Agenda, decisions and minutes

There were no apologies for absence.

Councillor John Morgan declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 9 as he had visited the site when he was Mayor of Hillingdon and had been contacted by residents about the application. He did not take part in the discussion or voting on this item.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting dated 17 November 2020 be approved as an accurate record.

None.

It was confirmed that all items were in Part I and would be considered in public.

Development of land north of playing pitches to provide an extension to West London Film Studios comprising construction of new sound stages, workshops and office accommodation, entrance structures and reception and security offices (Use Class Sui Generis), creation of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses from Springfield Road, with associated car parking, landscaping and the provision of an ecological enhancement area/landscaped buffer zone.

Recommendation: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED That:

1)    The application be approved +Section 106, subject to the additional information in the addendum;

2)    Authority be granted to the Head of Planning to add a new Head of Term to ensure the protection of the 20m landscape buffer / tree zone; and

3)    Authority be granted to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 16 to avoid deliveries ‘outside school hours’.

Development of land north of playing pitches to provide an extension to West London Film Studios comprising construction of new sound stages, workshops and office accommodation, entrance structures and reception and security offices (Use Class Sui Generis), creation of new vehicular and pedestrian accesses from Springfield Road, with associated car parking, landscaping and the provision of an ecological enhancement area/landscaped buffer zone.

Officers introduced the report and highlighted the information in the addendum. It was noted that the application site was in the Green Belt with no public access. The site was located 27m from Minet Country Park and the existing film studios lay 150m to the south. A 20m ecological buffer zone was proposed together with the planting of additional trees alongside the car parking areas to contribute to biodiversity.

Although the site lay in Green Belt land, the Committee was advised that there were precedents of special circumstances arguments being successfully applied in the case of film studio developments in particular given the significant support for this industry by the Government on both economic and cultural grounds. There was a shortage of film studio space at present and the film industry had expressed strong support for the scheme. It was felt that the economic benefits in this case represented a strong very special circumstances argument. Members were advised that the impact on the Green Belt would be limited and would be mitigated by means of the proposed 20m landscaping buffer zone. The highways impact would also be minimal. The application was recommended for approval.

The Committee heard that, although Springfield Road was a busy road, the Section 106 contribution would be used to fund some of the remaining highway works which would significantly mitigate part of the transport harm.

It was noted that film industry developments on Green Belt land had been permitted in the past at other locations. Members were informed that, in 2014, an appeal regarding the expansion of Pinewood Studios into the Colne Valley had been disallowed as the inspector had ruled that planning considerations outweighed the harm to the Green Belt. It was confirmed that the then Secretary of State had agreed with this decision stating that, in terms of the economic dimension of sustainable development, there was a strong national commitment to economic growth and support for the film industry. The secretary of State had agreed with the Inspector that the potential economic benefits of the proposal would contribute significantly to these national objectives. It was further confirmed that the current Mayor of London had recently approved a similar development in East London.

A petition in support of the application had been received and a written submission from the agent was read out for the consideration of the Committee. Key points highlighted included:

·         Film Studios had been in operation in the location since 2005;

·         WLFS worked with local schools and Colleges and with local charities such as MADE (Make a Difference Entertainment). They were also active members of the Chamber of Commerce;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 92.

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans) of planning application 71737/APP/2019/1979, dated 31/07/2020 (Proposed demolition of existing office and warehouse/workshops and erection of one flexible use class B1(c)(Eg(iii))/B2/B8 building comprising 3 units with associated access and parking), in order to amend the design of the roof, canopy and boundary fence.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED That: the application be approved +Section 106.

Variation of Condition 2 (Approved Plans) of planning application 71737/APP/2019/1979), dated 31/07/2020 (Proposed demolition of existing office and warehouse/workshops and erection of one flexible use class B1(c)(Eg(iii)/B2/B8 building comprising 3 units with associated access and parking), in order to amend the design of the roof, canopy and boundary fence.

Officers introduced the application advising Members that planning permission had already been granted at this site. The application was for a variation of Condition only. It was confirmed that the application had originally been approved with a wavy roof form. A canopy to the front on the building was now proposed instead with a similar wavy design. A Condition would be imposed to ensure the canopy was of good quality. The application was recommended for approval.

Members requested clarification regarding the depth of the proposed canopy. It was confirmed that it would project no more than 1.5m and Condition 19 would ensure it was constructed of good quality materials.

Members raised no further concerns and were in support of the application.

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

RESOLVED That: the application be approved +Section 106.

Development of 4 no. new buildings comprising residential units (in addition to those approved under planning permission ref: 1331/APP/2017/1883), a basement extension to Block B, flexible commercial uses (Class E) and associated landscaping, access, car parking and other engineering works.

