Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Members:-

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of interests made by Members.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 November 2018 and the Special meeting held on 7 January 2019 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 November 2018 & the minutes of the Special meeting held on 7 January 2019 be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive any public questions received in accordance with Executive Procedure Rule 49 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

Questions will be asked in the order in which they were received.  There will be a time limit of 15 minutes for the asking and answering of public questions.

[The deadline for receipt of public questions is 3.00 pm, Friday 22 February 2019.  Questions should be sent to publicquestions@harrow.gov.uk

No person may submit more than one question].

RESOLVED:  To note that 2 public questions were received and responded to as set out below:

Public Question 1

Questioner: John Cobb

Asked of:      Councillor Keith Ferry, Chair of the Major Developments Panel

Question:  What is the Council’s position and what representations have been made regarding the development of greenbelt land both east and west of Oxhey Lane right up to the London Borough of Harrow boundary by Three Rivers Council as part of their 20 year proposals for new residential development areas?

Chair’s Response:  Three Rivers District Council undertook an informal consultation at the end of last year on sites that had been put forward by land owners and development for consideration for residential development.  As the foreword to the consultation document notes:  ‘None of the sites have been agreed or indeed discussed by Councillors.  No sites have been ruled in or ruled out’.

The two sites to the west of Oxhey Lane were previously considered but not allocated for development in the current Three Rivers Local Plan.  The sites to the east of Oxhey Lane have more recently been put forward in response to a ‘call for sites’ by Three Rivers’ as part of preparing their new Local Plan.

All of these sites are located in Green Belt, for which the National Planning Policy Framework indicates there is a strong presumption against inappropriate development.  Proposals for these sites to be allocated for residential purposes as part of the new Local Plan would need to be fully evidenced and justified by Three Rivers District Council and subject to independent examination.  At present Three Rivers District Council have not indicated whether the sites will be taken forward for potential residential development; this will become evident when Three Rivers’ publishes its draft Local Plan later this year.

Consequently Harrow does not have a position on these sites other than to note the presumption against development on Green Belt and that any changes in Green Belt boundaries require exceptional circumstances that are fully evidenced and justified.  We will review any proposals and supporting evidence and justification when available.

Public Question 2

Questioner:  David Summers

Asked of:      Councillor Keith Ferry, Chair of the Major Developments Panel

Question:      The recent second public exhibition of the so-called step free access proposals for the redevelopment of the Harrow-on-the-Hill station area confirmed that it is planned to have a lift at both the north and south entrances - the latter subject to funding.  There would be no escalators from street level to concourse level.  The current steps are steep and non-compliant.  There was no consistency in response to the question - will the existing north and south steps be replaced.  There also appears to be no direct pedestrian access to the new bus station without crossing a bus lane and no direct pedestrian access to St. Ann’s Centre without descending to street level and crossing College Road.  This is not a 21^st Century development.

Will the Council insist that the existing north and south concourse steps  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 47 (Part 4D of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that none were received.

To receive a presentation

The Panel received a presentation by Notting Hill Genesis, architects Conran and Partners, and planning consultants, Rolfe Judd, regarding the proposed re-development of the Tesco site on Station Road, Harrow.

Following the presentation, the presenters responded to the Panel’s questions and comments as follows:

·                     the need for family housing had been factored into the plans and would be provided, although the siting of these had yet to be decided.  The units would be built to London Plan standards, would be affordable and would include access to private amenity space;

·                     the developers and architects had carefully studied the previously refused Tesco scheme and had taken on board the reasons for refusal and Members comments regarding the scheme;

·                     some of the proposed blocks would be up to six or seven stories high with others up to fourteen stories in height.  This would allow the developers to maximise on the site possibilities and yet remain sympathetic to the locality in terms of design;

·                     there was a massing and site strategy as well as a robust contemporary architectural style which would reflect the emerging character of Harrow and along Station Road/within Harrow town centre;

·                     parking at the Tesco site would be reduced by one third.  The site was located in a high PTAL (Public Transport Accessibility Level) and residents’ parking would be allocated at between 10-23%.  The developers were in ongoing discussions with the planning and highways authorities regarding the matter;

·                     a transport consultant had been engaged and a transport assessment would be undertaken to ensure that the correct levels of parking were achieved.

Members urged the developers to take the following comments on board with regard to the proposed development:

·                     height and massing of the proposed development should not be excessive.  The construction of tall buildings at the site should not make residents in the area feel closed in as this may lead to residents objecting to the plans.  It was crucial to bear in mind the already constrained and busy nature of the site;

·                     the development should be sympathetic to the local vernacular and its design should complement what was already there;

·                     reducing parking by a third would cause difficulties for shoppers as the Tesco car park was often full at key times of the week and throughout the year;

·                     the developer for the Tesco site and the architects for the Safari Cinema development should collaborate to ensure that the two developments were sympathetic to each other.  Specifically, their frontages should be unified in character and their design and should complement each other.

RESOLVED:  That the presentation be noted.

Beverley Kuchar, Interim Chief Planning Officer

The Panel received a report of the Interim Chief Planning Officer which set out  a change to the process of allocating the ‘neighbourhood portion’ of Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) receipts within the Harrow and Wealdstone Opportunity Area, which had been agreed by Cabinet at its meeting on 7 December 2017.

Following questions and comments from Members, officers advised that:

·                     he did not have to hand a list of all ongoing projects that were being proposed to be funded by CIL monies.  He would circulate the information to Members after the meeting;

·                     the CIL process was administered by the Community Engagement Team. Using CIL funds across Ward boundaries was not precluded, and neighbouring Ward Councillors had the option of entering into informal agreements;

·                     he would circulate the guidance information and the form used to bid for these funds to Members after the meeting;

·                     the Borough CIL monies were included as part of the Council’s overall annual Capital Programme.  There was an assessment process, and a review of both existing and proposed Capital Programme projects that could potentially be funded by CIL.

A Member proposed that the Process be reviewed in a year’s time.  This was agreed by all the Members of the Panel.

The Chair stated that he would ensure that all 12 Ward Councillors would have an opportunity to provide their feedback regarding the Process before the next Cabinet meeting.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted

The Panel received an update on the major development projects in Harrow.

RESOLVED:  That the update be noted.

RESOLVED:  That Members would advise the Interim Chief Planning Officer of any suggestions for future topics and presentations.

RESOLVED:  To note that all future meetings of the Panel would have a 6.30 pm start time.