Agenda and minutes

To approve as an accurate record, and the Chair to sign, the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 2 April 2019.

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 2 April 2019 were agreed as an accurate record.

There were no apologies for absence.

If a Councillor has a disclosable pecuniary interest in a particular item, whether or not it is entered in the Authority’s register of interests, or any other significant interest which they consider should be declared in the public interest, they should declare the existence and, unless it is a sensitive interest as defined in the Member Code of Conduct, the nature of the interest at the commencement of the consideration of that item or as soon as it becomes apparent.

At meetings where members of the public are allowed to be in attendance and speak, any Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest or other significant interest may also make representations, give evidence or answer questions about the matter.  The Councillor must then withdraw immediately from the meeting before the matter is discussed and any vote taken.

Where Members of the public are not allowed to be in attendance and speak, then the Councillor with a disclosable pecuniary interest should withdraw from the meeting whilst the matter is under consideration. Councillors who have declared other significant interests should also withdraw from the meeting if they consider their continued participation in the matter would not be reasonable in the circumstances and may give rise to a perception of a conflict of interest.

Councillors are not obliged to withdraw from the meeting where a dispensation to that effect has been obtained from the Audit, Pensions and Standards Committee. 

There were no declarations of interest.

At the start of the meeting, the Chair confirmed that Waterfront Hammersmith Embankment, Chancellors Road, London W6 9RU had been withdrawn from the agenda by the Council and would be considered at a later meeting.

In view of members of the public present for particular applications the Chair proposed that the agenda be re-ordered, with which the Committee agreed, and the minutes reflect the order of the meeting.

Due to the number of speakers on some items, the Chair used her discretion and those speaking for and against applications were permitted to speak for 6 minutes each in total, rather than the usual 5 minute maximum.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which made minor changes to the report.

The Committee heard several representations from residents in objection to the application. A number of points were raised and included: the officer reports for the previous and current application were the same and contained a number of errors. With regards to landscaping and trees, the current proposal was vague in relation to the existing trees between the rear of the residential properties on Pennard Road. The new proposal was only 4.5 metres away from residents’ boundary fences at the nearest point and the proposal would result in the loss of sunlight and daylight, as well as overshadowing.

In relation to the comments which were read out from the Hammersmith Society, who were unable to attend the meeting, the proposed development would have a dominating impact, and the height and bulk of the new building would exceed the existing building. Further points included: that the proposal would retain the appearance of an office block, the area was densely populated with no parking, so the construction of a further hotel was a bad idea. Furthermore, the proposal would  cause harm to the biodiversity and character of the area associated with the loss of some trees.

The Committee heard a representation from the Applicants’ representative. A number of points were raised which included: the proposal would promote the vitality and viability of Shepherd's Bush Town Centre. The proposal would deliver numerous local events and conditions would ensure any noise and disturbance would be minimised to nearby occupiers. Further points included, that the proposal would create local employment opportunities and the design would incorporate  a confident civic frontage.

The Committee heard a representation in objection to the application from Councillor Mercy Umeh, Ward Councillor for Shepherd’s Bush Green.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including, the importance of due diligence and the use of an independent sunlight and daylight expert. The Committee considered the sunlight and daylight implications of the proposal at length and questioned the independent expert who attended the meeting.

Further topics included the design merits and setting of the proposal within the Shepherd’s Bush Conservation Area, and the footprint and proximity of the proposal to properties on Pennard Road. Additional topics included, the level of the s106 contributions, employment and training opportunities, as well as the landscaping and arboreal implications of the proposal.

The Committee voted on application 2017/01898/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendations of approval. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

Officer Recommendation 1:

For:

5

Against:

3

Not Voting:

0                          

Officer Recommendation 2:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

            RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2017/01898/FUL be approved, subject to:

1.    To resolve that the Strategic Director, The Economy be authorised to determine the application and grant permission up on the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and subject to the condition(s) listed below.

2.    To authorise the Strategic  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee heard several representations from residents in objection to the application. A number of points were raised and included: the design and massing of the proposal was out of keeping with the existing pattern of development. The proposal would cause irreversible damage to heritage assets, including the listed terrace and pub facing New Kings Road and adjoining conservation area. Peterborough Mews was a residential street, rather than a commercial district and the proposal would have a negative impact on neighbours, including increased traffic, parking stress and no proposed parking.

Further points included, that the technical reports for the proposal were 2 or 3 years old which was unusual. The daylight and sunlight assessments were inadequate and an addendum on this topic had only just been submitted. Insufficient consideration had been given to the impact on neighbours in relation to

overshadowing and loss of outlook due to the overbearing design (especially 1 Broomhouse which incorporated a residential annex within the garden).

The Committee heard a representation from the Applicant. A number of points were raised which included: a new sunlight and daylight assessment had been submitted. A progressive number of setbacks had been used within the design  to improve and mitigate the outlook aspects of the design. Obscure glazing would be used  to address privacy concerns of local residents. There would no adverse impacts to the highway from the proposal. The proposal would make a valuable contribution to the local economy and also incorporate some affordable rent space. It was noted that the current building would not be demolished and the design incorporated using the existing concrete frame.

The Committee heard a representation in objection to the application from Councillor Mark Loveday, Ward Councillor for Parsons Green and Walham.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including, the impact on heritage assets, the level of the Section 106 contributions and the possible impacts on the residential annex at 1 Broom house. Further issues included, the reasons why the technical reports were 2 to 3 years old, as well as further clarification about the distances some dwellings were situated from the boundary of the proposal.

