To receive any apologies for absence.

No apologies were received.

In accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct and the Planning Protocol, Members are requested to declare any interests orally at the start of the meeting and again immediately before consideration of the matter. Members are reminded to specify the agenda item number to which it refers and whether the interest is of a personal or prejudicial nature.

Members are also asked to declare whether they have been subject to lobbying from interested parties, if they have carried out any site visits and whether they have predetermined their view on any item to be considered.

Members are also reminded of the requirements of Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 that they should declare and not vote on specified matters if they are two months or more in arrears with their Council Tax payments.

10/3780/DD01 - REGAL HOUSE, LONDON ROAD, TWICKENHAM

Councillor Chappell declared a prejudicial interest in the item owing to her sustained involvement in previous applications on this site.

To consider the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 16 June 2011 TO FOLLOW

The minutes of the 16^th June 2011 were agreed as a correct record and the Chairman authorised to sign them as such.

Reports of the Development Control Manager attached – see list below.

The recommendations contained in the attached reports are those of the officers and are not binding upon the Committee.

The Chairman will confirm the order in which the attached reports are to be heard at the start of the meeting. Members are asked to note that there may be an adjournment of the meeting for a period of approximately 10 minutes starting at a convenient time from 8.30pm.

Demolition of existing dwelling and erection of a five bedroom dwelling, detached garage with habitable room above.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

Councillor Naylor informed the committee that he knew one of the speakers on this item and had attended the appeal for a previous application on this site.  He considered that these factors were not sufficient to declare a formal interest.  He also confirmed that he had not pre-determined the application and would consider it on its merits.

The Development Control Officer introduced the application and made the following additions, deletions and amendments to the report:

• Add to condition U41024 Approved drawings: 

Drawings: Site Location Plan, Supporting Statement, Structural Report, Energy Statement, Code for Sustainable Homes Report Ref: SM.CP-1,  2010/51/BAL, received on 29/03/2011, Ecology Survey, received on 9/05/2011, and drawing numbers 2010/51/GAR Revision A, 2010/51/P02 Revision C and 2010/51/P01 Revision A, received on 8/06/2011.

• Replace U4115 with Vehicular turn table

The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with technical details and drawings which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, such details to show; the vehicular turn table which shall thereafter be retained as approved. 

REASON: In the interests of highways safety and neighbour amenity and to ensure that the proposed development accords with Council residential parking standards.

• Remove condition U41036 replace with the following informative:  The applicants are advised that the garage structure hereby approved must remain ancially to the house hereby approved.  The use of this structure as a self-contained residential property will require a further planning consent.

• Add to condition U41116 – ‘Siting and design of solar panels’.

Amend report:

• Remove ‘and accords with policy’ from first sentence of 2^nd para in summary.
• Para. 43 – add, ‘partially’ before screened on second line
• Para. 57 – add ‘broadly’ before accords.
• Add following paragraph:  Impact on Care Home:

The proposed dwelling would be located in broadly the same position as existing in the northern corner of the plot and would be broadly the same height as existing. 

Whilst the proposed dwelling would be wider than existing, the sufficient separation distances involved, proposed height and level of boundary treatment dividing the application site from the care home, would ensure that no detrimental impact would be caused with regard to outlook or loss of light.  The proposal accords with BRE guidelines. 

Many of the existing first and ground floor windows face toward the care home. However, the existing garage and boundary treatment screens the bulk of the existing house from the care home and prevents undue overlooking and a loss of privacy.  Many of the proposed balcony and first floor windows would face towards the care home as the existing windows do. However, the proposed dwelling would be recessed into the ground and would be broadly the same height as the existing house and the proposed garage and existing boundary treatment would screen views into the grounds of the care home.  As such the proposed dwelling would not afford any direct views into the habitable room space or private amenity areas of the care home.

The Development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12a

Retention of alterations at the rear of The Greyhound Public House, including black metal gates, rebuilt wall with rendering and an enclosure with wooden gates housing refuse bins.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control officer introduced the item for consideration and confirmed that no new information had been received since the publication of the report.

The Committee heard a representation in favour of the application from Tony O’Connell (Applicant).

The Committee considered the merits of the application and in particular they discussed non standard condition U40389 which required the gates to be closed at all times and sought solutions in order that they could be used for access. 

