Agenda and minutes

To note that one public question had been received and responded to and the recording had been placed on the website.

The Panel received a presentation from the Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital in conjunction with the University College London (UCL) Institute of Orthopaedics and Musculoskeletal Science and bmj architects on the development of the Royal Orthopaedic Hospital site.

Members were advised of the creation of the Bio-Medical Engineering Hub and enabling works which would replace the eight buildings on the RNOH site currently occupied by UCL.

In response to questions from Members, it was stated that:

·                     independences, such as gaining vacant  possession, were required to align with a separate report in March 2016.  The aim was that the first phases, which included the commencement of the Princess Eugenie House scheme in 2017/18 and the private patient unit, would come together in 2018;

·                     reserve matters included a final application for the housing plans.  Vacant possession with outline planning permission for the housing on the western part of the site was required before being marketed;

·                     there was massive support for the clinical model and for RNOH remaining in Stanmore;

·                     detailed consideration had been given to traffic management in the outline planning permission by way of S106 arrangements including road works, pedestrian crossing, traffic lights and contributions towards a TfL bus service.  It was not proposed to amend these prior to the final application;

·                     with regard to car parking, the requirement for a bus route was supported and the construction of a multi-storey car park would provide more effective car parking than the current arrangements.  Temporary areas of car parking would be provided during the construction period to separate public and construction parking.  It was acknowledged that car parking would continue to be a problem;

·                     additional students would be enrolled as new specialist degree programmes were fundamental to the plans.  Measures to manage the increase in people, which was estimated to be in the region of several hundred, included shuttle bus services from the underground station and student accommodation on site;

·                     with regard to the cost implication of maintaining foliage in the folded metal flat mesh with climber plants on the Bio Medical Engineering Hub, there would be two to three visits per year with the use of cherry pickers.  The Developer undertook to take back to the Board the reservations expressed on the cost of the future maintenance on vegetation vis a vis use for the achievement of excellence at the hospital;

·                     no net additional floorspace was proposed.  Any application for additional floorspace would require the submission of special circumstances;

·                     a new voluntary strategy had been launched, apprenticeship schemes were in place, academics gave talks in schools and pupils were encouraged to participate in projects on site.

RESOLVED:  That the presentation be noted.

The Panel received a presentation from Harrow College, Palmer Lunn Achitects and Preston Bennett Hamptons regarding the development of Harrow College and the Steiner site.  Apologies were received that a representative from the Goodman Group was unable to attend.

In response to questions from Members, it was advised that:

·                     whilst the opportunity to include a physical link between the Helix site and the College had arisen, its inclusion was not crucial to the success of the project;

·                     very special circumstances would need to be agreed for consideration of any intensification or increase in scale.  The quantum increase in scale was in the floor area and volume.  In the region of 150 units of accommodation was proposed, using existing assets and the Austen building, restoring Steiners and building on the car park.  Bentley Day Centre would not have been suitable for conversion;

·                     the Developer noted the request for a good programme of consultation due a lack of consultation with regard to previous plans for the Helix site.  Communication with the public was paramount with the presentation to Members being the first session in a two stage consultation.  A reassurance was given that the site would be well managed with high buildings not visible from the front of the site.  The height of the Austen building would not be exceeded and the visual assessment would be discussed with the planning officers;

·                     work on a highways assessment had commenced. Most students used public transport or were dropped off and a reduction in parking on the college site was envisaged due to staff transferring to the Harrow on the Hill campus.  There were good bus links to the college from Harrow Weald and Harrow on the Hill.

RESOLVED:  That the presentation be noted.

The Panel received a presentation from Lockglide Property Development Consultancy, Origin Housing Association, and St Johns Church, Greenhill.  The Chair referred to the planning application which had been approved by the Planning Committee the previous week.

In response to questions, the Panel was advised that:

·                     following the resolution to approve Phase 1 by the Planning Committee, a further floor on the Sheepcote Road frontage was proposed for Phase 2;

·                     the request for a stepped height development had been addressed with the church not being overwhelmed due to a rise in the road and the lowest level being stepped down, in addition to the space between the church and the proposed development to provide a setting for the church;

·                     the diocese was firmly in support of the plans and had formed a Sub-Committee to fast track the proposals.  The extra space between the church and housing would be managed by private ownership.  The project would include the replacement of the church boiler;

·                     with regard to the suggestion concerning efficient lighting as the development would result in narrow walkways and tall buildings, a proposed caretaker service would operate dawn to dusk and extend into Victoria Hall;

·                     with regard to the visibility of Victoria Hall from the High Street, the quality and nature of the space would give it its own identity and the  raised hill would emphasise this.  Signage would be considered if appropriate;

RESOLVED:  That the presentation be noted.

The Divisional Director of Planning gave a presentation on the status of major development projects in Harrow which provided summary data on each scheme.

RESOLVED:  That the presentation be noted.

RESOLVED:   That any ideas from Members for topics for the next meeting of the Panel on Wednesday 4 November 2015 be submitted to the Divisional Director of Planning.