Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Roy Chamdal, with Councillor Philip Corthorne substituting.

Apologies were received from Councillor Darran Davies, with Councillor Farhad Choubedar substituting.

Apologies were also received from Councillor Gursharan Mand, with Councillor June Nelson substituting.

Councillor Adam Bennett declared a non-pecuniary interest with regard to items 8 and 9 in that he knew the petitioner. Councillor Bennett recused himself from the room for the duration of items 8 and 9 and did not take part in the vote.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting of the Hillingdon Planning Committee dated 01 November 2023 be approved as a correct record.

There were none.

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

Formal Description: Demolition of existing Yiewsley Library Building and the erection of a new residential building on the Yiewsley Library site (Falling Lane) and the erection of a new mixed use building on the former Yiewsley Swimming Pool site (Otterfield Road), with a replacement library at ground floor level, residential uses above and new pedestrian access off of the High Street.

Detailed Description: Demolition of existing Yiewsley Library Building and the erection of a 5-storey residential building, comprising 50 dwellings, with 28 undercroft parking spaces (13 for residential and 15 for use by Rabbsfarm Primary School). The Otterfield Road site proposes the erection of a 5-storey building, comprising 45 dwellings, with 25 car parking spaces (23 for residential and 2 for library users).

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Formal Description: Demolition of existing Yiewsley Library Building and the erection of a new residential building on the Yiewsley Library site (Falling Lane) and the erection of a new mixed use building on the former Yiewsley Swimming Pool site (Otterfield Road), with a replacement library at ground floor level, residential uses above and new pedestrian access off of the High Street.

Detailed Description: Demolition of existing Yiewsley Library Building and the erection of a 5-storey residential building, comprising 50 dwellings, with 28 undercroft parking spaces (13 for residential and 15 for use by Rabbsfarm Primary School). The Otterfield Road site proposes the erection of a 5-storey building, comprising 45 dwellings, with 25 car parking spaces (23 for residential and 2 for library users).

Officers noted that there was an addendum on this item, which contained changes to two key conditions.

A written representation from the lead petitioner was read out:

Thank you for the opportunity to present this statement in support of the petition.

Where is the evidence of Yiewsley residents saying we want more flats?

The opposite is the case. We counted the residential developments in Yiewsley. Since 2008, we estimate that 1,525 residential units have been built. There may be more. Hillingdon Council does not appear to publish a site map with the number of new residential units that have been built by ward for Council Tax payers to assess.

For a long time, residents of Yiewsley have felt they are ignored by Hillingdon Council. For example, in 2017 we organised a paper petition which said: “We formally request that Hillingdon Council provides funds to build and run a new swimming pool at the site of the old Yiewsley pool off Otterfield Road.”

Currently, the Leisure Centre which Hillingdon Council decided to build in West Drayton, a waste of Council Taxpayers’ money, is sitting as an empty building site with the company that was building the Leisure Centre having gone into administration. If the Council had accepted that Yiewsley residents’ petition proposal, we would have had a compact pool on the Otterfield Road site. It would have withstood the economic risks that the Ukraine/ Russian war have caused in terms of energy costs to swimming pools up and down the country. Residents could leave their children swimming in a safe small local pool and go shopping, in Tesco, Aldi, Iceland and had a cup of coffee and a custard tart in Alma Lusa café down the High Street.

I had a stroke in 2019 and have not attended today’s Hillingdon Council Planning Committee in person owing to ongoing health issues.

Accessibility of the Planning Documents

Since my stroke, as a Disabled person, I have experienced difficulties reading documents. I used to enjoy reading, mainly sci fi books, but find it very difficult to read long documents, especially ones that are online.

Most residents do not understand the Planning documents that have been posted on Hillingdon Council’s website.

We counted the number pages of the proposed Planning Application being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Section 73 application to vary condition 2 of planning permission ref: 68153/APP/2019/1319, dated 27-05-2020, (Redevelopment of site to erect a two storey building with a basement and accommodation at roof level to provide 12 residential units with associated works), to allow revisions to the parking arrangements on site, incorporating the removal of the basement and moving the car parking from the basement to the surface level (situated in front of the consented block) and associated external amendments to the site.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Section 73 application to vary condition 2 of planning permission ref: 68153/APP/2019/1319, dated 27-05-2020, (Redevelopment of site to erect a two storey building with a basement and accommodation at roof level to provide 12 residential units with associated works), to allow revisions to the parking arrangements on site, incorporating the removal of the basement and moving the car parking from the basement to the surface level (situated in front of the consented block) and associated external amendments to the site.