It was RESOLVED:

1.                        That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report but that condition U40389 be amended as set out below:

·         that details either of the method by which the steel entrance gates shall be kept permanently open and flat to the outer walls when in use, or how the opening and shutting of the gate shall be controlled be submitted to Officers

2.                        that authority to approve details of the management of the gates be delegated to the Development Control Officer. 

Retention of outbuilding in rear garden.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control officer introduced the application to the Committee and reported the receipt of a further representation since the publication of the report, details of which are set out below:

• The letter (and enclosures) from the applicant’s agent, suggested that the outbuilding had been erected in accordance with the approved drawings and that measurements taken on site failed to take account of a temporary excavation around the building which had since been restored.

The Committee heard representations from Councillor Urquhart who spoke as an interested Councillor and from Mr Massa a neighbour of the site who spoke against the application receiving permission.

The development Control officer advised the Committee that the professional opinion of officers who had attended the site and measured the building disputed this claim.  However it had been considered that the additional height was not unduly harmful to neighbouring properties and was therefore recommended for retrospective approval.

The Committee also heard that it was likely that if the building were to be reduced in height by 20cm it was likely to have to be demolished and rebuilt.

It was RESOLVED:

1.                  That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report and the additional condition set out below, required to ameliorate the effects of the application site on the visual amenity of the neighbours at Clare Lawn Avenue:

Details of a landscaping scheme to be provided between the garden fences and the building on the site to be submitted to officers and the final decision on the submitted details be delegated to the Development Control Officer.

Temporary change of use of land to rear of 1-3 Richmond Road for a period of 3 years for use as a garden.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the report for the Committee and confirmed that no new information or representations had been received since the publication of the report.

Members discussed the information contained within the report and sought clarification of the temporary nature of the permission sought.

It was RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report

Erection of a bespoke public sculpture at Richmond Housing Partnerships’ head office.

Officer Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the report for the Committee and made the following amendment to the report:

• Last sentence of Paragraph 9 to be omitted.

No representations were made by members of the public or Councillors at the meeting.

Members discussed the information contained within the report and sought and received clarification of the relevant planning considerations in relation to this application.

It was RESOLVED:

1.      That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report

Removal of existing single-storey side extension and shed and construction of a single-storey rear and side extension

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the report for the Committee and made the following amendment to it:

·               Insert the following wording at the end of Paragraph 1:

         ‘The application is before the Planning Committee as the applicant is employed in the Environment Directorate, otherwise it would normally be dealt with under delegated officer powers.’

In addition the Development Control Officer reported the receipt of one late letter from the applicants’ agent which acknowledged neighbours concerns in respect of party wall and foundations issues.

Members discussed the information received and sought and received clarification that the appearance of the application at Committee was owing solely to the applicant working within the Environment Directorate.

It was RESOLVED:

1.                  That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report

Details pursuant to condition NS01 (Materials), NS04 (Planting landscaping) and NS05 (Obscure glazing) of planning permission 10/3780/FUL.

Officer’s Recommendation: VARIOUS – SEE FULL REPORT

Having declared a prejudicial interest in the item previously Councillor Chappell withdrew from the position of Chairman and the Committee for the duration of the item.

Joint Vice Chairman Councillor Naylor took the Chair.

The Development Control Officer introduced the item for the Committee and made the following amendments to it:

• The applicant has confirmed that details required by condition U39297 –NS05, in relation to the obscure glazing of the upper floors (above second floor level) are not to be considered under this application and that existing and proposed drawings of obscurely glazed windows and an obscure glazing sample for the upper floors will be submitted under a separate application at a later date (email from agent, Jason Lebidineuse, received 05/07/2011).

As such, recommendation to be amended to read “I therefore recommend the full discharge of condition U37984 - NS04 (Planter landscaping) and the partial discharge of conditions U37847 - NS01 (Details - Materials to be approved) and U39297 - NS05 (Obscure glazing) full discharge of these conditions reserved pending the receipt of samples/details of materials for use on the footbridge and further drawings/samples of obscure glazing for upper floors (above second floor level).

• Informatives to be amended to read:

NS01           Conditions yet to be complied with

The applicant/agent is advised that Condition (s) U37847 - NS01 (Details - Materials to be approved) (in part), U39297 - NS05 (Obscure glazing) (in part) and NS02 (Structural drawing) of decision 10/3780/FUL still need (s) to be discharged.

