Agenda item

Erection of 2 x two-storey, 4-bedroom detached dwellings, associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossovers

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be deferred for a site visit.

Erection of 2 x two-storey, 4-bedroom detached dwellings, associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossovers

Officers introduced the application, highlighted the addendum and made a recommendation for approval.

A petitioner in objection of the application addressed the Committee and referred to photographs and a presentation that had been circulated to Members prior to the meeting. The main issues for objecting to the application were detailed in the presentation and related to conflict with the local character of the area, loss of amenity due to the removal of trees, lack of vehicle turning circle on proposed plans leading to an unsafe and dangerous situation, insufficient parking, objection to new access via Portman Gardens and excess traffic caused by construction. It was submitted that the proposals were not in keeping with of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) Policy DMH 6 The proposals would establish the unwelcome precedent of other sites being developed in the same way. Although the officer’s report had indicated that Portman Gardens was devoid of parking control, this was incorrect and the report had been based on inaccurate information. There was no justifiable requirement to make access via Portman Gardens as the property could be accessed from the access point on Sweetcroft Lane. The residents agreed that some development to the property should be carried out but within the access to the property from Sweetcroft Lane. As part of the external consultation, 28 properties had been consulted, there had been 32 individual objections against the development and the petition had 44 signatures from residents. The Committee was asked to put residents first.

By way of written submission, the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee. It was submitted that the National Planning Policy Framework encouraged the effective use of land and the use of previously developed vacant under-utilised sites to be maximised. At a local level, the plan provided support to the housing provision. Previous concerns that had been raised were now addressed in terms of the quantum of development, the design, layout, siting and the impact the homes would have on the character and appearance of the ASLC. A number of amendments to the application had been made to the roof form, windows and removal of balconies. The applicant/agent had worked closely with officers to maintain the development pattern and character. The existing narrow and long access from Sweetcroft Lane would be closed and new access provided by extending the existing highway at Portman Gardens. Officers had confirmed that the new access, car parking, layout, cycle parking and servicing were all acceptable and did not raise any safety concerns. Further, the internal layouts complied with the floor area standards, there would also be a landscape buffer and the development would not result in any concerns relating to the loss of privacy, daylight or sunlight to any of the neighbouring properties.

Councillor David Yarrow, Ward Councillor for Uxbridge North addressed the Committee and supported the points raised by the petitioner. This was an emotive application effecting the lives of residents on Portman Gardens which was a quiet Cul De Sac. It was submitted that the application had been put before the Committee twice and the appeal had been dismissed. The size of the property had been reduced however there was more to consider than the size and number of the property. The Council had a policy around back gardens and the Committee was asked to consider the long-term effects of the proposals. There were five other properties waiting for this application to be accepted and further extension would take place if this application was approved. It was requested that a site visit take place to check the way cars travelled on existing pathways and a tree preservation order was placed on the remaining five properties. If the Committee was not minded to conduct a site visit, it was requested that the application be deferred until tree preservation orders were determined and proved to be robust. 

Prior to Member discussion, Officers noted the submissions in relation to policy DMH 6 in relation to back land development and considered that the layout and design were acceptable. In relation to access from Sweetcroft Lane, it was confirmed that there was also a specific criterion in Policy DMH 6 in relation to access and access roads between dwellings and unnecessarily long access roads were unacceptable. NPPF para 203 was noted in respect of non-designated heritage assets. Officers had assessed the site and although there would be some harm, it was considered that the layout and design would present an extension of Portmans Garden. Each application needed to be considered on its own merits and it was confirmed that the area was covered by a tree preservation order. It was confirmed there was an oversight in relation to the parking restrictions in Portman Gardens in the report, however there were no highway objections to the development.

Members agreed to defer the application for a site visit to investigate the area further.

A motion to defer the application for a site visit was moved, seconded and unanimously agreed at a vote.

RESOLVED: That the application be deferred for a site visit.