Agenda item

Redevelopment of the site to provide three buildings ranging from 2 to 11 storeys in height delivering 333 residential units and 710 sq.m of ground floor commercial floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, B1, D1 or D2), including the provision of private and communal amenity areas, child play space, car parking, secure cycle parking, refuse storage areas and other associated development.

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be deferred.

Redevelopment of the site to provide three buildings ranging from 2 to 11 storeys in height delivering 333 residential units and 710 sq.m of ground floor commercial floorspace (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, B1, D1 or D2), including the provision of private and communal amenity areas, child play space, car parking, secure cycle parking, refuse storage areas and other associated development.

Officers introduced the application for three buildings from two to 11 storeys with 333 residential units, and noted the addendum.

A petitioner spoke in objection to the application, and cited concerns regarding density, parking, traffic, fire safety, the affordability of the proposed homes and the mix of housing which is not required in the area. Members heard that if the Committee was minded to approve the application, the local residents would like conditions requesting a secure perimeter with CCTV, maintaining the closure of Chalfont Road and Little Road, reducing the density of the application, controlled hours of business for the commercial buildings and construction working hours, and the use of dust prevention systems and vehicle cleaning for all residents affected by the demolition of the existing buildings.

The agent for the application addressed the Committee and stated that the design reflects the emerging architectural character of the area, and the development would use high quality materials. The high density application was consistent with national regional and local area planning policies, and exceeded space standards required with a range of parking, sufficient parking and a S106 agreement. Members were also informed that the application provided 35% affordable housing.

The Committee asked what the future of the commercial buildings currently on site held, and heard that a number of tenants have already served notice to vacate, but one business may like to return to the site. Responding to questioning from Councillors, the agent also commented that the application received no objections from the national air traffic control service and will provide 35% affordable housing, comprising 27% affordable rent, 35.6% London living rent and 37.4 shared ownership.

Councillor Lynne Allen, Ward Councillor for Townfield, addressed the Committee and thanked the residents for their report. Cllr Allen confirmed that the application would cause more traffic concerns and that parking issues would be exacerbated, while the application provides a number of one, two and three-bed homes, but the local area requires more four or five-bed homes for families. Cllr Allen also stated that air quality in the area was poor, and it was important that the S106 money goes to the local residents in Townfield.

Councillor Peter Curling, Ward Councillor for Townfield, also noted that there was high demand for family homes at affordable social rents in the area, and this application did not provide that. Furthermore, there were already parking issues which would be intensified and traffic would be worsened in the surrounding area too.

The Head of Planning, Transportation and Recycling stated that car ownership was much higher in houses than in flats, and this was an entirely flatted development, unlike others in the area, which explains the parking provided.

The Committee agreed that brownfield site developments were good for housing in the Borough, but noted that Hayes does require more four and five bedroom homes for families, and it was disappointed that these were not included in the application. Members were informed by the Head of Planning, Transportation and Recycling that there was a need for all homes in the Borough and it was difficult to defend at appeal unless a very low number of family homes were provided, but three-bed homes were considered family homes and the application provided 55 of these units.

Members expressed concerns regarding the height of the application, and stated that 10 and 11 storeys would be out of character and inappropriate next to two-storey suburban housing, while there were concerns regarding the density of the application, refuse collection leading to traffic, the impact on local residents and the opening and delivery hours for the commercial units. Furthermore, it was noted that the application exceeded air quality limits in a location that was already within an Air Quality Focus Zone. The Committee also noted that screening may be required near the 4m high deck on the edge of the development to protect the privacy of residents. Members also welcomed a condition regarding fire safety at the properties and a refuse plan review.

Councillors moved a motion to defer the application to allow for further discussions with the developer and a site visit. This motion was seconded, and upon being put to a vote, was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED: That the application be deferred.