, the development would have no impact on the Green Belt.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Installation of 5 x non illuminated fascia signs.

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Installation of 5 x non illuminated fascia signs.

Planning permission was sought for the installation of five non illuminated fascia signs at the existing Shell Service Station located on the corner of Harmondsworth Road with Holloway Lane. Officers confirmed that whilst the site was within the metropolitan Green Belt area, the development would have no impact on the Green Belt.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Installation of ATM unit.  (Retrospective)

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Installation of ATM unit.  (Retrospective)

Retrospective planning permission was sought for the installation of an ATM machine at the existing Shell Service Station located on the corner of Harmondsworth Road with Holloway Lane. Officers confirmed that whilst the site was within the metropolitan Green Belt area, the development would have no impact on the Green Belt, visual amenity of the application property and street scene, and would not cause a loss of residential amenity or highway safety.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Extension to changing rooms

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Extension to changing rooms

Planning permission was sought for the erection of an extension to the changing rooms. Officers confirmed that the proposed extension was acceptable in regards to size, height and design, and would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the existing building, or to the visual amenity of the surrounding Green Belt. The extension to the changing rooms would not impact on the street scene and would not impact on residential amenity.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Single storey side/rear extension, first floor rear extension, conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer and conversion of roof from hip to gable end and conversion of dwelling to 2 x 3-bed flats with associated amenity space.

Recommendation: Refusal

Resolved -    That the application be refused.

Single storey side/rear extension, first floor rear extension, conversion of roofspace to habitable use to include a rear dormer and conversion of roof from hip to gable end and conversion of dwelling to 2 x 3-bed flats with associated amenity space.

Officers highlighted the reasons for refusal as set out on the report.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be refused.

Change of use from Use Class A1 (Shops) to Use Class A5 (Hot Food Takeaways) involving alterations to elevations.

Recommendation: Approval

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

Change of use from Use Class A1 (Shops) to Use Class A5 (Hot Food Takeaways) involving alterations to elevations

Planning permission was sought for the change of use from retail (Use Class A1) to hot food takeaway (Use Class A5). It was considered that the proposal would not harm the visual amenity of the site or its wider setting, nor, subject to considerations requiring the submission and approval of details relating to the proposed flue and any plant and the restriction of operation hours, would it cause harm to the amenity of nearby residents. Accordingly, it was recommended that the application be approved.

The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and unanimously agreed by the Committee upon being put to a vote.

Resolved -    That the application be approved.

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

Councillor Jazz Dhillon confirmed that as he had reported the site for enforcement, he would not be voting on the item.

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

RESOLVED:

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

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

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraphs 2 and 6(a) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).