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 the nature of the interest.

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.

Councillor Roberts declared that he had already pre-determined his view for applications 11/3417/FUL and 11/3418/LBC. He undertook to leave the Committee for the duration of this item and would speak as an Interested Councillor.

Councillor Linnette declared that he had carried out site visits for applications 11/3417/FUL, 11/3418/LBC, 12/2518/COU and 12/1974/FUL.

Councillor Naylor declared that he had already pre-determined his view for application 12/1974/FUL. He undertook to leave the Committee for the duration of this item and would speak as an Interested Councillor.

The Committee declared that they were acquainted with the applicant for 1/2663/FUL as he was a Councillor but that they had not pre-determined their view for this application.

To consider the minutes of the Planning Committee held on 11 October 2012 attached.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11 October 2012 were approved as a correct record of proceedings and the Chairman authorised to sign them.

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 vacant structures attached to the original dwellinghouse, renovation and alteration of dwellinghouse and erection of 4 flats alongside.

Officer’s Recommendation: 11/3417/FUL: PERMISSION subject to a

Section 106 legal agreement.

11/3418/LBC: PERMISSION

[Having declared that he had pre-determined his view on this item, Councillor Roberts left the Committee for this item and spoke as an Interested Councillor.]

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and made amendments to the report as set out in the addendum [attached below].

The Committee heard a representation against the application from Mr Morpurgo, a local resident.

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from Mr Scott, a consultant on behalf of the applicant.

The Committee heard a representation from Councillor Roberts who spoke as an Interested Councillor.

The Committee considered points raised by speakers and information provided by officers in conjunction with the report.

The Committee discussed the design of the application. Members were mindful that two previous appeals had been dismissed on design grounds. Some members felt that the south and east elevations of the design would be incongruous with this historic location at the entrance to Bushy Park opposite Hampton Court Palace and would not enhance the character of the Conservation Area. However, the consensus view was that the design of the building was modest and not out of character compared to adjacent residential buildings.

It was RESOLVED:

That 11/3417/FUL be APPROVED subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.

That 11/3418/LBC be APPROVED.

The planning application is for the partial change of use of the 1st floor from Class B1 offices to Class D2 leisure to provide a 24 hour gym.  This will be accessed via London Road from the walkway approved in ref: 10/3780/FUL

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and made amendments to the report as set out in the addendum [attached below].  Amendments were made to the following conditions at the beginning and during the debate:

Condition U54747:   ‘’has demonstrated” was replaced with “must remain”. 

Condition U54744:  Omit “in the northeast elevation”

The Committee heard representations against the application from Mr Milner, a neighbour adjoining the site.

The Committee heard representations in support of the application from Mrs Crowson and Mr Crowson, the applicants; and from Mr Cotton, a consultant on behalf of the applicants.

The Committee heard representations from Councillor Chappell and Councillor Khosa who spoke as Interested Councillors.

The Committee considered points raised by speakers and information provided by officers in conjunction with the report.

The Committee considered whether the benefit to the community would outweigh any negative impact on the amenity of nearby residents. It was recognised that some residents were concerned about night time disturbance from potential noise and light pollution and general activity from vehicles coming and going. However, members recognised that Regal House was already accessible 24 hours a day and that the use of the building outside of normal office hours is not an uncommon occurrence.  It was also acknowledged that the predictions show modest numbers during the night.  It was felt that in order to minimise any potential harm to neighbour amenity (i.e light emissions, noise, activity) the applicant should be encouraged to adopt additional measures.  These would be suggested through an informative.  A number of safeguarding conditions were secured to ensure the scheme maintained an acceptable relationship with existing occupiers of Regal House and neighbours.

It was RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the officer’s report and in the addendum and the following additional informative:

• The applicants are advised of the following:
• When considering condition U54750 (car parking), the applicants are encouraged to secure on site car parking spaces at the front of the site, adjacent to London Road.
• The applicants are encouraged to install black out blinds
• The applicants are encouraged to use lights that can be controlled with sensors, and which turn off when there is a lack of activity in the gym
• The applicants are advised to publicise a phone number on their website, which allows residents to contact if an issue arises when the gym is unstaffed.

Erection of external decking.

Officer’s Recommendation: REFUSAL

[Having declared that he had pre-determined his view on this item, Councillor Naylor left the Committee for this item and spoke as an Interested Councillor.]

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and made amendments to the report as set out in the addendum [attached below].

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from Mrs Cooper, the applicant.

The Committee heard a representation from Councillor Naylor who spoke as an Interested Councillor.

The Committee considered points raised by speakers and information provided by officers in conjunction with the report.

Members discussed the relationship of the decking to the host property. The Committee felt that the height of the decking did not cause demonstrable harm and would not feature prominently in the view from Twickenham Riverside.

It was RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED for the following reason:

The development, by reason of its siting, and lack of prominence when seen in context of the surrounding pattern of development, would preserve the character, appearance and setting of the site, conservation area in general and Thames Special Policy Area.  The scheme thereby does not prejudice the aims of policy and SPG. 

That approval be subject to the following conditions:

·         The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.  REASON: To conform with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

·         The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with detailed drawings to a scale of not less than 1:20; which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, such details to show elevations and materials of balustrades, and materials of decking.  REASON: To ensure that the proposed development is in keeping with the existing building(s) and does not prejudice the appearance of the locality.

·         The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and documents, where applicable. Site location plan, proposed block plan received on 22nd June 2012; Modified north elevation, modified east elevation, Image 1; Image 2 received 24th August 2012.  REASON: To accord with the terms of the application, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

Conversion of existing laundrette into an office and laundrette.Proposed single storey rear extension and erection of a 2m brick wall to boundary. Installation of new shopfront.

Officer’s Recommendation: PERMISSION

[Councillor Naylor was not present for this item.]

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and made amendments to the report as set out in the addendum [attached below].

There were no speakers.

The Committee considered information provided by officers in conjunction with the report.

The Committee did not perceive that there was substantial harm in the application to warrant refusal.

It was RESOLVED:

That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions and informatives set out in the report.