Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

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

RESOLVED: That, in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 4.1, Councillors John Cowan, Mrs Kinnear, Navin Shah and Stephenson who are not Members of the Committee, be allowed to speak on Items 2/26, 2/09, 2/09 and 2/07 and 2/23 respectively.

To receive declarations of personal and prejudicial interests (if any) from Members of the Committee arising from the business to be transacted at this meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note the following declarations of interests arising from the business to be transacted at this meeting:

(i)   Item 2/02 – Land to Front and Adjacent to 55, 56 and 57 Hartington Close, Harrow, Substation R/O 55 (P/1006/03/CFU/RJS)

Councillors Bluston and Knowles declared an interest in the above application arising from the fact that they were the Council’s representatives on Arms Length Management Organisation’s (ALMO) Shadow Board.  They were advised by the Borough Solicitor’s representative at the meeting that under paragraph 12.2(c) of Part 5 (Codes and Protocols) of the Council’s Constitution, that they did not have a prejudicial interest in the above matter as it related to a body to which they had been appointed by the Council as its representatives.  Accordingly they remained and took part in the voting and discussion on this item.

(ii)   Item 2/08 – Timbers, 41 Brookshill, Harrow Weald (P/13336222/03/CVA/GM)

      Councillor Marilyn Ashton declared a personal interest in the above application arising from the fact that she knew a resident who lived near the above property.  She stressed that she had not discussed the application with this person.  Accordingly she remained and took part in the voting and discussion on this item.

(iii)  Item 2/09 – 42 & 44 High Street, Harrow on the Hill (P/1017/03/CFU/SSI)

      Councillors Arnold, Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Bath, Knowles and Mrs Joyce Nickolay declared a prejudicial interest in the above item arising from the fact that a Member of the Conservative Group owned the site, and accordingly left the room and took no part in the discussion or voting on this item.

Councillor Mrs Kinnear, a local Ward Councillor for the area, also declared an interest. She added that she had taken advice from the Borough Solicitor (Monitoring Officer) and the Leader of the Conservative Group but, that, as a backbenching Ward Councillor for Harrow?on?the?Hill in which this application was being made, she would be representing her constituents who would not otherwise understand why their Ward Councillor(s) could not represent them.

(a)  To consider whether any item included on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded because it contains confidential information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985;

(b)  to receive the addendum sheets and to note any applications which are recommended for deferral or have been withdrawn from the agenda by the applicant.

RESOLVED: (1)  That in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985, the following items/information be admitted to the agenda by reason of the special circumstances and grounds for urgency stated:

(2)  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

(3)  Chandos Parade, Buckingham Road, Edgware (Item 1/02) (P/1610/03/CFU/TW)

      Members noted that the above application had been withdrawn by the applicant as stated in the addendum report.

(4)  Timbers, 41 Brookshill, Harrow Weald (Item 2/08)  (P/1362/03/CVA/GM)

Members were informed that a letter had been received from the Government Office for London (GOL) directing the Council not to grant consent until the Secretary of State had had time to consider a request from a third party to call-in the proposal.  Accordingly, the recommendation from the Chief Planning Officer had been revised from ‘grant’ to ‘defer’, as stated in the addendum report, in order to await consultation by GOL.

      Following a short discussion, the Committee agreed to consider the planning application  that evening.  Following legal advice, the Chair pointed out that the Committee would not be able to grant planning permission that evening because of the direction received from GOL.  She added that, however, the Committee could either refuse the planning application that evening, or indicate that it would be ‘minded to grant’ planning permission.

[Note:  Members considered and determined the planning application that evening (Minute No. 383 (Item 2/08 in the schedule) refers)].      

(5)  RC Church of St. William of York, Du Cros Drive, Stanmore (Item 2/22)  (P/841/03/CFU/TEM)

      The Committee noted that officers were recommending that consideration of the above applications be deferred in order to allow expiry of re-notification, as stated in the addendum report.

(6)  To note that whilst the order of the agenda was varied, business is recorded in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 376.

To agree the minutes of the meetings held on 9 and 30 July 2003, those minutes having been circulated, as correct records of those meetings.

RESOLVED: (1) That, having been circulated, the minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2003 be signed as a correct record of that meeting;

(2) That, having been circulated, the minutes of the meeting held on 30 July 2003, be signed as a correct record of that meeting subject to the following amendments:

30/32 Uxbridge Road, Stanmore (Item 1/01) (P/6/03/CFU) Minute to include (a) that Councillors Marilyn Ashton and Mrs Bath wished to be recorded as having voted against the decision reached;

(b)  that Councillors Marilyn Ashton and Mrs Bath complained that whilst outline permission had been granted on appeal, although it had been refused unanimously by the Development Control Committee, the detailed application should have been submitted to the Committee rather than being granted by the Chief Planning Officer under his delegated powers.

72 Silverston Way, Stanmore (Item 2/10)   (P/110/03/CFU) – Minute to include that Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Bath and Knowles (who had moved a refusal) wished to be recorded as having voted against the decision reached.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents/organisations under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 18 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED: To note that there were no public questions to be received at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 18 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors.