Officer introduced the application, noting the addendum which pertained to a clarification on no parking in front of the ancient Oak tree and an amendment to condition 6 to improve air quality. Officers also noted that concerns had been raised by residents regarding increased vehicle movements and noise due to the new parking arrangement. However, there would actually be a reduction in parking spaces from 16 to 10, and the proposal aligned with the London plan's parking standards. Officers further clarified that the London Plan policy would allow nine car parking spaces so it was one space above the maximum. The site was scored as having reasonable access to public transport compared to London as a whole. There were parking restrictions outside the site which should avoid any problems arising from car parking displacement.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Proposed change of use from Office (Class B1) to Assisted Living Care Beds (Class C2) with internal and external alterations to include a new bin store and access ramp

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Proposed change of use from Office (Class B1) to Assisted Living Care Beds (Class C2) with internal and external alterations to include a new bin store and access ramp.

Councillor Bennett left the room at the start of this item and returned following the conclusion of item 9.

Items 8 and 9 were presented together.

Officer introduced the application and noted the addendum which related to brief corrections regarding the Highways section of the report and the conditions.

The lead petitioner attended and made the following points:

• The building in question was poorly maintained, as a listed building within a conservation area.
• The objection was not to an assisted living facility but rather to its proposed location. Vine Lane was a busy road; there was a busy pub at the end; there were concerns over traffic speed; there was no crossing and so it would be difficult for vulnerable people to cross the road.
• It was suggested that 400 vehicles per hour used the road.
• The suggested of an impact statement and CCTV were noted.
• There was no change in the parking in the area. Vine Lane was very congested with drop-offs to Bishopshalt School and people using it as an alternative route to Long Lane.
• The question of a turning circle for an ambulance and electric vehicle charging points were raised.
• This was an historic building situated within a Conservation Area.
• If this application was recommended to go ahead, it was suggested to defer until these points could be addressed.

The design had been scrutinised by both the Council's Heritage Officer and Historic England. Therefore, officers were confident that, subject to conditions, the development would meet policy tests of either preserving or enhancing the grade two building.

Members shared concerns about road safety and accessibility due to the high traffic flow, highlighting the challenges for vulnerable residents and those using wheelchairs. Officers noted there would be electric vehicle charging points and there was a Parking Management Scheme in operation. In its current use as offices the development could generate 86 trips on a daily basis. With its change of use to a care home that number would fall to 16.

Members focused on the need for supported housing, seeking clarification about an assessment of need, to which the officers confirmed that the adult social care team supported the proposal.

Officers clarified that ambulances would be able to enter and exit the site in a forward direction.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Proposed change of use from Office (Class B1) to Assisted Living Care Beds (Class C2) with internal and external alterations to include a new bin store and access ramp (Application for Listed Building Consent).

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Proposed change of use from Office (Class B1) to Assisted Living Care Beds (Class C2) with internal and external alterations to include a new bin store and access ramp (Application for Listed Building Consent).

Items 8 and 9 were presented together.

Councillor Bennett left the room prior to the previous item and returned following the conclusion of this item.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Erection of a two storey side extension with pitch roof and single storey side and rear extension with pitch and flat roof.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Erection of a two storey side extension with pitch roof and single storey side and rear extension with pitch and flat roof.

Officers introduced the application, noting the addendum which noted that there be no roof alteration without further permission from the Planning Authority. 

A written representation from the lead petitioner was read out:

In June, residents submitted a petition with 26 signatures objecting to this planning application, because of their concerns about inadequate information, overlooking, poor design and harm to the Greenway Conservation Area.

This followed the unlawful construction of a very large conservatory extension built without planning permission when work was done at all hours and without consideration for the neighbours. Enforcement were notified, but did not keep us updated or take action, leaving us in limbo. After the planning application and our petition, we made enquiries and had no response from planning until our local councillor got involved. This was worrying as we thought no-one was listening.

It is welcome that the plans now show the conservatory extension has now been removed and changes have been made to the façade (thanks to officers). However, there are still concerns that:

·         the property is too wide (far in excess of current policy) creating a terracing effect contrary to the character of the road.

·         that the property will be too large to be much needed family accommodation and will default to being an HMO (noting that the proposal would include more building at two storeys than No.12 and already includes an irregular full 3rd storey on the outrigger).

·         That the proposal does not step back at ground floor. This is a different building to No.12 with a different entrance location providing different design challenges. Brick matching etc.  

This application illustrates the concern local people have over recent developments in the Greenway Conservation Area and the pressing need for a conservation area appraisal which would identify what is significant and protect the things that contribute to character. For example,

·         Walls and gardens at the front of properties (already lost in this case) so that front gardens contribute towards green space and attenuation and do not just become parking lots.

·         The spacing between houses (which would be lost between number 10 and 12 (Not a pair as stated, but different houses). 

