Agenda item

Variation of condition No. 2 (Approved Plans) of planning permission ref:3689/APP/2015/2851 dated 23/12/2015 to relocate the staff parking, alter the location of the shop, increase canopy height, alterations of various glazed elements and relocation of the bin store. (Erection of petrol filling station, shop and canopy, including underground tanks and demolition of existing petrol station

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved, subject to the addition of a lighting condition, to be agreed by the Chairman and the Labour Lead.

Variation of condition No. 2 (Approved Plans) of planning permission

ref:3689/APP/2015/2851 dated 23/12/2015 to relocate the staff parking, alter the location of the shop, increase canopy height, alterations of various glazed elements and relocation of the bin store. (Erection of petrol filling station, shop and canopy, including underground tanks and demolition of existing petrol station

Councillor Oswell, having declared a pecuniary interest, left the room for the duration of the item.

The officer introduced the report, and highlighted the addendum. It was confirmed that permission was granted in 2015 for the demolition of the site's existing petrol station and the erection of a new petrol filling station, shop, and canopy, including underground tanks. The proposal now before the Committee was for the variation of condition 2 (approved plans) to relocate the staff parking, alter the position of the shop, raise the canopy height by an additional 0.5m, and re-position the bin store. As it was felt that the new proposal would have no material impact on the Eastcote Village Conservation Area or residential amenity, nor would it result in a significant increase in traffic, it was recommended that the proposal be approved.

A petitioner objecting to the proposal addressed the Committee, citing as reasons for objection the proposed increase in canopy height, (and discrepancies within the officer's report relating to the size of the increase), the size of the proposal which would lead to overdominance within the conservation area, and light pollution which could affect houses opposite to the site and could have environmental consequences for the river.

The petitioner went on to explain that lighting at the previous site was turned off at night, and that this condition was missing from the current proposal. In addition, it was asserted that a lighting scheme would be required, particularly as a separate application for nine additional illuminated signs at the site had been submitted. It was requested that the decision be deferred until such time as a full lighting review could be conducted.

The agent for the application addressed the Committee in response. The agent reminded the Committee of the proposal that had been permitted previously, and that this proposal was only to amend that scheme. The proposed changes were to allow for a more efficient layout on site, and the canopy was to be raised to allow modern tankers to service the site. The permission granted in 2015 did not specify any conditions related to operating hours, and it was confirmed that the site itself had always been operable 24 hours. Responses to the recent consultation had not resulted in any concerns from the Environmental Agency over light or noise pollution. The agent reiterated the officer's recommendation, and requested that the application be approved.

In response to the petitioner, officers confirmed that the proposed new canopy was 0.5m higher than the canopy approved in 2015. Officers confirmed that due to the new height, there would be additional light spillage, but that this would be minimal.

The Chairman confirmed that Ward Councillors for Eastcote had requested that the decision be deferred due to concerns over light pollution. In addition, the Chairman drew attention to the addendum which set out that the proposed nine additional illuminated signs were part of a separate planning application and not under consideration at this meeting. The chairman requested that the separate application be brought to a future Committee meeting for consideration.

Members discussed the application, and requested that an additional condition be added to ensure that any lighting from inside the shop was turned down after 10pm, to limit any light spillage onto the forecourt after those hours. This was moved, seconded and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

(Councillor Flynn was in the room but did not vote or take part in the discussion as he was not present when the item was introduced.)

RESOLVED:  That the application be approved, subject to the addition of a lighting condition, to be agreed by the Chairman and the Labour Lead.