S73 application seeking variation of condition 2 (approved plans) and 3 (approved documents) of planning permission ref 66819/APP/2014/1600 dated 24th December 2014 for:
Redevelopment of the site to provide a foodstore with ancillary cafe (Class A1) and ancillary petrol filling station, cinema (Class D2), 5 x restaurant units (Class A3), and residential development consisting of 132 units, together with new vehicle and pedestrian accesses, car parking, servicing areas, landscaping arrangements, and other associated works.
changes sought: 1) Increase of total units on the site from 132 to 163 and associated design/elevation changes.
2) Changes to the approved Energy Strategy
AMENDED PLANS RECEIVED 21/1/16 INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES TO 163 AND AMENDING THE PARKING LAYOUT.
Recommendation: Approval + Sec 106
Minutes:
S73 application seeking variation of condition 2 (approved plans) and 3 (approved documents) of planning permission ref 66819/APP/2014/1600 dated 24th December 2014 for:
Redevelopment of the site to provide a foodstore with ancillary cafe (Class A1) and ancillary petrol filling station, cinema (Class D2), 5 x restaurant units (Class A3), and residential development consisting of 132 units, together with new vehicle and pedestrian accesses, car parking, servicing areas, landscaping arrangements, and other associated works.
changes sought: 1) Increase of total units on the site from 132 to 163 and associated design/elevation changes.
2) Changes to the approved Energy Strategy
AMENDED PLANS RECEIVED 21/1/16 INCREASING THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES TO 163 AND AMENDING THE PARKING LAYOUT.
Officers introduced the report and highlighted the changes set out in the addendum.
In accordance with the Council's constitution, a representative of the petitioners objecting the proposals addressed the meeting.
The petitioner made the following points:
· The original application was subject to significant scrutiny and delivered a completed package.
· The current proposal would be detrimental to the area.
· The associated construction would create noise, pollution and congestion.
· It was not acceptable for a company to achieve planning permission and then amend it.
· Residents do not want the development.
· Adding a further 31 homes to the site would spoil it.
· The wrong mix of housing types might be created.
The agent spoke in support of the application and made the following points:
· The Developer had worked with the Council to investigate how the scheme could be improved.
· The proposal now provided outside amenity space to all the new homes.
· The privacy to the new homes had been improved.
· The proposal site was close to public transport links.
· The developer acknowledged that South Ruislip Residents Association had concerns but had engaged with Officers about the scheme.
· There been no objections received from external consultees.
· 18 letters of support had been received.
· Increased traffic and vehicular movements would not be significant.
Officers explained that the unit mix and lay out had been changed within the site which had resulted in an increase the total number of units to 163 (28x1 bed, 128x2bed, 6x3bed and 4x4bed houses). Further changes included an amendment to the parking provision and layout had been revised to provide 163 parking spaces and a proposed increase in the number of units, alterations to the height of Blocks F and J and elevation alterations.
The Committee noted that the proposed increase in the number of units had allowed for a higher provision of affordable units to be provided within the site, and all of the existing and additional units proposed met or exceed the required internal unit size standards.
In the course of discussions, the Committee raised a number of points which included the design and appearance of the scheme, the number of disabled units and the defensible space surrounding the bedrooms of the developments. In response, Officers confirmed that the colour scheme depicted in the artists renditions was not accurate and the there were no radical colour changes to the building. With regards to the number of wheelchair units, Officers confirmed that 10% of the spaces would be disabled and in relation to defensible space, the Committee were informed that the addendum set out the following requirement: ‘including details of the screening required for the defensive space at the front and rear of the flats to ensure privacy of these residents’
On being put to the vote, it was moved, seconded and agreed that the application be approved as per the officer report, addendum and following changes:
Resolved -
That the application be Approved as per officer recommendation and addendum and the following three changes:
1. Condition 18- amend to include in paragraph 2 'All residential parking shall be allocated to a residential property at no cost to the future occupiers. The plan shall.....'.
2. Condition 18- amend to include 'notwithstanding the location of disabled parking spaces shown on the approved plans, a further plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Council to show the location of all disabled parking bays.'
3. Condition 18; for clarification, an amended plan showing disabled parking spaces must be submitted to show dispersal of disabled bays throughout the site and in more accessible locations, closer to the residential unit entrance points.'
Supporting documents:
PDF 5 MB