Agenda item

Part two storey, part single storey 3-bed, detached dwelling house with associated parking and amenity space involving demolition of existing B1 building.

Recommendation :

Part two storey, part single storey 3-bed, detached dwelling house with associated parking and amenity space involving demolition of existing B1 building.

Officers introduced the report setting out details of the application and amendments contained on the addendum sheet.

In accordance with the constitution a representative of the petitioners objecting to the proposal and the agent addressed the meeting.

The petitioner made the following points:-

·         The site lies within an area of Special Local Character and was densely populated.

·         The proposal was bulkier and higher than the existing building and would therefore be out of character with the surrounding area.

·         There would be a loss of outlook to homes in Hallowell Road

·         The proposal backs on to the London Underground rail line.

·         The current building does not affect daylight/sunlight where as it was felt the proposed 2 storey dwelling would.

·         Emergency vehicles/construction traffic would be unable to enter the site due to the narrow access to the site

·         There would be an impact on the surrounding roads during construction.

·         Residents were concerned if damage was caused to their properties during construction.

·         A retaining wall was needed for the gardens adjoining the site.

·         Would tree roots be protected during construction?

·         116 - 124 Hallowell Road had a combined occupancy of 140 years and Hillingdon should put residents first and refuse the application.

The agent made the following points:-

·         The previous use could be recommenced at any time.

·         The application was for a modest 3 bedroom family home.

·         Parking provision had been provided on site so there would be no impact on surrounding roads.

·         The proposal was not over development as it was low scale.

·         Access for Emergency/refuse would be the same as currently exists.

·         There were a number of shared common boundaries and this would be no different to what currently exists.

·         The proposed house had been designed to be north/south facing, to reduce its impact on neighbouring occupiers.

·         The issue raised in relation to noise and pollution had been covered in the report.

·         There was currently partial overshadowing to adjoining gardens but the proposal would not increase this significantly.

·         Delivery Companies could be advised of the narrow access enabling smaller vehicles to be used.

·         First response vehicles would be able to access the site.

·         A hydrant was to be located at the corner of the site and if a sprinkler system was thought necessary this could also be installed.

The Committee raised concerns in relation to the close proximity of the proposed dwelling to the railway line and impact the foundations may have on the railway embankment.

Officers were unable to give clarification of the distance from the railway line but advised that there had been no objections received from London Underground Limited subject to appropriate conditions and informatives.

In answer to a concern raised in relation to the sound insulation, officers advised that Condition 8 required a scheme to be submitted so this was something there would be control over. Also condition 3 could be amended to include the requirement for final details of windows being used to be submitted.

A member asked whether a condition needed to be added on the boundary enclosure at the rear.  Officers advised that there were 3 conditions that covered the issue of means of enclosure and felt that this was sufficient.

In answer to an issue in relation to a condition in regards to contamination officers suggested that a condition should be added to cover this.

The recommendation for approval with condition 3 amended and an additional condition added in relation to land contamination was moved, seconded and on being put to the vote there were 4 in favour, 3 against and 1 abstention.

Resolved - That the application be Approved, subject to the conditions set out in the officer's report, addendum sheet circulated at the meeting Condition 3 amended to require final details of windows and an additional condition in regards to land contamination.