Agenda and minutes

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

RESOLVED:  To note that there were no Reserve Members in attendance at this meeting.

RESOLVED: That, in accordance with Committee Procedure Rule 4.1, the following Councillors, who are not members of the Committee, be allowed to speak on the agenda items indicated:

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

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

(i)                   Agenda Item 21 – First Floor, 49 High Street, Harrow on the Hill

A note on the agenda advised that Councillor Harriss, who was not present at the meeting, had stated on his ‘Notification by a Member of Financial and Other Interests’ Form that he had a licence to occupy 49 High Street, Harrow on the Hill for 28 days or longer.

Councillors Marilyn Ashton, Mrs Bath, Kara, Knowles and Joyce Nickolay declared an interest in the above agenda item arising from the fact that a Member of the Conservative Group had an interest in the property concerned. They  left the room and took no part in the discussion or decision-making on this item.

(ii)                 Planning Application 1/01 – Rayners Lane Estate, Rayners Lane (P/2209/03/CFU)

Councillor Bluston declared an interest in the above item arising from the fact that he was a proposed Member of the ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation). He remained in the room and took part in the discussion and decision-making on this item.

(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(b)  to receive the addendum sheets and to note any applications which are recommended for deferral or have been withdrawn from the agenda by the applicant.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: That  (1) 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:

and;

(2) all items be considered with the press and public present, with the exception of the following items which be considered with the press and public excluded for the reason indicated:

That it be agreed that, having been circulated, the Chair be given authority to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2003 as a correct record once they have been printed in the Council Bound Minute Volume.

RESOLVED: That, having been circulated, the minutes of the meeting held on 10 December 2003 be signed as a correct record.

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.

RESOLVED: To note the receipt of the following petitions which were considered with the relevant planning applications on the agenda:

·            Petition objecting to the proposed development at 154-156 Eastcote Road, Pinner (application 1/04 on the list of planning applications)

Councillor John Nickolay presented the above petition which had been signed by approximately 774 local residents.

·            Petition objecting to the proposed development at 99 Stanmore Hill, Stanmore (application 2/06 on the list of planning applications)

A local resident presented the above petition, signed by 36 local residents, in the following terms:

“We the undersigned object to the redevelopment of 99 Stanmore Hill into an office block with 6 offices generating 14 cars. This is an overdevelopment and has no parking. Stanmore Hill cannot sustain a development of this size. We are a conservation area with a rural parade of small, unobtrusive sole owner businesses which we would like to retain”.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B) of the Constitution.

The Committee considered whether to hear a deputation request which had been received but which did not comply with all of the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution) in that it was not supported by the signatures of 10 local residents/representatives of local businesses or organisations. Following discussion it was:

RESOLVED: That, under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 26.1, Rule 16.2 be suspended for the duration of the meeting and the following request be heard:

Deputation re 46a Harrow View, Harrow – Breach of Planning Control: From Mrs Patel, a neighbouring resident. 

(See also Minute 481).

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 (1) in accordance with the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 17 (Part 4B of the Constitution) and the list of requests received, notified on the Addendum, representations be received in respect of items 2/04, 2/06, 2/08, 2/09, 2/10 and 2/23 on the list of planning applications; and

(2)  under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 26.1, Rule 17.6 be suspended for the duration of the meeting and three minutes in total be allowed for objectors to speak, on each planning application, including on those items for which more than one request to speak had been received.

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.

Supplemental Report of the Chief Planning Officer.

(See planning application 2/24 on the schedule of decisions re planning applications received attached to these minutes).

Arising out of the consideration of planning applications received, the following issues were raised and discussed:

(i)                   Planning Application 2/04 – 34 & 36 Shooters Avenue, Harrow

Having agreed to defer consideration of this application, the Chair enquired as to whether the two objectors who had submitted requests to speak in relation to this item wished to defer speaking to a subsequent meeting when the matter returned to the Committee for determination. The speakers indicated that they would. Following a request from a Member, the Chief Planning Officer agreed that officers would ensure that the two objectors were advised of the date of the meeting to which the application would return.

(ii)                 Planning Application 2/08 -  81 Elmsleigh Avenue, Kenton

Following a request from a Member, it was agreed that any subsequent applications received in relation to this site would be referred to the Committee for determination rather than being dealt with under officer delegated authority.

(iii)                Planning Application 3/02 - 51 Abercorn Crescent, South Harrow

Following discussion, it was agreed that the Member site visit to the above property would take place on Saturday 7^th February 2004 and Members would meet at the property at 10.00 am.

