Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Janet Duncan and David Yarrow.

None.

RESOLVED That: the minutes of the meeting dated 4 December 2018 were approved as an accurate record.

None.

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

Proposed conversion of the first floor from a former Church and Nursery (Class D1) to 11 residential units (Class C3)

Recommendation: Approve + Section 106

RESOLVED That: the decision on this application be deferred pending resolution of a query regarding the Financial Viability Appraisal calculation.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the amendments in the addendum. The application sought to convert the first floor of Legion House, Hayes from a former Church and Nursery (Class D1) to 11 residential units (Class C3). It was confirmed that the second floor already consisted of 11 residential units and consent had been given for the creation of five residential units on the third floor of the building; these were under construction.

Members requested clarification regarding the provision of parking spaces for electric vehicles. It was confirmed that a decision had been taken not to provide any such spaces as they were larger and took up too much room.

Councillors expressed concern regarding the Financial Viability Appraisal mentioned on page 25 of the officer's report which stated that there was only a requirement to provide one affordable housing unit within the proposed development in this instance. It was explained that the existing 11 residential units on the second floor of Legion House were implemented following a Prior Approval application in 2014; under a Prior Approval application there was no requirement for the provision of affordable housing. The five residential units on the third floor were approved in 2015 and no affordable housing was required as the proposed development fell below the 10 unit threshold for affordable housing provision. The financial consultant had assessed the Financial Viability Appraisal on the basis of the 13 units originally proposed under this application, together with the five units previously approved (18 in total). The 11 units on the second floor had not been included.

The Committee questioned why a new Financial Viability Appraisal had not been carried out based solely on the current application; it was felt that the five units built previously should not have been included.

The Head of Planning and Enforcement found the FVA calculation to be acceptable and confirmed that an electric charging point could be added to the scheme if required.

Members expressed concern regarding the methodology used to calculate the FVA and requested that this be checked. It was suggested that the decision be deferred to enable this to be clarified.

The Committee moved, seconded and unanimously agreed to defer the decision pending clarification of the FVA calculation.

RESOLVED That: the decision on this application be deferred pending resolution of a query regarding the Financial Viability Appraisal calculation.

Demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site to provide a part 4 to part 8 storey building comprising a replacement Class A1 1,643sq.m (GIA) foodstore, 144 residential units, basement car parking and associated works

Recommendation: Approve + Section 106

RESOLVED That: the decision on the application be deferred to enable a site visit to take place.

Officers introduced the application and highlighted the addendum. The application sought to demolish the existing buildings and to redevelop the site to provide a part 4 to part 8 storey building comprising a replacement Class A1 smaller foodstore, 144 residential units, basement car parking and associated works. Members were advised that the suggested hours for no loading/unloading and deliveries under condition 16 were to be amended to 06:00 to 23:00. There would also be no loading/unloading or deliveries during Public and Bank Holidays. It was also suggested the re-wording of condition 23 be delegated to the Head of Planning.

Members commented that they were broadly satisfied with the proposed percentage of affordable housing and affordable rentals. However, concerns were raised regarding light issues and the storage of refuse. It was also felt that the high-rise nature of the development was not in keeping with the character of the High Street. Councillors were concerned about 'cramming' and stated that some Yiewsley residents had expressed considerable concern regarding the perceived over-development of Yiewsley.

The Committee requested clarification regarding the parking arrangements for the new development. It was suggested that the proposed 40% reduction in parking spaces was substantial and would result in pressure on parking if shopping were to continue at comparable levels in the future. However, it was recognised that the reduction in the size of the store and parking availability would potentially result in more local use with less people travelling to the store by car from outside the area.

With regards to the height of the proposed development, Members were informed that there was a dip in the road and the new development would be of a similar height to other buildings in the area.

With regards to deliveries, it was suggested that the Committee consider both condition 13 and condition 17 simultaneously. Further clarification was requested regarding refuse collection and control of access to the residential parking area.

In view of the concerns raised regarding the development, a site visit was suggested.

The Committee moved, seconded and voted to defer the decision pending a site visit, with one Councillor voting against this proposal.

RESOLVED That: the decision on the application be deferred to enable a site visit to take place.