The plans show a development of 913 residential units (totaling 1,473 units involving a net additional uplift of 84 units from that permitted by planning permission ref: 1331/APP/2017/1883 (as amended)), amendments to Blocks B, C, F3, F4, H, and 206 sq.m of commercial floorspace.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved +Section 106, subject to the information in the addendum;

2)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to re-word Head of Term 23 to state “Child Play Space and recreational facilities within the vicinity of the site”;

3)    The Head of Planning review the accuracy of the figure in Head of Term 21 in relation to Air Quality mitigation;

4)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to draft an additional Condition in relation to an overheating assessment;

5)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to draft an informative indicating that no further developments at the site will be considered favourably.

Development of 4 no. new buildings comprising residential units (in addition to those approved under planning permission ref: 1331/APP/2017/1883), a basement extension to Block B, flexible commercial uses (Class E) and associated landscaping, access, car parking and other engineering works.

The plans show a development of 913 residential units (totalling 1473 units involving a net additional uplift of 84 units from that permitted by planning permission ref: 1331/APP/2017/1883 (as amended), amendments to Blocks B,C,F3,F4,H and 206 sqm of commercial floorspace.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the information in the addendum. Members were informed that the main changes proposed were at upper floor level. There was a shortfall in amenity space at Block C – a rooftop amenity was proposed to mitigate this harm. £72,000 had been secured to enhance play facilities for older children at the site. The Committee heard that the application now included 40% affordable housing and the number of proposed 3 bed units remained unchanged. No comments had been received from members of the public during the consultation period. The application was recommended for approval, subject to the Conditions and Heads of Terms set out in the report.

At the request of Members, it was agreed that the Head of Planning would slightly amend the wording of Head of Term 23 to read “Child Play Space and recreational facilities within the vicinity of the site”.

In response to requests for clarification from the Committee, it was confirmed that the 84 units comprised a mix of 1 and 2 bed dwellings and there would be no significant harm in relation to shadowing.

Members expressed concern regarding the lack of proposed amenity space and were disappointed to note that there was no uplift in family units. It was felt that the original scheme had been well designed and there was a need to discourage any further development at the site. It was agreed that delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to draft an informative to this effect.

The Committee requested further clarification regarding the Air Quality mitigation contribution of up to £855,601 as cited at point 21 of the recommendations in the report. It was noted that a higher contribution of £1.3m had been cited in an earlier Committee report (May 2020). It was agreed that the Head of Planning would review the accuracy of this figure.

Members noted the omission of a Condition in relation to an overheating assessment; it was agreed that authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to add this.

Members raised no further objections or concerns and were in support of the scheme. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed, subject to the addendum and agreed amendments.

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved +Section 106, subject to the information in the addendum;

2)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to re-word Head of Term 23 to state “Child Play Space and recreational facilities within the vicinity of the site”;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94.

Demolition of existing buildings for residential-led mixed use development comprising buildings between 3 and 10 storeys to provide residential units (Use Class C3) and ground floor commercial floorspace (Use Class B1/A3) with associated access and car and cycle parking, landscape and amenity areas and associated servicing (AMENDED June 2020).

Details: Comprising 400 residential units (Use Class C3) and 1,130 sqm of commercial floorspace (Use Class B1) at ground floor including 308 sqm (Use Class B1/A3) with associated access and car parking for 195 vehicles and 674 cycle parking, landscape and amenity areas and associated servicing

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED That: the application be approved +Section 106, subject to the additional information in the addendum.

Demolition of existing buildings for residential-led mixed use development comprising buildings between 3 and 10 storeys to provide residential units (Use Class C3) and ground floor commercial floorspace (Use Class B1/A3) with associated access and car and cycle parking, landscape and amenity areas and associated servicing (AMENDED June 2020).

Details: Comprising 400 residential units (Use Class C3) and 1,130 sqm of commercial floorspace (Use Class B1) at ground floor including 308 sqm (Use Class B1/A3) with associated access and car parking for 195 vehicles and 674 cycle parking, landscape and amenity areas and associated servicing.  

Councillor John Morgan declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 9 as he had visited the site when he was Mayor of Hillingdon and had been contacted by residents about the application. He did not take part in the discussion or the voting on this item.

Officers introduced the report and highlighted the information in the addendum. Members were informed that, on the day of the meeting, the Council had received a late letter of representation from TfL. The Council’s Committee report on page 289 stated that it was not deemed that TfL had met the regulatory tests prescribed when seeking planning obligations to mitigate the harm resulting from a development proposal. This specifically related to the request by TfL for £370,500 for the A312 Healthy streets Scheme. 