NS02          Condition – partial compliance

This submission only partially complies with the terms of Condition (s) U37847 - NS01 (Details - Materials to be approved) and U39297 - NS05 (Obscure glazing) of planning permission10/3780/FUL; and details of the following matters remain to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority:- Details/samples of the new secondary entrance footbridge and further drawings/samples of obscure glazing for upper floors (above second floor level).

There were no representations from Members of the Public or Councillors.

Members discussed the information received and the ensured that the amendment was understood correctly.

It was RESOLVED:

1.            That the application be APPROVED in line with the Officer’s recommendation and subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the addendum to the report as follows:

Conditions:

·         full discharge of condition U37984 - NS04 (Planter landscaping)

·         partial discharge of conditions U37847 - NS01 (Details - Materials to be approved) and U39297 - NS05 (Obscure glazing) full discharge of these conditions reserved pending the receipt of samples/details of materials for use on the footbridge and further drawings/samples of obscure glazing for upper floors (above second floor level).

Informatives:

·   NS01           Conditions yet to be complied with

   The applicant/agent is advised that Condition (s) U37847 - NS01 (Details - Materials to be approved) (in part), U39297 - NS05 (Obscure glazing) (in part) and NS02 (Structural drawing) of decision 10/3780/FUL still need (s) to be discharged.

·   NS02          Condition – partial compliance

   This submission only partially complies with the terms of Condition (s) U37847  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12g

Erection of part single part two storey building with additional accommodation in the roof, comprising ground floor B1 offices and 6 one bedroom flats above. Provision of refuse and cycle storage.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the application and made the following additions, deletions and amendments to the report:

·         Added condition:  The development hereby approved shall not be carried out other than as a variation to the terms and requirements of planning permission ref.no.07/3481/FUL.  Reason: In order to ensure a satisfactory form of development.

·         Deleted condition IL12 A and replace with condition:  Approved Drawing numbers

o        The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents, where applicable.   C7/UKH/002 REV D; C7/UKH/003; 1907 2000; C7/UKH/004 REV A; 1907 2001; C7/UKH/005 REV A; 1907 2002; C7/UKH/006 REV B; 1907 2006; C7/UKH/009 REV B; C7/UKH/007 REV A; received 28th February 2011.  1907 2007 A; 1907 2004 A; 1907 2003A; C7/UKH/008; 1907 2005A Received 18th May 2011.  REASON: To accord with the terms of the application, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

·         Advised members this recommendation removes the roof light for consideration, given since the last site visit, this has been constructed and differs from the proposed.  An informative will be placed on any decision advising the applicants of such.

·         Added the previously imposed condition ‘U22579; regarding the loading bay and footway to the decision notice.

Corrections to report:

·         Advised members that the table in paragraph 4 outline the principle changes from the approved scheme.

·         Corrections to table in para 2:

o        East dormer – the approved projects 1.7m not 1.2m

o        West elevation – flat roof extension is 3.1m in height as approved and 3.3m in height as proposed

·         Para. 4 - 16 letters of objection have been received in total during the course of the application. Since the committee report was written three further letters have been received from No. 132 Holly Road,  72a Heath Road and 5 Copthall Gardens which raise the following concerns:

Further representations were received from four sources, as follows:

132 Holly Road:

·     Nature and number of changes is not considered minor

·     Height of the building still remains unclear with an independent survey indicating it is higher than in the drawings

·     Concern that the position of the building on the plans is incorrect

·     Loss of light to kitchen window and overshadowing

·     Building is overbearing and intrusive

·     Loss of privacy to occupiers of Copthall Gardens and Clifden Road residents

·     Concern that 9 parking spaces are shown on the plans when the original scheme proposed none.

·     Solar panel and box structure on the roof are prominent and intrusive

Photographs had additionally been provided to illustrate the impact the building has from the kitchen/garden area of this dwelling.

72a Heath Road:

·     Building is higher and more imposing than the original

·     Raised structure with solar panels is unsightly

·     Dormer windows directly overlook the first floor rear of 72a Heath Road

·     Building looks top heavy

·     Car parking spaces appear to have been allocated

5 Copthall Gardens:

·     Concern about detailing to the rooflight to the first floor rear portion of the development

Photographs attached to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12h