Councillor Bluston presented a petition containing 31 signatures drawing attention to the evidence in respect of three properties  - 2 Kenton Road, 9 Kenton Road and 3 Kenton Avenue – which it was being alleged were or had been in multiple occupation.  He added that the petition also related to item 12 on the agenda (Minute. No. 385 refers) which would be discussed later.

RESOLVED: That the petition be received and noted.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4B) of the Constitution.

RESOLVED: To note that there were no deputations to be received at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

To receive references from Council and any other Committees or Panels (if any).

RESOLVED: To note that there were no references from Council or other Committees or Panels to be received at this meeting.

To confirm whether representations are to be received, under Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution), from objectors and applicants regarding planning applications on the agenda.

RESOLVED: That, in accordance with the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution), representations from members of the public be received in respect of items 2/08, 2/09, 2/22 and 2/26 on the list of planning applications.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer (circulated separately).

RESOLVED: That authority be given to the Chief Planning Officer to issue the decision notices in respect of the applications considered, as set out in the schedule attached to these minutes.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer regarding a request to vary a condition on the hours of opening agreed by the Committee at its meeting on 30 July in respect of the above premises.

RESOLVED:  That Condition 2 be amended to read as follows:

The use hereby permitted shall not be open to customers outside the following times:

(a) 07.30 hours to 23.00 hours Monday to Saturday inclusive

(b) 10.00 hours to 22.30 hours on Sundays.

[Note: (1)  During the course of discussion on the above item, it was moved and seconded that the premises should open during the hours of 09.00 to 23.00 hours Monday to Saturday inclusive and not 07.30 hours to 23.00 hours as recommended by the Chief Planning Officer.  Upon being put to a vote, this was not carried;

(2) Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Bath and Knowles wished to be recorded as having voted against the above decision].

(1) Mulltiple Occupancy – Certificate Review

      Members were informed that this matter had been placed on the agenda by Councillor Bluston and not Councillor Choudhury as stated on the agenda.

      Councillor Bluston stated that numerous applications for certificate for multiple occupancy were considered by this Committee and that he had received representations, including a petition (Minute No. 379 refers), from local residents questioning why adjoining neighbours were not notified of such applications.

      RESOLVED:  That the Chief Planning Officer be requested to report back on consultation issues in relation to Certificate applications for existing multiple occupation uses.

(2)  Bentley House Hotel (15-21), 15A Headstone Drive, Harrow

      Members noted that Councillor Marilyn Ashton had placed this matter on the agenda.

      Councillor Marilyn Ashton reported that, to date, the owners had not submitted a planning application for continued use of the premises as a hostel and that the permission, which had been granted for one year only, was due to expire on 12 September 2003.  She added that the Chief Planning Officer had informed her that the owners had indicated their intentions to submit an application.

      In response, the Planning Officer stated that the Council’s Enforcement Officer had been informed and that officers would investigate the status of use.

      Noted.

Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

FOR INFORMATION

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which listed those appeals being dealt with and those awaiting decision.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

FOR INFORMATION

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which listed those enforcement notices awaiting compliance.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

(if any).

(1)     Common Road (Application No. P/1661/03/CDT)

RESOLVED: (a) That the applicant be informed that prior approval of details of siting and appearance is required;

(b)  that prior approval be granted subject to the condition, reason and informatives set out in the addendum report.

(2)     498/500 Honeypot Lane, Stanmore  (Application No. P/1874/03/CDT)

         RESOLVED: That the applicant be informed that prior approval of details of siting and appearance is not required and that this approval is subject to the informatives set out in the addendum report.

         [Note: Councillor Thornton wished to be recorded as having abstained from voting on this application.]

(3)     180 Eastcote Lane (Application No. P/1758/03/CDT)

         (a) RESOLVED: That the applicant be informed that prior approval of details of siting and appearance is required;

         (b)  that prior approval be refused for the reason and informative set out in the addendum report.

(if any).

RESOLVED: To note that there were no demolition applications which required consideration.

(which the Chair has decided is urgent and cannot otherwise be dealt with).

(1)  St. Dominic’s 6^th Form College  (Application No. WEST/964/02/FUL)

      RESOLVED:  That had an appeal against non-determination of the above planning application not been lodged, the application for a detached 2/3 storey building to provide teaching accommodation and drama studio, as set out in plan numbers 1270/30A/31A/32A/37A/38, would have been refused for the reasons and informative set out in the addendum report;

(2)  Members’ Site Visit to Valleyfield, Mount Park Road, Harrow

      Following discussion, it was agreed that the Members’ site visit to the above property would take place on 23 September 2003 and that Members would meet at the site at 6.15 pm.

In accordance with the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 14 (Part 4B of the Constitution) it was

RESOLVED: At (1)  10.00 pm to continue until 11.00 pm;

                        (2)  11.00 pm to continue until 11.20 pm;

                        (3)  11.20 pm to continue until 11.30 pm;

                        (4)  11.30 pm to continue until 11.50 pm;

and                   (5)  11.50 pm (by consensus) to continue until the completion of the remaining business on the agenda that evening.