There is much to protect in the Greenway Conservation Area with its unique history and its development, described to some extent in the Hillingdon Townscape study. We believe that a conservation area appraisal would assist officers, save their time and preserve the valuable and valued asset of the Greenway Conservation Area.

A written representation from the Councillor Tony Burles as Ward Councillor was read out:

Apologies for not being there in person tonight but I would like to make a couple of comments on the above application 77809/APP/2023/1129.

I fully support the residents in opposition to this application. The residents and I appreciate the hard work put in by the planning team in negotiating conditions with the applicant in particular over  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of two storey, 4-bed detached dwelling with habitable roof space (incorporating a rear dormer and front/side roof lights), parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front. Renewal of expired planning consent under reference 24351/APP/2016/1304.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of two storey, 4-bed detached dwelling with habitable roof space (incorporating a rear dormer and front/side roof lights), parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover to front. Renewal of expired planning consent under reference 24351/APP/2016/1304.

Officers introduced the application, noting the addendum, which amended a condition to improve air quality.

The lead petitioner addressed the Committee and made the following points:

• The petitioner did not want to prevent development of the plot.
• Neighbourhood stability was sought, rather than an HMO.
• Overdevelopment would lead to irreversible consequences of loss of privacy, natural light and scenic viewpoint.
• Many other neighbours would suffer as well.
• A key issue was constructing what was, in all but name, a six-bedroom three-story building which would stretch the building line beyond reasonable limits. This in itself would not impact number 43 so devastatingly if the proposed new front building line were able to be brought forward to compensate.
• The back of the petitioner’s property and patio would be overshadowed by the proposed structure.
• Why has the front build line of the existing structure not been able to be retained?
• It was uncertain as to where the 45-degree visibility angle from number 43 has been measured from.
• There was already variation in the building line of the petitioner’s side of the road.
• The report mentions possible negative impact on other neighbour’s properties, but not the petitioner’s property.
• The comments from West Drayton Conservation Area panel stated this application “will take light from the rear of number 43 and will have an overbearing effect on the properties on both sides”.
• The planning officer’s comments section stated that there was no kitchen extractor shown on the proposed plans when in fact an extract system was shown on some drawings as blowing directly onto the petitioner’s patio.
• The height of 8.41 meters would tower far above the petitioner’s property which was 6.4 meters at maximum.

The applicant addressed the Committee and made the following points:

• This application had been previously approved via a pre-planning application, with lots of contact with planning officers.
• No changes had been made.
• This was the same application.

A condition was added to require corrected plans to be submitted prior to commencement, given an error in the drawings pertaining to a staircase.

A condition was added to remove permitted development rights for change of use to a small HMO.

Members questioned and officers clarified that while the application was identical to the previous one, the policy framework had been updated, and considering physical context and the impact on neighbouring properties, any substantial changes could appear unreasonable and might not withstand an appeal. Officers acknowledged the limitations in changing the plans due to the expiration of the determination and the necessity to assess the application based on the current development plan.

When this application was approved previously, the Council did impose a condition restricting the height of the building. That was taken to appeal and the Council lost so that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

Demolition of former residential school and erection of academic building (Use Class F1) and ancillary structures including heat pump and substation enclosures, construction of a multi-use games area, revised vehicular access, landscaping, car and cycle parking and associated works.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Demolition of former residential school and erection of academic building (Use Class F1) and ancillary structures including heat pump and substation enclosures, construction of a multi-use games area, revised vehicular access, landscaping, car and cycle parking and associated works.

Officers introduced the application, noting the addendum, which amended a condition to improve air quality.

Members asked about sustainable water management. Officers noted that the application did submit a drainage strategy as part of the application. This was written in accordance with Local Plan/ London Plan requirements that there be sustainable drainage measures proposed. There would be increased soft landscaping and attenuation as part of the proposals including a green roof and officers considered this to be acceptable subject to a planning condition which was listed under condition 14. This would secure the final detail of any such drainage strategy.

Members asked about the green belt and its footprint. Officers clarified that there was an increased footprint. There was an increased volume which was equal to approximately 50% volume but there was a sufficient decrease in height, equal to 3.3 meters.

Members asked about urban design. The Urban Design officer did raise concerns over the general approach of the design but one of the main things to consider was officers had already seen what was essentially the same proposal previously, and it had been approved at Committee back in July 2022 and approved this year formally in 2023 so it would not be reasonable to seek further amendments as part of this application proposal.

Members acknowledged the urgent need for new SEN places at secondary level.