(iv)                Planning Application 4/01 - Edgware Community Hospital, Burnt Oak Broadway, Edgware

During discussion on this application, which was to be determined by the London Borough of Barnet but on which Harrow, as a neighbouring authority, was being consulted, the Committee noted that it was understood that, as a consequence of the works planned, a nearby bus stop was to be relocated to a point opposite a parade of shops. A number of Members expressed concern that this could interfere with the loading/unloading arrangements for the shops and requested that the Committee’s concerns regarding the implications of the relocation of the bus stop be conveyed to Barnet and that Barnet also be advised that the Committee felt strongly that the matter should be the subject of further consultation with the bus companies and transport users. It was also agreed that the matter would be referred to the Harrow’s Traffic and Road Safety Advisory Panel for consideration. 

RESOLVED:  That the action outlined above be agreed.

Joint Report of the Borough Solicitor and Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which advised of a breach of planning control at the above address.

The report outlined the nature of the breach, which was the material change in use of a first and second floor maisonette to bed-sits, and advised that it was now considered expedient to  issue an enforcement notice to rectify the breach for the reasons stated in the officer report.

RESOLVED: That, subject to his being satisfied to the evidence, the Borough Solicitor be authorised to:

(1) Issue an Enforcement Notice pursuant to Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:

(i)                   the permanent cessation of use of the property as bed-sits;

(ii)                 the permanent removal of all locks from internal doors, with the exception of the bathroom.

(i) and (ii) to be complied with within a period of 6 months from the date on which the Notice takes effect;

(2) Issue Notices under section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) as necessary  in relation to the above alleged breach of planning control; and

(3) Institute legal proceedings in the event of failure to;

(i)                   supply the information required by the Borough Solicitor to the Council through the issue of Notice(s) under Section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

and/or

(ii)                 comply with the Enforcement Notice

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

[Note: The Committee also received a deputation request in relation to this item but the deputee gave no indication that they were present when called to speak].

Joint Report of the Borough Solicitor and Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which advised of a breach of planning control at the above address.

The report outlined the nature of the breach, which was the erection of a single storey rear conservatory extension without planning permission, and advised that it was now considered expedient to issue an enforcement notice to rectify the breach for the reasons stated in the officer report.

RESOLVED: That, subject to his being satisfied as to the evidence, the Borough Solicitor be authorised to:

(1) Issue an Enforcement Notice pursuant to Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:

(i)                  the demolition of the Conservatory;

(ii)                 the permanent removal of its constituent elements from the land.

(i) and (ii) to be complied with within a period of 3 months from the date on which the Notice takes effect;

(2) Issue Notices under section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) as necessary  in relation to the above alleged breach of planning control; and

(3) Institute legal proceedings in the event of failure to;

(i)                   supply the information required by the Borough Solicitor to the Council through the issue of Notice(s) under Section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

and/or

(ii)                 comply with the Enforcement Notice

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

Joint Report of the Borough Solicitor and Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which advised of a breach of planning control at the above address.

The report outlined the nature of the breach, which was the erection of a detached building, without planning permission, in the rear garden of the property, and advised that it was now considered expedient to issue an enforcement notice to rectify the breach for the reasons stated in the officer report.

RESOLVED: That, subject to his being satisfied as to the evidence, the Borough Solicitor be authorised to:

(1) Issue an Enforcement Notice pursuant to Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:

(i)                  the demolition of the detached building;

(ii)                 the permanent removal of its constituent elements from the land.

(i) and (ii) to be complied with within a period of 3 months from the date on which the Notice takes effect;

(2) Issue Notices under section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) as necessary  in relation to the above alleged breach of planning control; and

(3) Institute legal proceedings in the event of failure to;

(i)                   supply the information required by the Borough Solicitor to the Council through the issue of Notice(s) under Section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

and/or

(ii)                 comply with the Enforcement Notice

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

Joint Report of the Borough Solicitor and Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee received a report of the Chief Planning Officer which advised of a breach of planning control at the above address.

It advised that a report had been submitted to the Committee at its 11 December 2002 meeting relating to the unauthorised construction of a shop front at the above property and  the Committee had resolved that an Enforcement Notice be issued requiring the removal of the shop front and its replacement with a shop front as specified in the notice. However, it was explained that the Local Planning Authority may only do this where it has accurate records of the shop front removed and on this occasion such records did not exist. Therefore, it was reported, it would be necessary to allow adequate time for the owners of the property to apply for planning permission for a replacement shop front. As such, a compliance period of 6 months was recommended. 

