Agenda and minutes

Major Applications Planning Committee - Tuesday, 8th December, 2015 7.00 pm

Venue: Committee Room 5 - Civic Centre. View directions

Contact: Charles Francis  01895 556454

Items
No. Item

11.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

None.

12.

Declarations of Interest in matters coming before this meeting

Minutes:

None.

13.

Matters that have been notified in advance or urgent

Minutes:

None.

14.

To confirm that the items marked in Part 1 will be considered inpublic and those items marked in Part 2 will be heard in private

Minutes:

All items were considered in Part 1.

15.

Abbotsfield & Swakeleys School - 3505/APP/2015/3030 pdf icon PDF 415 KB

Redevelopment of the Abbotsfield and Swakeleys School sites to provide two new three-storey secondary schools with detached sports halls and associated facilities including playgrounds, sports pitches, a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA), car parking and pupil drop-off/pick-up areas; erection of a new two-storey Vocational Training Centre (VTC); creation of a new vehicular access via Sutton Court Road; landscaping; and ancillary development (including retention of an existing sports hall and maths block and demolition of all other existing school buildings).

Minutes:

Redevelopment of the Abbotsfield and Swakeleys School sites to provide two new three-storey secondary schools with detached sports halls and associated facilities including playgrounds, sports pitches, a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA), car parking and pupil drop-off/pick-up areas; erection of a new two-storey Vocational Training Centre (VTC); creation of a new vehicular access via Sutton Court Road; landscaping; and ancillary development (including retention of an existing sports hall and maths block and demolition of all other existing school buildings). (ADDITIONAL INFORMATION INCLUDING UPDATED TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT AND REVISED PLANS)

 

Officers introduced the report and spoke about each specific school application in detail, outlining what the main planning considerations were. Officers then set out the changes in the addendum.

 

In accordance with the constitution a representative of petition in objection was invited to address the meeting. As there were two petitions in objection, one petitioner spoke to both petitions for 10 minutes.

 

The petitioner objecting to the proposals made the following points:

 

·         The existing location of Abbotsfield School (as amended) - It was highlighted that although many residents had no objection in principle to a school, they wished its location to be moved even further south to where the existing Abbotsfield school was located.

·         Sutton Court Road Traffic - It was noted that a permanent 20mph speed limit (as well as other traffic calming and safety measures) were recommended. This measure was to mitigate the increase in traffic. This is a conditional requirement for planning approval to be given. It was requested that this stipulation should be agreed as a condition of planning approval rather than as an informative.

·         Sutton Court Road Security - To enhance security, residents requested  cctv to be installed along the north side of the site, (where the proposed new  school would border the back of Sutton Court properties).

·         It was felt that the cctv should cover the whole line of sight of the new entrance to the bottom of Sutton Court (West to East).  The petitioner reiterated that the request should be considered as a condition rather than as an informative.

·         The Abbotsfield Bell - Instead of using a school bell (as was the case now), the request was made for this to be substituted for a buzzer which would be less intrusive to local residents.

·         It was requested that the bell only be used in emergency situations and that the school bell or buzzer  should be deactivated on Saturdays, Sundays, public holidays and school term breaks such that Sutton Court Residents do not suffer “noise pollution"

·         The request was made that the same conditions should be applied to the public announcement system. The petitioner reiterated that the request should be considered as a condition rather than as an informative.

 

 

 

A representative of the applicant raised the following points:

 

·         The applicant confirmed the siting of Abbotsfield school had not been its first choice and had been influenced by interaction with a number of organisations including Sport England.

·         The current proposed site was located 53m away from the nearest  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

16.

Land South Holloway Lane/North Harmondsworth Lane Holloway Lane (solar farm) - 1354/APP/2015/2752 - WITHDRAWN FROM THE AGENDA pdf icon PDF 198 KB

Solar Energy Farm for the local generation of low carbon electricity to the Local Distribution Network, including the installation of solar photovoltaic panels and associated infrastructure.

 

Minutes:

 

Solar Energy Farm for the local generation of low carbon electricity to the Local Distribution Network, including the installation of solar photovoltaic panels and associated infrastructure.

 

 

The item was withdrawn from the agenda by the applicant before the meeting.

17.

Hertfordshire County Council - 39708/APP/2015/4186 pdf icon PDF 33 KB

Application for mineral extraction, processing and importation of sand and gravel and reclamation materials for Denham Park farm with restoration to agriculture and a small wetland area at Pynesfield, off Tilehouse Lane, Maple Cross, Rickmansworth, Herfordshire (consultation by Hertfordshire County Council)

Minutes:

Application For mineral extraction, processing and importation of sand and gravel and reclamation materials for Denham Park Farm with restoration to agriculture and a small wetland area at Pynesfield, off Tilehouse Lane, Maple Cross, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire (Consultation By Hertfordshire County Council)

 

Officers explained that Hertfordshire County Council had sought comments from the London Borough of Hillingdon Council on an application for mineral extraction, processing and importation of sand and gravel and reclamation materials (from Denham Park Farm) for restoration to agriculture and a small wetland area and a new vehicular access on land at Pynesfield, off Tilehouse Lane, Maple Cross, Rickmansworth, Hertfordshire

 

In response to a Committee question about the likely impact, Officers confirmed the applicant had failed to provide sufficient information to demonstrate the proposed development would not result in increased traffic generation on roads which were currently used to capacity within the London Borough of Hillingdon.

 

It was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote agreed unanimously that an objection be submitted.

 

Resolved -

 

That the London Borough of Hillingdon object as per the officers report.

 

18.

Sipson Village Garden Centre Sipson Road - 67666/APP/2015/2413 pdf icon PDF 253 KB

Mixed use development comprising up to 53 residential units (Use Class C3/C2) and associated private and public open space, pedestrian and vehicular access and parking, including demolition of garden centre.

 

Minutes:

Mixed use development comprising up to 53 residential units (Use Class

C3/C2) and associated private and public open space, pedestrian and

vehicular access and parking, including demolition of garden centre (Outline application).

 

Officers explained that outline planning permission was sought for a residential development comprising 53 units, public open space, an ecology biodiversity area, a village green and 20 allotment pitches. The Committee learnt that the proposal included the demolition of existing buildings, structures and the glass house associated with the former Sipson Village Garden Centre.

 

The Committee were informed that a total of 121 surrounding occupiers were consulted and 65 representations were received in objection to the scheme. In the course of discussions, Officers explained the scheme was considered to be an inappropriate form of development in the Green Belt. Furthermore, 'very special circumstances' had not been demonstrated which would outweigh the potential harm to the Green Belt. Additional reasons for refusal included  the unacceptable ecological impacts and sustainability.

 

Discussing the application, the Committee agreed the proposal was an inappropriate form of development in the green belt and result in an unacceptable degree of urbanisation.

 

It was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote agreed that the application be refused.

 

Resolved -

 

That the application be refused.