Minutes of the Planning Committee held on 17 February 2011 and minutes of the Planning Committee held on 3 March 2011 TO FOLLOW.

Having declared a prejudicial interest, Councillor Morris withdrew from the room whilst the minutes of 17 February 2011 were discussed and whilst the Matters Arising report of the Director of Environment was discussed.

Councillor Nicholson was not present for the discussion of the Matters Arising report.

It was RESOLVED:

1)      That the minutes of the meeting held on 17 February 2011 were agreed as a correct record of proceedings and the Chairman authorised to sign them, subject to the following amendment:

·        Item 54g – 10/3734/HOT – 214 Buckingham Road, Hampton

Amend condition and informative within the Committee’s resolution to read:

“Condition: The balcony shall not be used unless a side screen, at a minimum height of 1.7m, is provided and constructed in accordance with details which have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The side screen shall be installed on the east facing side of the balcony.

REASON: To comply with the terms of the application and to safeguard privacy.

Informative: With regard to condition 5 (U37877 - Side screen to balcony required) the applicants are encouraged to discuss with occupiers of neighbouring property the choice of materials used for the side screen prior to submission for approval.”

2)      That the Matters Arising report of the Director of Environment be NOTED.

3)      That the minutes of the meeting held on 3 March 2011 were agreed as a correct record of proceedings and the Chairman authorised to sign them.

Members are asked to declare any interests in matters for consideration at the meeting.

Minutes of 17 february 2011 and matters arising report

Councillor Morris declared a personal and prejudicial interest in these items by virtue of being the applicant for Item 54g – 10/3734/HOT – 214 Buckingham Road, Hampton. She undertook to withdraw from the room for the duration of these items.

Councillor Nicholson declared a personal interest in these items by virtue of the fact that she lived on Buckingham Road. She did not live in close proximity to the application site.

10/3772/COU – HAMPTON RAILWAY STATION, ASHLEY ROAD, HAMPTON

Councillor Nicholson declared that she had predeterminded her view on this item and would be speaking as an Interested Councillor. She undertook to withdraw from the Committee for the duration of this item.

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 Chair will determine the order in which the attached reports are to be heard at the start of the meeting. Members are asked to note that there will be an adjournment of the meeting for a period of approximately 10 minutes starting at a convenient time between 9.00 and 9.30pm.

Upgrading of all facades, replacement of main entrance canopy, new secondary entrance to the building on London Road with an associated footbridge.

Officer’s recommendation:  PERMISSION

Having arrived late to the meeting, Councillor Palmer did not join the Committee for this item.

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and reported the receipt of the following correspondence:

• Additional objections from neighbour (and further photographs) were received reiterating concerns regarding the lack of landscaping, specific colour finish, requesting further details of the finish of the building, need for the scheme, proposal would detract from the appearance of the building; and hours of construction.

The Development Control Officer reported the following additions to the report:

• Add to recommendation (para. 28) “and subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure a contribution of £500 towards transport infrastructure”
• An additional perspective images to aid in assessment and a revised elevation which clarified an inconsistency in the submitted drawings were received 17/03/2011 (supersede ‘Proposed elevations sheet 01’ 413-100 rev. 03 received 14/02/2011 referred to in condition DV48 with ‘Proposed elevation sheet 01’ 413-100 rev. 03 received 14/03/2011)
• A letter has been forwarded to the Planning Committee Members from the agents.
• Add condition NS05:  Prior to the commencement of development, a scheme for the obscure glazing of windows shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  This scheme shall include elevations showing location of existing and proposed areas of obscure glass, and a sample of the proposed obscure glass.  REASON:  To preserve the amenities of adjacent residents.
• Add informative:  The applicants are advised when considering condition NS05, where there is currently obscure glass, this should be replaced with obscure glass only.
• Add informative:  The applicants are encouraged to join the Considerate Constructors Scheme.
• Advice to Member:  Notwithstanding what is shown on plans, this development solely relates to the works outlined in the proposal description (Plans show hotel development (approved at appeal in 2010) this is under construction).
• Condition NS01:  Replace ‘ends of buildings’ with north, south and east elevations, referred to as elevations C, F and E on drawing DR-431-101 03.

The Committee heard representations against the application from Mr Milner, a neighbour not adjoining the site; Ms Griffiths, an adjoining neighbour; and from Ms Read, a local resident and representative of a residents’ association.

The Committee heard a representation in support of the application from Mr Lingard, the agent.

Councillor Chappell spoke as an Interested Councillor.