It was confirmed that the additional information received clarified that the monies requested met the tests prescribed by the CIL regulations 2010. The Council therefore wished this clarification to be minuted to allow it to be corrected. However, the scheme already secured local highways mitigation ?by way of the Clayton Road Healthy Streets Scheme and, whilst there were no additional monies available for the strategic A312 Bulls Bridge Project, some of the works secured under this obligation were also securing the objectives of the A312 Healthy streets scheme and would therefore be of benefit to the strategic programme.  The Council’s recommendation therefore remained unchanged, and no additional monies could be secured for the A312 Heathy Streets scheme.

Members welcomed the inclusion of family homes, affordable housing and amenity space – notably a child play area and public park.

In response to Members’ requests for clarification, it was confirmed that the car parking ratio was considered adequate as people were being actively encouraged to walk and cycle more and be less reliant on cars.

Further clarification was sought by the Committee in relation to the daylight / sunlight report as set out on page 267 of the agenda pack. It was confirmed that, with regards to VSC and the properties on Clayton Road, all but 2 windows had passed. It was therefore considered that there would be insufficient harm to warrant a reason for refusal.

Members expressed concern regarding the proposed non-affordable / affordable housing ratio. It was confirmed that the split should be 70 / 30 yet in this case it was 77 / 23; this was not policy compliant but the scheme would deliver a considerable  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95.

Upgrade of existing sports pitch to provide World Rugby Compliant 3G Artificial Grass Pitch with associated perimeter fencing and technical dugout recessed areas, erection of temporary gym facility, and associated works

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved, subject to the information in the addendum;

2)    the application require a stage 2 referral to the GLA and an SoS referral; and

3)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 9 to ensure implementation of the remediation plan within one year of the closure / removal of the temporary gym – whichever occurs first.

Upgrade of existing sports pitch to provide World Rugby Compliant 3G Artificial Grass Pitch with associated perimeter fencing and technical dugout recessed areas, erection of temporary gym facility, and associated works.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the information in the addendum. It was noted that the application site was in the Green Belt and the gym facility would be temporary for 5 years only. Although the gym building did not comply with policy, it was felt that the potential harm was outweighed by the benefits. It was confirmed that the floodlighting and artificial pitch were permanent and would be retained.

The Committee was advised that the application would need to be referred back to the Mayor of London at Stage 2 and the Secretary of State.

Members noted that Condition 9 was incomplete as it did not mention a remediation plan and a timeframe for this. It was agreed that delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 9 accordingly.

No further concerns were raised.

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

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved, subject to the information in the addendum;

2)    the application require a stage 2 referral to the GLA and an SoS referral; and

3)    Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 9 to ensure implementation of the remediation plan within one year of the closure / removal of the temporary gym – whichever occurs first.

Redevelopment of the site to provide two industrial units providing industrial floorspace (Use Class B1c/B2/B8) and ancillary offices together with associated parking, access arrangements, landscaping and infrastructure (Re-consultation on revised landscaping plan).

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved +Section 106, subject to the additional information in the addendum; and

2)    authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 11 to avoid residential areas.

Redevelopment of the site to provide two industrial units providing industrial floorspace (Use Class B1c/B2/B8) and ancillary offices together with associated parking, access arrangements, landscaping and infrastructure (Re-consultation on revised landscaping plan).

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the information in the addendum. It was confirmed that the site had recently been designated a Grade II Registered Park and Garden. Members were informed that a small part of the building would be located in the Green Belt. The applicant had maximised opportunities for new landscape planting. It was noted that the economic benefits of the proposal would be significant and, once completed, it would create up to 450 new Full Time Equivalent jobs. A green roof and green walls to the elevations were proposed to minimise the impact. The application was recommended for approval.

In response to Members requests for reassurance regarding HGV movements, it was agreed that delegated authority be granted to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 11 to ensure vehicles did not stray into residential areas.

Members raised no further concerns.

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

RESOLVED That:

1)    the application be approved +Section 106, subject to the additional information in the addendum; and

2)    authority be delegated to the Head of Planning to amend Condition 11 to avoid residential areas.

Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans), 3 (Supporting Documentation), 8 (Signage and Lighting Details) and 13 (Turning Areas) of planning application 53216/APP/2018/4179, dated 21/11/2019 (Change of use of 25 existing moorings from leisure to residential use, with associated works), in order to amend the wording of conditions and make changes to the approved parking layout, landscaping, cycle storage, bin storage and lighting.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED That: the application be approved, subject to the additional information in the addendum.

Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans), 3 (Supporting Documentation), 8 (Signage and Lighting Details) and 13 (Turning Areas) of planning application 53216/APP/2018/4179, dated 21/11/2019 (Change of use of 25 existing moorings from leisure to residential use, with associated works), in order to amend the wording of conditions and make changes to the approved parking layout, landscaping, cycle storage, bin storage and lighting.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the information in the addendum. It was noted that the proposed changes were minor and the application was recommended for approval.

Members raised no concerns. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed, subject to the addendum.

RESOLVED That: the application be approved, subject to the additional information in the addendum.