Concerns about external lighting were addressed with specific conditions to minimise light pollution. Additionally, the plan's focus on energy self-sufficiency was highlighted, indicating an energy net positive provision secured by conditions and a legal agreement.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a single commercial building for employment purposes Class E(g)iii, B2 and B8, along with ancillary offices, gatehouse, associated infrastructure including; service yard, car parking, drainage and hard and soft landscaping.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a single commercial building for employment purposes Class E(g)iii, B2 and B8, along with ancillary offices, gatehouse, associated infrastructure including; service yard, car parking, drainage and hard and soft landscaping.

Officers presented the application, noting an addendum related to a pollution-absorbing tree planting condition amendment.

Members asked about the road layout. Officers clarified that there would be only alterations made to the lane arrangement within the site. At present there were two lanes coming out of the site and as part of the proposals that would be reduced to one lane. This was viewed favourably by Highways officers because it would reduce the potential for conflict between vehicles at this junction.

Members noted that it was a positive to have someone want to take on the unit. This application would provide jobs and boost the local economy.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

The demolition of existing structures and redevelopment for Use Classes E(g)(iii), B2 and B8 (applied flexibly) including hard and soft landscaping, servicing and associated works.

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

The demolition of existing structures and redevelopment for Use Classes E(g)(iii), B2 and B8 (applied flexibly) including hard and soft landscaping, servicing and associated works.

Officers introduced the application, noting the addendum which highlighted amended conditions.

Members commended a good investment – it was pleasing that businesses wanted to invest in Hillingdon.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Demolition of existing library and construction of a new mixed-use building comprising a replacement library and 9 x residential dwellings with car parking, cycle parking, waste storage and associated infrastructure

Recommendations: Approve + Sec 106

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Demolition of existing library and construction of a new mixed-use building comprising a replacement library and 9 x residential dwellings with car parking, cycle parking, waste storage and associated infrastructure

Officers introduced the application, noting the addendum which amended conditions to ensure a policy compliant level of car parking was provided, and to improve air quality.

Members expressed support for investing in new library facilities, emphasising the public benefits and the prospect of creating additional housing.

Members raised a query about the parking provisions, which were clarified to prioritise parking allocation for the three-bedroom family units via specific conditions. It was anticipated that people visiting the library would likely already be in the town centre and so would not generate single purpose trips.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Installation of 2no. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHPs) on the cooling tower roof, 1no. ASHP on the chimney roof with one thermal buffer, and 4no. ASHPS within the service yard surrounded by a 2.1m high, red metal louvre fencing and one thermal buffer. Replacement of existing timber beams and roof covering of the cooling tower roof. Installation of 9 steel beams to reinforce the existing steel frame in the plant room beneath the roof. On the chimney roof, the paving slabs and stilts will be removed to offset the load of the ASHP and thermal buffer on the supporting roof structure.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Installation of 2no. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHPs) on the cooling tower roof, 1no. ASHP on the chimney roof with one thermal buffer, and 4no. ASHPS within the service yard surrounded by a 2.1m high, red metal louvre fencing and one thermal buffer. Replacement of existing timber beams and roof covering of the cooling tower roof. Installation of 9 steel beams to reinforce the existing steel frame in the plant room beneath the roof. On the chimney roof, the paving slabs and stilts will be removed to offset the load of the ASHP and thermal buffer on the supporting roof structure.

Items 16 and 17 were presented together.

Officers introduced the application.

Members noted that bringing the Civic Centre up to a more environmentally friendly standard was critically important.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations

Installation of 2no. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHPs) on the cooling tower roof, 1no. ASHP on the chimney roof with one thermal buffer, and 4no. ASHPS within the service yard surrounded by a 2.1m high, red metal louvre fencing and one thermal buffer. Replacement of existing timber beams and roof covering of the cooling tower roof. Installation of 9 steel beams to reinforce the existing steel frame in the plant room beneath the roof. On the chimney roof, the paving slabs and stilts will be removed to offset the load of the ASHP and thermal buffer on the supporting roof structure. Installation of secondary glazing and cavity wall insulation.

Recommendations: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

RESOLVED: That the application be approved

Installation of 2no. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHPs) on the cooling tower roof, 1no. ASHP on the chimney roof with one thermal buffer, and 4no. ASHPS within the service yard surrounded by a 2.1m high, red metal louvre fencing and one thermal buffer. Replacement of existing timber beams and roof covering of the cooling tower roof. Installation of 9 steel beams to reinforce the existing steel frame in the plant room beneath the roof. On the chimney roof, the paving slabs and stilts will be removed to offset the load of the ASHP and thermal buffer on the supporting roof structure. Installation of secondary glazing and cavity wall insulation.

Items 16 and 17 were presented together.

Officers’ recommendations were moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved as per officer’s recommendations