The Committee also examined the current policies regarding B1 usage, the employment opportunities and the overall height of the proposal.

The Committee voted on application 2018/03985/FUL and whether to agree the officer recommendations of approval and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

Officer Recommendation 1:

For:

5

Against:

3

Not Voting:

0

Officer Recommendation 2:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/03985/FUL be approved, subject to:

1.     To resolve that the Strategic Director, The Economy be authorised to determine the application and grant permission up on the completion of a satisfactory legal agreement and subject to the condition(s) listed below.

2.     To authorise the Strategic Director, The Economy, after consultation with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee heard several representations from residents in objection to the application. A number of points were raised and included: during the construction phase, the basement excavation would cause harm to trees in neighbouring gardens on Wingate Road (as suggested by the independent arboreal report). The construction phase would result in noise, dust and traffic disruption. Increased traffic movements would be a hazard to pedestrians and schoolchildren.

Three immediate neighbours would be affected by the construction of the swimming pool, including one neighbour who used a garden office. There was a possibility that without significant buttressing, there could be land slippage during the excavation phase. Further points included: that the development of a large swimming pool was undesirable and inappropriate in a residential community. The proposal would result in a loss of existing and potential accommodation, and could be used as a precedent by future developers.

The Committee heard a representation from the Applicant. A number of points were raised which included: in relation to the roots of trees in neighbouring gardens, the council's Arboricultural Officer had advised that, given the subject property's existing rear extension adjoining the party wall, it was unlikely that any trees close to the boundary would have significant roots underneath it. To mitigate these concerns, the Applicant stated that a condition could be applied which recommended hand excavation to a depth of 1.5 metres, so that any roots that were encountered could be cleanly severed, thus preventing damage to the trees.

Further points included: with regards to the construction phase, underpinning techniques would be used to ensure no land slippage occurred. The proposed lightwells were modest and would not be visible from the street and finally, the Council permitted this form of development as it was within the footprint of the existing dwelling.

The Committee heard a representation in objection to the application from Councillor Jonathan Caleb-Landy, Ward Councillor for Ravenscourt Park.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including, whether Council officers had seen the independent  arboricultural report, the duration of the planned works and the likely disruption caused by the excavation and construction phases.

Councillor Alex Karmel proposed that condition 3 be amended  to include the requirement that the Council’s arboricultural Officer inspect the roots at the early excavation /  hand digging stages to ensure the trees at Wingate Road properties were not affected by the excavation process. This was seconded by Councillor Matt Thorley.

The Committee voted on application 2018/03985/FUL and whether to agree the proposed amendment of condition 3 from Councillor Alex Karmel, officer recommendations of approval and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

Officer Recommendation 1:

For:

5

Against:

3

Not Voting:

0

Officer Recommendation 2:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/03985/FUL be approved, subject to:

1.     To resolve that the Strategic Director, The Economy  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee heard one representation in support from the Architect. A number of points were raised and included: The application only sought minor material amendments to the approved drawings of planning permission reference: 2017/04094/FUL dated 15th May 2018 for the "Material amendment to planning permission reference: 2015/00670/FUL granted 13th October 2016. There would be no increase in height and the permission would only have a modest uplift on the design.

The revisions would reduce the complexities of the form and the proposal would be a high quality development which would make a positive contribution to the urban environment. In addition, the proposal would not harm the character or appearance of the conservation area.

During the course of discussions, the Committee explored a number of issues including the need for developers to avoid repetitious applications and also the Section 106 contributions associated with the application.

The Committee voted on application 2018/00664/VAR and whether to agree the officer recommendations of approval. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

Officer Recommendation 1:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0                          

Officer Recommendation 2:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

            RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2018/00664/VAR be approved, subject to:

1)    To resolve that the Strategic Director, The Economy be authorised to determine the application and grant permission subject to the condition(s) listed below.

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director, The Economy, after consultation with the Director of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor changes to the proposed conditions which may include the variation addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee voted on application 2019/00433/FR3 and whether to agree the officer recommendations set out in the report and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2019/00433/FR3 be approved, subject to:

1)    To resolve that the Strategic Director, the Economy, be authorised to determine the application and grant permission pursuant to Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the condition(s) listed below:

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director, The Economy, after consultation with the Director of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor changes to the proposed conditions which may include the variation, addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee voted on application 2019/00434/FR3 and whether to agree the officer recommendations set out in the report and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2019/00434/FR3 be approved, subject to:

1)    To resolve that the Strategic Director, the Economy, be authorised to determine the application and grant permission pursuant to Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the condition(s) listed below:

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director, The Economy, after consultation with the Director of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor changes to the proposed conditions which may include the variation, addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.

Please see the Addendum attached to the minutes which amended the report.

The Committee voted on application 2019/00436/FR3 and whether to agree the officer recommendations set out in the report and changes set out in the addendum. This was put to the vote and the result was as follows:

For:

8

Against:

0

Not Voting:

0

RESOLVED THAT:

Planning Application 2019/00436/FR3 be approved, subject to:

1)    To resolve that the Strategic Director, the Economy, be authorised to determine the application and grant permission pursuant to Regulation 3 of the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 subject to the condition(s) listed below:

2)    To authorise the Strategic Director, The Economy, after consultation with the Director of Law and the Chair of the Planning and Development Control Committee to make any minor changes to the proposed conditions which may include the variation, addition or deletion of the conditions, any such changes shall be within their discretion.