Agenda item

Demolition of existing building and erection of new building comprising 24 apartments, amenity space and car parking.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to an additional condition regarding parking.

Officers introduced the report and highlighted the addendum. The application sought to erect a four storey building with semi basement parking comprising 24 residential flats, involving the demolition of the existing industrial buildings. Officers explained that the site was immediately adjacent to West Drayton town centre boundary and adequate parking would be provided for the flats on a 1:1 basis.

Members made reference to the issue of pedestrian safety due to the width of the site access as mentioned by the Highways Officer in the report and queried how this had been addressed in the scheme. The Transport Consultant confirmed that a central island had been considered and rejected as this would necessitate an even wider site entrance. The Committee asked whether the alternative option of a path for pedestrians flush to the footway had been considered. The Transport Consultant confirmed that this had been considered and corrected the Highway Officer comments. It was confirmed that treatment of this access was within the Highways work schedule.  

Councillors sought clarification regarding other possible approved developments surrounding the proposed one and asked if they were indicated on the plans. Officers confirmed that proposed developments were already clearly indicated on the plans. Members also queried whether the distances between buildings were adequate. The Head of Planning and Enforcement confirmed that the 21m distance requirement and window to window distances required had been met to the south. Regarding the front of the development, officers advised that a 15m distance to Claxton House had been previously approved. There was also a 15m distance between the new development and the properties on Trout Road but this was deemed to be acceptable in this case as nobody had objected, it looked onto a public highway and, if it were further back, it would be out of sync with the building line. Members enquired about the blocks to the north which were currently industrial but could be re-developed. Officers confirmed that these were light industrial and, if they were to be re-developed, the 21m rule would have to be adhered to.

The Committee also enquired regarding the possibility of parking being 'priced out' or charged for by the developer. It was agreed that officers could not control what a developer chose to charge for a parking space and the Legal Advisor confirmed that the condition stated that spaces were allocated solely for the use of the units therefore 'pricing out' would be unlikely. Members asked whether the wording of the condition could be amended to state that parking was allocated for the use of each unit. Members felt the condition should be strengthened to indicate that parking was for the use of each of the units so that one individual would not be able to buy multiple parking spaces.  It was agreed that the Head of Planning would agree the wording of the condition with the assistance of the Legal Services department for the approval of the Chairman and the Labour Lead.

Members voted unanimously to approve the application subject to the re-wording of the condition regarding parking allocation.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to the re-wording of the condition regarding parking allocation.