Agenda item

Installation of a multi-deck car park to provide 9 levels of parking to provide 215 staff car parking spaces for the neighbouring Gate Gourmet Building and the remainder of spaces to be a commercial car park (Outline Application seeking approval of access, appearance, layout and scale).

Installation of a multi-deck car park to provide 9 levels of parking to provide 21 staff car parking spaces for the neighbouring Gate Gourmet Building and the remainder of spaces to be a commercial car park (Outline Application seeking approval of access, appearance, layout and scale).

Officers introduced the report. The application was seeking outline planning permission for the erection of a ground level car park, in addition to an eight level multi-storey car park with a total of 2,077 spaces. It was noted that 215 spaces on the ground level of the car park would be for use by Gate Gourmet employees. The proposals would provide adequate spaces for use by disabled persons. The upper floors of the car park would be operated as 'meet and greet' valet parking. It was noted that the site was not within a special area.

Officers considered that if the application were approved by the Committee, the parking spaces would fall within the total cap of 42,000 spaces for Heathrow car parks that had been imposed when Terminal 5 was granted permission. However, the situation in relation to cap was complex and it was considered that the cap applied to Heathrow Airport as a whole and not just to the airport operator.

The application was considered to be acceptable in relation to highways and it would provide adequate parking to prevent the build up of traffic in the vicinity. It proposals were considered to be of acceptable appearance. Officers, therefore, recommended approval by the Committee.

Members were referred to the addendum sheet that had been circulated. This proposed that a condition be included, in the event of the application being approved by Committee, to specify that the scheme would not commence until a scheme for an air quality and parking strategy had been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. A verbal addition was requested to specify that pickup for the 'meet and greet' parking was to take place off site and not in neighbouring roads.

Officers advised that an e-mail had been received at 3:30 pm on the day of the Committee meeting, which was after publication of the addendum. The   e-mail objected to the application and requested sight of the legal advice that had been provided to the Council in relation to the parking cap. It was agreed that discussion was needed in relation to the legal advice provided to the Council. As the information was considered to be of legal professional privilege and related to possible legal proceedings, it was agreed that the meeting would move into Part II - Members only.

It was RESOLVED: That:

The meeting moved to Part II and the members of the public present were asked to leave the room.

This item is included in Part II as it contains information which a) is likely to reveal the identity of an individual and b) contains information which reveals that the authority proposes to give, under an enactment, a notice under or by virtue of which requirements are imposed on a person. The authority believes that the public interest in withholding the Information outweighs the public interest in disclosing it (exempt information under paragraph 5 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985 as amended).

It was RESOLVED: That:

The meeting moved back to Part I. Accordingly, members of the public were invited back into the room.

The Chairman advised the members of the public present that it had been necessary for the meeting t o move into Part II - Members only to enable confidential legal advice to be discussed.

There was further discussion regarding whether hotels due to be built in the area would be included in the cap. A question was also raised in relation to the number of spaces currently used within the cap, as the figures provided by Heathrow Airport dated from July 2014. Members wanted confirmation that the July 2014 cap figure was still current and that no subsequent parking has been granted since that time.

RESOLVED - That: the meeting be adjourned to enable officers to seek clarification in relation to the parking cap.

RESOLVED - That: the meeting be reconvened.

Following a discussion between officers, the Chairman advised that, as there could not be certainty with regards to which parking provision would be included in the Heathrow cap, it was requested that the application be deferred to allow further investigation.

The request to defer determination of the application was moved, seconded and on being to the vote was unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED - That the application be deferred and determined at a future meeting of the Committee, to enable officers to provide additional information as requested by the Committee.