Agenda, decisions and draft minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Eddie Lavery, with Councillor Roy Chamdal substituting.

Councillor Janet Duncan declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item number 6, Old Coal Depot, as she was a member of the Garden City Estate Residents' Association that was opposing the application. Councillor Duncan left the room during consideration of the item.

Resolved: That the minutes of the meetings held on 11 May and 31 May 2016 be agreed as accurate.

No matters had been notified in advance or were urgent.

It was confirmed that all items were Part I and would, therefore, be heard in public.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to provide a materials recovery and recycling facility and Civic Amenity Site, incorporating a recovery and recycling building, storage bays, administration office/training building, external processing and storage area, two weighbridges, reuse and extension of railway sidings, and Civic Amenity Centre, together with associated car parking, landscaping, fencing and infrastructure.

Recommendation: Refusal

Resolved: That the application be refused.

Demolition of existing buildings and redevelopment of site to provide a materials recovery and recycling facility and Civic Amenity Site, incorporating a recovery and recycling building, storage bays, administration office/training building, external processing and storage area, two weighbridges, reuse and extension of railway sidings, and Civic Amenity Centre, together with associated car parking, landscaping, fencing and infrastructure.

Introduction of the application

Officers introduced the report, which sought the redevelopment of the Old Coal Yard to provide a materials recovery and recycling facility and Civic Amenity Site. The proposals would provide a Materials Recovery and Recycling Building (MRF), which would provide 15,581 square metres of floor space. A number of storage bays would house materials associated with the construction industry. External Processing and Storage Areas would be provided to the western side of the site for concrete and wood processing and inert material storage. Offices and associated parking would be provided for the site. The offices would be contained within a two storey building. A 220 metre railway platform was also proposed to allow loading and unloading of trains transporting materials to and from the site. The existing rail sidings would be retained and extended. Two weigh bridges would facilitate the weighing of vehicles entering and leaving the site and a civic amenity site would be provided with 22 parking bays.

The only difference between the proposals and the previously refused (2013) application was the reduction in the proposed capacity of the development from 950,000 tonnes per annum to 450,000 tonnes per annum.

A total of 974 neighbouring properties had been consulted, with site notices having being displayed at 22 locations within the Yiewsley and West Drayton area. 239 representations had been received, 2 had been in support, 6 provided general comments and 231 were objections. In addition, 9 petitions in objection to the scheme had been received, containing a total of 3,137 signatures.

The London Plan had designated the site as a strategic industrial location and as an industrial and business area in the local plan. Policies LE1 and LE2 of the Hillingdon Unitary Development Plan sought to retain land within these areas for B1, B2 and B8 uses.

The West London Waste Plan provided a policy framework for the assessment of applications for waste management facilities. The Old Coal Yard site had not been identified as a site for the provision of waste management during the period covered by the Plan. The Planning Inspector, upon examination of the West London Waste Plan, had concluded that the site would not be appropriate for such use. Appropriate sites had been identified and allocated to meet the need for waste management facilities.

The likely traffic impacts of the development were also a cause for concern, with the Council's Highway Officer having raised significant concerns about the quality and accuracy of the Transport Assessment. It was considered that the development would have significant adverse impacts on the free flow of the highway network in the Yiewsley and West Drayton Area and on highway  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Consultation under part 8 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted development) Order 2015 for the erection of a Baggage Recovery Facility (BRF) and Utility Storage Device (ULD) Store.

Recommendation: No Objection

Resolved: That no objection be made as part of the consultation.

Consultation under part 8 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted development) Order 2015 for the erection of a Baggage Recovery Facility (BRF) and Utility Storage Device (ULD) Store.

Officers introduced the report in relation to the proposed consultation response regarding a proposal to build a Baggage Recovery Facility and storage facility for Utility Loading Devices to the north of Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport. The proposals were located within the green belt. The principal of development at Terminal 5 had been considered by the Planning Inspector at the Terminal 5 enquiry. It was noted that the proposals related to an airside development. There were no associated highway issues and the development would be 1.5 kilometres from the nearest residential properties. Accordingly, officers recommended that no objection be made to the proposals.

The recommendation to make no objection to the proposal as part of the consultation was proposed, seconded and upon being put to the vote, was agreed unanimously.

Resolved: That no objection be made as part of the consultation.

Reserved matters (details of landscaping) in compliance with condition 2 of outline planning permission ref: 65688/APP/2016/94  dated 7/3/2016 (erection of a multi deck car park for use by Gate Gourmet and British Airways staff).

Recommendation: To be delegated to the Head of Planning and Enforcement for approval.

Resolved: That the application be approved.

Reserved matters (details of landscaping) in compliance with condition 2 of outline planning permission ref: 65688/APP/2016/94 dated 7/3/2016 (erection of a multi deck car park for use by Gate Gourmet and British Airways staff).

Officers introduced the application, which was to provide details of landscaping in relation to a previous application for construction of a multi storey car park at Heathrow Airport. Construction of the car park had been approved by the Committee in March 2016. This included the provision of 1,022 parking spaces, motorcycle bays and electric vehicle parking. The application was recommended for approval.

The recommendation for approval was proposed, seconded and upon been put to the vote, was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED: That the application be deferred for approval by the Head of Planning under Delegated powers. This approval would be subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer's report.

Reserved Matters Application for the erection of 1 x 5 storey office building and 1 x 4 storey office building with associated plant, parking and landscaping.

Recommendation: To be delegated to the Head of Planning and Enforcement for approval.

Resolved: That the application be approved.

Reserved Matters Application for the erection of 1 x 5 storey office building and 1 x 4 storey office building with associated plant, parking and landscaping.

Officers introduced the report, which related to Reserved Matters in relation to the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping of a previously approved application for the construction of two office buildings at St Andrews Park. It was proposed that shared parking would be provided in a basement car park, to be used by both office users and local residents. Members were referred to the addendum sheet circulated, which proposed amendment to the wording of the proposed approval condition number 3. Approval of the application was recommended.

A Member raised concerns with regards to a nearby barrier that had been put in place to prevent through traffic passing between Chippendale Waye and Vine Lane. Access was only due to be available to available to emergency services, but it appeared that 2,000 to 3,000 passes to the barrier had been issued to local residents. It was questioned whether passes would be issued to everyone who worked in the office, which would lead to increased traffic congestion. Officers advised that the issue raised was separate to the planning application under consideration and was an enforcement issue that officers were trying to resolve.

It was questioned whether officers could be sure that the parking would be a shared facility, which would also be available for use by non users of the office. Officers advised that a link to the plaza area would be developed to ensure that the public could access the car park. There was also a planning condition associated with the outline application, which specified that the parking should be shared.

The recommendation for approval was proposed, seconded and upon been put to the vote, was approved unanimously.

RESOLVED: That delegated powers be given to the Head of Planning and Enforcement to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer's report and subject to any changes negotiated by the Head of Planning and Enforcement prior to the issuance of the decision.