The Committee considered the information provided by the officer and points raised by speakers. In particular, the Committee noted the following:

(i) Though the painting of building was classed as permitted development, the applicants had agreed to a condition for the paint colour to be secured by condition.  An additional informative could be imposed, advising the applicants that the details submitted as part of NS01 would be subject to consultation with residents who made representations and ward councillors. 

(ii) Windows would be obscure glazed to ensure that there was no increase in over-looking. The windows were deemed to be in proportion to the building.

(iii) Landscaping condition NS04 had been agreed in relation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60a

Externally illuminated name signs on either side of front support of new entrance canopy.

Officer’s recommendation:  PERMISSION

The Development Control Officer introduced the item. There were no late amendments to be made to the report.

No representations were heard.

The Committee considered the information provided by the officer. It was noted that the lettering would be placed along the canopy in stainless steel. The Committee did not perceive any harm to the street scene resulting from the application.

It was RESOLVED:

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

Demolition of storage outbuildings and the construction of a new storage facility, offices and garages ancillary to the retail units at 73-81 Heath Road.

Officer’s recommendation:  PERMISSION

Councillor Linnette, Councillor Naylor and Councillor Nicholson declared that they had visited the site.

The Development Control Officer introduced the item and reported the receipt of the following:

• Letter received from Cllr Head supporting the application as it displays no demonstrable harm.

The Development Control Officer made the following amendments and additions to the report:

• Additional condition: NS13: No development shall begin until details of scheme for the provision of transport infrastructure to meet the needs of the development in accordance with the relevant policies of the Unitary Development Plan and the London Plan have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall include a timetable for the provision to be made and shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To help off set the increased burden on local public infrastructure resulting from this development and to comply with the terms of the Council’s adopted Planning Obligations Strategy.

• Replace condition NS06 with the following: The parking spaces including those within the garage hereby permitted shall be clearly marked out on site and be used only for purposes of vehicle parking by the occupiers or visitors of the premises.

REASON: To ensure that the parking accommodation provided within the site is utilised by occupants of the site to meet the car parking standards of the Local Planning Authority.

• Drawing errors corrected and an additional elevation received.

• Revise condition DV48 to replace drawing no.s 007, 008, 009, 010 and 011 received on 2 November 2010 with 007 Rev. 07, 008, Rev. 06, 009 Rev. 05, 010 Rev. 04 and 011 Rev. 07 received on 14 March 2011. 

• Additional informative: The applicant is advised that the following sums of money are likely to be required to comply with the Grampian condition forming part of this planning permission:

Transport - £1016 and 5% monitoring fee of £50.80.

• Additional informative: In the event that asbestos is present within the buildings to be demolished, the applicant is reminded that the demolition and removal thereof must comply with relevant Health and Safety legislation.

• Replace paragraph 41 with the following: The Planning Obligation Strategy SPG requires that all commercial schemes with a gross floor area of 100sqm Gross Floor Area or more are required to make financial contributions towards transport infrastructure. Whilst the proposed building replaces in part the lost retail floor area to the main shop and the various storage facilities to the outbuildings it would amount to a net gain of 124sqm and as such a contribution towards transport is required of £1066.80.  Transport planners and highway engineers have identified that the money would be used for a study of existing loading and parking restrictions in the locality.

The Committee heard representations in support of the application from Mr Dowding, the applicant, and from Mr Robinson, the applicant’s consultant.

The Committee considered the information provided by the officer and points raised by speakers. The Committee noted the following points in particular:

(i)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60c

Use of office space as a taxi order office.

Officer’s recommendation:  PERMISSION

Having declared that she had pre-determined her view, Councillor Nicholson withdrew from the Committee for this item.

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

• Delete standard condition AT01and informatives IE05A, IH06B, and IL10A.

A representation was heard from Councillor Nicholson who spoke as an Interested Councillor and did not vote on this item.

The Committee considered the information provided by the officer and points raised by Councillor Nicholson. In response to questions it was noted that:

(i) In relation to concerns over parking at the station, the car park was managed by South West Trains who held responsibility for admittance to the spaces. Condition NS02 regulated the hours of operation of the business but the Committee were not able to regulate the hours of access to the car park.

(ii) The taxi company would not be able to impose a taxi rank or allow waiting vehicles to pick up customers because the proposal was for a private taxi hire business rather than a business with a Hackney Carriage license.

(iii) The building within which the office space would be located was a Building of Townscape Merit and this would affect any future proposals for external alterations such as Advertising Consent.

It was RESOLVED:

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

·        Informative: The applicants are advised to be aware of the status of the property as a Building of Townscape Merit when applying for any future advertising consent.