RESOLVED: That, subject to his being satisfied as to the evidence, the Borough Solicitor be authorised to:

(1) Issue an Enforcement Notice pursuant to Section 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requiring:

(i)                  the demolition of the shop front;

(ii)                 the permanent removal of its constituent elements from the land.

(i) and (ii) to be complied with within a period of 6 months from the date on which the Notice takes effect;

(2) Issue Notices under section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) as necessary in relation to the above alleged breach of planning control; and

(3) Institute legal proceedings in the event of failure to;

(i)                   supply the information required by the Borough Solicitor to the Council through the issue of Notice(s) under Section 330 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990

and/or

(ii)                 comply with the Enforcement Notice

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

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.

A Member queried whether enforcement action was to be taken in respect of 4 Elm Park. It was agreed that officers would report back on this matter.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted and officers report back on the issue of enforcement action in respect of 4 Elm Park.

(if any).

·            Outside Homebase, 364 High Road, Harrow Weald, P/2902/03/CDT

Proposals: Provisions of 12m high ultra-slim monopole telecommunications mast; colour to be agreed, sited towards back edge of footway; 3 ancillary cabinets, the largest being 1260mm wide x 600mm deep x 1490mm high, within 4m of the proposed mast; colour of mast and cabinets to be agreed.

RESOLVED: That (1) Prior approval of siting and appearance be required; and

(2) details of siting and appearance be refused for the following reason, subject to standard informatives indicated:

The proposed development, by reason of its proximity to existing similar telecommunications equipment and street furniture, would give rise to proliferation of such apparatus to the detriment of the visual amenities and appearance of the area.

Standard Informatives

Measurements from Submitted Plans

Relevant UDP Policies & Proposals(E6, E46, E52) (SD1, D4, D26)

(if any).

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

Joint Report of the Borough Solicitor and the Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer under Part II of the agenda regarding a Breach of Planning Control at the above address.

Following discussion it was

RESOLVED: That no further action be taken with regard to this matter.

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

Joint Report of the Borough Solictor and Chief Planning Officer.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer under Part II of the agenda regarding a Breach of Planning Control at the above address.

Following discussion it was

RESOLVED: That no further action be taken with regard to this matter.

[REASON: As outlined in the officer report].

[Note: Councillor Thornton wished to be recorded as having voted against the decision reached and outlined above].

(See also Minute 470 –Declaration of Interests).

Councillor Marilyn Ashton has requested that the above issue be placed on the agenda under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 8(ii)  (Part 4B of the Constitution) on the grounds for urgency/special circumstances outlined below.

A report of the Chief Planning Officer on this matter has subsequently been prepared and is enclosed.

The Committee is requested to consider whether, in accordance with the Local Government (Access to information) Act 1985 and Committee Procedure Rule 8(ii), the item may be admitted to the agenda by reason of the Special Circumstances/grounds for urgency specified.

The Committee considered a report of the Chief Planning Officer under Part II of the agenda regarding the appeal against the issue of a Planning Enforcement Notice in relation to the above property.

Following discussion it was

RESOLVED: That (1) officers be requested to seek the opinion of Counsel on the above matter;

(2) the advice of Counsel be circulated to all Members of the Committee; and

(3) the matter then be referred to Nominated Members for decision under the urgency procedure.

[REASON: To obtain further advice prior to reaching a decision on this issue].

[Note: Councillors Thornton and Whitehead wished to be recorded as having voted against the decision reached and outlined above].

(See also Minute 469 – Right of Members to Speak).

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

24 Uxbridge Road, Stanmore – Nomination of a Member to assist officers with an appeal

It was advised that an appeal had been lodged against the decision to refuse permission for a recent planning application in respect of the above site and a hearing date was to be arranged. It was explained that a Nominated Member was required to assist officers with the appeal as the Chief planning officer had recommended that the application be granted. It was agreed that Councillor Marilyn Ashton would be nominated.

RESOLVED: That the action outlined above be agreed.

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 10.30 pm;

(2) 10.30 pm to continue until 10.45 pm;

(3) 10.45 pm to continue until 11.00 pm;

(4) 11.00 pm to continue until 11.15 pm;

(5) 11.15 pm to continue until 11.25 pm;

(6) 11.25 pm to continue until 11.30 pm; and

(7) 11.30 pm to continue until 11.35 pm.