Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Dhillon and Yarrow. Councillors Morse and Tuckwell were present as their repsective substitutes.

Apologies were received from Councillors Dhillon and Yarrow. Councillors Morse and Tuckwell were present as their substitutes, respectively.

Councillor Chapman declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Item 17, in that he had reported the matter. Councillor Chapman left the room when the item was determined.

Councillor Chapman declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of Item 17, in that he had reported the matter. Councillor Chapman left the room when the item was determined.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 April 2019 be approved as a correct record.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 April 2019 be approved as a correct record.

The Chairman advised that a new Enforcement item, Item 18, had been added to the meeting agenda as an urgent item.

The Chairman advised that a new enforcement item, Item 18, had been added to the meeting agenda as an urgent item.

It was confirmed that items 1-13 were marked as Part I and would be considered in public. Items 14-18 were marked as Part II, and would therefore be considered in private.

It was confirmed that items 1-13 were marked as Part I and would be considered in public. Items 14-18 were marked as Part II, and would therefore be considered in private.

Covered external seating area to side

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused, and that the Head of Planning and Enforcement be delegated authority to amend refusal reason 4. 

Covered external seating area to side

Officers introduced the report and highlighted the addendum, asserting that the proposed development would represent inappropriate development within the Green Belt, being as it was located within a Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan or Borough Grade I Importance. Concerns remained over the development’s impact on nearby residential occupiers, from whom several objections had been received.

The applicant had failed to submit any details of any special circumstances which could justify the development within the Green Belt, that the development would assimilate into the surrounding area, or that unacceptable levels of noise and disturbance to nearby residential occupiers would not occur. For these reasons, the application was recommended for refusal.

Officers also recommended that the wording of refusal reason 4 be amended to correctly list DMEI policy 7, rather than 6, and that any associated wording be tweaked to match that policy.

The Chairman highlighted that a petition in objection to the application had been received. However, neither the petitioner nor the agent/applicant were present to address the Committee.

Members felt that the proposed development was unacceptable within the Green Belt, and moved the officer’s recommendations. These were seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused, and that the Head of Planning and Enforcement be delegated authority to amend refusal reason 4 as set out above.

Amendment of conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 6 (External Windows) of planning permission Ref:44222/APP/2017/1810 dated 14/08/2017 (Two storey, 2-bed detached dwelling with parking and amenity space) comprising a pitched roof over the single storey rear element and the inclusion of three additional windows across both floors on the South flank elevation

Recommendation: Approval

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

4 x two storey, 4-bed, detached dwellings with habitable roofspace, associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossovers

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED:  That the application be refused, and that the Head of Planning and Enforcement be delegated authority to amend refusal reason 2.

4 x two storey, 4-bed, detached dwellings with habitable roofspace,

associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossovers

Officers introduced the report, and asserted that due to its siting and layout, the development would fail to harmonise with the existing local and historic context of the surrounding area. For these reasons, the application was recommended for refusal.

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

·         The application was located within an Area of Special Local Character, and was not congruent with existing houses.

·         The development would result in a cramped development within the application site.

·         The proposed number of trees to be removed was unacceptable, and there was no space for large replacement trees. This would make it difficult for the Council to achieve its aim of achieving carbon neutrality.

·         There was existing access from Sweetcroft Lane, so there was no need for the proposed extension.

·         The proposed development did not include a turning circle, which would make it difficult for delivery, refuse and emergency service vehicles to manoeuvre, while making the area unsafe for pedestrians.

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

·         This was still an early planning outline, which could be amended.

·         The proposed extension from Portman Gardens was a natural extension.

·         Access from Sweetcroft Lane was currently difficult, being tight and with poor sightlines.

·         An arborilogical report had been commissioned, and many of the trees to be removed were diseased or old. The proposal die include some planting.

·         The development would be screened by new trees.

Members sought clarity on a number of points, including what would happen to the access road to Sweetcroft Lane, once closed, and why the decision had been made to build four houses, rather than two.

In response, the agent confirmed that the use of the access road was still to be determined, though it could potentially be sold to a neighbour. Regarding the decision to build four houses, this was due to a demand for smaller houses.

Councillor Raymond Graham addressed the Committee as Ward Councillor for Uxbridge North. Points highlighted included:

·         The proposed development was bulky and failed to harmonize with the area.

·         The removal of trees was a concern.

·         The proposed new access was unacceptable.

·         Due to its scale, proportion and mass, the development failed to enhance the area, and should be refused.

Members asserted that the proposed development site was backland development. Officers confirmed that this was the case, but was not referenced within the reasons for refusal, which were concerned with issues over the developments’ impact on the local area.

Officers recommended that that the wording of refusal reason 1 be amended to include reference to ‘cumulative tree loss’. In addition, it was recommended that for clarity, the word ‘rear’ and reference to Policy H12 be removed from paragraph 7.01 of the officer’s report.

Members felt that the proposal was out of character with the existing street scene, and the officer’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 245.

Change of use from retail/tattoo parlour (A1/Sui Generis) to restaurant/cafe (Use Class A3)

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Change of use from retail/tattoo parlour (A1/Sui Generis) to restaurant/café (Use Class A3)

Officers introduced the report, and asserted that the loss of a retail unit would harm the shopping provision in the area. Council policies stated that at least 70% of the frontages within a primary shopping area should be of retail use. The most recent survey conducted showed a current level of just 54%, and so the loss of the retail/tattoo parlour was deemed to be unacceptable. Accordingly, the application was recommended for refusal.

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

RESOLVED: That the application be refused.

Erection of 3 storey building to provide 5 x 2-bed self contained flats with associated parking, cycle and waste storage (Outline planning with some matters reserved)

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendments to Condition 6.

Erection of 3 storey building to provide 5 x 2-bed self contained flats with associated parking, cycle and waste storage (Outline planning with some matters reserved)

Officers introduced the report, highlighting that the proposal was a minor variation to a previously approved application, to increase the size of flats. The proposal was felt to have sufficient parking, and did not require the occupants to park off site. The application was recommended for approval.

Members suggested that Condition 6 be amended to include one active charging point for electric vehicles, together with storage for cycles and waste bins.

The recommendation, inclusive of the suggested amendments to Condition 6, was moved, seconded and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendments to Condition 6.

Part two storey, part single storey rear extension involving demolition of existing garage

Recommendation: Refusal

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

The item was withdrawn prior to the meeting.

Creation of third floor level, conversion of undercroft to office and creation of 4 x 1-bed and 4 x 2-bed self contained flats with associated alterations to elevations

Recommendation: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendment to the Heads of Terms.

Creation of third floor level, conversion of undercroft to office and creation of 4 x 1-bed and 4 x 2-bed self contained flats with associated alterations to elevations

Officers introduced the report, highlighting that there was a prior approval in place at the site. There were no changes proposed to the pre-approved 14 residential units, and the new proposal was not considered to give rise to disturbance and noise for the future occupiers of the proposed residential flats. On this basis, the application was recommended for approval.

Members sought clarity regarding potential improvements to the building access. Officers advised that this could be addressed via an amendment to the Heads of Terms.

The officer’s recommendation, subject to the amendment to the Heads of Terms, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, subject to amendment to the Heads of Terms.

Two storey side/rear extension, single storey rear extension and single storey front extension to allow conversion into 2 x studio flats and 1 x 1-bed self contained flat, with associated parking and amenity space

Recommendation: Refusal

RESOLVED: That the application be refused, and that the Head of Planning and Enforcement be delegated authority to amend the wording of Condition 2.

Two storey side/rear extension, single storey rear extension and single storey front extension to allow conversion into 2 x studio flats and 1 x 1-bed self-contained flat, with associated parking and amenity space

Officers introduced the report, highlighting that an extant planning permission for a two storey side extension and single storey rear extension was in place at the site. The new proposals, including the erection of a new 1.8m fence, were considered to represent a visually incongruous addition to the street scene, and furthermore, the proposal was considered an overdevelopment on the site given that it would fail to provide amenity space of sufficient size and quality. The application was therefore recommended for refusal.

Officers further recommended that the wording of Condition 2 be amended to emphasise the impact of the fencing on the street scene and amenity space.

Members sought clarity on whether the proposal included an external staircase. Officers confirmed that the staircase was enclosed within the building.

The officer’s recommendation, inclusive of the amendments to Condition 2, was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be refused, and that the Head of Planning and Enforcement be delegated authority to amend the wording of Condition 2.

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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 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 the report into the public domain, solely for the purposes of it 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 1085 as amended).