Agenda, decisions and minutes

None.

None.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 21 March 2017 be agreed as a correct record.

The Chairman confirmed that items 12 & 13 had been added to the agenda as urgent items.

It was confirmed that agenda items 1-9 and 12-13 were marked as Part I and would be considered in public. Agenda items 10 & 11 were marked as Part II and so would be considered in private.

Temporary Change of use of land from a commercial plant growing area to car parking for staff for 5 years (Retrospective)

Recommendation: Refusal

Temporary Change of use of land from a commercial plant growing area to car parking for staff for 5 years (Retrospective)

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Temporary Change of use of land from a commercial plant growing area to car parking for staff for 5 years (Retrospective)

Officers introduced the report, confirming that the building and use were commercial in character and were in conflict with the fundamental aims of Green Belt Policy, and no special circumstances had been provided to overcome the presumption of inappropriate development in the Green Belt. It was therefore recommended that approval be refused.

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

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Change of use of land from garden centre/nursery to a vehicle maintenance area involving erection of workshop and demolition of glass house and poly tunnels (Retrospective)

Recommendation: Refusal

Change of use of land from garden centre/nursery to a vehicle maintenance area involving erection of workshop and demolition of glass house and poly tunnels (Retrospective)

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Change of use of land from garden centre/nursery to a vehicle maintenance area involving erection of workshop and demolition of glass house and poly tunnels (Retrospective)

Officers introduced the report, confirming that the building and use were commercial in character and were in conflict with the fundamental aims of Green Belt Policy, and no special circumstances had been provided to overcome the presumption of inappropriate development in the Green Belt. It was therefore recommended that approval be refused.

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

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Conversion of existing house to two self contained flats.

Recommendation: Refusal

Conversion of existing dwelling to 1 x 1 bedroom and 1 x 2 bedroom self

contained flats

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Conversion of existing dwelling to 1 x 1 bedroom and 1 x 2 bedroom self

contained flats

Officers introduced the report, confirming that there were two main issues for the Committee to consider. Firstly, that the proposed indoor living area was of insufficient size for the occupiers of the first and second floor flats. Secondly, the proposal had not provided sufficient parking provision to comply with the Council's approved car parking standard. For these reasons it was recommended that the application be refused.

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

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Part two storey, part single storey side/rear extension and conversion of roof space to habitable use to include 1 rear dormer.

Recommendation: Refusal

Part two storey, part single storey side/rear extension and conversion of roof space to habitable use to include 1 rear dormer

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

Part two storey, part single storey side/rear extension and conversion of roof space to habitable use to include 1 rear dormer

Officers introduced the report, confirming that standards set out in the Supplementary Planning Document on residential extensions required that two storey side extensions be set at least one metre from the boundary of the property, for the full height of the building. In this instance, the ground floor was not set back from the boundary line at all.

In addition, the proposal could not be for a first floor extension as the existing structure at the side of the property was not sturdy enough to support the weight of any such extension, and so would need to be demolished.

The addendum was highlighted, which set out comments made by the agent in relation to previous developments at No. 21 Iver Lane, which the agent felt to be a comparable scheme. In response, the officer confirmed that, as No. 21 was located at a junction, the issue of terracing and/or the infilling of a gap between properties was not a concern. In addition, previous two storey and side/front extensions at No. 21 had been carried out prior to the adoption of the Council's current standards, and the roof works were allowed as part of permitted development. As such, it was not felt that this was comparable to the proposal for 16 Iver Lane, and refusal of the application was recommended.

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

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused.

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).

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).

Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping

Recommendation: Approval

Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping

RESOLVED: 

1.    That the application be approved; and

2.    That the Head of Planning be delegated authority to agree an additional informative relating to the community infrastructure levy.

Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping

Officers introduced the report, confirming that the application had been considered at the Central & South Planning Committee meeting held on 21 March 2016, where it had been deferred so that the legal position relating to a Listed Building Consent (ref. 5971/APP/2013/1839), that was linked to an expired application, could be clarified.

The associated Listed Building Consent, ref. 5971/App/2013/1839, for the reconstruction of the Grade II Listed Lesser Barn was approved by the Committee in November 2014, subject to a Section 106 agreement, which had not yet been completed. As such, the Listed Building Consent had not been formally granted.

The description of the associated Listed Building Consent, ref. 5971/App/2013/1839, had since been amended to refer to this current application, removing reference to the expired 2012 approved application. The two linked applications were therefore now brought to the Committee for authorisation.

The proposal was to reinstate the original barn as it was prior to its collapse. To this end, much of the original timbers had been saved for re-use. The dwellings and parking provision complied with all required standards, and the impact on adjoining properties was considered acceptable. It was confirmed that the application had not materially changed in comparison to the scheme approved in 2014. The application was therefore recommended for approval.

The addendum was highlighted, which confirmed that a petition of 28 signatures had been received in support of the application.

The Head of Planning requested that delegated authority be granted to add a standard informative relating to the community infrastructure levy, should the Committee be minded to approve the application.

The petitioner, (also the agent acting on behalf of the applicant), addressed the Committee, confirming that the site had been the subject of several approvals and approval recommendations over a number of years. It was regrettable that previous owners of the site had failed to perform, resulting in the barn subsequently collapsing. The new owner, having now acquired the site, had the funding in place to ensure the repair and restoration of the remaining timbers and to implement the development.

Following conversations with Hillingdon officers, the applicant had instructed specialist contractors to take steps to protect the timbers from further deterioration, and the draft Section 106 had now been agreed by both parties, awaiting final sign-off. However, due to the length of time the applications had been awaiting determination, the applicant was in danger of losing the funding required, and as such, the applications had been brought to the Committee as urgent items. The petitioner concluded by urging the Committee to approve the application, in line with previous determinations.

The Chairman confirmed that, as Ward Councillor for Yiewsley, he welcomed the proposal, and felt that it was an attractive development that would retain local heritage.

Members were supportive of the proposal, noting that it mirrored previously approved applications, and with this in mind the officer's recommendation was moved.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 249.

Dismantling of existing farm outbuilding and reconstruction to accord with planning application ref: 5971/APP/2016/3922 (Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping) (Application for Listed Building Consent).

Recommendation: Approval

Dismantling of existing farm outbuilding and reconstruction to accord with planning application ref: 5971/APP/2016/3922 (Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping) (Application for Listed Building Consent).

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved.

Dismantling of existing farm outbuilding and reconstruction to accord with planning application ref: 5971/APP/2016/3922 (Rebuilding of existing barn with internal and external alterations to create two three-bedroom dwellings with associated parking and landscaping) (Application for Listed Building Consent).

It was understood that the application was linked to ref. 5971/APP/2016/3922, which had been deliberated earlier in the meeting. The officer's recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved.