Planning

Minutes HILLINGDON PLANNING COMMITTEE 17 July 2025 Meeting held at Committee Room 5 - Civic Centre Committee Members Present: Councillors Henry Higgins (Chair) Adam Bennett (Vice-Chair) Keith Burrows Roy Chamdal Elizabeth Garelick Raju Sansarpuri Jagjit Singh LBH Officers Present: Chris Brady, Planning Team Leader Eoin Concannon, Planning Team Leader Natalie Fairclough, Legal Advisor Ed Laughton, Area Planning Service Manager Liz Penny, Democratic Services Officer Dr Alan Tilly, Transport & Aviation Team Manager 64. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (Agenda Item 1) There were no apologies for absence. 65. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST IN MATTERS COMING BEFORE THIS MEETING (Agenda Item 2) Councillor Henry Higgins declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 8 as he had not been present when this item had previously been discussed and deferred for a site visit on 9 April 2025. I t was agreed that he would leave the room while this item was being discussed and would not vote on this item. 66. TO RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING (Agenda Item 3) RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting dated 11 June 2025 be agreed as an accurate record. 67. MATTERS THAT HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED IN ADVANCE OR URGENT (Agenda Item 4) None. 68. TO CONFIRM THAT THE ITEMS OF BUSINESS MARKED PART I WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PUBLIC AND THE ITEMS MARKED PART II WILL BE CONSIDERED IN PRIVATE (Agenda Item 5) It was confirmed that all items of business were marked Part I and would be considered in public. 69. 14 COTEFORD CLOSE, EASTCOTE - 78399/APP/2024/564 (Agenda Item 6) Erection o f a part single, part two storey rear extension and single storey side extension. Conversion of extended house into 1 x 1 -bedroom flat and 1 x 3 - bedroom flat with associated parking, landscaping and private amenity space. (revised plans 04.07.24) Officers presented the application noting that previous planning permission had been granted in February 2024 for identical extensions. It was confirmed that the key difference in the current application involved the conversion of the property into two flats inclu ding subdivision of the rear garden, landscaping and associated parking. It was noted that the works already undertaken at the application site were lawful as they related to the previously granted permission. Members heard that the inclusion of Condition 11 would ensure the site could not be converted into an HMO at a later date. The application was considered acceptable and was recommended for approval subject to conditions as set out in the officer’s report. The lead petitioner was not in attendance but the agent for the application addressed the Committee Members and thanked officers for their excellent and thorough report. It was noted that the applicant’s intention was for the development to remain as flats – he did not intend to convert it into an HMO in the future. In response to Members’ questions, it was confirmed that the rear garden was for the use of both flats. Occupants of the first floor flat could access the garden via the side access. Members enquired whether the proposed informative in relation to the development being sited in a critical drainage area could be replaced by an enforceable condition. In response, officers affirmed that an informative was deemed to be appropriate given the substantial rear garden, the scale of the development and the low risk of flooding. Members raised no further objections or concerns. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed. RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to conditions as se t out in the report. 70. 18 & 20 WILMAR CLOSE, HAYES - 67410/APP/2024/2641 (Agenda Item 7) Change of use of 2no. outbuildings to granny annexes The Chair, Councillor Henry Higgins, left the room during the discussion and voting on this item as he had not been present at the meeting in April 2025 at which this item had previously been discussed. Councillor Adam Bennett assumed the role of Chair in his absence. Officers introduced the application noting that the matter had previously be en considered at Committee on 9 April 2025 but had been deferred for a site visit. It was reported that the site visit had taken place on 2 June 2025 at which time two noticeable issues had been observed. Members heard that, during the site visit, it had b een noted that the internal layout and windows to the rear of the outbuildings were not consistent with the plans. It was noted that the application had previously been recommended for approval subject to the omission of kitchen facilities in both outbui ldings. However, it was confirmed that the current plans, which included a kitchen and all other amenities consistent with use as independent living accommodation, were in contravention of the Council’s outbuilding policy. Moreover, Members were informed t hat a condition of the proposed development was that it would be for the use of family members only. The current tenants had been due to vacate by 25 June but had still been in residence in early July. For these reasons, the application was now recommended for refusal. It was noted that a number of similar decisions had been overturned by the Inspectorate on appeal; however, the current application differed in that it featured two annexes to two properties with no clear boundary between them. Members thanked officers for their thorough report and welcomed the update subsequent to the site visit. It was noted that there had been a long debate about the application when it had been considered by the Committee in April. It was hoped that, should be matter go to appeal, Inspectors would see it for what it was and dismiss it accordingly. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed. RESOLVED: That the application be refused. 71. THE ISLAND SITE, ESKDALE ROAD, UXBRIDGE - 957/APP/2024/2765 (Agenda Item 8) Redevelopment of site to provide new commercial buildings for use within Classes E(g)(iii)/B2/B8 together with associated infrastructure on site, to include landscaping, access, servicing, and parking. Officers presented the application noting that the development site lay within Uxbridge Industrial Estate on Potentially Contaminated Land and within an Air Quality Management Area. The proposal was deemed to be acceptable and would be consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework, The London Plan and the Hillingdon Local Plan. It was therefore recommended for approval. Members observed that the proposal constituted a sensible development which would be of benefit to the local area . Noting that the proposed development would be sited in a very busy industrial site, Members asked officers to ensure that the Construction Management Plan was closely followed for the benefit of local residents. Members raised no further concerns or qu eries. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed. RESOLVED: That the application be approved subject to a section 106 legal agreement and conditions as set out in the report. 72. PLAYING FIELD ADJACENT TO YEADING JUNIOR SCHOOL, CARLYON ROAD - 17997/APP/2025/1032 (Agenda Item 9) Placement of sports/recreation related containers/structures on playing field grounds, and all associated works. Officers presented the application noting th at the proposed structures would have no adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area, neighbouring amenities or the local highways network; it was therefore recommended for approval. Members enquired whether the colour of the containers co uld be conditioned to blend better with the landscape. It was agreed that the wording for this condition would be delegated to officers in consultation with the Chair. Members observed that the remote location of the structures could lend itself to antisocial behaviour and enquired whether any security measures were proposed to mitigate this. Officers confirmed that the proposed siting would facilitate access for the students and ensure they did not need to carry equipment too far from the main building. The containers would be locked and there would be a security perimeter fence and dense hedging around the site. It was requested by the Chair that the condition requiring details of colour be upgraded to a condition that covered both colour and maintenance. Members welcomed the proposal which would enhance facilities for the pupils at the school. No further concerns were raised. The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded and, when put to a vote, unanimously agreed. RESOLVED: 1. That the applicatio n be approved subject to conditions as set out in the report; and 2. That the wording of an additional condition in relation to the colour of the containers be delegated to officers in consultation with the Chair. The meeting, which commenced at 7.00 pm, closed at 7.41 pm. These are the minutes of the above meeting. For more information on any of the resolutions please contact Liz Penny on democratic@hillingdon.gov.uk. Circulation of these minutes is to Councillors, Officers, the Press and Members of the Public.

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Christos Chrysanthou 78464/APP/2024/3196 Date Application Valid: 05.12.24 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 14.03.25 Application Type: Full Ward: Hillingdon West Applicant: c/o Total Planning Site Address: Dyson Drive, Uxbridge, UB10 0GJ Proposal: The creation of 9no. off-street parking spaces and planting of 3no. new trees. Summary of Recommendation: REFUSE planning permission Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 3 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Petition received) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: REFUSE planning permission for the reasons specified in Appendix 1. 0 Deferred at Planning Committee on 12th March 2025 0.1 This application was deferred at Planning Committee on 12th March 2025 for members to conduct a site visit. During this time the applicant had also sought an extension of time to allow for parking controls to be implemented on site, and to enable them to compile a Transport S afety Note containing details of the parking controls to be implemented on site, plus accompanying evidence. 0.2 Before discussing the primary reason for refusal, it should be noted that the second reason for refusal which was proposed to members at Planning Committee related to the lack of a Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment (BNG). The applicant has now submitted a BNG Statutory Metric Calculation which indicates the pre -development biodiversity value of onsite habitats to be 1.8197 Habitat units and the post -development biodiversity value of onsite habitats to be 1.8286 Habitat un its. The BNG achieved onsite equates to a gain of 0.49%. To meet the 10% BNG target, the purchase of 0.1731 off -site habitat units will be required. The BNG requirement could be secured through a suitable condition and therefore officers have removed the second recommended reason for refusing the application. 0.3 Members are advised that since the application was last presented to Planning C ommittee a petition has been received in support of the application with 50 signatures. Members Site Visit 0.4 A member site visit was carried out at 9am to 10am on 18th March 2025. The site was viewed from the public footpath, and it was evident at the time of the visit that there were formal parking spaces available. It was also evident that there were vehicles parked parallel to the soft landscaped areas where there are no parking spaces. It should be noted that at the time of the site visit there were vehicles entering and egressing formal spaces without obstruction and a refuse lorry was witnessed travelling along Dyson Drive without obstruction, despite there being vehicles parked informally. 0.5 Section 7 of this committee report details the main concerns with this development in more detail. However, in summary the existing parking Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press provision is 70 spaces and serves 56 properties. This equates to a parking ratio of 1.25. The current application is required to be assessed against the most up to date policy which in this case would be the London Plan parking standards. In line with these standards a maximum of 46.5 spaces should be provided to serve the residential units. Therefore, when compared with these 2021 standards the existing parking provision would be considered an over provision, and thus the additional parking proposed would increase the parking ratio even further above the maximum standards . This would be a clear and significant policy departure. 0.6 During the presentation to Committee on 12 th March 2025 Members heard from the lead petitioner. It was stated that there is a need to extend the parking area to increase parking levels by 9 spaces due to there being inadequate levels of parking to serve the existing properties in Dyson Drive. It was conveyed that the level of parking is inadequate because the properties in Dyson Drive have 1 space each yet families in the street require more than 1 space. There was no justification for this policy departure. Additionally, the spaces were proposed due to injudicious parking by non-Dyson Drive residents in the existing spaces. There was a strong concern that this injudicious parking impacted servicing, including refuse collection and emergency services. 0.7 As stated above the applicant requeste d an extension of time to implement parking restrictions and submit the findings within a submitted Transport Safety Note. The applicant has now submitted this document which states there to be two main issues with th e parking situation on Dyson Drive which relate to anti-social behaviour and highway safety. Whilst regrettable, the anti- social behaviour issues are not material to the assessment of this planning application. Notwithstanding this point, there is a reference made to the fact that the spaces are not allocated and this results in conflicts. This would be a matter for the freeholder of the land to consider an appropriate remedy without resorting to non-policy compliant additional parking. 0.8 The report goes on to assess the impact of the procurement of a Privately Controlled Parking Management Scheme (February – August). 0.9 Page 6 of the report states that the parking restrictions that were implemented for control included permit only parking operating 24 hours per day and visitor parking whereby 4 bays were allocated to visitors and beyond these 4 visitors would need to find parking outside of Dyson Drive. 0.10 Page 7 refers to the control measures implemented which included signage, a self-ticketing system whereby residents who found an unauthorised vehicle in their bay would provide evidence and submission to a parking portal. Penalty notices were issued to the vehicle owners. Finally, escalation measures were implemented whereb y vehicles causing an obstruction were subject to towing or immobilisation after 24 hours’ notice. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 0.10 The document goes on to state that there were limited outcomes following the implementation of the controlled parking measures. The reasons provided for this include limited statutory powers, inconsi stencies in enforcement as it is dependent on residents reporting parking issues, drivers appealing the tickets received and there being a cost associated to enforcing the towing of vehicle and recovery rates. The argument made therefore is that private parking controls do not work. Evidence to counter this position would be the very significant number of successful private parking control companies that currently operate across the rest of the UK. There is no supporting evidence that demonstrates why private parking controls cannot operate in this location. 0.11 During the committee presentation Officers emphasised the proposal for new parking would not be an adequate resolution to the parking issues conveyed by the applicant and the wider resident’s group in Dyson Drive. In fact, it could have the opposite effect and create more harm. It was also stated that parking controls could be installed privately between residents and the freeholder of the land given that the road is not adopted. 0.12 In concluding the outcomes, the Transpo rt Safety Note states there to have been an incident on 2nd August 2025 whereby an emergency vehicle was unable to gain access due to the presence of a clamped white van causing an obstruction. As a result of this the parking control scheme was brought to an end. There is a reference on this page where it infers that new parking bays were created “On the 2nd August 2025, a large white van was parked along Dyson Drive on one of the new at the time parking areas (part of the Scheme).” This is not only contrary to the purpose of deploying the parking controls but also compounds Officers initial concerns regarding the impact creating additional spaces would have. Whilst the document contains no details on where these spaces were created, it seems apparent that the location of the space has played some part in the obstruction of the emergency service vehicle. The initial highway safety concerns resulting from vehicles parking in these locations was proposed to be remedied by the introduction of parking controls. To create vehicle parking in this location runs contrary to the justification for the proposals and therefore an issue caused by parking in this location does not support the proposals. Unfortunately, it cannot be considered fully in the assessment as there is no supporting plan indicating where the spaces were located within the submitted document. This demonstrates the inadequacy of the level of information presented to Officers to justify the development. 0.13 Despite the apparent confusion over the purpose of the parking controls and the lack of supporting details , the document is a laudable effort to provide further evidence of the parking issues within Dyson Drive . However, it does not address the key material considerations. Firstly, it fails to address the root cause of the proposed reason for refusal relating to the over provision of car parking, which is a direct conflict with the policy requirement to reduce vehicle use through measures such as reduced ca r parking levels, rather than increase car parking provision. It is important to note that it was made clear to Members during the presentation on 12 th March 2025 that this proposal Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press presents a significant policy departure which would set a harmful precedent for future development s and one which the applicant would need to demonstrate significant justification for approving. 0.14 The document submitted sets out a fram ework of actions taken and states there to have been little impact to resolve the issues, however it lacks any supporting evidence . At a very basic level the document should include evidence of the reporting of parking issues and how many tickets were served or other actions taken. This would at least inform officers and Members of the committee how many incidents have occurred across the 6-month control period. There is no evidence to demonstrate the number of incidents that have occurred or the action which has been taken to resolve the issues. As such it has not been demonstrated that the parking issues are significant enough to outweigh the policy departure. 0.15 The second point which has not been responded to is how the proposed additional spaces would resolve the issues of injudicious parking if this were the cause of the problem. Officers stated during the previous committee presentation that extending the parking area and creating more spaces doesn’t prevent vehicle users from outside of Dyson Drive parking in those spaces and there is a more significant concern that creating more spaces would only lead to more spaces becoming available for others outside of Dyson Drive to use, thus this proposal would not resolve the problem. 0.16 Turning to the incident which is report ed within the document regarding the obstruction of an emergency services vehicle in early August due to a vehicle being parked outside of the formal bays. Whilst there is written details of the incident, these are limited, and it would be expected that there would be additional evidence in the form of photos and a plan indicating where the additional spaces were created, that would demonstrate where the vehicle was parked and the type of emergency vehicle which was obstructed. Notwithstanding this point , as stated in para 0.2, Officers undertook a Member’s site visit where all of those present were able to witness the refuse collection vehicle navigate its way along Dyson Drive without obstruction despite there being vehicles parked outside the formal spaces. The incident referenced in the report is regrettable, however a refuse vehicle which is a significant sized vehicle was able to service the road despite the informal parking, this point combined with the fact the additional spaces would not address the issues of vehicle users outside of Dyson Dri ve using the formal spaces means that not only is there insuffic ient justification for the additional spaces, it would also have no impact upon the highway safety concerns which are referenced in the applicants submission. 0.17 To summarise the applicant has been afforded the opportunity to submit additional evidence to justify their proposal in addition to a member’s site visit being undertaken so members could see the parking situation for themselves. The document lacks the detail required to address the reason for refusal and nor does it include any evidence to demonstrate that a significant parking issue exists. There is no additional information presented to justify the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press significant policy departure, as su ch Officers can only reach the same recommendation as previously, which is to recommend to Members that the application be refused. The report that fo llows is that which was previously presented to Planning Committee on 12th March 2025. 1 Executive Summary 1.1 The application proposes to increase the car parking provision at Dyson Drive to provide residents with 9 additional car parking spaces and would result in the loss of soft landscaping. The application has come before the Committee due to the submission of a petition with 54 signatures in support of the proposal. The site is located within a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) rating area of 2 and therefore it is considered that there would be a moderate reliance on the private car to travel to and from the site, even though the site is within walking distance to the Uxbridge Town Centre. Notwithstanding this point, the additional spaces in combination with the existing spaces would exceed maximum car parking standards, which seek to reduce vehicle trips and promote sustainable travel modes. 1.2 As such the development would result in the exacerbation of the overprovision of parking, detrimentally impact on highway safety and fail to promote sustainable modes of transport, which has resulted in an objection from the Highway Authority. The planning application is therefore recommended for refusal for the reasons set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site refers to a relatively recently constructed residential development that forms part of St Andrews Park (the former RAF Uxbridge Site). Dyson Drive is located within Phase 3B of this development and lies within an area of land located in the southwestern part of the site. Dyson Drive is a private road (unadopted) and the site is bounded by Hillingdon Road to the west, the built out Phase 2A to the south, spine road and pocket park to the east and future phases to the north. The northern boundary of the site is occupied by a double line of mature horse chestnut trees which are to be retained, forming an important strategic landscape green link and frame to the former parade ground. The site is situated within a Developed Area as identified in the policies of the Hillingdon Local Plan (2012). Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Image of the Application site 3 Proposal 3.1 The application proposes the creation of 9no. off-street parking spaces replacing current soft landscaping and the planting of 3no. new trees. Figure 3: Proposed Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 4.2 The application is a follow up to application ref: 78464/APP/2023/3668 (Alteration to car parking layout) which was refused by Planning Committee on 14th March 2024. The main differences between the previously refused scheme and the current application are the orientation of the car parking spaces (which have increased by one space from 8no. to a total of 9no. spaces), which has resulted in the loss of soft landscaping, and the provision of 3no trees. The design and location of the proposed new car parking spaces have been moved off the existing shared surface and are now proposed to be sited adjacent to the existing car parking spaces within the soft landscaped area. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 48 neighbouring properties were consulted on 20th December 2024. A site notice was erected on 2nd January 2025. 6.2 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response A petition in support was received with 54 signatories. 1. The petition states: 'That planning application ref: 78464/APP/2024/ 3196 be approved as all the residents of the houses on the road support the proposal. Noted. 12 letters of objection have been received. I. Concerns are raised regarding highway safety, encroachment, existing road congestion. The application has been reviewed by the Highway Authority. A summary of their comments is provided at Table 2. II. Concerns are raised regarding the fairness of the application; other residents of Dyson Drive would not benefit and parking options would be reduced. Noted. 12 letters of support have been received. III. The homeowners support the application as it would increase the parking provision available to them. Noted. IV. The proposal would reduce parking congestion, enhance safety, align with sustainability practices, comply with local regulations and reduce visual clutter. An assessment of the proposal having regard to current planning policy is provided in Section 7 of this report. V. All houses have 2 parking spaces, only these houses have one parking space. Since the original permission was granted the policy landscape has changed and the consented level exceeds the maximum allowed Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press under the current London Plan. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Highway Authority There are robust highway objections to this proposal because it is contrary to Policy T1 which seeks to deliver the strategic target of 80 per cent of all trips to be made by foot, cycle or public transport by 2041. The proposal is also contrary to Policy T2 Healthy streets which requires that development should reduce the dominance of vehicles on streets – not increase them; Policy T4 Assessing and mitigating transport impacts, this requires that developments do not increase road danger and Policy T6.1 residential parking – this policy would allow Dyson Drive as a new build a maximum of 9no. car parking spaces, the proposal would create 18no. allocated car parking spaces , plus 6 unallocated spaces. Furthermore, Policy T6.1 requires all residential car parking spaces must provide infrastructure for electric or Ultra -Low Emission Vehicles. At least 20 per cent of all spaces should have active electric vehicle charging facilities with all the others having passive provision. None of the proposed 9no. additiona l car parking spaces would have EV provision which is contrary to Policy. Noted. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 The proposal is for the construction of new parking spaces on a residential street, however the additional car parking is contrary to the relevant Development Plan policies as set out within this report. Highways and Parking 7.2 The application site is known as Dyson Drive, an unadopted residential cul de sac which forms a junction with Churchill Road. The si te is located within a PTAL 2 rated area meaning that there is a reliance on the motor vehicle to travel to and from the site. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.3 Dyson Drive is part of the wider St Andrews's Park development and is located within Phase 3B. Planning application 585/APP/2015/4494 gave approval for 56 residential units and 70 car parking spaces resulting in a parking ratio of 1.25 spaces per unit. In combination with the 8 additional spaces proposed as part of this application the ratio would be raised to 1.41 per unit. 7.4 As this is a new planning application it must be assessed in consideration with the most up to date planning policy. The London Plan (2021) Table 10.3 - Maximum Residential Parking Standards allows dwellings with one or two bedrooms in outer London with a PTAL of 2 to have up to 0.75no. parking spaces per dwelling and dwellings with three or more bedrooms to have a maximum of 1no. spaces per dwelling. The table below provides a breakdown of the maximum number of spaces permitted for each unit type and an overall total in accordance with the London Plan. Table 3: Breakdown of Maximum spaces allowed under the London Plan No. of Bedrooms No. of Dwellings London Plan T10.3 Max Allowed 1 14 0.75 10.5 2 24 0.75 18 3 18 1 18 46.5 7.5 The above table states 46.5 spaces should be provided for the 56 units therefore the 79 spaces proposed would result in a significant over provision of parking. The Design and Access Statement refers to preventing cars parking along the road as one of the main drivers for submitting the application. Whilst noted, given the site is unadopted land, the lack of parking controls cannot be resolved by the Council. This is also not a material consideration which could outweigh a potential harm. 7.6 The proposed 9no. parking spaces would be allocated to homeowners on Dyson Drive. The Design and Access Statement suggests that the proposal would result in the removal of cars parking along the road and would improve the openness within the street scene. Drawing FLU.CP .02 titled ‘Proposed Location and Site Plans’ shows the proposed layout , which provides the additional car parking spaces adjacent to the existing rows of car parking spaces. Whilst the proposed arrangement would provide additional allocated parking spaces, due to the lack of parking controls on Dyson Drive, it is considered that the proposal would not resolve the existing informal parallel pa rking that currently occurs on the shared surface at Dyson Drive. It is therefore considered that the proposal c ould exacerbate the level of car parking and congestion on Dyson Drive. 7.7 As noted by the Highway Authority, the highway is a shared surface and the increase in formal parking spaces would increase the volume of traffic using Dyson Drive. The uplift in traffic volume would inc rease the potential for conflict with pedestrians and cyclists , which raises concerns on highway safety grounds. The proposal would fail to accord with the published NPPF Chapter 9 Promoting Sustainable Transport, the London Plan (2021) and London Borough of Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.8 Taking the above points into consideration, the proposed development would result in an overprovision of car parking. As such the development fails to comply with Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, DMT 5 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), Policies T2, T4, T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021) and Paragraphs 116 and 117 of the NPPF (2024). 7.9 The Highway Authority’s comments regarding the lack of electric vehicle charging points are noted. Had the application been recommended for approval, a condition could have been imposed to secure the appropriate level of provision. As this matter could be resolved by condition, it is considered that a refusal on these grounds would not be sustainable. 7.10 The resubmission is not considered to suitably address or overcome the previous reason for refusal of Application ref: 78464/APP/2023/3668. For the reasons given above, the application is recommended for refusal. Trees and landscaping 7.11 The proposal would require the removal of green spaces alongside the existing parking bays to accommodate the new parking spaces. The new parking spaces are proposed to be surfaced with ‘grasscrete ’. Whilst an effort has been made to retain a green visual aspect, the proposed use of grasscrete is not considered to be a suitable or effective solution to offset the loss of green space. 7.12 The additional car parking spaces, the loss of green space, the proposed surfacing and the resulting proliferation of parked cars would be detrimental to the character of the area and would detract from the visual quality and usability of the landscaped pedestrian link , which is seen as an important part of the estate. The level of harm identified, is however on balance, not considered to be significant to warrant a separate reason for refusal. 7.13 The proposal does include the planting of 3no trees, which goes some way to balance the harm to the visual amenity of the street scene caused by the proposal. However, the proposed tree planting is not considered to outweigh the overall detriment to the character of the area or the highways reason for refusal detailed in Paragraphs 7.2-7.10 of this report. Access 7.14 There are no direct issues that are purely related to accessibility matters. However, it is worth noting that the prop osed layout shows the car parking to be accessed via the shared surface, increasing th e number of vehicle movements and therefore the potential risks for pedestrians and cyclists. This raises concerns on highway safety grounds, but is not c onsidered to be a separate reason for refusal. Air Quality Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.15 The site lies within the Uxbridge Air Quality Focus Area and the Hillingdon Air Quality Management Area. It is considered that the proposal would not give rise to significant harm which would require mitigation. Land Contamination 7.16 The application site lies within a former contaminated land use as identified from the Council’s land contamination database. The development is not considered to pose a risk in terms of potential contamination. Had the application been recommended for approval, an informative would have been attached to the decision notice, pointing to a possibility that there may be some contaminating substances present in the ground and to advise persons working on site to take basic precautions. 8 Other Matters Human Rights 8.1 The development has been assessed against the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and in particular Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the Act itself. This Act gives further effect to the rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development rights and expectations which have been balanced and weighed against the wider community interests, as expressed through third party interests / the Devel opment Plan and Central Government Guidance. Equality 8.2 Due consideration has been given to Section 149 of the Equality Act with regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in the assessment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Local Finance Considerations and CIL 8.3 Not applicable to this application. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The neighbour representations and the petition are noted and the matters raised have been considered in full. In this inst ance, as discussed in this report, the development is not considered to comp ly with the development plan. The development would result in the exacerbation of the overprovision of parking, impact on highway safety, fail to promote sustainable modes of transport and detrimentally impact the character of the area. Therefore, having regard to the material considerations and all matters raised, the application is recommended for refusal. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 10 Background Papers Relevant published policies and documents taken into account in respect of this application are set out in the report. Documents associated with the application (except exempt or confidential information) are available on the Council's website here, by entering the planning application number at the top of this report and using the search facility. Planning appl ications are also available to inspect electronically at the Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW upon appointment, by contacting Planning Services at planning@hillingdon.gov.uk. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Appendix 1: Recommended Reason(s) for Refusal and Informatives. The application is recommended for REFU SAL for the following Reasons for Refusal: 1 The development would result in an overprovision of car parking and fails to encourage sustainable modes of transport including cycling, walking and the use of public transport, in conflict with Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, DMT 5 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), Policies T2, T4, T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021) and Paragraphs 116 and 117 of the NPPF (2024). INFORMATIVES 1 The decision to REFUSE planning permiss ion has been taken having regard to all relevant planning legislation, regulations, gu idance, circulars and Council policies, including The Human Rights Act (1998) (H RA 1998) which makes it unlawful for the Council to act incompatibly with Convention rights, specifically Article 6 (right to a fair hearing); Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life); Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination). 2 On this decision notice policies from the Councils Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies appear first, then relevant Local Plan Part 2 (2020), then London Plan Policies (2021). Hillingdon's Full Council adopted the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies on 8 November 2012 and the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 on 16 January 2020. 3 In dealing with the application the Counc il has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made available detailed advice in the form of our statutory policies from the Local Plan Part 1, Local Plan Part 2, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service. We have however been unable to seek solutions to problems arising from the application as the principal of the proposal is clearly contrary to our statutory policies and negotiation could not overcome the reasons for refusal. AAPPENDICES Planning Application 78464/APP/2024/3196 Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 5 AAppendix 1: Recommended Reason(s) for Refusal and Informatives Reasons for Refusal 1. NON2 P Parking, highway safety and sustainable modes of transport The development would result in an overprovision of car parking and fails to encourage sustainable modes of transport including cycling, walking and the use of public transport, in conflict with Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, DMT 5 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), Policies T2, T4, T6 and T6.1 of the London Plan (2021) and Paragraphs 116 and 117 of the NPPF (2024). Informatives 1. I52 C Compulsory Informative (1) The decision to REFUSE planning permission has been taken having regard to all relevant planning legislation, regulations, guidance, circulars and Council policies, including The Human Rights Act (1998) (HRA 1998) which makes it unlawful for the Council to act incompatibly with Convention rights, specifically Article 6 (right to a fair hearing); Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life); Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination). 2. I59 C Councils Local Plan : Part 1 - Strategic Policies On this decision notice policies from the Councils Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies appear first, then relevant Local Plan Part 2 (2020), then London Plan Policies (2021). Hillingdon's Full Council adopted the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies on 8 November 2012 and the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 on 16 January 2020. 3. I71 L LBH worked applicant in a positive & proactive (Refusing) In dealing with the application the Council has implemented the requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive way. We have made available detailed advice in the form of our statutory policies from the Local Plan Part 1, Local Plan Part 2, Supplementary Planning Documents, Planning Briefs and other informal written guidance, as well as offering a full pre-application advice service. We have however been unable to seek solutions to problems arising from the application as the principal of the proposal is clearly contrary to our statutory policies and negotiation could not overcome the reasons for refusal. Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 5 AAppendix 2: Relevant Planning History 585/APP/2009/2752 R A F Uxbridge Hillingdon Road Uxbridge 1. Outline application (all matters reserved, except for access) including demolition of some existing buildings and: a) Creation of up to 1,296 residential dwellings (Class C3) of between 2 to 6 residential storeys; b) Creation of up to 77 one-bedroom assisted living retirement accommodation of between 3 to 4 storeys; c) Creation of a three-form entry primary school of 2 storeys; d) Creation of a hotel (Class C1) of 5 storeys of up to 90 beds; e) Creation of a 1,200 seat theatre with ancillary cafe (Sui Generis); office (Class B1a) of up to 13,860sq.m; energy centre (Sui Generis) of up to 1,200sq.m; and retail (Class A1, A2, A3, A4, A5) of up to 2,850sq m; in buildings of between 4 to 6 storeys as well as a tower element associated with the theatre of up to 30m; f) Creation of a local centre to provide up to 150sq.m of retail (Class A1 and A2) and 225sq.m GP surgery (Class D1); Means of access and improvements to pedestrian linkages to the Uxbridge Town centre; car parking; provision of public open space including a district park; landscaping; sustainable infrastructure and servicing. 2. In addition to the above, full planning permission for: a) Creation of 28 residential dwellings (Class C3) to the north of Hillingdon House of between 2 to 3 storeys as well as associated amenity space and car parking; b) Change of use of Lawrence House (Building No. 109) to provide 4 dwellings (Class C3), associated amenity space and car parking including a separate freestanding garage; c) Change of use and alterations to the Carpenters building to provide 1 residential dwelling (Class C3); d) Change of use and alterations to the Sick Quarters (Building No. 91) to provide 4 dwellings (Class C3) as well as associated amenity space and car parking; e) Change of use of Mons barrack block (Building No. 146A) to provide 7 dwellings (Class C3) as well as associated amenity space and car parking. f) Change of use of the Grade II listed former cinema building to provide 600sq.m Class D1/2 use (no building works proposed); g) Change of use and alterations to the Grade II listed Hillingdon House to provide 600sq.m for a restaurant (Class A3) on the ground floor and 1,500sq.m of office (Class B1) on the ground, first and second floors; Decision: 18-01-2012 Approved 585/APP/2015/4494 St Andrew'S Park Hillingdon Road Uxbridge Reserved matters (layout, scale, appearance and landscaping) in compliance with conditions 2 and 3 for Phase 3B (Southern area) of planning permission ref: 585/APP/2009/2752, dated 18-01-12 (Outline application (all matters reserved, except for Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 5 access) including demolition of some existing buildings and mixed used redevelopment of the Former RAF Uxbridge site) DDecision: 07-03-2016 Approved 78464/APP/2023/3668 Dyson Drive Uxbridge Alteration to car parking layout Refused Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 5 AAppendix 3: List of Relevant Planning Policies The following Local Plan Policies are considered relevant to the application:- Part 1 Policies: PT1.BE1 (2012) Built Environment Part 2 Policies: DMHB 11 Design of New Development DMHB 14 Trees and Landscaping DMT 1 Managing Transport Impacts DMT 2 Highways Impacts DMT 5 Pedestrians and Cyclists DMT 6 Vehicle Parking LPP D3 (2021) Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach LPP T1 (2021) Strategic approach to transport LPP T2 (2021) Healthy Streets LPP T4 (2021) Assessing and mitigating transport impacts LPP T6 (2021) Car parking LPP T6.1 (2021) Residential parking Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 5 of 5

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Mitchell Heaven 44049/APP/2025/799 Date Application Valid: 21.03.2025 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 08.09.25 Application Type: Full Ward: Northwood Hills Applicant: Mr. Reaz Abdul Site Address: 35 Brookdene Drive, Northwood Proposal: Demolition of existing two-storey dwelling and erection of a replacement two-storey dwelling with solar panels, associated bin storage, parking, electric vehicle charging and air source heat pump. Installation of vehicular crossover and alterations to landscaping including hardstanding for driveway, soft landscaping and new boundary treatment and siting. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 3 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Petition received) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summar y 1.1 Planning permission is sought for the de molition of the existing dwelling and its replacement with a two store y five-bedroom dwelling. 1.2 The surrounding area is residential, comprised primarily of single and double storey detached dwellings in a variety of architectural styles and ages. The site is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The site is not located within a conservation area or an area of special local character. 1.3 A petition with 20 signatures in objection to the development has been received. The desired outcome of the petition is for the application to be refused or reduced in size and height with conditions. Two separate representations have also been received in objection to the proposal, as well as an objection from the Northwood Residents Association. The main concerns raised include the impact on the local character, neighbours’ amenity, parking, trees and landscaping of the site. Revisions to the scheme have been secured which include reducing the height of the proposed replacement dwelling. A further six comments in support of the scheme have been received following re- consultation on the amended details, as well as an additional objection and the Northwood Residents Association maintaining their earlier objection. A full list of the matters raised in the consultation is included within Section 6 of this report. 1.4 The principle of the replacement dwelling is acceptable as it would continue to provide a large family dwelling house. Whilst it is acknowledged that the existing property exhibits some uniform features with the wider estate, this factor alone does not amount to the building being of such considerable value to warrant its protection from demolition. The building is not statutory or locally listed and is considered to be of limited historic value. The principle of the demolition and replacement of the existin g dwelling is therefore acceptable. 1.5 The proposed dwelling is of an appropriate scale and design and would appear visually sympathetic with the character and appearance of the street scene. The applicant has worked cooperatively with the Local Planning Authority and in response to officer feedback during processing of the application has provided a revised scheme including changes to the proposed landscaping and a reduction in height. The proposed landscaping would include a mixture of hedging which would mature to the front of the proposed fencing to ensure the site blends into the verdant local character and street scene. Similar mature hed ging exists Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press along Brookdene Drive. The proposal is considered to harmonise with the character and appearance of the local area. 1.6 The proposal would not cause a detrimental impact on neighbouring residential amenity. The two-storey part of the building would comply with the ‘45-degree rule’ for the adjoining neighbours at 34 Brookdene Drive, ensuring sufficient daylight and sunlight to the adjacent residence is maintained. The replacement dwelling would also be sited a sufficient distance from the neighbouring apartment block building to the north-west of the site (Saxon Court). In the event of an approval, a condition would be secured requiring the side elevation windows facing 34 Brookdene Drive to be obscure glazed with restricted openings to maintain neighbours’ privacy. These windows would serve a bathroom and ensuite. 1.7 The dwelling would also provide a satisfactory provision of internal and external amenity space for future occupiers. The Council's Highways Department is satisfied that the proposal would not present a risk to road safety, hinder the free flow of traffic, or lead to parkin g stress. 1.8 This Committee Report seeks to provide a comprehensive assessment of the full application and supporting documentation. All material planning considerations have been considered. It is therefore recommended that planning permission is granted, subject to the imposition of relevant planning conditions set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Localit y 2.1 The application site is semi-rectangular in shape and is located at the T-junction of the Brookdene Drive cul-de-sac. Current development comprises a detached two-storey dwelling with a gable roof and a detached single-storey garage. The rear of the site consists of a landscaped garden containing several mature trees includin g a scheduled Oak Tree protected under TPO 16. 2.2 The street scene on Brookdene Drive is characterised by two-storey detached dwellings in a variety of ages, architectural styles and materials, albeit brick and gable roofs are predominant features. The site adjoins 34 Brookdene Drive to the south which consists of a two-storey detached dwelling. To the west, the site adjoins the vehicle access for 1-14 Saxon Court, 36 Brookdene Drive which is a three-store y building consisting of flats. 2.3 According to the Council's GIS, the site is located within a Critical Drainage Area. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 2 (less than moderate ). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Figure 2: Image of the application property on the right. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3: Existing garage situated to the north-western boundary of the site. Figure 4: Rear elevation of the property. Figure 5: Existing dwelling and conservatory and view facing 35 Brookdene Drive. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 6: The street scene showing the application site to the left. 2 Brookdene Drive is to the right and 1 Brookdene Drive is in the background with a hedged boundary treatment. 3 Proposal 3.1 The application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of a two-storey dwelling. The garden boundary is also proposed to be moved closer to the public footway with a 1.8m high fence and hedging proposed along the site boundary. It is also proposed to install a vehicular crossover and driveway at the eastern end of the site with alterations to the landscaping. The existing shared crossover would thus become redundant for the application site, so would be reduced in width and the footway reinstated. The existing garage would be retained, albeit would not be used for parking but for storage and other typical uses incidental to the dom estic use of the property (f or example, secure cycle parkin g). 3.2 Amendments were received during the assessment with improvements made to the landscaping provision with more green landscape provided and alterations to the fence line to ensure that the existin g Oak Tree would be protected. 3.3 Further amendments were received which clarified the location of the Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) on the site plan and relocation of the bins away from the neighbouring property boundary with 34 Brookdene Drive. The siting of the proposed ASHP would be 13 metres set-back from the boundary with the nearest neighbour. Amendments were also received to reduce the overall height of the proposed dwellin g to better fit in with the heights of the homes in the street. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Proposed Floor Plans (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Figure 8: Proposed Elevations (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4 Relevant Plannin g History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 5 Plannin g Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations a nd Representations 6.1 Twenty-four neighbouri ng properties, Northwood Hills Residents Association and Northwood Residents Association were consulted on the application by letter dated 03.04.25. The consultation period expired 26.04.25. Internal and external consultations were also sent out and a summary of the comments received are noted below in Table 2 of this Committee Report. Re-consultation on revised drawings was carried out on 07.08.25 and the consultation period expired on 21.03.25. The revisions included alterations to the fence line to ensure that the existing Oak Tree would be protected; clarification of the siting of the proposed ASHP; and a reduction in the overall hei ght of the proposed dwelling. A further revised drawing was received to remove the bins adjacent to the boundary with No. 34 Brookdene Drive. It was not considered necessary to re-consult given the nature of this revision. The proposed landscape plan will be updated for consistenc y and drawing reference reported in the Addendum Report. 6.2 For the second round of consultation, a total of eight additional comments were received, six of which supported the application and two in objection to the proposal (one new objector and the other maintaining earlier concerns). 6.3 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response A petition of 20 valid signatures has been I. Adverse visual impact on the street scene. This is discussed at paragraphs 7.6 – 7.25 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press received against the application requesting refusal of the application. II. Overbearing given the higher ground level compared to neighbours. The potential harm to neighbouring residential amenities is discussed at paragraphs 7.26 – 7.38 of this report. III. New access is in an unsafe location. Highways matters are discussed at paragraphs 7.43-7.54 of this report. The Highways Officer has reviewed the application and is satisfied no harm to highways safety would arise from the application. IV. Insufficient onsite car parking provision The Highways Officer has reviewed the application and is satisfied sufficient onsite parking would be provided in accordance with overriding regional plan requirements. 2 individual letters of objection and an objection from the Northwood Residents Association have been received. I. Impacts the character of Brookdene Drive. Erodes the street character due to increase in footprint and height, reduction in symmetry with the neighbouring properties, erosion of consistent rooflines and scale. The scale of the proposed development and impact on the character and appearance of the area is discussed at paragraphs 7.6 – 7.25 of this report. II. Location of new vehicle access would impact safety and accessibility of Brookdene Drive. Highways matters are discussed at paragraphs 7.43 –7.54 of this report. The Highways Officer has reviewed the application and is satisfied no harm to highways safety would arise from the application. III. Increased size of dwelling and increased fencing at 35 Brookdene Drive Highways matters are discussed at paragraphs 7.43 – 7.54 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press would limit driver visibility. The Highways Officer has reviewed the application and is satisfied no harm to highways safety would arise from the application. IV. Provision of one car parking space is insufficient, not in accordance with the Local Plan and will increase demand for on street parking. Currently the property has a double garage and associated parking. Parking of excess cars on this narrow road will cause additional parking issue Highways matters are discussed at paragraphs 7.43 – 7.54 of this report. The Highways Officer has reviewed the application and is satisfied sufficient onsite parking has been proposed in accordance with overriding regional plan requirements. V. Overdevelopment of the site. The scale of the proposed development and impact on the character and appearance of the area is discussed in paragraphs 7.6 – 7.25 of this report. VI. Increased size of the dwelling would harm the residential amenities of neighbouring properties through overbearingness, loss of natural light and increased overlooking. It would lead to a sense of confinement and oppression to neighbours, and loss of privacy. The potential harm to neighbouring residential amenities is discussed in paragraphs 7.26 – 7.38 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press VII. Boundary treatment repositioned close the Brookdene Drive. The fencing would enclose large parts and the existing green verge and will not harmonise with the local character as it would no longer mirror its neighbour. This is discussed at paragraphs 7.19-7.25 of this report. VIII. Construction noise and disturbance would harm the residential amenities of neighbouring sites. Concerned that the road will not be maintained at all times and how construction vehicles will manoeuvre on the narrow street The development would be subject to standard construction noise and disturbance laws. A construction management plan would also be secured by condition. IX. Inappropriate use of the garage as independent residential accommodation. This is discussed at paragraph 7.4 of this report . A condition is recommended requiring the garage to remain in use incidental to the enjoyment of the main dwellin ghouse. X. Lack of details of heat pump installation. This is addressed in paragraphs 7.58-7.59 of this report. A revised site plan has been submitted indicating the positioning of the Air Source Heat Pump towards the eastern side of the garden. This would be over 13 metres away from the common boundary with 34 Brookdene Drive. A condition is recommended re garding the finer details Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press of the Air Source Heat Pump to be submitted including a restriction on the level of noise. XI. Lack of dimensions on the submitted drawings. The submitted plans have been drawn to scale with scale information provided to be able to measure the drawin gs accurately. XII. Potentially inaccurate drawing of 45-degree field of view from neighbouring dwelling windows. Planning officers are satisfied, based on the site visit, that the location of neighbouring sites and dwellings, and 45-degree outlook, has been depicted accurately. This is discussed further in paragraphs 7.26-7.38 of this report. XIII. The proposed front fencing should be no more than 1m high due to the location on a highway. A close- boarded fence would be out of keeping with the character of the area. This is discussed further at paragraphs 7.19-7.23 of this report. XIV. Potential odour effects from location of bins alongside the boundary. This is discussed in paragraph 7.80 of this report. A revised location for the bin storage has since been received. The bin storage would now be situated away from the adjoining residents at 34 Brookdene Drive. XV. Trees are protected. Request replanting given the loss of a Yew Tree. This is discussed further at 7.64 -7.72 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Repositioning of the boundary treatment would partially reduce the visibility of T2 [Oak tree] which would impact on the street character. Northwood Residents Association The following concerns were raised: x Fencing and landscaping along the street. x Parking should be maintained to two car spaces. x The bulk of the dwelling. x Impact on the extra height on the neighbours. 45- degree line needs to be clearly shown. x Concerns regarding noise from Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP). This is discussed further at paragraphs 7.19 – 7.23 of this report. Highways matters are discussed at paragraphs 7.43 – 7.54 of this report. Discussed in the design section at paragraphs 7.6 – 7.25 of this report. The potential harm to neighbouring residential amenities is discussed in paragraphs 7.26 - 7.38 of this report. This is addressed in paragraph 7.58-7.59 of this report. The ASHP would be sited towards the eastern side of the garden, over 13 metres away from the common boundary with 34 Brookdene Drive. A condition regarding the finer details of the ASHP to be submitted including a restriction on the level of noise. 6 representations in support have also been x The existing dwelling is dated and in poor Discussed in the design section at paragraphs 7.6 - 7.25 of this report Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press submitted following re- consultation. condition. The new plans and house would aesthetically look good and make the street look better. x Welcome the incorporation of sustainable features. Sustainability features are discussed at paragraphs 7.81-7.83 of this report. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Access Officer No accessibility concerns are raised subject to the inclusion of recommended accessibility conditions. The comments from the Access Officer are noted. Relevant conditions are recommended to be added to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Highways Officer No objection. The application has been reviewed by the Highway Authority who are satisfied that the proposal would not discernibly exacerbate congestion or parking stress, and would not raise any measurable highway safety concerns, in accordance with relevant planning policies. The Highways Officer recommends inclusion of conditions and informatives relating to the provision of electric vehicle charging points; the reinstatement of the public footway and construction of the new crossover; and maintenance of pedestrian visibility splays in relation to the proposed crossover. The comments from the Highways Officer are noted and the relevant conditions are recommended to be added to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Trees Officer Upon initial review, further clarification was requested on the extent of pruning to the scheduled Oak tree, the methodology of excavations within the root protection area The comments from the Trees Officer are noted. The conditions are recommended to be added Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press (RPA) of the scheduled Oak tree and the extent of proposed hardscaping within the RPA of the scheduled Oak tree. Upon receipt of amended plans reducing the extent of works within the RPA of the scheduled Oak tree, clarification on the methodology of excavations, and confirmation that consent for tree pruning would be applied for at a later date, the Council’s Trees Officer confirmed that they do not object to the application subject to conditions ensuring the protection of retained trees on site. Whilst separate tree consent would be sought for tree pruning, the Trees Officer was satisfied that an acceptable level of pruning could be agreed that would maintain the tree health. to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Urban Design Officer No objection to the overall landscaping scheme. However, several recommended improvements have been identified. Recommended that the proposed 1.8m boundary fence located directly at the base of the protected Oak Tree, as well as some hardstanding, be shifted further away from the tree trunk. Also identified minor changes to the proposed landscaping species and recommended the south-east garden remain a complete green asset instead of introducing the new car parking pad. The applicant provided an amended landscaping plan re-siting the proposed boundary fence and hardstanding from around protected Oak Tree and updated landscaping with hedging proposed. Whilst the recommendation to retain the south-east garden as fully green is noted, it is also recognised that the existing driveway would be replaced with green landscaping on site. Therefore, on-balance the proposed car parking is considered acceptable. 7 Plannin g Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 Policy DMH 1: Safeguarding Existing Ho using of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) requires proposals to avoid the net loss of housing. The proposal is for the replacement of the existing dwelling with a new dwelling and is therefore in accordance with Polic y DMH 1. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.2 Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Pl an: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) adds that the Council will require the provision of a mix of housing units of varied sizes in schemes of residential development to reflect the Council's latest information on housing need. The current information on housing need indicates a substantial borough-wide requirement for larger affordable and private market units, particularly 3-bedroom properties, as identified in the Strategic Housin g Market Assessment 2016. 7.3 Whilst an existing family sized dwelling (defined in the London Plan 2021 as a three-bedroom or more unit) would be demolished, it would be replaced by a two storey, five-bedroom dwelling. The proposed deve lopment would comprise a spacious 5-bedroom dwelling. The proposal would therefore not result in a net loss of family sized housing, in accordance with Policies DMH 1 and DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 – Developm ent Management Policies (2020). Notwithstanding the above, there are other planning considerations that need to be considered which are discussed in the remainder of this committee report includin g the design amenity, parking and highway safety. 7.4 Policy DMHD 2 of the Hillingdon Local Pl an: Part Two (2020) is clear that outbuildings should only be used for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the main dwelling house. The existing and proposed plans demonstrate that the garage on site would be retained as existing. Whilst it is noted that it would not be possible to park a car in the garage (the associated crossover to the site is proposed to be extinguished and footway reinstated), the garage is proposed to remain. A condition is recommended to require the outbuilding to only be used for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the main dwellinghouse. This would prevent the outbuilding from being used for primary living accommodation such as a bedroom, livin g room or kitchen. 7.5 Overall, the principle of the proposed development is accepted and complies with the relevant planning policies. These policies can be read in full in the Committee Report Part 3 - Polic y Appendix. Desi gn / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.6 Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) require development proposals to be of high quality and to enhance the local context by delivering buildings and spaces that positively respond to local distinctiveness. Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 – Strategic Policies (2012), and policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 – Development Management Policies (2020) in summary seeks to secure a high quality of design that enhances and contributes to the area in terms of form, scale and materials, is appropriate to the identity and context of the townscape and would respect local character. Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2024 (NPPF) also supports these aims. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.7 Brookdene Drive is a T-shaped cul-de-sac consisting primarily of large two-storey detached dwellinghouses with a variety of attached and detached garages and outbuildings. The road features reasonably uniform front building lines. The site frontages of the existing properties are typically characterised with low level boundary treatment with a mixture of hard and soft landscaping with space for off- street parking. The corner sites 1, 2 and 35 Brookdene Drive all consist of taller 1.8m-2m fences/walls either set-back from the adopted highway or on the site fronta ge boundary. 7.8 The residential properties along Brookdene Drive vary in age, materials, scale, height and design. Gable-roof forms and brick materiality form the predominant appearance of the streetscape, although the area is not located within a Conservation Area or an Area of Special Local Character. 7.9 At present, the application site is characterised by a two-storey gable-roofed dwelling located on a corner site. The eastern frontage is landscaped and open while the northern-most frontage is walled off albeit with the boundary wall setback from the legal property boundary. The application site also contains a single storey garage towards the northern end of the garden. 7.10 The proposed detached dwelling would also be two-storeys. However, it would be larger in overall size and would have a crown roof. During the application, amended drawings were sought to reduce the overall height of the roof. The amended roof design involved lowering the height of the ridgeline of the roof, so that it would now be more reflective of the height of the existing dwelling and the wider prevailing character. The eaves of the roof would be approximately 300 mm higher than the existing eaves and the crown roof marginally higher than the existing main ridgeline. The dwelling would sit on top of the existing dwelling footprint but would be lar ger to the south, east and north. 7.11 The siting of the proposed dwelling is acceptable. The dwelling would be centred on the existing dwelling footprint, minimising the change in environment. It would be set-in a minimum of 1.2m from the shared site boundary with 34 Brookdene Drive to the south. This is a reasonable set-in for the suburban environment, maintaining an acceptable level of spaciousness along the shared boundary. The proposed front building line along the eastern frontage would extend forward of the front building line of 34 Brookdene Drive by approximately 800mm which is not excessive and would not appear obtrusive or harmfully bulky. The proposed front building line along the northern frontage would still be well-setback from the site boundary. In the absence of a contiguous building line along this frontage, this is considered acceptable. 7.12 This proposal is greater in height, bulk and scale than the existing dwelling to be demolished. However, it would be similar in bulk to other two-storey dwellings on the street including Nos. 11, 15 and 17 Brookdene Drive and the two-storey form would still sit comfortably in the street scene. The revisions that have also been Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press sought during the assessment have reduced the overall height/bulk of the development so that it now appears more sympathetic within its immediate setting and the wider street scene. 7.13 Planning permission was granted in 2016 at 17 Brookdene Drive for a replacement dwelling (ref. 68427/APP/2016/1717). The subject proposal at 35 Brookdene Drive would not be dissimilar in scale to this approval. The scale would be mitigated by the deep rear garden which would prevent the site from appearing overdeveloped or cramped. 7.14 It is also worth noting that the site abuts Saxon Court which is a large three storey property to the north-west along Brookdene Drive and its junction with Watford Road. This adjacent site received planning permission in 2007 for the demolition of 36 Brookdene Drive and the erection of the flatted building for 14 apartments (ref. 62535/APP2007/2726). In the context of this neighbouring building, the replacement dwelling would appear modest in scale, bulk and would be sympathetic in design. It is noted that the properties along Brookdene Drive have evolved with both extensions and replacement buildings creating a varied appearance alon g the street. 7.15 The dwelling would be taller than the height of the adjacent property at No. 34 due to the increased height and differences in underlying ground levels. The new dwelling would have eaves approximately 30cm higher than the existing dwelling to be demolished and 1.2m higher than No.34. It would have a maximum ridge height marginally higher than the exis ting dwelling and approximately 500mm higher than No.34. However, it is worth noting that the overall ridge height has been reduced by 600mm through the amendments received, to better visually integrate with the appearance of the street scene. Figure 8 depicts the existing dwelling (in blue) with the proposed dwelling overlaid, to demonstrate the height differences between the existin g and proposed replacement dwelling. 7.16 The dwelling would remain two-storeys in height with an approximate 5.6m eaves height and an approximate 7.5m roof height. Taken into account the amendments to the height within the immediate street context, the proposed two-storey dwelling would is not considered unreasonably tall or dominant to the appearance and character of the area. The impact on the residential amenities of No.34 is discussed in para graphs 7.26-7.38 of this report. 7.17 Large crown roofs are generally resisted by the planning department. However, there are several examples of crown roofs in the area including at 15, 17 and 36 (Saxon Court) Brookdene Drive and 12, 7-13 and 15-25 Watford Road. In this context, the proposed crown roof would integrate acceptably with the established character and appearance of the area and would not appear visually incongruous or harmful. Although the proposed crown roof has increased in size because of the reduction in height, in combination with this reduced height, the overall scale ensures it is not considered harmfully large. The lowered ridgeline reduces the visual dominance of the roof and brin gs it more in-keepin g with previousl y Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press approved roof forms along Brookdene Drive. Aligning the ridgeline more closely with the height of the existing building and the prevailing local pattern ensures the proposal would inte grate acceptably with the surrounding homes. 7.18 The elevations provided indicate that the dwelling would be visually unassuming in appearance and would not be incongruous or overly dominant within the streetscape. The proposed materials of brick, render and rooftile are characteristically evident throughout Brookdene Drive and would not appear out of place. A details condition is also recommended to ensure the finer detail of the proposed materials are s ympathetic to the appearance of the area. Landscaping 7.19 In terms of landscaping, the applicant has provided a detailed landscaping plan that is considered would complement the visual landscaped appearance of the site and streetscape (see figure 9). The proposal includes shifting the northern- most garden boundary treatment closer to the site boundary. Figure 9: Proposed Landscaping Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) 7.20 While representations have raised concerns about potential impacts on the openness of the streetscene and the symmetry with No. 2 Brookdene Drive, it is not uncommon in the immediate area to have boundary treatments positioned along street-facing site boundaries. This element of the proposal would therefore not result in undue harm to the character of the streetscape sufficient to warrant refusal. The surrounding area contains a mix of open and enclosed street-facing Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press boundaries, including hedging, soft landscaping, and brick walls. In this context, the proposal to incorporate a fence line softened with a front hedge would help integrate the scheme into the local character. 7.21 The use of privet hedging, to be planted at 80–100 cm and capable of reaching 2m in height, would provide screening for the private amenity space from passing traffic and residents while creating a visual buffer of green landscaping that would be a more aesthetically pleasing frontage than a solid fence or unbroken brick wall. Comparable arrangements exist nearby: 1 Brookdene Drive features a tall hedge, Saxon Court combines hedging with railings, and 18 Brookdene Drive also uses a hedge as its street-facing boundary treatment. All of these are located in the immediate vicinity of the site and contribute positively to the local streetscene. Within the parking area, lower-level planting of evergreen berberis, generally maintained at around 500 mm, is proposed to ensure it does not interfere with visibility splays while still contributing to the site’s overall landscaping quality. A condition requires pedestrian visibility splays. Figure 10: Saxon Court, 36 Brookdene Drive (left) and 1 Brookdene Drive (right) boundary treatment frontages 7.22 It is not unreasonable that this corner site would include higher boundary treatment on this ‘secondary’ frontage. This would ensure that the outdoor amenity space is adequately private and is like the current site circumstances (albeit re- sited to increase the area of private garden space). This is evident at 1 Brookdene Drive, as well as the nearby corner sites at 31 Carew Road and 1 Foxfield Close (shown in Figures 11 and 12 below). As such, the proposal would not be out of keepin g with a typical pattern of development on corner sites in the area. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 11: Established boundary treatment at nearby 31 Carew Road Figure 12: Established boundary treatment at nearby 1 Foxfield Close street frontage. 7.23 The proposal to move the boundary treatment closer to the legal site boundary would enhance the applicant’s private enjoyment of their property. Along the frontage, high-quality hedging is proposed which, although it would reduce the site’s openness, would create a visually green and softly landscaped frontage in Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press keeping with other examples in the street scene and surrounding area. This planting would also help to soften the visual impact of the proposed fencing, which is considered an acceptable and necessary measure to protect the privacy of the proposed rear garden. 7.24 Overall, the design and appearance of the proposed development would sit comfortably within the streetscape and would not unduly harm the character and appearance of the street scene. The proposed massing and layout are comparable to other two-storey dwellings in the area and a good sense of spaciousness and views around the development would be retained. The landscaping scheme would enhance the visual landscape quality of the site and acceptabl y offset the loss of openness on the site frontage. 7.25 It is considered that the proposed development would comply with the overarching aims of Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One - Strategic Policies (2012), Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020), Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021) and the National Plannin g Policy Framework (2024). Residential Amenit y 7.26 Policy DHMB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) states that development proposals should not adversely impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. An assessment of the potential impact on nei ghbouring residential amenity is discussed as follows. 7.27 It is considered there would be no undue harm to the residential amenities of No. 34 Brookdene Drive adjacent to the south of the site. The new dwelling has been designed to ensure that the proposed two-storey depth would not intrude into the 45-degree line from the closest first-floor rear elevation window of No.34. Therefore, the proposal would not have any undue impact on loss of sunlight and daylight to habitable rooms. The proposed two storey element would extend 3.6 metres beyond the rear elevation of No. 34 with a set-back between 1.3-1.4 metres from the shared boundary (to the rear side of the dwelling) and 2.6 metres from the flank wall of 34 Brookdene Drive. This is considered a sufficient set-back and depth to not adversely affect outlook from this neighbouring property, or to appear overbearing. The single storey rear element would have a commensurate depth to the existing conservatory proposed for demolition. 7.28 Whilst representations received have queried the accuracy of the submitted drawings with respect to showing the 45-degree BRE line from the nearest first floor rear elevation window of 34 Brookdene Drive, planning officers are satisfied this is accurately presented. This is based on the site visit and clarification was also provided by the applicant who confirmed the plans’ accuracy. Figures 13 and 14 below provide an image of the siting of the nearest windows at 34 Brookdene Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Drive in relation to the existing dwelling and the proposed first floor plan depicting the 45-degree line. Figure 13: Aerial imagery of the nearest first-floor rear elevation window at No. 34 Brookdene Drive. 7.29 It can be seen from aerial imagery (Figure 13) and the proposed plan below (Figure 14) that the footprint of the neighbour is accurately depicted for the purpose of this assessment. The plan (Figure 14) shows in a dotted blue line the existing conservatory which extends in proximity to the common boundary. This is evident on the aerial above that the existing conservatory maintains a minimal gap with the neighbour along the boundary. When measured, the proposed two-storey element would be set-in approximately 2.6m from the flank wall of the neighbouring property at 34 Brookdene Drive. The two-storey element would project approximately 3.6m beyond the rear building line of this neighbour. However, as can be seen from the plan, it would not breach the 45-degree line taken from the centre of the first-floor window that serves this neighbour’s habitable accommodation. 7.30 Given the set-in from the shared boundary, the existing conservatory, and that the nearest windows pass the 45-degree testing, Officers are satisfied that the impact on daylight and sunlight to habitable room windows would be acceptable. The outlook from the neighbours’ glazed double doors and first-floor windows would Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press be maintained to the rear garden. As t he proposed dwelling would also be set-in between 1.3 and 1.4 metres from the common boundary with No. 34 Brookdene Drive, it would maintain a level of openness between both plots and not lead to an undue sense of enclosure to the adjoining residents. Figure 14: Confirmation the dwelling passes ‘45-degree test’. The blue line indicates the footprint of the dwelling, including the conservatory. 7.31 The amendments to the hei ght of the dwelling (reduced by 600mm) would ensure that the dwelling would align more closely to the existing height. Further, the first floor would still be located at minimum approximately 1.2m away from the shared boundary (to the front) which increases to 1.3/1.4m to the rear given the nature of the plots. The set-back from the side shared boundary would ensure that visual gaps are maintained between both properties. This would ensure that the proposed dwelling would not lead to a s ense of enclosure to the nearest neighbour. 7.32 The site is located almost directly due north of 34 Brookdene Drive and therefore would introduce minimal, if any, additional shading over the neighbouring site and would not unduly harm the sunlight and daylight access of No.34 Brookdene Drive. 7.33 Four new obscured windows and an obscured glazed door are proposed in the south side elevation facing 34 Brookdene Drive. The obscure glazing would ensure no harmful overlooking over this neighbouring property is generated by the proposed dwelling, ensuring no undue ha rm to privacy. To ensure the obscure Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press glazing is sufficient to prevent overlooking, it is recommended the obscurity level is secured by adding a condition to the decision notice (Condition 5). 7.34 In summary, while the proposal introduc es a larger dwelling on the site compared to the existing dwelling to be replaced, the development would not unduly harm the residential amenities of 34 Brookdene Drive. It would not lead to an unacceptable reduction in daylight or sunlight, nor lead to a sense of enclosure or loss of privac y. 7.35 In respect to 1-14 Saxon Court (to the north-west) it is considered there would be no undue harm to the residential amenities of these adjacent flats. The proposed dwelling would be set on a similar building footprint to the existing building and therefore setback over 25m from the closest side elevation of Saxon Court, which is noted to be blank with no outlook or windows. Due to this generous separation distance, there would be no undue harm on the residential amenity of 1-14 Saxon Court. 7.36 It is considered that there would be no undue harm to the residential amenities of properties opposite the road, across Brookdene Drive to the north and east. The proposed dwelling would be se t on a similar building footprint to the existing building and would be well separated from opposing properties by the highway. Due to the intervening highway providing sufficient separation, there would be no undue harm on the residential amenit y of these properties. 7.37 Representations have raised concern with the potential use of the existing outbuilding/garage as an independent unit of accommodation or primary habitable living space. These concerns raise potential adverse noise and disturbance effects on neighbouring properties with regards to unreasonable comings and goings from the site. Whilst planning permission would be required to use the outbuilding as an independent dwelling or for an ancillary use, a condition has been recommended to prevent these uses (Condition 15). 7.38 Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers. It would therefore comply with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdo n Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Mana gement Policies (2020). Qualit y of Residential Accommodation (Internal and External) 7.39 Regarding internal accommodation, Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) sets out the requirements for the gro ss internal floor area of new dwe llings at a defined level of occupancy. Table 3.1 of the London Plan (2021) set outs the same gross internal area space standards set out in the technical housing standards - nationally described space standard (2015). Policy DMHB 16 of the Local Plan (2020) aligns with this policy. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.40 The proposed development compri ses a spacious 5-bedroom dwelling with multiple living areas and utility areas. The dwelling would meet all internal space standards of the London Plan (2021) and it is considered that all habitable rooms would have an adequate source of light and outlook. As such the proposed development complies with Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy DMHB 16 of the Local Plan (2020). 7.41 With regard to external amenity space, Policy DMHB 18 of Local Plan (2020) states that all new residential development and conversions will be required to provide good quality and usable private outdoor amenity space. Amenity space should be provided in accordance with the standards set out in Table 5.3, which requires a 4-plus bedroom house to provide a minimum of 100 square metres of private genuinely usable amenity space. 7.42 The site would retain in excess of 300sqm of private rear garden for private external amenity space which is considered to be of a sufficient size, usability and functionality, in accordance with Poli cy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan (2020). Hi ghways and Parking Access / Crossover 7.43 Several representations received have raised concerns that the proposed new vehicle access would impact the safe and efficient operation of Brookdene Drive due to its location and that the provision of a single carpark would create additional demand and stress on street parking in the area. The existing vehicular crossover would be removed as part of the proposal with the kerb reinstated. This is a shared crossover (with Saxon Court) so would be reduced in width as part of the reinstatement of the kerb. These works would be secured with the Council’s Highways Department and the reinstatement of the works secured prior to occupation via a condition at full cost to the developer (Condition 12). 7.44 The Highways Officer has reviewed the proposal and confirmed that the proposed new carriageway crossing is considered acceptable in principle and should conform to the council's maximum allowable width for crossing provisions as stipulated within the council's 'Domestic Vehicle Footway Crossover' Policy (2022). Final designs would be arranged post-permission, and it should be noted that the crossing would need to be constructed to an appropriate council standard executed under S184 of the Highways Act 1980 (or suitable alternative arrangement) all at the applicant's/developer's expense. This would also apply to all works linked to the reinstatement of public footwa y. Parking 7.45 Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 Policy - DMT 6 requires that new development will only be permitted where it accords with the council's adopted parking standards Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press unless it can be demonstrated that a deviation from the standard would not result in a deleterious impact on the surrounding road network. London Plan (2021): Policy T6.1 (Residential Parking) requires that new residential development should not exceed the maximum parking standards as set out in table 10.3. 7.46 The application proposes to disestablish the existing garage for car parking and provide one new onsite car parking space on the south-eastern frontage of the site. The Highways Officer is satisfied this is sufficient as the provision complies with the maximum parking provision of 1 space under the overriding regional standard of the London Plan. London Plan (2021): Policy T6.1 (Residential Parking) requires that new residential development should not exceed the maximum parking standards as set out in table 10.3. The maximum requirement for a 3-bedroom + dwelling as per the overriding regional standard demands up to 1 space. As the established double garage and parking directly in front would cease to function as a provision for car parking, the new replacement single on- plot space conforms to the standard. 7.47 Whilst concerns have been raised during the consultation process that the development would lead to parking pressures with the loss of the double garage. The policy requirement for a dwelling house of this size would be 1 car parking space. It is also questionable whether the existing garage is of sufficient size for two modern vehicles. Notwithstanding this, as there is a parking space re- provided, it would be in line with the policies requirements. As such, the parking provision is in accordance with Policies DMT 6 and T6.1 and is acceptable. C ycle Parking 7.48 In terms of cycle parking there should be a provision of 2 secure and accessible spaces to conform to the adopted borough cycle parking standard. This quantum is to be provided within the retained ‘double garage’ which is considered an acceptable arrangement. Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP) 7.49 In line with the London Plan (2021), within the final parking quantum there is a requirement for a minimum of 20% 'active' EVCP provision with all remaining spaces being designated as 'passive' prov isions. In this case, 1 ‘active’ space should be provided in order to future proof for anticipated demand which is demonstrated on the proposed plan. This would be secured b y Condition 2. Vehicular Trip Generation 7.50 Policies DMT 1 and DMT 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) requires the council to consider whether the traffic generated by proposed developments is acceptable in terms of the local highway and junction capacity, traffic flows and conditions of general highway or pedestrian safety. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.51 The Highways Officer considers there would be no discernible difference in vehicle bound activity as compared to the scale and single tenure of the existing dwelling (which will remain the sa me for the replacement build) hence any generated activity can therefore be readily absorbed within the local road network without notable detriment to traffic congestion and road safety. The application is in accordance with Policies DMT 1 and DMT 2. Operational Refuse Requirements 7.52 Refuse collection would continue to take place via Brookdene Drive. To conform to the council's 'waste collection' maximum distance collection parameter of 10m distance from a refuse vehicle to the point of collection, arrangements should ensure that waste is positioned at a collection point within this set distance. The proposed waste storage positioning conforms to this requirement and refuse would be brou ght to the front boundary on collection days. Construction Management Plan (CMP) 7.53 The Highways Officer considers a full and detailed CMP should be required given the constraints and sensitivities of the local road network to avoid/minimise potential detriment to the public realm. It is recommended provision of a CMP is secured b y adding condition (Condition 6) Conclusion 7.54 The Highways Authority have been consulted on the application and are satisfied, subject to conditions, that the proposal would not discernibly exacerbate congestion or parking stress, and would not raise any measurable highway safety concerns, in accordance with Local Plan: Part 2 Development Plan (2020) Policies DMT 1, DMT 2 and DMT 6 and Policies T4, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2021). Noise 7.55 Policy D14 of the London Plan (2021) requires that proposals minimise noise pollution and Policy EM8 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies (2012) promotes the maximum possible reduction in noise levels and seeks to ensure that noise impacts can be adequatel y controlled and mitigated. 7.56 The site would be used in an exclusively residential capacity. Therefore, in terms of the operational phase of the proposed development (occupation of the dwellin g), no significant issues are raised by the proposal in respect to noise. 7.57 Given the built-up residential nature of the area, a Construction Management Plan would be necessary to minimise noise and other emissions caused during the construction phase as far as practicable. This would be secured b y Condition 6. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.58 The proposal also includes an Air Source Heat Pump (ASHP) which would provide some comfort in achieving sustainability in energy usage. A revised plan has been submitted showing an indicative location for the ASHP which would be situated within the private amenity garden along the eastern side of the property. It would be approximately 13.5m away from the common boundary with 34 Brookdene Drive. 7.59 Given this separation distance, Officers are satisfied that the ASHP would not lead to any adverse impact on the adjoining neighbours. Whilst satisfied with the overall positioning, a condition has been recommended which requires the finer details of the air source heat pump to be submitted prior to occupation (Condition 19). Furthermore, to safeguard the neighbours, the condition also ensures that the noise generated would be in line with industry practice and shall be 5 decibels below the lowest existing background noise measured 1 metre outside the nearest and/or most affected noise sensitive premises. Floodin g Risk/Critical Drainage Area 7.60 Policy DMEI 9 requires all new development to adequately manage flood risk. Policy DMEI 10 requires all new development proposals to include water efficiency measures, includin g the collection and reuse of rainwater and grey water. 7.61 The application site is not located within a Flood Zone 2 or 3 or at risk of surface flooding. It is located within a Critical Drainage Area and proposes construction of a new dwelling. A Sustainable Urban Drainage Strategy (SudS) prepared by Aval Consulting Group, has been submitted in support of the application. The strategy confirms attenuation tank/s (11.4sqm); flow control devices and permeable paving would be used as part of the development to ensure sustainable drainage occurs. While this approach is acceptable in principle, further details are required as to the dimensions, appearance and specific siting of the proposed attenuation tank/s to assess the potential impacts of its appearance. Condition 17 has been included in this recommendation to secure further details. Subject to compliance with any approved details the development would be in accordance with Policies DMEI 9 and 10. Accessibilit y 7.62 Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021) seeks to ensure development proposals achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design. Policy D7 of the London Plan (2021) r equires at least ten percent of dwellings to meet Building Regulation requirement M4(3) 'wheelchair user dwellings', with all other dwellings meetin g Category M4(2) 'accessible and adaptable dwellings'. 7.63 The Councils Access Officer has been consulted on the application and has no objection to the proposed development in terms of accessibility subject to securing conditions pertaining to ens uring step free access to the dwelling and requiring certification of compliance with M4 (2) accessibility regulations prior to occupation Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press of the dwelling. It is recommended these are added as Conditions 13 and 14 to ensure the development is in accordance with Policies D5 and D7. Trees and Landscapin g 7.64 Policy DMHB 14: Trees and Landscaping of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part Two (2020) states that all developments will be expected to retain or enhance existing landscaping, trees, biodiversity or other natural features of merit, and will be required to provide tree surveys and protection plans where proposals might affect existing trees. It also states that development proposals will be required to provide a landscape scheme that includes hard and soft landscaping appropriate to the character of the area, which supports and enhances biodiversit y and amenity. 7.65 The site is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) and there is a scheduled Oak Tree located on the eastern boundary of the site as well as several other mature trees. Sometime prior to submission of the planning application, several mature trees have been removed from the site. The trees removed were not protected under the TPO and therefore did not require planning permission to be removed. The removal of these trees requires no further action. 7.66 An Arboricultural Impact Assessment, prepared by Arbol EuroConsulting, has been submitted in support of the application. The report confirms no further tree removal is proposed as part of the application. However, construction works would occur within the Root Protection Area of the scheduled Oak Tree. The report confirms the extent of proposed works and includes an arboricultural method statement to ensure these works are undertaken with due regard for the health and safet y of all mature trees on the site. 7.67 The report also identifies facilitation pruning would be required to the scheduled Oak Tree however does not determine the extent of tree pruning required. This is because it is not determinable without detailed construction methodology. Therefore, this pruning does not form part of this planning application and separate tree works consent would be submitted in due course. It is noted that the proposed plan (24024 FP1 01.02 Rev C) includes an annotation regarding pruning works to be carried out to the protected Oak Tree. For the avoidance of doubt, Condition 11 has been added reminding the applicant that no permission has been granted for these tree pruning works. Such works would need to be secured through a tree works consent application and an informative is also included reminding the applicant of the need for a follow-up application related to any prunin g works. The Council’s Tree Officer agrees with this approach. 7.68 The Council’s Tree Officer has reviewed the application and originally identified concerns with the extent of works and methodology of excavations around the scheduled Oak Tree. The applicant subsequently submitted amended plans reducing the extent of hard surfaces and fencing within the root protection area (RPA) of the Oak Tree and confirmed all excavations within the extent of the RPA would be undertaken b y hand to avoid undue harm to the roots of the tree.

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Christos Chrysanthou 17979/APP/2025/1314 Date Application Valid: 09.05.25 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 09.09.25 Application Type: Full Ward: Northwood Hills Applicant: Hillingdon Council Site Address: Haydon Drive, Pinner, HA5 2PL Proposal: Demolition of 16 studio bungalows and the erection of 21 affordable family -sized houses with associated facilities. Summary of Recommendation GRANT planning permission subject to section 106 legal agreement and conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 6 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (the Council is the Applicant) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 legal agreement to secure the heads of terms set out below, and subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1. It is recommended that delegated powers be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to grant planning permission subject to the following: A) That a legal agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) or any other legislation be agreed to secure the following: i. To secure on-site affordable housing, to include a provision of 100% by habitable room with all units being Social Rent. ii. London Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU) financial contribution of £18,428 to fund enhanced or new health facilities within the London Borough of Hillingdon. iii. Carbon offset contribution of £17,670. iv. Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £18,188. v. The provision of Public Open Space and Children’s Play Space in the location outlined on drawing no. APL006 Rev D shall remain open to all members of the public in perpetuity and be managed and maintained in accordance with the agreed Landscape Management Plan. vi. A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. B) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparing the Section 106 Agreement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed. C) That officers be authorised to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the proposed agreement and conditions of approval. D) That, if the Legal Agreement has not been finalised within 6 months (or such other time frame as may be agreed by the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth), delegated authority be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to refuse planning permission for the following reason: 'The applicant has failed to mitigate the impacts posed by the proposed development (in respect of Affordable Housing, Health, Carbon Emissions and Air Quality). The scheme therefore conflicts wi th Policies DMCI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020); the adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Planning Document (2014); Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021); and paragraphs 56-58 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).' E) That if the application is approved, that the permission is subject to the Conditions as set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summary 1.1 The application seeks planning permission for the demolition of 16 studio bungalows and the erection of 21 affordable family -sized houses with associated facilities. 1.2 The proposal is considered to be acceptable in principle, making effective use of an existing brownfield site to provide additional housing, and notably provide 100% affordable housing, secured as Social Rent. The proposal also secures the provision of 3no. accessible housing units and communal play space and open space that provides an inclusive, accessible and flexible development. 1.3 The proposed site layout and density are considered to represent the optimal use of the site. The overall scale, massing and appearance of the development is considered to respond well to local context and the proposed detailed design is of high quality, The proposed building along Joel Street provides a coherent frontage facing onto the public highway and harmonises with the street scene. 1.4 Due to the siting of the proposed development coupled with separation distances to adjoining buildings, the impact on residential amenity of nearby properties would be acceptable. The quality of accommodation proposed is considered to be of a high standard with sufficient outlook and access to natural ligh t within the future units and amenity spaces, with all uni ts meeting the minimum space standard requirements. A sufficient level of parking provision is also provided. Having due regard to the need to optimise the use of the site, the impacts on townscape, residential amenity and local transport impacts are all considered to be acceptable 1.5 Overall, the proposal is considered to bring forward a number of significant benefits, namely the provision of 100% affordable housing explicitly targeted at addressing the tenure in the highest demand within the borough, several on-site improvements, including improvements to park ing arrangements and public realm enhancements. Taking all matters into account, the proposed development is considered to comply with the Development Plan and the application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions and s106 obligations set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site area measures 0.58ha and contains 16 studio bungalows and large amounts of green open space, including a wide range of mature trees and public lawns. The surroundings are a low-density suburban setting characterised Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press by 2-storey family housing with pitched roofs, including along Joel Street. Front gardens along Joel Street generally provide greening, car parking and access to private front doors. The public transport accessibility level (PTAL) of the area is 1b which is at the lower range of the scale. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Figure 2: Street View of the Application Site (taken from Joel Street) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of 16 studio bungalows and the erection of 21 affordable family -sized houses with associated facilities. The development would be 100% affordable housing tenure for the purposes of social rent. 3.2 Comprising a mix of 6no 3bedroom dwelli ngs and 15no 4bedroom dwellings, the proposal would replace the existing substandard and poor -quality studios with high-quality family-sized dwellinghouses that would benefit from private amenity spaces, parking and access to communal open space and play space. Figure 3: Proposed Scheme (the set of proposed plans can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 160 neighbouring properties and Northwood Hills Residents’ Association were consulted on 20th May 2025. A newspaper advert was placed on 28 th May 2025. The consultation period expired on 18th June 2025. 6.2 A total of 16 objections were received. 6.3 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 16 individual letters of objection have been received. 1. Overdevelopment Discussed at paragraphs 7.6 – 7.8 of this report. 2. Impact on amenity, noise and anti-social behaviour Discussed at paragraphs 7.22 - 7.23 and 7.57 - 7.58 of this report. 3. Noise and disturbance from building work Discussed at paragraph 7.22 of this report. 4. Fly tipping and waste Fly tipping is not a material planning consideration. Waste/refuse is discussed at paragraph 7.7 of this report. 5. Parking, traffic and highway safety Discussed at paragraphs 7.42 – 7.50 of this report. 6. Impact on wildlife Discussed at paragraphs 7.64 – 7.65 of this report. 7. Other properties needing work Comment is noted, however this is not a material planning consideration. 8. The Council has a duty of care to prevent homelessness and not force existing tenants out without finding suitable alternative housing. Discussed at paragraph 8.3 of this report. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Policy Request to retain Public Open Space, including public access, plus improved Biodiversity Net Gain. Public Open Space to be secured by obligation and plans have been revised to achieve an Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press acceptable level of BNG. Urban Design The proposal creates urban repair and a better layout than the existing buildings. which is supported and welcomed. The appearance of the buildings is a modern twist on the existing houses in the area which is supported. Landscaping details to be secured by condition. Support for the proposals is n oted. Relevant conditions are recommended to be attached should the application be approved. Access No objection subject to conditions. Relevant conditions are recommended to be attached should the application be approved. Air quality No objection subject to conditions and an air quality contribution. Relevant obligation secured and conditions are recommended to be attached should the application be approved. Building Control No comments. Noted. Contaminated Land No objection subject to a condition and informative. Relevant condition is recommended to be attached should the application be approved. Highways No objection subject to conditions. Relevant conditions are recommended to be attached should the application be approved. Waste Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press No objection. Note that Hillingdon Council is not a wheeled bin borough for refuse and recycling. Food waste bins can be presented for collection but refuse and recycling would need to be removed from bins and presented as loose sacks at front boundary of property for collection. Noted and informative added. Cadent Gas No comments. Noted. Historic England No objection. Noted. Thames Water No objection to the development proposed. Additional information provided in terms of waste water network and water provision. Noted and informative added. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 The site accommodates existing residential dwellings therefore the residential use of the site is already established. Furthermore, the development plan provides significant support for the redevelopment and optimisation of existing residential sites and brownfield land for residential intensification provided it is designed appropriately. This development brings forward the opportunity to increase local housing stock including the provision of family sized dwellings, through the intensification of the use of the site, whilst maintaining adequately standards of living accommodation and promoting good design. The development would comply with Policy H2 of the Local Plan Part 2 which identifies a need for sites with a capacity for 10 or more units to ensure that the affordable housing mix reflects housing needs in the Borough, particularly the need for larger family units of three or more bedrooms. Affordable housing 7.2 The application is supported by an affo rdable housing statement which confirms the proposal would be a 100% affordable housing scheme under Social rent tenure which would be secured via a legal agreement . Policy H5 of the London Plan outlines that developments which provide 75% or more affordable housing may follow the Fast Track Route where the tenure mix is acceptable to the borough Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press or the Mayor where relevant. The pr oposal therefore does not require consideration of financial viability information. 7.3 The proposal is 100% affordable housing, in line with Policy H8 Part E of the London Plan. The development would result in a net increase of five units of affordable housing provision within the application site. The proposal would replace existing outdated and substandard housing units with modern family size dwellings, thus increases and improves the offer of affordable housing stock within the borough. Housing Mix 7.4 The plans and schedule of accommodation submitted with the application indicate there will be a mix of 3 bedroom and 4 bedroom dwellinghouses which meets the Council's definition of family sized housing , which is also defined in the London Plan as ' a dwelling that by virtue of its size , layout and design is suitable for a family to live in and generally has three, four, five, or more bedrooms'. 7.5 As stated previously, there is an identif ied local need for affordable housing that are 3+ bedroom units. The mix of housing proposed is therefore supported. Density 7.6 Under Table 5.2 of the Local Plan Part 2, for dwellinghouses, a density range of 35 - 70 units per hectare (u/ha) would be considered acceptable for the site context. The site area measures 0.58 hectares and 21 no. units are proposed. The development would have a density of 36.2 u/ha, which is towards the lower end of the residential matrix. 7.7 The application site as a whole is currently under-utilised and the level of residential accommodation provided by the bungalows within the context of the size of the application site is suboptimal. The appropriate density has been determined by the ability of the development to sit comfortably within the suburban context whilst accommodating the appropriate levels of car parking, landscaping with a placemaking approach to the site and its surroundings. 7.8 The development proposed responds to the generally low-rise context of its surroundings, and the scale of development and number of units is considered to achieve the appropriate use of the site which provides a good level of new housing at an appropriate density for the area. Design / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.9 The existing single storey bungalows that would be removed, sit within a residential area comprising predominantly two and three storey buildings. The scheme has been subject to several rounds of pre -application discussions which have informed the evolution of the proposal. In acknowledging the opportunity to increase the density to a more appropriate level and thus make the best use of the site, the scale of development proposed responds to the wider site context Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press which comprises residential buildings that are 2- 2.5 storeys in height and footprints proposed are consistent with the surrounding buildings on Haydon Drive and Joel Street. 7.10 Block D is formed of a 2.5 storey building comprising a row of four terraced dwellinghouses. The building is orientated to face onto Joel Street and the siting of the building follows the established pattern of development and respects the front and rear building lines. Three of the four dwellings are provided with private gardens to the rear and th e other dwelling is provided with a relatively larger amenity space to the side and front. Th e building design incorporates a gabled roof form and materials that correspond to the neighbouring properties along Joel Street. The massing and proportions of the building are considered to be acceptable and allow the block to sit comfortably in relation to the neighbouring properties and provide a defined frontage along Joel Street. 7.11 Directly behind Block D is Block A2, whic h is formed of a 2.5 storey building comprising a row of six terraced dwellinghouses. The building is orientated to face northwest which provides surveillance of the car parking area and open space and play space. Block A1 is located southeast of Block A2 and is formed of a 2.5 storey building comprising a row of five te rraced dwellinghouses with its principal elevation facing northeast. All eleven dwellinghouses in these blocks are provided with rear garden areas. 7.12 Opposite Block A1 and located towards the eastern boundary of the site are Blocks B and C which are 2 storey buildings set out as two rows of three terraced dwellinghouses. All six dwellinghouses in these two blocks are provided with rear patios and garden areas. The siting of Blocks B and C in this part of the site supports a transition in scale from the dwellings on Haydon Drive to the east, which are also two storey in height, and allows for an optimisation of roof spaces in Blocks A1, A2 and D to reflect the higher density developments along Joel Street, which includes 2.5 storey buildings. 7.13 Due to the irregular shape of the site, Blocks A1, A2 and C are of a staggered design to optimise the site layout and this also helps to break down the massing of the development and along with the design features incorporated into the scheme, adds an element of visual interest. Whilst the ground level s where Block D is sited are relatively flat, the other buildings would have a varied height, which responds well to the changes in ground levels across the site. 7.14 A detailed materials schedule has been provided. The materials schedule indicates that red brick and red/brown ro of tiles would be the primary exterior material used in the development with se condary materials such as the standing seam cladding, panels, windows, doors, rainwater goods canopies and balcony enclosures being of a grey/brown colour scheme. Surfaces are of a neutral colour scheme. The specific details of the materials would be secured by condition in the event of an approval. 7.15 Overall, the proposed materials coupled with the detailed design of the scheme indicate that a high-quality finish would be achieved. The current scheme is Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press considered to represent the optimal use of the site and is acceptable with regards to character and appearance considerations. Neighbouring Residential Amenity 7.16 The separation distance between Block A1 and the rear elevations of Nos.195- 199 Joel Streetis at least 35.6 metres, which far exceeds the minimum separation distance of 21 metres described in the Hillingdon Local Plan. Consequently, there would not be any undue overlooking or loss of privacy experienced by these neighbours. The rear elevations of Units 10 and 11 on Block A2 would face towards the foot of the rear garden of No.195, however given the separation distance and screening provided by the boundary treatment and existing trees, there is not considered to be any significant loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties. 7.17 Block B would be sited approximately 14.5 metres to the north of Nos.33-39 Haydon Drive where it is noted there are 4no . windows in the side north facing elevation. These windows on the neighbouring building would face primarily onto the new road and the front gardens of Block B. Further, the two-storey massing of Block B has been designed with a part step back to increase the separation at first floor level. As such there would not be any undue loss of outlook to these neighbouring windows. 7.18 Blocks B and C have been designed with non-habitable rooms towards the rear at first floor level which avoids any potentia l overlooking, loss of privacy and inter- visibility with the rear elevations and gardens of Nos. 114 -120 and Nos. 121-128 Haydon Drive which are located to west of the blocks. The first-floor rear windows of Blocks B and C would be obscure glazed as secured by a suitable condition. Blocks B and C are both two storeys in height and of a similar scale to the neighbouring properties that are located behind them to the east. Due to the acceptable separation distance between the two blocks and these neighbours, there would not be an undue overbearing impacts or loss of outlook experienced by these neighbouring properties. 7.19 Block D would not extend into the 45-degree line of sight measured from the nearest windows at No.195. The neighbour on the other side at No.185 is located approximately 30.7 metres away from the north facing side elevation of Block D. Therefore, both adjacent neighbours on Joel Street would not experience any significant loss of outlook. Any first-floor views from the rear of the Block D towards the rear garden of No.195 would be at an oblique angle and not harmful in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy. 7.20 The application is supported by a Daylight & Sunlight Amenity Study that assesses the likely significant effe cts to daylight for neighbouring buildings in terms of Vertical Sky Component (VSC), Daylight Dist ribution (DD) (often referred to as No-Sky Line) and Annual Probable Sunlight Hours (APSH). The report demonstrates that satisfactory daylight and sunlight provision would be retained to neighbouring properties following the implementation of the proposed development. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.21 The report highlights that the kitchen at No.195 Joel Street would not meet the BRE guidance. It is however noted that the kitchen would retain its main rear aspect and therefore the marginal reduction in daylight and sunlight experienced via the glazed side door would not be s ufficient to warrant a recommendation for refusal. As kitchens are defined in the Local Plan as non-habitable rooms and noting that the kitchen would achieve an acceptable level of Vertical sky component and daylight distribution , it is considered that the neighbouring properties’ kitchen would retain an acceptable level of daylight and sunlight provision. 7.22 Concerns have been raised by residents regarding the potential for anti-social behaviour and noise taking into consideration the proximity of the proposed play area to neighbouring properties on Joel Str eet. It is highlighted that the existing open space does not benefit from direct surveillance and as discussed in the ‘Security’ section of this report, the de velopment would be subject to a condition to achieve ‘secure by design’ accreditation which aims to make places safer. Noise levels are unlikely to reach levels beyond that which would be associated with the residential use and are unlikely to be so significant as to create a nuisance. Anti- social behaviour and noise nuisance are however covered by other legislation which provides residents with the ability to report such activities to the relevant authorities. 7.23 Concerns have been raised in the neighbour representations regarding the noise and disturbance from the construction process. This is an inherent part of any development process and whilst there would inevitably be some disruption, this would be temporary. A construction management plan (titled Demolition Environmental Management Plan) has been submitted in support of the application, which sets out how the development would preserve the amenity of the area and minimise disruption to the local highway network. The plan has been reviewed by the Highway Authority who consider the plan to be acceptable. 7.24 Overall, the development is considered to preserve neighbouring residential amenity. Quality of Residential Accommodation 7.25 Affordable housing should be built to the same standards and should share the same level of amenity as private housing. 7.26 Table 3.1 of London Plan under Policy D6 requires the following minimum Gross Internal Area (GIA) to be provided for 3 and 4 bedroom dwellings: - A dwelling with 3bedrooms, 5person occupancy: a GIA of at least 93 sq. metres - A dwelling with 3bedrooms, 6person occupancy: a GIA of at least 102 sq. metres - A dwelling with 4bedrooms, 7person occupancy: a GIA of at least 115 sq. metres - A dwelling with 4bedrooms, 8person occupancy: a GIA of at least 124 sq. metres Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.27 The proposed 3 bedroom units are provided with GIAs of between 109.5-113.4 sq. metres. The proposed 4 bedroom units are provided with GIAs of between 135-140.2 sq. metres. All 21 of the prop osed dwellings exceed the minimum internal floorspace standards. 7.28 A Daylight and sunlight assessment has been submitted in support of the application. It demonstrates that with regards to spatial daylight autonomy (which assesses illumination levels and daylight hours of rooms within the development), that the proposed layout results in Blocks, B, C and D being 100% compliant with BRE guidance. Block A is noted to be 86% compliant with only 9 rooms out of 66 rooms falling below the BRE guidance. 7.29 The 9 rooms that do not meet the BRE criteria are noted to be kitchens which are served by windows that are northeast and northwest facing and therefore would not benefit from consistent direct dayl ight/sunlight throughout the day. Despite their orientation, these kitchens would benefit from good outlook and a median lux level of between 158 and 178 lux. Whilst the illumination levels for these kitchens are lower than the BRE guidance of 200 lux, this is not considered to be significant in the context of the overall level of day light/sunlight provision achieved by the development. Kitchens are defined in the Local Plan as non-habitable rooms and in this context , the levels of daylight and sunlight provided to these rooms is considered to be acceptable and would not be detrimental to the living conditions of future occupiers. 7.30 Across the whole development which comprises 114 rooms, BRE compliance is achieved at 92.2% which is considered to represent an acceptable level of daylight/sunlight provision for the development. 7.31 The sunlight exposure assessment re sults indicate that 33 rooms would have between 0-0.1 sunlight exposure hours. These rooms include the kitchens and bedrooms in Block A that are served by windows that are northeast and northwest facing and a second floor bedroom window in Block D that is northeast facing. However, all remaining habitable rooms including all living rooms in the development achieve compliance with BRE guidance (minimum of 1.5 hours of direct sunlight). 7.32 All units are dual aspect and provided with 2.5 metre floor to ceiling heights for at least 75% of the proposed floor areas. The bedrooms within all units are of a suitable size and all habitable rooms are provided with adequate outlook. Overall, the proposal delivers a high standard of residential accommodation. Private amenity space 7.33 Private amenity space should be provided in accordance with the standards set out in Table 5.3 of the London Plan. Table 5.3 states that: - 3-bedroom dwellings should be provided with at least 60square metres of private amenity space; and Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - 4-bedroom dwellings should be provided with at least 100 square metres of private amenity space. 7.34 In accordance with the above standards, a total private amenity space provision of 1,860 sq. metres would be required to serve the development. The 21 no dwellings would be provided with an overall private amenity space provision totalling 1,710 sq. metres. The quantum of private amenity space provision is 150 square metres under the required guidance. It is however considered that the shortfall is offset by the provision of the play space and open space which taken together measure 743 sq. metres. The amenity spaces available for use by future occupiers within the site totals 2,453 sq. metres. 7.35 There are a total of 48 amenity spaces which includes gardens and patio areas and terraces which are provided for indivi dual use by future occupiers of the dwellinghouses. The BRE guidance aims for 2 hours of sunlight across at least 50% of private amenity spaces. The Daylight/sunlight assessment submitted with the application includes a 2 hour sunlight analysis of the private amenity spaces and a summary of the findings is provided below. 7.36 The Daylight/sunlight assessment demonstrates that 37 of the 48 amenity spaces would be compliant with the BRE guidance. The 11 spaces that do not meet the BRE guidance include three first floor te rraces, two rear gardens and six patio areas. The lower level of Daylight/sunlight provided to these 11 spaces is attributed to the layout and orientation of the spaces. 7.37 Taken as a whole, it is highlighted that all 21 no. residential units would be provided with individual amenity spaces which are good quality and useable and consistent with the overall design of the development. Therefore, having regard to the above and taking a balanced view, it is considered that the development would provide an adequate level of amenity spaces within the site. Open Space 7.38 The site contains part of an existing public footpath (R55) on its northern boundary and an area of public open space. This is an important pedestrian route for residents providing a footpath between Joel Street, Chamberlain Lane and Haydon Hall Meadows. The proposal would retain the public footpath and the open space alongside a new play space. 7.39 Based on the Council’s open space strategy and planning obligations SPD, open space amounting to 1,121.4sq.m would be required. The open space to the north of the site measures 500sq.m. As detail ed in the ‘Play Space’ section below, the development also comprises a dedicated play area measuring 487sq.m. The site also lies in close proximity to Haydon Hall M eadows and Haydon Hall Park providing occupiers with access to recreational open spaces. Taken as a whole, the level of open space available to future occupiers is considered to be sufficient. An obligation is proposed to be secured by legal agreement to ensure that the public open space is secured in perpetuity. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Play Space 7.40 The Mayor's supplementary planning guidance (SPG) 'Shaping Neighbourhoods: Play and Informal Recreation' sets a benchmark of 10m2 of usable child play space to be provided per child, with under -fives play space provided on-site as a minimum. The GLA Population Yield Calculator (v3.2) has been used to determine the play space requirement based on the numbers of children that would be yielded from the proposed development. This would be in addition to the retention of on -site public open space provision. Base d on the housing mix listed in the schedule of accommodation, the GLA Population Yield Calculator results in a total play space requirement of 437 sq. metres. 7.41 The landscape plan has been amended to factor this requirement into the scheme. A play space of 487 sq. metres is provided along the northern boundary. It would be enclosed for security and furnished with play equipment and enhances the communal amenity sp ace made available for use by residents. An obligation is proposed to be secured by legal agreement to ensure that the play space is also secured in perpetuity. Highway safety and Parking 7.42 The application site would continue to be accessed off Haydon Drive as there is no vehicular access off Joel Street. The road would be redesigned to accommodate the proposed layout and the highway works would be subject to a s278 agreement which would be secured directly with the Highway Authority. 7.43 There would be a marginal increase in traf fic generation relative to the existing situation, estimated to amount to less than 10 two -way movements during peak traffic periods. The vehicle movements associated with the development could be absorbed within the local road network. As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Highway Authority do not raise an objection on highway safety grounds. 7.44 The application site has a PTAL of 1b, which is considered to represent a poor level of access to public transport. In a ccordance with Policy T6.1 of the London Plan, the maximum parking standards applicable in this instance would allow for up to 31 parking spaces (applying a ratio of up to 1.5 spaces per 3+ bedroom dwelling). 7.45 A total of 25no. car parking spaces (including 3 dedicated wheelchair accessible spaces) are proposed to serve the development. The quantum of parking provision would allow for at least one parking spac e per dwelling, which accords with the London Plan requirement. The parking spaces are proposed to be allocated to the units. 7.46 Five of the spaces would be provided with active electric vehicle charging points and the remaining spaces would be provided with passive electric vehicle charging points. The electric vehicle charging points are shown on the revised site plan and their implementation would be secured by condition. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.47 As recommended by the Highway Authority, a parking, design and management plan providing details of how the parking spaces would be allocated and managed in perpetuity would be secured by condition. 7.48 The proposed layout also includes two motorcycle/scooter parking spaces. Each dwelling is provided with secure and accessible storage for 2 no . bicycles. A condition would be attached in the event of an approval to ensure these facilities are provided prior to occupation. 7.49 A Travel Plan framework has been submitted in support of the application. It outlines a strategy of promoting walking, cy cling, car sharing and use of public transport through providing relevant information and advice to residents upon occupation. The trav el plan would be managed by an appointed co-ordinator and is considered to be acceptable. A conditi on would be attached in the event of an approval, to ensure the travel plan is implemented within the indicated timeframes. 7.50 A construction management plan (titl ed Demolition Environmental Management Plan) has been submitted in support of the applicatio n. The plan has been reviewed by the Highway Authority who consider the plan to be acceptable. A compliance condition would be attached in the event of an approval to secure the implementation of the CMP in the interests of minimising disruption to the local highway network and preserving the amenity of the area. Air Quality 7.51 The application site is not located within an Air quality management area or an Air quality focus area. In accordance with Policy SI 1 of the London Plan, the application is supported by an Air Quality Assessment (AQA). 7.52 The AQA concludes that the development would be air quality neutral with respect to building -related emissions. The AQA lists mitigation measures including promoting non -car modes of transport , the use of sustainable energy technologies, urban greening and a ventilation strategy to maximise air quality for future occupiers. These mitigation measures would be secured by condition. 7.53 As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the proposal has been assessed by the Council’s air quality officer and having reviewed the AQA, it has been determined that the proposed development would not be air quality neutral and therefore further action is required to reduce em issions, and these can include off-site mitigation measures. The level of mitigation required to the proposed development for traffic emissions is £18,188 and this would be secured through a legal agreement. In addition, relevant conditi ons to be attached in the event of an approval are recommended to manage the control of dust and emissions during construction and demolition as required by the Mayor of London. Health 7.54 The floorspace occupied by affordable housing is not liable to Community Infrastructure Levy. Accordingly, the HUDU Planning Contributions Model has Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press been used to assess the health service requirements and cost impacts of the development. A financial contribution amou nting to £18,428 has been calculated and is recommended to be secured as part of a legal agreement. Accessibility 7.55 Three of the proposed dwellings are M4(3) wheelchair accessible. These units are located within Block C and are provided with accessible parking spaces located within close proximity of their frontages. A drawing showing step- free level thresholds throughout the development has been submitted in support of the application. 7.56 A condition is recommended to be attached in the event of an approval to require compliance with the provision of 3 no. M4(3) units and all remaining units being to M4(2) building regulation standards, which ensures the development is accessible and adaptable in accordance with Policy D7 of the London Plan (2021). Security 7.57 A planning condition is recommended requiring the site to achieve Secured by Design accreditation in consultation with the Metropolitan Police to ensure the proposal meets the requirements of Policy D11 of the London Plan and Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan. 7.58 It is noted that a resident’s objection refers to the potential for anti-social behaviour to occur within the children’s play area. The area where the children’s play area would be located is an existing open space located behind the gardens of Nos. 45-51 Haydon Drive which are enc losed with timber boarded fencing to the rear. Natural surveillance would be achieved through Block A2 which faces towards the children’s play area and the residential properties would have views of this area. On this basis, the proposal would impr ove surveillance of the open space and is considered acceptable in terms of safety and security. Trees and Landscaping 7.59 The proposal includes the delivery of on-site greening, planting and soft landscaping and public realm enhancements including improved rights of way. The submitted documentation indicates that there are 4 trees proposed to be removed. The remaining 47 existing trees would be retained with measures proposed for tree protection. 7.60 Full hard and soft landscaping details are provided in the submitted Proposed Landscape Plan. The landscape proposals include the planting of 8 new trees which results in a 125% increase in soft landscaping representing a significant benefit to existing and future residents. 7.61 The landscape plan also includes areas laid to lawn, hedges, wildflower and shrub planting, formal footpaths, the provisio n of suitable boundary walls and areas of hardstanding constructed with permeable surfacing. The proposed landscape plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press is considered to be acceptable and would assist with enhancing the visual amenity of the site. A planting and implementation specification is provided in the landscape plan. Details and the implementation of the landscape scheme would be secured by condition. Urban Greening Factor 7.62 The London Plan recommends that boroughs seek an Urban Greening Factor (UGF) target score of 0.4 for developments that are predominately residential. In broad terms, the UGF is an assessment of the amount, type and value of natural environment provided on site as a proportion of the overall site area. 7.63 In this instance, due to the significant landscaping improvements and increased greening within the application site, th e development achieves a UGF of 0.518 which is above the target score set by the London Plan. Ecology and Biodiversity Net Gain 7.64 The application site is not subject to any ecological designations however it lies in proximity to the River Pinn corridor and adjoining Green Belt to the east and Haydon Hall Meadows SINC to the south. A Preliminary Ecological Appraisal has been submitted in support of the application. The report recommends the submission of a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEMP), ensuring the scheme is designed to achieve a Biodiversity Net Gain, further surveys including a Preliminary Bat Roost Assessment and a Ground- level Tree Assessment to determine if bats are present. The CEMP and ground level tree assessment would be secured by a suitable condition. 7.65 APreliminary Bat Roost Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. The report identifies that all four of the existing buildings and one of the trees that is proposed to be removed may have the potential to support roosting bats. The report recommends the carrying out of bat emergence surveys and notes that if a roost is found a licence from Natural England would be required. The report also details recommendations regarding the scheme design and lighting. The recommendations including the additional surveys and measures listed within the report would be secured by a suitable condition. 7.66 In accordance with the statutory frame work for Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG), a Biodiversity Statement & Metric Assessment have been submitted in support of the application. The report identifies a shortfall of 0.1 habitats required to meet the 10% BNG requirement. As the shortfall is relatively low, the site/landscape plan have been updated to reduce the amount of parking and hardstanding and increase the number of on -site trees to be planted. Taken together, the sh ortfall has been addressed, and the scheme therefore meets the 10% BNG target. The standard BNG condition would be attached in the event of an approval. Flooding and Drainage Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.67 The application site lies in a Flood Zone 1 (low risk) and a Critical Drainage Area (CDA) identified in the Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) for Hillingdon. In accordance with Policy DMEI 10: Part B of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2, the application is supported by a Drainage statement. 7.68 The Drainage statement comprises a flood risk assessment that demonstrates that the site is at a low risk of flooding from all sources. 7.69 The surface water strategy detailed within the Drainage statement, demonstrates a reduction in surface water run-off to a rate of 7.75 l/s which is lower than the pre- development run -off rate of 8.34 l/s and the greenfield run- off rate of 8.34 l/s (based on calculations for a 1:100 year storm scenario including a 40% climate change allowance). 7.70 Surface water is proposed to be attenuated by way of below ground attenuation tanks and the use of permeable paving. A maintenance schedule is also detailed to ensure long -term efficiency of the drainage strategy. The implementation of the measures listed in the Drainage statement would be secured by condition.Further, an informative would be attached with guidance on how the applicant can reduce the surface water from the site entering the sewers. Overheating 7.71 An Overheating Analysis has been submitted in support of the application. The report identifies passive design measures including energy efficient lighting and appliances, insulation of the building above building regulations standards, glazing design that keeps heat out, shading provided by the developme nt, natural and mechanical ventilation and ventilation louvres. The report demonstrates compliance with Part O of the building regulations. The implementation of the measures listed in the Overheating Analysis would be secured by condition. Energy and Sustainability 7.72 In accordance with Policy SI2 of the Lon don Plan, Major development should be net zero carbon. A minimum on -site reduction of at least 35 per cent beyond Building Regulations is required for major development. Where it is clearly demonstrated that the zero -carbon target cannot be fully achieved on- site, any shortfall should be provided, in agreement with the borough, through a cash in lieu contribution to the borough’s carbon offset fund. 7.73 An Energy Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. The report details measures to reduce carbon including the installation of photovoltaic panels and air source heat pumps and concludes that following the implementation of the three -step Energy Hierarchy, the development will achieve the following: - 80% overall regulated CO2 reduction against 2021 (Part L compliant baseline) - 58% overall regulated CO2 reduction by renewable sources (‘Be green’) - 22% overall regulated CO2 reduction by efficiency measures (‘Be Lean’) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.74 The report identifies the development would not meet the zero-carbon target due to a shortfall of 6.2 tonnes Co2/yr. A carbon offset contribution has been calculated at a sum of £17,670 which would be paid into the borough’s carbon offset fund and is recommended to be secured as part of a legal agreement. 7.75 A Sustainability Statement has been subm itted in support of the application. The report identifies further measures including the use of green roofs, water efficiency, waste management and materials efficiency and principles to promote sustainability throughout the development. The implementation of the measures and principles detailed in the report would be secured by condition. Re-use and circular economy 7.76 A Circular Economy Report and a Pre-Demolition Audit Report have been submitted in support of the application. Whil st the application is not referable to the Greater London Authority (GLA), the reports provide a summary and strategy of how materials from t he existing buildings can be re-used and re- cycled. According to the audit report, over 95% of waste materials by weight could be diverted from landfill, which accords with the target set by Policy SI 7 of the London Plan. The implementation of the strategy detailed in the reports would be secured by condition. Refuse and Waste Management 7.77 Refuse collection points are proposed on-site along Haydon Drive and on Joel Street in conjunction with existing refuse collection arrangements. The quantum of refuse storage proposed, and the proposed arrangements are considered to be acceptable. No objection has been raised by the Council’s waste services. Land Contamination 7.78 There is the possibility for contamination within the site as it is identified as being located on a potential former contaminated land use. A Preliminary Investigation Report has been submitted in support of the application and reviewed by the Council's Contaminated Land Officer. 7.79 The Council's Contaminated Land Officer has recommended a condition to restrict any importing of contaminated soils or other materials to the site and an informative which requires a remediation scheme be submitted in the event of any contamination being identified when works are carried out. The condition and informative would be attached in the event of an approval. Fire Safety 7.80 In support of the application, a fire statement form has been submitted that provides limited detail with regards to fi re safety including the location of fire hydrants in proximity of the developme nt. A swept path analysis demonstrating acceptable access and turning for emergency vehicles has been provided. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.81 It is unclear whether the materials used in construction of the building are fully non-combustible. The fire statement form indicates that the balconies and external walls would be of materials that are classified as having limited combustibility. Due to the lack of clarity on this matter, it is recommended that details are secured through the imposition of a condition. 7.82 The fire statement form does not detail the means of escape for future residents or provide an evacuation strategy, details of evacuation lifts, fire -protected stairways and evacuation assembly points and other active fire safety measures including fire detection alarm systems and automatic water fire suppression systems (i.e. an automatic sprinkler system). A condition is recommended to secure a fire safety strategy. Planning Obligations 7.83 Policy DMCI 7 of the Local Plan Part 2 states to ensure development is sustainable, planning permission will only be granted for development that clearly demonstrates there will be sufficient infrastructure of all types to support it. Infrastructure requirements will be predominantly addressed through the Council's Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). P lanning obligations will be sought on a scheme -by-scheme basis to secure the provision of affordable housing in relation to residential development schemes, where development has infrastructure needs that are not addressed through CIL, and to ensure that development proposals provide or fund improvements to mitigate site -specific impacts made necessary by the proposal. Applications that fail to secure an appropriate Planning Obligation to make the proposal acceptable will be refused. 7.84 The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulation 2010 (Regulations issued Pursuant to the 2008 Act) and the NPPF have put three tests on the use of planning obligations into law. It is unlawful (since 6 April 2010) to request planning obligations that do not meet the following tests: i. necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms ii. directly related to the development, and iii. fairly and reasonable related in scale and kind to the development 7.85 The effect of the Regulations is that the Council must apply the tests much more strictly and can only request planning obligations that are genuinely necessary and directly related to the development. Should the Council request planning obligations that do not meet the policy tests, the Council would have acted unlawfully and could be subject to a High Court challenge. 7.86 Section 106 Heads of Terms are as follows: i. To secure on-site affordable housing, to include a provision of 100% by habitable room with all units being Social Rent. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press ii. London Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU) financial contribution of £18,428 to fund enhanced or new health facilities within the London Borough of Hillingdon. iii. Carbon offset contribution of £17,670. iv. Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £18,188. v. The provision of Public Open Space and Children’s Play Space in the location outlined on drawing no. APL006 Rev D shall remain open to all members of the public in perpetuity and be managed and maintained in accordance with the agreed Landscape Management Plan. vi. A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. 8 Other Matters Human Rights 8.1 The development has been assessed against the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and in particular Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the Act itself. This Act gives further effect to the rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development rights and expectations which have been balanced and weighed against the wider community interests, as expressed through third party interests / the Devel opment Plan and Central Government Guidance. Equality 8.2 Due consideration has been given to Section 149 of the Equality Act with regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in the assessment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Duty of Care 8.3 The Council is committed to supporting tenants who are required to move due to proposed redevelopment, ensuring the process is handled with fairness and compassion. Statutory Home Loss and Disturbance Payments will be made in line with the Land Compensation Act 1973, covering the permanent loss of a home and reasonable moving costs such as mail redirection and utility reconnections. Moving services will also be provided. Additional support, including a packing service, will be offered to vulnerable tenants, specifically those with a disability or serious health condition, and those aged 65 or over. Tenants may also receive help with bidding for new properties and be offered accompanied viewings where needed. In cases of serious financial difficulty, early partial payment of the Home Loss Payment may be considered. The Council recognises its duty of care and is committed to offering personalised, practical assistance throughout the decant process. Local Finance Considerations and CIL Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 8.4 Not applicable as the proposed development is 100% Affordable Housing and is therefore not CIL liable. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The principle of development is considered to be acceptable, given the established residential use of the land, making effective use of the site to deliver a notable 100% affordable housing scheme of 21 family sized units, secured as Social Rent tenure. The development will make a positive contribution by providing new homes that meet the borough's identified needs , bringing an underused brownfield site into optimal use. 9.2 Due to the siting of the proposed development coupled with separation distances to adjoining buildings, the impact on residential amenity of nearby properties would be acceptable. The proposal would be inclusive and accessible and future residents would be provided with a high standard of living accommodation and amenity. 9.3 The overall scale, density, and layout of the development are considered to respond well to local context. The design of the development as a whole, including the massing, scale, bulk and detailed archit ecture of the proposed buildings, is considered appropriate for the site and su rroundings. Having due regard to the need to optimise the use of the site, the impacts on townscape, residential amenity and local transport impacts are all considered to be acceptable. 9.4 Overall, the proposal is considered to bring forward significant benefits, in the form of public realm improvements and by optimisation of the existing site, the increase in the quality and quantity of affordable housing provision that is specifically targeted at addressing the tenure in the highest demand within the borough. The proposal is considered to comply with the Development Plan and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. Consequently, the application is re commended for approval subject to the conditions and s106 obligations set out in Appendix 1. 10 Background Papers 10.1 Relevant published policies and documents taken into account in respect of this application are set out in the report. Documents associated with the application (except exempt or confidential information) are available on the Council's website here, by entering the planning application number at the top of this report and using the search facility. Planning appl ications are also available to inspect electronically at the Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW upon appointment, by contacting Planning Services at planning@hillingdon.gov.uk. AAPPENDICES Planning Application 17979/APP/2025/1314 Hillingdon Planning Committee - 9th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 17 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. RES3 T Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. REASON To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. RES4 A Accordance with Approved Plans The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted plans, numbers: - APL001 A - APL006 D - APL007 D - APL101 B - APL102 B - APL103 B - APL104 B - APL201 B - APL202 B - APL203 C - APL204 C - APL205 B - APL210 B - APL211 B - APL301 B - APL302 B - APL303 B - APL304 B - APL305 B - APL306 A - APL401 A - APL402 A - APL403 A - Proposed External Materials Rev.B, and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence. Hillingdon Planning Committee - 9th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 17 REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012), Part 2 (2020) and the London Plan (2021). 3 3. RES5 G General compliance with supporting documentation The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the following has been completed in accordance with the specified supporting plans and/or documents: - Travel Plan (Revised Issue 14th February 2025, Motion) - Demolition Environmental Plan (Rev. B) - Air Quality Assessment (27/02/2025, Eight Versa) - Drainage Statement (P02, 27/03/2025, SD Engineers and Drainage Design) and Drawing Number 2002-SDE-00-XX-DR-C-1000 P04 - Overheating Analysis (04/03/2025, Eight Versa) - Energy Assessment (25/02/2025, Eight Versa) - Sustainability Statement (28/03/2025, Eight Versa). - Pre-Demolition Audit Report (11/06/2025, Eight Versa) - Circular Economy Report (30/05/2025, Eight Versa). Thereafter the development shall be retained/maintained in accordance with these details for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012), Part 2 (2020) and the London Plan (2021). 4. RES7 M Materials (Submission) Notwithstanding the approved plans, no development (excluding demolition and works below slab level) shall take place until details of all materials and external surfaces, including details of windows, doors and balconies have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such. Details should include information relating to make, product/type, colour and photographs/images. REASON To ensure that the development presents a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 5. NONSC M Means of enclosure Notwithstanding the approved plans, no development (excluding demolition and works below slab level), shall take place until details of boundary fencing and/or other means of enclosure have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved means of enclosure shall be erected before the development is occupied and shall Hillingdon Planning Committee - 9th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 17

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Michael Briginshaw 2370/APP/2023/1727 Date Application Valid: 15.06.2023 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 30.09.2025 Application Type: Full Ward: Yiewsley Applicant: Habourside Investments Ltd & WM Morrison Supermarkets PLC Site Address: Morrisons Supermarket, 41-67 High Street Proposal: Phased demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site for a replacement foodstore (Class E), 158 residential units (Class C3), car parking, servicing and access arrangements and associated works. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to section 106 legal agreement and conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 1 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Major application recommended for approval) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 legal agreement to secure the heads of terms set out below, and subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1. Ma yor of London Stage 2 Referral & S106 Legal Agreement Heads of Terms It is recommended that delegated powers be given to the Director of Planning, Regeneration and Environment to grant planning permission subject to the following: A) That the application be referred to the Mayor under Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. B) That the Council enter into a legal agreement with the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) or any other legislation to secure the following: i. Affordable Housing: To secure on-site affordable housing, to include a provision of 10% Shared Ownership tenure (measured by habitable room). The obligation shall include an Early and Late-Stage Viability Review mechanism. ii. Air Quality Mitigation Contribution: Financial contribution equal to £60,789. iii. Canal & River Trust Contribution: Financial contribution equal to £70,000. iv. Carbon Offset Contribution: A carbon offsetting contribution, based on £95 per tonne over a period of 30 years, to be calculated through the submission of an updated Energy Strategy. v. Highway Improvement Works Contribution: Financial contribution equal to £49,500. vi. Car Club: Provision on site of 2 no. car club parking spaces. vii. Employment and Construction Training Scheme: An Employment/ Construction Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. viii. Residential Parking Permit Restrictions: Residential Parking Permits restriction (excluding Blue Badge holders). ix. Residential Travel Plan: A full Residential Travel Plan to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. x. Retail Travel Plan: A full Retail Travel Plan to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. xi. HUDU Health Contributi on: Financial contribution equal to £29,898. xii. Project Management and Monitoring Fee: A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press C) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparing the Section 106 Agreement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed. D) That officers be authorised to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the proposed agreement and conditions of approval and agree any changes requested by the Greater London Authority. E) That, if the Legal Agreement has not been finalised within 6 months (or such other time frame as may be agreed by the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth), delegated authority be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to refuse planning permission for the following reason: 'The applicant has failed to mitigate the impacts posed by the proposed development (in respect of Affordable Housing, Air Quality, Canal Enhancements, Carbon Emissions, Highways Safety, Car Club Provision and Travel Planning, Parking, Health, Employment and Planning Obligations Monitoring). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policies DMCI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Pa rt 2 (2020); the adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (2014); Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021); and paragraphs 56-58 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).' F) That if the application is approved, that the permission is subject to the Conditions as set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summar y 1.1 This application seeks permission for the phased demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site for a replacement foodstore (Class E) (1,672m2), and 158 residential flats (Class C3). This would comprise 74 no. 1 bed flats (46.8%), 66 no. 2 bed flats (41.8%), and 18 no. 3 bed flats (11.4%), including 10% of units (based on habitable rooms) as shared ownership affordable housing. A total of 88 no. car parking spaces are proposed to be split between residents and customers, alongside servicing and access arrangements, and landscaping works to create communal and private amenity space, alon gside some play space. 1.2 The proposed reduction in the floorspace of the Morrisons retail unit has previously been accepted under previous applications and there is no reason to conclude otherwise under the current application. There are no objections to the loss of the existing building which has little or no architectural merit and the provision of additional residential flats on sustai nably located br ownfield land within the Yiewsley and West Drayton Town Centre is supported. The retail unit will generate jobs on a site which has rema ined vacant for a number of years and the new residents of the development will provide further business for local Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press traders and support the vitality and viabilit y of the town centre. This weighs significantly in favour of the development in the planning balance. 1.3 The proposal for 11.4% family housing (3-bedroom units) is less than would be expected for such a scheme. However, in this regard it is recognised that there are some clear site constraints for the proposal, which includes the town centre location. In this circumstance, any request for an increase to the number of family units, which would therein result in an overall reduction of units, would compromise viability and potentially jeopardise the delivery of the scheme. On balance, the unit mix as proposed is accepted but the lack of family housing does not wei gh in favour of the application. 1.4 The scheme has been subject to viability testing by the Council's third-party consultants and the Greater London Authority. Following such assessment, it has been concluded that the scheme generates a deficit but is within the range of deliverability when accounting for growth within the market. Despite this, the developer has made a 10% shared ownership affordable housing offer. This offer increases the deficit generated by t he scheme and reduces its viability and deliverability. It is therefore concluded that this offer would represent the maximum viable affordable housing provision deliverable. In the event of an approval, it is recommended that the 10% shared ownership affordable housing offer is secured by legal agreement and includes Early and Late-Stage Viability Review mechanisms as defined b y Policy H5 of the London Plan (2021). 1.5 Other matters which are considered to be planning policy conflicts include the location of a tall building on a site not identified as suitable for a tall building in the development plan, the failure to meet urban greening factor requirements, and the delivery of a shortfall in amenity space provision, play space provision, and open space provision. 1.6 Planning obligations are proposed to secure affordable housing provisions, an air quality contribution, Canal & River Trust contribution, carbon offset contribution, highways improvement works contribution, car club provisions, employment strategy and construction training, parking permit restrictions, travel plans, and a HUDU health contribution. A project management and monitoring fee would also be secured to mana ge and monitor the planning obligations. 1.7 Subject to the planning conditions and obligations recommended, the proposed development is considered acceptable with respect to design, heritage, residential amenit y, environmental issues, transport, and sustainability. 1.8 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that planning applications should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the reasons outlined above and within the main body of the report, the application is considered to broadly comply with the Development Plan. Where there are minor conflicts with the Development Plan, there are considered to be sufficient mitigating factors and benefits which outweigh such conflicts. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval, sub ject to Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press securing the planning conditions set out in Appendix 1 and a Section 106 legal agreement. 2 The Site and Localit y Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) 2.1 The application site is outlined in red in Figure 1 and comprises a 0.52 hectare piece of land occupied by a large two storey building with a mansard roof, formerly used as a Morrisons supermarket at ground floor level with ancillary offices at first floor level. The site fronts the western side of High Street, Yiewsley, immediately to the north of the High Road's southern junction with St Stephen's Road. There is surface level parking and a service area to the rear of the building, accessed from St Stephen's Road. This area also provides ramped access to the single level basement car parking area beneath the store. There are a number of stairwells that provide direct access to the High Road from the basement and a walkway also provides access from the store entrance to the rear parkin g area along the northern elevation of the building. 2.2 The northern and eastern boundaries of the site comprise predominantly 3 storey retail parade buildings, with retail units on the ground floor and predominantly residential use above and to the south of the site is located a recently completed residential development, beyond which the High Street crosses the Grand Union Canal. To the rear of this development, the Grand Union Canal and its towpath immediately adjoin the opposite side of St Stephen's Road, separated by a narrow strip of hedging abutting the site's rear (western) boundary is St Matthews Primar y School, also accessed via St Stephen's Road. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Image of the Application Property 2.3 The site is located within the `Primary Shopping Area' of the Yiewsley/West Drayton Town Centre as designated by the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (January 2020). The site is designated as part of the Heathrow Opportunity Area as part of the London Plan (2021), identified as a significant location for development capacity. Other designations at the site include air safeguarding height restrictions, the Canals and Rivers Trust Zone, potentially contaminated land, the Hillingdon Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and the West Drayton/Yiewsley Air Quality Focus Area (AQFA). Transport for London’s WebCAT planning tool also identifies the site as moderately accessible with a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) ratin g of 3. 3 Proposal 3.1 This application seeks permission for the phased demolition of the existing Morrisons Supermarket buildings and the redevelopment of the site for a replacement foodstore (Class E), 158 residential units (Class C3), car parking, servicing and access arrangements and associated works. Please see Figure 3 for the elevation of the proposal as seen from the Hi gh Street. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3. Proposed High Street View (sourced from drawing ref. 2-200 Rev. K) 3.2 The proposal would demolish 5,480m2 Gross Internal Area (GIA) of Class E floorspace and would replace it with 4,024m2 GIA of Class E floorspace (including 1,672m2 of foodstore floorspace), plus 13,101m2 GIA residential floorspace (totalling 17,125m2 GIA). The development comprises a range of storey heights, ranging from 8 stories down to part 7, 6, 5 and 4 stories. There are two main forms of massing proposed. One is located on the High Street to the front (comprising the retail space as well as Cores A and B) and one is located on St. Stephen’s Road to the rear (comprising Core C). First floor amenity decks are proposed in between these blocks, as well as to the rear of Core C. All residential units are served by balconies as part of the amenity space strate gy. Please see Figure 4 for a proposed site plan. Figure 4. Proposed Site Plan indicating amenity space and storey heights (sourced from drawing ref. 2-100 Rev. E) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3.3 The retail space would be located on a ground floor level and mezzanine level and the residential units would be located on the first floor and above. Pedestrian access to the retail space would be taken from the eastern elevation, from the High Street. Pedestrian access to the residential units would be via the northern and southern Cores A and B, taken from the High Street, and via Core C taken from St. Stephen’s Road. Please see Fi gure 5 for a proposed ground floor plan. Figure 5. Proposed Ground Floor Plan (sourced from drawing ref. 2-101 Rev. S) 3.4 The retail space would be serviced via a yard space accessed off St. Stephen’s Road to the rear. Customer and residential car parking spaces are also accessed from St. Stephen’s Road. The number of parking spaces on site is proposed to reduce from the existing 114no. spaces to 88no. car parking spaces, including 64 no. car parking spaces (plus 4 no. motorcycle spaces) allocated for use by customers and 24 no. car parking spaces (including 2 no. car club spaces, and 4 no. accessible spaces ) allocated for use by residents. 3.5 During the course of the application, amendments were agreed and submitted as part of a revised proposal. Additional stair cores were proposed to each residential core in accordance with fire safety requirements for tall residential buildings. The energy strategy was amended and agreed that the development would be served by PV panels and a communal heating system. Following viabilit y testing, it was also a greed that the development would provide 10% of Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press the habitable rooms as shared ownership affordable housing, equating to 13 units (or 42 habitable rooms). 3.6 Please note that larger versions of the plans can be found in the Committee Plan Pack. 4 Relevant Plannin g History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 4.2 Application reference 2370/APP/2018/2793 was granted consent on 21 August 2019 for the demolition of the existing buildings and the redevelopment of the site to provide a part 4 to part 8 storey building comprising a replacement Class A1 1,643sq.m (GIA) food store, 144 residential units, basement car parking and associated works. The consent expired on the 21 August 2022. Although this planning permission was not implemented, it is highlighted that this permission is a material plannin g consideration. 4.3 Application reference 2370/APP/2019/2880 sought planning permission to vary planning permission reference 2370/APP/2018/2793 in order to allow the removal of the lower basement car park level and reconfiguration of the upper- level basement car park layout. This involved a reduction in the number of car parking spaces for the residential units from 101 to 23 spaces and additional off- site highway improvement works on St Stephen's Road. The application was refused for two reasons, as stated below: “1. The proposed reduction of on-site car parking for future residential occupiers fails to address the needs of future occupiers. Due to the sites only moderate public transport accessibility, there is a heavy reliance on the private car to provide access to jobs, schools, services etc. The proposed development would lead to future residents and visitor vehicles being displaced onto the surrounding local and strategic road network. The Council's evidence shows that this displacement of vehicles would lead to further congestion on the highway network resulting in an unacceptable impact on highway and pedestrian safety, particularly when combined with the cumulative impacts of future housing developments in the vicinity of the site, coming forward with similarly low on-site parking ratios, leading to a severe residual cumulative impacts on the road network and resultant impacts on highway and pedestrian safety. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DMT 1 and DMT 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (January 2020), Policy 6.3 of the London Plan (March 2016), Policy T4 of the draft London Plan (Intend to Publish Version 2019), para 105, 106 and 109 of the NPPF (January 2019), Mayors Transport Strategy 2018 and TfL Travel Plan Guidance (2013). 2. The applicant at this stage has failed to provide a Deed of Variation that would secure the contributions previously agreed and now required for this scheme. In the absence of the Deed of Variation the proposal is considered to be contrar y Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press to Policy DMCI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (January 2020), the Lond on Borough of Hillingdon Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations (2014), Policy 8.2 of the London Plan (March 2016), Policy DF1 of the Draft London Plan (Intend to Publish Version 2019 ) and para 54, 56 and 57 of the NPPF (January 2019).” 4.4 The decision to refuse this application was appealed and allowed as the Appeal Inspector concluded: “44. I therefore conclude on this main issue that the proposed variation of the parking arrangements would not unacceptably harm the safety or convenience of users of the highway network in the vicinity of the site including pedestrians, or the quality of life of existing residents or future occupiers of the development. Accordingly, I find no conflict with Policies DMT 1 or DMT 2 of the Local Plan or Policy 6.3 of the LP. Nor do I find conflict with Policy T4 of the ITPLP to which I give significant weight. These policies require, amongst other things, that the transport needs of development are met, that transport impacts are addressed in a sustainable manner and that development does not contribute to the deterioration of air qualit y, noise, local amenity or safety.” 4.5 As such, it was concluded that a scheme on this site that delivers 1,643m2 of food store floorspace and 144 residential flats, alongside 23 residential parking spaces was acceptable. For comparison, the current application seeks permission for 1,672m2 food store floorspace, 158 residential flats, alongside 24 residential car parkin g spaces. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 A total of 350 no. letters were sent to neighbouring properties, a site notice was displayed to the front of the site and an advert was posted in the local paper. The neighbour consultation process expired on 27 March 2024 and a total of three comments in support and 9 comments against the proposal were received from nei ghbouring residents. 6.2 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response A total of 9 comments in objection to the development were received from neighbouring residents. 1. The development will cause highways safety issues. Noted. Please refer to the Transport section starting paragraph 7.126 of this report. 2. The proposal is overdevelopment. Noted. Please refer to the Density section starting paragraph 7.11 of this report. 3. The design is unacceptable and will impact on privacy, light and the wind environment. Noted. Please refer to the sections of this report starting at paragraphs 7.32 (Tall Building), 7.42 (Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area), 7.49 (Residential Quality) and 7.87 (Residential Amenity). 4. The development will cause noise disturbance. Noted. Please refer to the Noise section starting paragraph 7.98 of this report. 5. The development should deliver community uses and affordable housing instead. Noted. Please refer to the Land Use Principles and Affordable Housing sections of this report starting at paragraphs 7.1, 7.7 and 7.22. More specifically, the proposed retail and residential uses are acceptable in land use terms. It is also advised that following amendment to the proposal, the development would deliver some affordable housing. 6. The development will increase pressure on infrastructure. Noted. Whilst the development would increase pressure on infrastructure, any permission granted would ensure that acceptable Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press details are secured by condition to avoid significant harm. The proposal is also liable to the Community Infrastructure Levy and Section 106 obligations which contribute to the maintenance and improvement of infrastructure. A total of three comments in support of the development were received from neighbouring residents. 1. The existing building is an eyesore and attracts anti-social behaviour. All comments in support are noted and taken into consideration as part of the assessment of this application. 2. Bringing back Morrisons will vitalise the high street and housing is needed. 3. Residents miss Morrisons. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response External Consultation National Air Traffic Services: The proposed development has been examined from a technical safeguarding aspect and does not conflict with our safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company ("NERL") has no safeguarding objection to the proposal. The NATS comments are noted. Thames Water: Waste Comments The proposed development is located within 15 metres of a strategic sewer. Thames Water requests that a condition secures the submission of a piling method statement. As required by Building Regulations part H para graph 2.36, Thames Water requests that The Thames Water comments are noted. A Piling Method Statement is proposed to be secured by Condition 20. The final details of the drainage strategy and verification are proposed to Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press the Applicant should incorporate within their proposal, protection to the property to prevent sewage flooding, by installing a positive pumped device (or equivalent reflecting technological advances), on the assumption that the sewerage network may surcharge to ground level during storm conditions. With regard to surface water drainage, Thames Water would advise that if the developer follows the sequential approach to the disposal of surface water we would have no objection. Management of surface water from new developments should follow Policy SI 13 Sustainable drainage of the London Plan 2021. Where the developer proposes to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames Water Developer Services will be required. We would expect the developer to demonstrate what measures will be undertaken to minimise groundwater discharges into the public sewer. Groundwater discharges typically result from construction site dewatering, deep excavations, basement infiltration, borehole installation, testing and site remediation. Any discharge made without a permit is deemed illegal and may result in prosecution under the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. Should the Local Planning Authority be minded to approve the planning application, Thames Water would request an informative is attached to any planning permission. Thames Water would recommend that petrol / oil interceptors be fitted in all car parking/washing/repair facilities. Failure to enforce the effective use of petrol / oil interceptors could result in oil-polluted discharges entering local watercourses. Thames Water would advise that with regard to the wastewater network and sewage treatment works infrastructure capacity, we would not have any objection to the above planning application, based on the information provided. be secured via Conditions 27 and 28. Informative 7 is also to be added to any decision for approval in accordance with the Thames Water comments. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Heathrow Airport Safeguarding: The proposed development has been examined from an aerodrome safeguarding perspective and could conflict with safeguarding criteria unless any permission granted is subject to a planning condition for a Bird Hazard Management Plan. The Heathrow Airport Safeguarding comments are noted. Please refer to Condition 26 and informative 8. London Underground/DLR Infrastructure Protection: No comment. Noted. Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS): The proposal is unlikely to have a significant effect on heritage assets of archaeological interest. The GLAAS comments are noted. Canal & River Trust: Suitably worded conditions and a legal agreement are necessary to address comments made below. Increased use of the towpath: The proposals would result in increased usage of the access and towpath and the benefit to potential future occupiers is recognised in the submitted Planning and Transport Statements. The towpath has been upgraded and the pedestrian and cyclists’ access to the Grand Union Canal at the point to the east where St Stephens Road starts to run parallel with the Canal has been built with other funding. However, the “works to improve the existing formal pedestrian access where St Stephen’s Road bends away from the canal in a northeast direction” would still be required as part of any S106 obligation. The addition of wayfinding to and along the canal and biodiversity improvements to the existing hedge should also be included. The proposals to install a raised table across St Stephens Road, to assist with crossin g to The Canal & River Trust comments are noted. In relation to the proposed elevation to St Stephens Road, the Applicant has responded to similar matters raised by the Council’s urban design officer. The Applicant has updated the proposed elevation drawing (2-200 Rev. K). This has resulted in some amendments to the elevation including the provision of enhanced landscaping to St. Stephen’s Road. A Canal & River Trust contribution is proposed to be secured by S106 Head of Term (iii). Details of external lighting is proposed to be secured via the landscaping scheme Condition 23. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press the access point and calming traffic, would also still be beneficial, though it is noted these works do not form part of the “Canal & River Trust contribution”. Impact on the character and appearance of the waterway: The site is located to the north of the Grand Union canal and set back from the towpath (across St Stephens Road) and the set back and existing landscaping will aid in reducing the impact of the proposed development. However, it is disappointing to note that the ground floor elevation facing St Stephen’s Road has been amended from the previously approved scheme. This elevation faces the canal and has changed from largely residential (and therefore open and active) to almost exclusively ‘back of house’ elements comprising bin and bike storage, plant rooms and substations, and vehicular access points, all of which are ‘closed’ and provide no value to the streetscape. The elevation to the canal boundary would now primarily consist of a two-storey wall which would be largely blank but for louvred panels and the tall gates to the service yard. As above, it is recognised that there is a fairly dense strip of planting between the towpath and St Stephen’s Road which forms a visual buffer and will conceal much of the lower section of the building, especially in the summer. With the exception of this, there are improvements to the approved scheme, the breaking of the mass, by reducing the scheme to two separate blocks, and the articulated roof form of the western block are welcomed, and the landscaped amenity block, with views onto the canal, will undoubtedly be welcomed by the residents. Nevertheless, it would be preferrable if, where possible, amendments could be made to the scheme to improve the appearance and add interest and vitality to the ground floor elevation facing onto St Stephen’s Road. Demolition, Construction and Environmental Management Plan details are proposed to be secured via Condition 18. The final drainage strategy is to be secured via Conditions 27 and 28. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Impact on the biodiversity of the waterway corridor: Any external lighting should be angled downwards, and light directed into the site, and it should not provide flood lighting to the canal corridor to show consideration for bats and other nocturnal species. The details of any external lighting could be addressed by condition. Potential contamination of the waterway and ground water during any demolition, remediation and construction works from wind blow, seepage or spillage at the site should be avoided and details of pollution prevention measures provided. Works should also be carried out at appropriate times to avoid adverse impacts to nesting birds / bats etc. This could be addressed by the submission of a Construction and Environmental Management Plan which could be required by condition. Drainage The drainage methods of new developments can have significant impacts on the structural integrity, water quality and the biodiversity of waterways. The submission indicates that a Sustainable urban drainage system is proposed which incorporates green roofs with any surface water runoff being disposed through infiltration into ground at or close to source. This should be addressed by condition. The impact on the structural integrity of the canal: With any development close to the waterway there is the potential for adverse impacts on the infrastructure of the canal in terms of stability, drainage pollution, etc. The proposed development would be in close proximity to the canal and the applicant is advised to review the Canal & River Trust “Code of Practice for Works affectin g the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Canal & River Trust” with particular regard to any potential vibration impacts and ensure that any necessary consents are obtained and that the works comply with the Code. Ministry of Defence: The proposed development would be considered to have no detrimental impact on the operation or capability of a defence site or asset. The MOD has no objection to the development proposed. The Ministry of Defence comments are noted. London Fire Brigade (LFB): LFB has been consulted and have confirmed that they have no observations to make. The LFB comments are noted. It is noted that the development should accord with the relevant Building Regulation requirements. Fire safety matters are also to be addressed through Condition 34. Greater London Authority (GLA) (Stage 1): Strategic issues summary Land use principles: The principle of a mixed use of retail and residential mixed-use development on this town centre site in the Heathrow Opportunity Area is supported in accordance with London Plan Policies SD1, SD6 and SD7. Affordable housing: The applicant is currently proposing no affordable housing, and this is wholly unacceptable. GLA officers are robustly interrogating the viability assessment with a view to increasing the amount of affordable housing. Affordability and eligibility criteria and early and late-stage reviews should be secured. Urban design: The tall building proposals are not fully compliant with London Plan Policy D9. Additional work is required in relation to the functional impacts, inclusion of basement The GLA’s Stage 1 comments are noted. Please refer to Paragraph 7.22 for consideration of affordable housing. Following amendments to the scheme, 10% of the units proposed are to be delivered as shared ownership affordable units. Please refer to the sections of this report starting at paragraph numbers 7.32 (Tall Building) and 7.42 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press parking, public realm and play space, residential quality and elevation design. Transport: The applicant should provide further justification in relation to the level of car parking, and improvements are also required in relation to cycle parking provision. Additional information and clarification is required in relation to healthy streets, vehicular access strategy, transport network impacts, delivery servicing, construction logistics and the travel plan. Further information is also required in relation to inclusive design, and sustainable development. (Impact on Character and Appearance of the Area) for consideration of design matters. Please refer to the section starting at paragraph 7.126 for consideration of transport matters. Regarding inclusive design, the number of M4(3) units has been increased from 15 to 16, equating to 10.1% of all units. This resolves the GLA’s comments regarding inclusive desi gn. Transport for London (TfL) (Dated August 2023): To summarise: 1. An Active Travel Zone Assessment (ATZ) assessment should be submitted to inform further discussions with the Highway Authority about intended mitigation. 2. A contribution towards bus service enhancements should be secured from this development. 3. A reduction in the quantum of retail parking at this site is required. 4. Amendments to the cycle parking provision at this site is required. These amendments should be carried out prior to the determination of this application. 5. A CMP, Parking Design and Management Plan Travel Plan and Delivery and Servicing Plan should be secured through the appropriate mechanism. Transport for London (TfL) (Dated January 2025): Due to additional demand being placed on the bus stops in proximity to the site, enhancements to the bus stops and their The TfL comments are noted. Each point is addressed in turn: 1 & 2. It has been agreed with the Applicant Team that a £49,500 contribution is made towards local highways improvement works, including bus stop enhancements as requested by TfL. This also resolves the comments made by TfL dated January 2025. 3. Given that the retail floorspace is reducing and the basement parking provision is also reducing, the number of retail parking spaces is provided on a like- for-like basis. Car parking is also required to facilitate the retail use which is for weekly food shops in the main. The number of parking spaces complies with local plan standards and is accepted by the Highways Authority. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press waiting environment would be appropriate and in line with Policy T3. The following improvements to Bus Stop A and Bus Stop B could be made: x The carriageway within the bus stop cage should be resurfaced. x Raising of the kerb height to meet standards to enable deployment of the mobility ramp and easier access for other passengers. x It should be ensured that the lighting around the bus stop waiting area is of good quality. x Bus cage markings should be remarked. x For Bus Stop A and B, repainting of the yellow bus stop markings on the carriageway. 4. As confirmed by the Highways Authority, an acceptable quantity of cycle parking for retail and residential is proposed. The final detail of this parking is proposed to be secured by Condition 23. 5. A construction management plan is proposed to be secured by Condition 18, a parking design and management plan is to be secured by Condition 32, Travel Plans are to be secured under S106 heads of terms (ix) and (x), and a delivery and servicing plan is to be secured b y Condition 33. Health and Safety Executive (HSE): Following a review of the information provided in the planning application, HSE is content with the fire safety design as set out in the project description, to the extent it affects land use planning considerations. However, HSE has identified matters that the applicant should try to address in advance of later regulatory stages. The HSE comments are noted and have been passed onto the Applicant Team to address at later regulatory stages, should permission be granted. Hillingdon Friends of the Earth: The sustainability features of the proposal should exceed minimum requirements, including circular economy, whole life carbon, carbon emissions, ventilation, drainage, sustainable transport, landscaping and ecology. The Hillingdon Friends of the Earth comments are noted. The development has been assessed against the Development Plan and a balanced planning decision is required to be made, weighing up all relevant material planning considerations. Internal Consultation Planning Policy Officer: Housing Mix: It is noted that the applicant states that the proposal would suppl y 17% [family sized The Planning Policy Officer comments are noted. Matters relating to the principle of development and housin g mix are Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press units] when calculating the scheme by habitable rooms within the planning statement. However, this is not considered to be an accurate representation of the proposal in this regard, and it is considered that the site would only provide 11.4% family units. When considering the previously approved scheme there is also a drop in the number of family sized units (3 bedrooms or more). It should be noted that the previous proposal was approved prior to the adoption of the Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) and London Plan (2021), where both of these development plans include policies encouraging a higher proportion of family units within schemes. Policy H10 of the London Plan sets out that schemes should generally consist of a range of unit sizes. In addition, paragraph A.6 of Policy H10 of the London Plan recognises that “the nature and location of the site, with a higher proportion of one and two bed units generally more appropriate in locations which are closer to a town centre or station or with higher public transport access and connectivity”. The site is located within the Yiewsley/West Drayton town centre and approximately 300m from the Crossrail station. The site has a PTAL rating of 3. The applicant should therefore revise the proposal to ensure that the proposal provides a minimum of 15% family units to ensure that the proposal is able to conform with the development plans and the housing mix. Affordable Housing: The Local Plan Part 2 policy DMH7 and London Plan policy H5, sets out that subject to viability and if appropriate in all circumstances, a minimum of 35% of all new homes on sites of 10 or more units should be delivered as affordable housing, with the tenure split 70% Social/Affordable Rent and 30% Intermediate as set out in Policy H2: Affordable Housing of the Local Plan Part 1. The applicant has submitted a viability assessment stating that they are unable to provide an y affordable housing or any off-site addressed in the sections starting at paragraph numbers 7.1 to 7.22 of this report. It should also be noted that following amendment to the scheme, 10% of units are proposed to be provided as shared ownership affordable housing. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press contributions towards affordable housing. Given this, it is considered necessary that the viability assessment is tested by a third-party consultant. Urban Design Officer (Dated August 2023): The principle of re-developing this site for a mixed retail and residential scheme has been established by the granting of previous permissions. This application seeks to increase the building height by one storey, delivering a tall building. This density is above the recommended density for the context as set out in Local Plan Policy DMHB 17 and outside of areas identified for a tall buildings in accordance with Local Plan Policy DMHB 10. Accordingly, the density, height and massing are a concern. Scrutiny of the layout and elevational design show that many of the benefits of the previously approved scheme have been lost or design quality reduced, where it is expected that the design quality should be improved. Lastly, the landscape design needs a comprehensive review. Urban Design Officer (Dated January 2025): In previous Urban Design comments, the reduced design quality from the original scheme was outlined. During negotiations with the applicant some of the changes were understood and accepted. However, concerns remain about the raised finished floor level (FFL) as this necessitates ramps to the supermarket impacting the street frontage and ramps to the Core B affecting the entrance design. These latest updates are minimal, confined to changes to the bathrooms and cores. Additionally, comments were raised regarding the qualit y of the Amenity decks and The Urban Design Officer comments are noted. Matters relating to design are addressed in the sections starting at paragraph numbers 7.32 to 7.49 of this report. The final design details of the materials and landscape scheme are proposed to be secured by Conditions 21, 22, 23 and 24. These conditions should resolve the concerns raised by the Urban Design Officer, including the quality of amenity space, greening and ramp details. More specifically, it should be noted that density standards are only intended as a guide and density guidance has largely been superseded by the design- led approach taken by Policy D3 in the latest London Plan (2021). The design-led approach requires consideration of design options to determine the most appropriate form of development that responds to a site's context and capacity for growth and existing and planned supporting infrastructure. The policy then goes on to highlight the relevant considerations which would Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press streetscape along St Stephens Road. These spaces should be high quality as there is a shortfall of 15% of the outdoor open space required. Further, it was requested that the applicant increase the greening along St Stephens Road as the trees shown along the south side of the proposed buildings do not have sufficient space to reach maturity. Lastly, more detail is needed on the ‘Potential new path onto the canal’, which is showing the ramp. Clarification is needed on the impact on the green canal edge planting and remaining width of the existing after the proposed ramp is installed. Urban Design Officer (Dated June 2025): Conditions are required to secure further detail on materials and the final landscape scheme. contribute to defining an appropriate density such as site context, amenity considerations etc. These aspects of the proposal are considered in detail within the relevant sections of this report, but it is concluded that overall, the cumulative impacts of the proposal do not suggest that the scheme is of such a density that it is completely inappropriate in terms of the character and amenity of the local area. Access Officer: This development proposal for a replacement food store and 158 residential units has been reviewed with reference to London plan policy D1, D5, D7, D12, S4 and T6.1. The following comments are provided: 1. A convenient drop off point should be provided for door-to-door transport services such as Dial a Ride, taxis, and hospital transport. An area should be provided for the residential and retail element of the proposal. 2. Details of the height clearance within the basement carpark should be provided to ensure access is possible for high sided vehicles. A minimum height clearance of 2.9m should be achieved. 3. An accessible parking bay should be allocated to every M4(3) wheelchair accessible/adaptable unit. The Access Officer comments are noted. Each point is addressed in turn: 1. The Applicant Team have responded by stating that there is not sufficient space for a site located within the town centre. Whilst this reasoning cannot be wholly accepted, it is accepted on balance provided that other highways improvement works are to be secured as part of the agreed planning obligations. 2. The basement car park is existing and as such is accepted. 3. A total of 16 no. M4(3) wheelchair accessible units are proposed alon gside 4 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4. It is noted that 15 M4(3) units have been included on the floor plans however apart from 2 units, they are all 1B2P units. As a large number of wheelchair users would have a companion, a live-in assistant, or may simply require an additional room to store disability related equipment, the number of 2B3P M4(3) units should be increased to 10. 5. 10% of Affordable Housing units would be required to satisfy the design standards for an M4(3) Wheelchair Accessible unit. 6. The affordable units should be suitable for 'day one occupation' by a wheelchair user. These units should be designed and fitted as per the prescribed standards for a Wheelchair Accessible M4(3) unit, as set out in ADM 2015. 7. All remaining units must be designed to the standards for Category 2 M4(2) Accessible and Adaptable dwellings, as set out in Approved Document M 2015. 8. Details of the materials palette should be provided with reference to paver types intended for use within the public realm. A methodology statement is required to ensure that all materials could be installed in accordance with the tolerances set out in BS8300:2018. 9. Details should be required on the accessible play equipment for disabled children, including those with a sensory impairment, or complex multiple disabilities. Provisions could include outdoor sound tubes, colour and lighting canopies, and other play equipment that could stimulate the olfactory senses. Inclusive play is a key requirement of any new residential development. A comprehensive Design & Access Statement should support any future planning application, demonstrating how the principles of inclusive design have informed the design from the inception stage. no. accessible parking spaces. The policy requirement is for 3% of dwellings be provided with an accessible parking space, equal to 4.74 spaces (rounded to either 4 or 5). Given the accessible town centre location of the site, the number of accessible parking spaces is accepted. Whilst the allocation of a space to each M4(3) unit would be preferred, it is not a planning policy requirement. 4. Should the number of 2B3P M4(3) units be increased to 10, the number of overall M4(3) units would reduce from 16 to 8 units. On balance, the M4(3) mix of units is accepted as proposed. 5. One of the M4(3) 1B2P flats are proposed as an affordable shared ownership unit. This is considered to satisfy this point. 6. Whilst the timing of delivery is not strictly a planning policy requirement, the flats are to be secured as M4(3) units through Condition 9. This is considered to be sufficient. 7. The delivery of M4(2) is to be secured through Condition 9. 8. The materials details are to be secured through Condition 21. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 9. This detail is to be secured through Conditions 23 (Landscape Scheme) and 24 (Play Area Details). Matters relating to accessibility are also addressed in paragraphs 7.74 to 7.77 of this report. Highways Officer: Considering that the ratio of residential car parking spaces proposed is in accordance with the London Plan standard and only marginally less than the number proposed under planning application ref: 2370/APP/2019/2880 and upheld at appealed application ref. 2370/APP/2019/2880, the number of residential car parking spaces proposed can be accepted. The number of car parking spaces proposed for the supermarket is above the number permitted in the London Plan but would be in accordance with the Local Plan and the number allowed at appeal. Taking all considerations into account, the number of car parking spaces proposed for the supermarket can also be accepted. Subject to the above and planning conditions, there are no highway objections to this proposal. The Highways Officer comments are noted. Matters relating to transport are addressed in the section starting at paragraph 7.126 of this report. Air Quality Officer: The proposed 158 residential flats (Use Class C3 residential development) is anticipated to generate 79 daily residential vehicle trips per day for car drivers. The Morrisons proposal includes a 1,672.1 sqm GIA foodstore with an associated trip generation of 383,250 trips per year. The proposed development is within the West Drayton/Yiewsley Focus Area. The proposed development is not air quality neutral and is not air qualit y positive, as required by the LBH The Air Quality Officer comments are noted. Please see S106 Head of Term (ii) for confirmation that £60,789 fee is proposed to be secured via a Section 106 legal agreement. Please also refer to Conditions 15 and 36. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Local Action Plan. Therefore, the total emissions associated with these activities need to be mitigated. The level of mitigation required to the proposed development for traffic emissions is £936,984. Flat rate deductions have been applied to account for the Travel Plan, the sustainable transport measures and the viability challenges of the scheme. Once all deductions were applied, the remaining value of mitigation due is £60,789. This fee should be secured by S106 legal agreement and paid to Hillingdon Council to mitigate the impact of the development and deliver the local air quality action plan. Flooding and Drainage Specialist: 1. The application does not comply with the hierarchy of drainage set out in the London Plan Policy SI 13. The applicant has not considered the use of rainwater harvesting features, such as blue roofs and/or water butts, in alignment with the Drainage Hierarchy of the London Plan Policy SI 13. 2. The Drainage Strategy Plan does not illustrate the position of the green roofs on site. 3. The Drainage Strategy Plan does not illustrate the routes overland flow will take in events that exceed the 1 in 100-year (plus 40% climate change) event. This information is required in alignment with S9 of Defra’s Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage. 4. The full site area (5,200m2) has not been used in the calculations. 5. The applicant has not provided the bespoke maintenance tasks and frequencies associated with the proposed vortex flow control device. 6. It is unclear whether the area of the basement will chan ge from existing, and not The Flooding and Drainage Specialist comments are noted. Matters relating to flood and water management are addressed in the sections starting at paragraphs 7.116 (Flood Risk) and 7.118 (Drainage) of this report. As the issues raised are a matter of detail rather than a fundamental issue, Conditions 27 and 28 are proposed to resolve the matters raised. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press enough information has been provided on the proposed method of drainage for the basement. To address the above, please can the applicant submit information which: 1. Demonstrates that the applicant has considered the use of rainwater harvesting features, such as blue roofs and/or water butts, in alignment with the Drainage Hierarchy of the London Plan Policy SI 13. 2. Illustrates the position of the green roofs and any rainwater harvesting features on site within an updated Drainage Strategy Plan. 3. Illustrates the routes that overland flow will take in events that exceed the 1 in 100-year (plus 40% climate change) event, in alignment with S9 of Defra’s Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage. 4. Demonstrates that the full site area (5,200m2) has been used in the calculations. 5. Outlines the bespoke maintenance tasks and frequencies associated with the proposed vortex flow control device and any additional rainwater harvesting features. 6. Clarifies whether the area of the basement will change from existing and provides further information on the proposed method of drainage for the basement. Noise Specialist: Sufficient information has been provided by the Applicant to make a recommendation with respect to noise. It is recommended that no objection is made on noise grounds subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions which should be met based on the design information provided and considering measurement and prediction uncertainty. The Noise Specialist comments are noted. Matters relating to noise are addressed in the section starting at paragraph 7.98 of this report. Please also refer to Conditions 10 and 11. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Waste Strategy Officer: The waste provisions are acceptable. Noted. Daylight and Sunlight Consultant: The Council’s consultants Avison Young (AY) have commented upon the submitted Neighbouring Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Report prepared by Consil in support of the Applicants’ proposals for the site. AY raised the following matters in respect of the technical analysis appended to Consil’s report: x Union Wharf, Bentick Road – AY agrees with the conclusions presented in the report. For annual probable sunlight hours (APSH), the north-facing rooms are not pertinent for inclusion in the assessment. x Betjeman Court, Bentick Road - AY agreed with the conclusions. For the ASPH assessment, the north-facing rooms are not pertinent for inclusion in the assessment. x St Matthew Church of England Primary School, High Street – AY agrees to Consil’s approach to assessing the two classrooms facing the Site and agree to the conclusions. x St Matthew Vicarage, 93 High Street – AY generally agreed with the vertical skyline component (VSC). AY agree with the no sky line (NSL) conclusion. Regarding the APSH, AY concur with Consil’s assertation that the observed losses can be justifiably attributed to the presence of the soffit located above the windows. It is reasonable to argue that the levels of sunlight retained are only marginally below the 25% threshold as recommended by the BRE guidelines. x 34-42 High Street – AY agrees to the conclusions. For the VSC however the reductions are substantial but relatively The Daylight and Sunlight consultant comments are noted. As explained in Consil’s daylight and sunlight report, the BRE guidance gives illuminance recommendations of 100 lux in bedrooms, 150 lux in living rooms and 200 lux in kitchens. In multi-use rooms, such as the proposed living/kitchen/dining rooms, the target value for living rooms can be used. The BRE Report suggests that the target value for a living room can be used for a combined living/kitchen/dining area if the kitchens are not treated as habitable spaces, as it may avoid small separate kitchens in the design. By reference to the submitted floor plans, the kitchens are typically located at the rear of the room, designed to be predominantly artificially lit, with the living areas adjacent to the windows to maximise the natural light. Consequently, it is appropriate for 150 lux to be adopted for this scheme. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press small when compared to the previously consented schemes. x 32 High Street – AY agree to the VSC and APSH conclusions. For the NSL, it is recommended that Consil furnish the essential floorplans to definitively verify the actual spatial layout, thereby ensuring accurate and precise understanding of the room’s configuration and its impact on daylight distribution. x 24 High Street – AY agree with the VSC and NSL conclusions. For the ASPH, the north-facing rooms are not pertinent for inclusion in the assessment. Overshadowing: x Consil refrained from providing a comprehensive explanation of the outcomes attained from the Overshadowing test. This omission is notable even though the examined area does satisfy the prescribed threshold in accordance with the BRE guidelines. Internal Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing: x For the Internal Daylight Results, Consil have applied a lower target of 150 lux to all Living/Kitchen/Dining rooms within the scheme. There is a degree of uncertainty regarding the precise location of the kitchen areas within the rooms due to unavailability of the floor plans. x It remains within acceptable parameters to adopt a 150 lux target should the kitchen area not be classified as a habitable space. As confirmed by the Council's Daylight and Sunlight Consultant, there are some shortcomings in respect of daylight and sunlight considerations, but it is not considered that the extent of failures warrant a reason for refusal given the urban context of the site. Sunlight and daylight considerations are addressed in paragraphs 7.53 (Residential Quality) and paragraph 7.90 (Impact on Neighbours) of this report and are considered acceptable.

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Michael Briginshaw 75111/APP/2025/739 Date Application Valid: 02.04.2025 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 30.09.2025 Application Type: Full Ward: Pinkwell Applicant: Ark UP4 Ltd. Site Address: Union Park UP4, North Hyde Gardens Proposal: Redevelopment of site to deliver extension to existing Union Park data centre campus consisting of (a) free standing data centre building; (b) energy, power, and water infrastructure; (c) site access and internal roads; (d) site security arrangements; (e) hard and soft, green landscaping; and (f) other ancillary and auxiliary forms of development. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to section 106 legal agreement and conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 1 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Major application recommended for approval) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 legal agreement to secure the heads of terms set out below, and subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1. Ma yor of London Stage 2 Referral & S106 Legal Agreement Heads of Terms It is recommended that delegated powers be given to the Director of Planning, Regeneration and Environment to grant planning permission subject to the following: A) That the application be referred to the Mayor under Article 5 of the Town and Country Planning (Mayor of London) Order 2008. B) That the Council enter into a legal agreement with the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) or any other legislation to secure the following: i. Air Quality Contribution: A financial contribution shall be paid to the Council to address air quality impacts arising from the development, amounting to £210,508 (damage cost 1), and potentially rising to more depending on emission monitoring results in year 2 of operation of the energy centre and subsequent years, in accordance with the air quality conditions. ii. Architect Retention: Retention of the existing architectural design team to the completion of the project. iii. Carbon Offset Contribution: A Carbon Offset contribution of £602,149. iv. Travel Plan: A full Travel Plan to be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. v. Healthy Streets / Active Travel Zone Contribution: A Healthy Streets/ Active Travel Zone contribution of £43,000. vi. Transport for London (TfL) A312 Healthy Streets Contribution: A TfL Healthy Streets contribution of £31,643. vii. Canal and River Trust Contribution: A contribution for works to improve connections, access and enhancements to the Grand Union Canal, equal to £26,356. viii. Employment/Construction Training Scheme: An Employment/ Construction Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. ix. Project Management & Monitoring Fee: A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. C) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparin g the Section 106 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Agreement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed. D) That officers be authorised to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the proposed agreement and conditions of approval and agree any changes requested by the Greater London Authority. E) That, if the Legal Agreement has not been finalised within 6 months (or such other time frame as may be agreed by the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth), delegated authority be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to refuse planning permission for the following reason: 'The applicant has failed to mitigate the impacts posed by the proposed development (in respect of Air Quality, Carbon Offsetting, Travel Planning, Healthy Streets, Canal Enhancements, Employment and Planning Obligations Monitoring). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policies DMCI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Pa rt 2 (2020); the adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (2014); Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021); and paragraphs 55-57 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2023).' F) That if the application is approved, that the permission is subject to the Conditions as set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summar y 1.1 This application seeks permission for the redevelopment of the site to deliver an extension to the existing Union Park data centre campus consisting of (a) free standing data centre building; (b) energy, power, and water infrastructure; (c) site access and internal roads; (d) site security arrangements; (e) hard and soft, green landscaping; and (f) other ancillary and auxiliary forms of development. 1.2 The proposed data centre development is an appropriate use within the Hayes Strategic Industrial Location. The significant uplift in floorspace will ensure the intensification of industrial capacity, which is supported by strategic policies. The proposed office floorspace will be ancillary to the primary data centre use and is therefore considered acceptable in principle. 1.3 The economic benefit of information and communications technology infrastructure is acknowledged and supported by national, regional and local planning policies. As noted under Paragraph 85 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and produc tivity. There will be substantial economic benefits arising from the proposed development in terms of employment, national non- domestic rates (NNDR) and gross value added (GVA). It also acknowledged that data centre capacity needs to be located within London to be as close as possible to its end users and support the broader econom y. These benefits and Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press considerations are given significant weight in the overall assessment of the planning balance. 1.4 Given the substantial power demand associated with data centres, the applicant has outlined the strategy in the Infrastructure Statement. This site would be an effective extension of the existing data centre campus adjacent to the site and would utilise the 37MVA already secured as part of the wider site via a contractual agreement with National Grid. The documentation submitted states that the National Grid connection for the broader site was energised in January 2023 via National Grid’s substation at North Hyde. Therefore, the development has secured a power supply and would not overburden the local grid capacity and is not considered to result in detrimental impacts connected to energy infrastructure. 1.5 The proposed development is considered to alter how the site is perceived within the wider townscape, but it is important to acknowledge that the development will connect to the approved and existing Union Park data centre campus. The high-quality design and elevational treatments, including a lighting scheme to Energy Centre 4 (EC4), are considered to soften its townscape impact and mitigate any perceived harm. The proposed development also retains an industrial/technolo gical aesthetic that respects the immediate area's character. 1.6 Subject to the planning conditions and obligations recommended, the proposed development is considered acceptable with respect to design, heritage, residential amenit y, environmental issues, transport, and sustainability. 1.7 Due regard has been given to residents’ objections; however, it is concluded that the proposal complies with the Development Plan. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that planning applications should be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the reasons outlined above and within the main body of the report, this application is considered to comply with the Development Plan and is recommended for approval, subject to securing the planning conditions set out in Appendix 1, Stage 2 referral to the Mayor of London and a Section 106 le gal agreement. 2 The Site and Localit y 2.1 The site comprises a 1ha triangular plot of land, formerly occupied by a warehouse building operated by Addison Lee for the repair, maintenance, and replacement of private hire vehicles. Addison Lee vacated the site, and the building has been demolished in accordance with permission ref. 56402/APP/2025/235, dated 27 February 2025. The site is currently being used by Ark Data Centres and their contractors as a construction base whilst the Union Park Data Centre scheme is being delivered, as approved under planning permission references 75111/APP/2020/1955, dated 15-04-21, and 75111/APP/2022/1007, dated 21-09-22. Please refer to Fi gure 1 below. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) 2.2 The Union Park Data Centre scheme comprises a hyperscale data centre with three blocks, named UP1 (w estern-most block), UP2 (central block) and UP3 (eastern-most block). Three energy centres support the data centre, and sit to the south, either side of North Hyde Gardens, named EC1, EC2 and EC3. Two visitor reception centres again support the data centre function and are located on the eastern and western ends of the overall data centre campus. 2.3 The Great Western railway is located immediately to the north, the River Crane and Yeading Brook run circa 240m to the east abutting UP1 and the Grand Union Canal (Paddington Branch) to the south. The Parkway (A312) sits to the east of UP1 and forms part of the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN). Access to the Parkway is from Bulls Bridge Roundabout, via North Hyde Gardens/Road, less than 1km awa y. 2.4 The Grand Union Canal, River Crane and Yeading Brook are locally designated Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINC). Minet Country Park is located some 350m to the north-east and is also desi gnated as a SINC. 2.5 The site is positioned to the south-east of Hayes Town Centre, on the eastern boundary of the Borough, within close proximity of the Nestles Conservation Area to the south-west and the Bulls Bridge Conservation Area to the east, which contains the Grade II listed Bulls Bridge and the locally listed Toll House. The Grade II Listed Benlow works building is also located approximately 180 metres to the north-west of the site. 2.6 The site forms part of a wider defined Strategic Industrial Location (SIL), as desi gnated under the Hillin gdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Site Allocations and Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Designations (2020). The sites also fo rms part of the declared Hillingdon Air Quality Management Area and Hayes Air Quality Focus Area, where the EU annual mean limit value for nitrogen dioxide (NO2) has been exceeded, there is high human exposure and current planned measures are insufficient to resolve the poor air quality issues. Transport for London's webCAT planning tool confirms that the Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) is rated at 3 (moderate). 2.7 The Policy SA 5 site allocation, better known as the Former Nestle Factory site (or Hayes Village development), is located to the south-west and is subject to planning permission reference 1331/APP/2017/1883 for 1,386 dwellings, office, retail, community, leisure, commercial and data centre uses. The eastern-half commercial development has been built out and occupied and the western-half residential development is in the later phases of development, with occupation of circa 750 residential units so far. A view from this site towards the application site is shown in Fi gure 2 below. 2.8 Figure 2: View of the Site from Hayes Village (prior to demolition of former Addison Lee buildin g) 3 Proposal 3.1 This application seeks permission for the redevelopment of the site to deliver an extension to the existin g Union Park data centre campus consistin g of (a) free Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press standing data centre building; (b) energy, power, and water infrastructure; (c) site access and internal roads; (d) site security arrangements; (e) hard and soft, green landscaping; and (f) other ancillary and auxiliary forms of development. Please refer to Fi gures 3 and 4 for the proposed site plan and elevations. Figure 3: Proposed Site Plan (please note – a larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) 3.2 More specifically, the proposed development would comprise a data centre building (Union Park 4 or UP4), an Energy Centre building (EC4) and an ancillary building (AB5) to connect the two main elements of development, totalling 15,410 m2 Gross Internal Area. The development would sit adjacent to and connect with AB4 and UP3, which were consented and built out under planning permission ref. 75111/APP/2020/1955, 15 April 2021. The development would result in a data campus with 4 no. data hall blocks (UP1 to UP4) and 4 no. energy centres (EC1 to EC4). 3.3 UP4 comprises the main data centre function of the application site. Ancillary water treatment facilities, plant rooms, switch rooms and offices are proposed on the ground and first floors of UP4. Data halls are proposed on the second, third and fourth floors of UP4. Green roofs are proposed on top of both UP4 and AB5, alon gside photovoltaic (PV) solar panels as part of the energy strategy. 3.4 EC4 provides backup power for UP4 and hosts 14 no. generators, alongside switch rooms and plant rooms. 3.5 AB5 contains ancillar y office space and would sit between UP4 and EC4. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 4: Proposed Elevations (please note – a larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) 4 Relevant Plannin g History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 4.2 Application reference 75111/APP/2020/1955 (dated 15.04.21) granted permission for: x Site clearance and preparation, including the demolition of remaining buildings, and the redevelopment of the site to provide: a new data centre (Use Class B8), two MV Energy Centres (including stand-by generation plant and gas storage), a HV Sub-Station, a visitor reception centre, plant, the creation of a new footpath and cycleway link to the canal towpath, works to the highway, car park ing, cycle parking, associated infrastructure, enclosures and necessary physical security systems, hard and soft landscaping (including wor ks to the River Crane) and ancillary uses, as well as associated external works. This is the original permission covering the entirety of the site. The development is currently being built out in phases and data centre halls UP1 and UP2 are currentl y occupied and operational. 4.3 Application reference 75111/APP/2022/1007 (dated 21.09.22) granted permission for: x Full planning permission for site clearance and preparation, including the demolition of remainin g buildings, and the redevelopment of the site to Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press provide three energy centres, two visitor reception centres, a new footpath and cycleway link to the canal towpath, works to the highway, car parking, cycle parking, associated infrastr ucture, enclosures and necessary physical security systems, hard and soft landscaping, and ancillary uses, as well as associated external works. This permission ‘slots’ into the original permission granted and relates only to the energy centres, visitor reception centres and associated works. As such, this permission sits on top of the original permission and supersedes these elements of the ori ginal proposal. This development is also being built out in phases. 4.4 Application reference 75111/APP/2025/596 (dated 30.04.25) granted retrospective planning permission for the construction and retention of a flank wall to form the western facade of Ancillary Block 4 for a temporary period of three years. This application is inherently connected to the Union Park UP4 application. Should consent be granted for UP4, the temporary wall will be removed and the UP4 development will be implemented. Should consent be refused, the temporary wall will be removed, and the original planning permission (as cited above) will be implemented. 4.5 Application reference 56402/APP/2025/235 granted consent for the demolition of the former Addison Lee building under the provisions of Schedule 2, Part 11, Class B of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order (2015) (as amended). The building has since been demolished and is bein g used as a construction base for the wider estate. 4.6 The current application would sit on top of the original permission consented on the Union Park data centre campus. More specifically, it would supersede the element on the western-most section of the site, relating to data hall UP3. In effect, the development would extend the data centre building west and would facilitate an additional data hall called Union Park 4 (or UP4). 5 Plannin g Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 A total of 1,021 no. letters were sent to neighbouring properties. A site notice was displayed to the front of the site and an advert was posted in the local paper. All forms of consultation expired on 19 May 2025. A total of three objections were received from nei ghbouring residents. 6.2 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response A total of three letters of objection were received from neighbouring residents. 1. The area is already full of industrial projects, and the proposal is overdevelopment. Noted. Please refer to the land use principles and design sections of the report, paras 7.1 to 7.29. 2. The data centre will be a burden on local infrastructure and residents, including energy, water, noise, heat and the power grid. Noted. Please refer to relevant sections of the report, including paras 7.11 to 7.15 (power infrastructure), 7.44 to 7.51 (neighbouring residents and noise), 7.71 to 7.78 (flood risk, drainage and water infrastructure), 7.99 to 7.112 (sustainability and energy), and 8.11 to 8.18 (planning obligations and CIL ). 3. The development will result in unacceptable air quality emissions and health impacts, including electromagnetic fields (EMFs). Noted. Please refer to relevant sections of the report, including paras 7.54 to 7.59 (air quality) and 8.1 to 8.2 (health impacts including EMFs). 4. The development will increase traffic and compromise safety of nearby residents. Noted. Please refer to relevant sections of the report, including paras 7.81 to 7.98 (transport). 5. The recent fire at the North Hyde substation, which is in close proximity to the proposed site, has highlighted the dangers of having high-risk industrial facilities near residential communities. Noted. Please refer to relevant sections of the report, including paras 7.35 to 7.36 (fire safety). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 6. The green areas around Union Park have been sacrificed and it is eroding quality of life. Noted. Please refer to relevant sections of the report, including paras 7.60 to 7.70 (trees and landscaping, urban greening factor and biodiversit y). Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response External Consultation Affinity Water: No response received. n/a Canal and River Trust (May 2025): Suitably worded conditions and a legal agreement are necessary. The main issues relevant to the Trust as statutory consultee on this application are: a. Impact on the structural integrity of the waterway. b. Drainage. c. Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG). d. Impact on the character and appearance of the waterway. e. Impact on the biodiversity of the waterway. f. Accessibility. g. Sustainable Energy. Impact on the structural integrity of the waterway. A risk Assessment and Construction Methodology Plan, including details of all earthmoving, excavations and the design and construction of all foundations for all works adjacent to the waterways should be provided in order that the extent of the risk of such works to the stability of the canal infrastructure can be properly quantified and assessed. This matter could be addressed by planning condition. The Canal and River Trust Comments are noted. With respect to matters a to g, these points are addressed below. a. Condition 13 is proposed to secure a Risk Assessment and Construction Methodology Plan. b. Conditions 22 and 24 is proposed to secure final drainage details. c. Regarding BNG, please refer to the Canal and River Trust’s response dated June 2025. d. Maintenance of planting within the site is proposed to be secured by Condition 18 and maintenance of boundary planting located on Canal and River Trust land is proposed to be secured via S106 HoT (vii). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Drainage The submitted details indicate that all surface water would be directed to the River Crane, though an attenuation pond is shown to the top of the cutting slope. Further details on this would be required to demonstrate that there would either be no infiltration or that any infiltration would not have a detrimental effect on the cutting slopes stability over time and after prolonged periods of wet weather. The detailed design of the attenuation pond and information as to how any surface water drainage to the canal would be managed during remediation and construction should be provided for consideration. This matter could be addressed by condition. Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) The applicant/developer to provide some clarity on this matter and confirm the application’s distance from the watercourse. There also seems to be a small strip of land which is within the applicant’s ownership which has not been included within the red line site area and clarification on this should also be provided. The Trust wish to be consulted on any further information when available. Impact on the character and appearance of the waterway The proposals though seem to rely heavily on planting along the canal corridor for screening and not within the site itself. A S106 obligation should be secured to enhance and maintain this land. The boundary treatment proposed appears to be a mesh type fence though no details on its colour finish is provided, green would be preferrable. This matter could be addressed by condition. e. External lighting details are proposed to be secured via the landscape scheme Condition 18. f. S106 HoT (vii) secures a contribution towards towpath improvements. g. The development is proposed to be cooled via air source heat pumps. The recommended details to be secured by condition have been adopted in conditions 13 (Construction Management and Logistics Plan), 14 (CRT Risk Assessment and Construction Methodology Plan), 18 (Landscape Scheme) 19 (External Lighting Scheme) and 20 (Biodiversity Net Gain). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Impact on the biodiversity of the waterway Any external lighting should therefore be angled downwards, and light directed into the site, and it should not provide flood lighting to the canal corridor, including the canalside landscaping, to show consideration for bats and other nocturnal species. The final details of any external lighting proposed could be addressed by condition and the Trust wish to be consulted on any further detail when available. Accessibility The Trust would request contributions towards towpath improvements, including the Hayes Bypass flyover and Bull’s Bridge. The Trust would also welcome some discussion with the applicant/developer on the potential for engagement/education support for the local community, through events such as the Hayes Canal Festival or support/fund/promote/collaborate on the Trust’s Let’s Walk programme, promoting healthy and active lives to site employees and the local community. The Travel Plan for the site should also include promotion of the canal towpath for walking and cycling beyond the site – e.g. the Southall Wellbeing Way, Paddington Arm and west to Uxbridge. Sustainable Energy The Trust wish to highlight the potential of the canal for heating & cooling of the proposed development. Summary Conditions are required to address the matters listed below, we will provide full recommended wording for these conditions and any other conditions that may be necessary, once the above information has been submitted and reviewed: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - Landscaping details and maintenance and management regimes and responsibilities. Including details on soft landscape proposals including plant schedule with species, size and quantities, written planting specification, tree pit designs, hard landscape specifications, including details of any bespoke elements and boundary treatment, and a landscape management and maintenance plan (stand alone or combined with a LEMP or the BNG HMMP). - Landscape and Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) - Habitat maintenance and Management Plan (HMMP) - Risk Assessments and Construction Methodology and any necessary mitigation measures. - Construction and Environmental Management Plan - External Lighting details - Detailed drainage proposals. Canal and River Trust (June 2025): Suitably worded conditions and a legal agreement are necessary. On the basis that the red line site boundary is more than 10m from the canal bank the inclusion of watercourse units as part of the BNG assessment would not seem to be applicable. A S106 obligation should be secured to enhance and maintain planting on CRT land. Any proposals would need to consider opportunities to reduce the potential for anti- social behaviour within/behind the planting and improve the sense of safety, limiting access to the landscaped area through in-fill in places where possible. As a minimum the The Canal and River Trust Comments are noted. Maintenance of planting within the site is proposed to be secured by Condition 18 and maintenance of boundary planting located on Canal and River Trust land is proposed to be secured via S106 HoT (vii). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Trust would also expect that any existing, replacement and proposed planting would be provided and maintained by the applicant / developer. Denham Aerodrome Safeguarding: No response received. n/a Ealing Council: No response received. n/a Environment Agency We have no objections to the proposed development. An informative pertaining to permitting and past contaminative uses is recommended. The Environment Agency comments are noted. Informative 9 has been added. Greater London Authority (GLA) (Stage 1): Land Use Principles: The extension to an existing data centre campus within a Strategic Industrial Location is supported in land use terms. Urban Design and heritage: Whilst the impacts of the proposed tall building are likely to be acceptable given the site’s context, this must be confirmed within a revised townscape and visual impact assessment that contains proposed views. Improvements to the boundary treatment and interaction with the canal are recommended, and appropriate conditions should be placed to ensure design quality. With regards to heritage, insufficient information has been provided to enable assessment of the impacts on heritage assets, and this must be provided to enable full assessment. Transport: An updated Active Travel Zone (ATZ) assessment is required, with a financial requested of £31,643 to be provided for works to the A312. A revised trip generation, increase in cycle parking and other improvements are required. The GLA’s Stage 1 comments are noted. An amended Utilities Statement was submitted to address the GLA comments received. Please refer to paras 7.1 to 7.15 for consideration of land use principles. Additional viewpoints as seen from local heritage assets were submitted to address the GLA comments. Please refer to paras 7.16 to 7.41 for consideration of design and heritage matters. An amended Transport Assessment and Delivery and Service Management Plan were submitted to address the GLA comments made. Please refer to paras 7.81 to 7.98 for consideration of transport matters. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Environment and sustainable infrastructure: Further information is required on energy, infrastructure, circular economy, whole-life cycle carbon, biodiversity, and sustainable drainage. Recommendation That the Hillingdon Council be advised that the application does not yet fully comply with the London Plan for the reasons set out in this report. Outstanding matters relating to urban design, heritage, transport and environmental matters should be addressed. Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS): No further assessment or conditions are necessary. The GLAAS comments are noted. Hayes Town Partnership: Principle of development We have no objections to the proposal in principle but would like to make sure that full account is taken of the relationship of the development to the Grand Union Canal, the travel options for employees, the connections with Brunel University and Uxbridge College and the need to maximise job opportunities for local people. Landscaping Good landscaping is therefore essential in minimising any adverse effects and this has been largely achieved in the proposed design except for the boundary with the towpath. The development should contribute towards enhancement and maintenance of the landscaped planting. Travel plan The Hayes Town Partnership comments are noted. Officers note that planning obligations must only be sought where they meet all of the following tests (as paragraph 58 of the NPPF): a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; b) directly related to the development; and c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. Please refer to the S106 HoTs which include all planning obligations which are considered to meet the relevant tests. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press The Travel Plan gives insufficient attention to the potential of the canal towpath to play a significant role in encouraging employees to walk or cycle to and from work. The Travel Plan needs to be revisited so that it can come up with some more radical proposals on how to encourage more people to walk and cycle. Lighting of towpath Hayes Town Partnership request that the developer contributes towards lighting of the canal towpath. Bulls Bridge improvement project Hayes Town Partnership request that the developer contributes towards local improvement schemes, including the Bulls Bridge improvement project. Links with educational establishments Hayes Town Partnership has encouraged those proposing data centres to contact Brunel University, Uxbridge College and local secondary schools. In the case of Ark there has been some contact with the College but not the University. The Partnership requests that ways be explored of informing and engaging local students so that they are encouraged and equipped to enter the data centre industry. Local recruitment Large developers tend to recruit to posts by using central London-based agencies, but the Hayes Town Partnership would like to see a more coordinated local recruitment exercise. Health and Safety Executive (HSE): No comment confirmed. The HSE comments are noted. Heathrow Airport Safeguarding: We have now assessed the above application a gainst safeguarding criteria and can confirm The Heathrow Airport Safeguarding comments are noted. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press that we have no safeguarding objections to the proposed development. Hounslow Council: No comment or objection confirmed. The Hounslow Council comments are noted. Inland Waterways Association: The sites travel plan doesn't highlight the use of the canal towpath for both walking and cycling to and from the proposed site. It is the most direct route to/from Hayes and Harlington railway station and much more attractive than the identified road route. To make this route more attractive the development should look to: - Part fund under S106 contributions improvements to the towpath with an agreement with Canal and River Trust (CRT), this to include both resurfacing, vegetation improvements and ongoing maintenance. Work with CRT to investigate low level lighting to increase personal safety. - Part fund under S106 contributions better mooring provisions in this area. More boats moored in the area improves personal safety all along the towpath and encourages additional journeys using the towpath. - Provision of 'pool bikes', both e-assisted and manual, for use of staff to include a 3-year maintenance agreement with a local supplier. Investigate with other local businesses a 'Zipcar' type scheme. The Inland Waterways Association comments are noted. S106 HoT (vii) is proposed to secure a Canal and River Trust Contribution towards canal environment improvements. Transport matters are considered within paras 7.81 to 7.98 of the report. London Fire Brigade: No response received. Fire safety matters are considered in paras 7.35 to 7.36. Condition 33 is also proposed to secure the final fire safety details. Metropolitan Police (Secured by Design): No response received. Accreditation for secured by design is proposed to be secured by Condition 34. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Metropolitan Police (Counter Terrorism) Concerns raised around trees, mostly from the Union Park Canal side to be used as climbing aids to circumvent the perimeter fence line. They [the applicant] informed me that they will be engaging with the Canal body to trim the trees and pay / contribute towards maintenance. The Metropolitan Police (Counter Terrorism) comments are noted. Ministry of Defence: No response received. n/a National Air Traffic Services (NATS): The proposed development does not conflict with NATS safeguarding criteria. Accordingly, NATS (En Route) Public Limited Company ("NERL") has no safeguarding objection to the proposal. The NATS comments are noted. Thames Water: Waste Comments With regard to SURFACE WATER drainage, Thames Water would advise that if the developer follows the sequential approach to the disposal of surface water we would have no objection. Management of surface water from new developments should follow Policy SI 13 Sustainable drainage of the London Plan 2021. Where the developer proposes to discharge to a public sewer, prior approval from Thames Water Developer Services will be required. Thames Water would advise that with regard to the FOUL WATER network capacity, we would not have any objection to the above planning application, based on the information provided. The application indicates that SURFACE WATER will NOT be discharged to the public network and as such Thames Water has no objection, however approval should be sought from the Lead Local Flood Authorit y. Should The Thames Water comments are noted. Informative 8 is proposed to be added to any decision for approval. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press the applicant subsequently seek a connection to discharge surface water into the public network in the future then we would consider this to be a material change to the proposal, which would require an amendment to the application at which point we would need to review our position. Water Comments With regard to water supply, this comes within the area covered by the Affinity Water Company. Network Rail: Network Rail has no objection in principle to the above proposal but due to the proposal being next to Network Rail land and our infrastructure and to ensure that no part of the development adversely impacts the safety, operation and integrity of the operational railway, the applicant will be required to contact Network Rail Asset Protection prior to works commencing. The Network Rail comments are noted. Network rail would be consulted as part of an application to discharge landscape scheme Condition 18. Transport for London (TfL): An increase in the quantum of cycle parking at this site is required to ensure the proposal is in line with London Plan standards. A £31,643 contribution towards the A312 Healthy Streets scheme should be secured. Further thought on the Travel Plan, and the targets contained within the Travel Plan, is required. A Parking Design and Management Plan (PDMP), Construction Logistics Plan (CLP), Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP) should be secured through the appropriate mechanism. The TfL comments are noted. Please refer to paras 7.81 to 7.98 for consideration of transport matters. S106 HoTs (iv) and (vi) would secure this contribution and a suitable Travel Plan. Conditions 31 (Parking Design and Management Plan), 13 (Construction Management and Logistics Plan) and 32 (Delivery, Servicing and Waste Management Plan) would secure these recommendations. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Internal Consultation Access Officer The detail of this planning application has been considered, with no accessibility issues raised. However, an informative concerning the service providers obligations under The Equality Act 2010 should be attached to any grant of planning permission. The Access Officer comments are noted. The requested informative has been added (Informative 5). Air Quality Officer: The proposed data centre building (Class B8) with 14 emergency generators (14 no.) and associated flues is not air quality neutral as required by the London Plan, not air quality neutral as per LBH Air Quality Local Action Plan 2019-2024, and not air quality positive, as required by the LBH Local Action Plan. Therefore, further mitigation is required. The total level of mitigation required to the proposed development for pollutant emissions is £189,413 for 14 generators and £21,095 for traffic emissions, totalling £210,508. This should be secured by S106 legal agreement. Conditions are also proposed for the following: x Testing and maintenance regime and annual hours of use of the backup generators. x Schedule for the monitoring and testing of NOx and PM2.5 emissions of the proposed standby generators. x Specification of the details of the emergency backup generators. x Hours of Testing of the standby generators. x Backup Generator Fuel. x Cleanest Generator and Fuel Technology. x SCR to achieve 96mg/Nm3. x Emission Reduction Plan. x Low Emission Strategy. The Air Quality Officer comments are noted. Please refer to S106 HoT (i) for the air quality obligation to be secured. Please refer to Conditions 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, and 39. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press x Reducing Emissions from Demolition and Construction. Contaminated Land Officer: Having consider the nature of the proposed development and applicant submitted supportive information i.e. Phase 2 Ground Investigation Report Revision no. B with reference 0301341/BH/CK prepared by Colliers Building Consultancy Limited dated 08 March 2024 taken note of sections 5 (Preliminary Conceptual Site Model), 7 (Ground Investigation), 8 (Ground Conditions), 10 (Geo-Environmental Results), 11 (Discussion), 12(Conclusions) and 13 (Geo- Environmental Recommendations), please be advised that, we have no objection to the proposed development. However, a land contamination condition is recommended should the planning application be approved. The Contaminated Land Officer comments are noted. Condition 15 (Contaminated Land) is proposed to be secured. Economic Development Officer: For this application, the standard employment and skills clauses would be required. We would expect the developer to deliver an employment and skills training programme during the construction phase, and we would expect the developer to work with the Council and local employment/education partners for any end user opportunities that arise from this development. For the end user opportunities, we would expect the deliverer to engage with the council four months prior to completion. The Economic Development Officer comments are noted. S106 HoT (viii) is proposed to be secured. Flood and Water Management Specialist (Metis): No objection is raised subject to conditions securing the final details and implementation of the drainage strategy. The Flood and Water Management Specialist comments are noted. Conditions 22, 23 and 24 are proposed to be secured. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Head of Environmental Specialists (Energy): Conditions and a S106 obligation should be secured to ensure policy compliance. The Head of Environmental Specialists comments are noted. Condition 25 and S106 HoT (iii) is proposed to be secured. Highways Authority: Location North Hyde Gardens intersects with A437 North Hyde Road some 250 metres west of the A312 Bulls Bridge roundabout. North Hyde Gardens is aligned in a north south direction until it crosses the Grand Union Canal 350 metres further north where it then bends to the right in a west east alignment. The main application site is situated to the north of this bend. Approximately 70 metres north of North Hyde Road, North Hyde Gardens changes from being adopted to unadopted highway. North Hyde Gardens benefits from street lighting and a 30mph speed limit. In the vicinity of the application site there are double yellow line parking restrictions on either side of the road. Access to public transport Transport for London use as system called PTAL (Public Transport Accessibility Level) to measure access to the public transport network. PTAL assesses walk times to the nearest public transport location taking into account service frequency. The location is then scored between 0 and 6b where 0 is the worst and 6b the best. According to the Transport for London WebCAT service the application site has a PTAL ranking of 4, indicating access to public transport is reasonable compared to London as a whole, suggesting that there would be opportunities for trip-making to and from the site by public transport. Pedestrian access to the site will be gained from North H yde Gardens, through the The Highways Authority comments are noted. The Travel Plan is to be secured under S106 HoT (iv). The Healthy Streets / Active Travel Zone contribution is to be secured under S106 HoT(v). TfL A312 Healthy Streets Contribution is proposed to be secured under S106 HoT (vi). The relevant conditions are to be secured under Condition numbers 31 and 32. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press secured entrance consented under the adjacent Union Park project. The access consists of security rated turnstile and bypass gate for disabled and bicycle access. Parking The proposal would offer 14no. car parking spaces of which 1no. would be allocated as a disabled persons space, 6no. active electric vehicle charge point spaces and 3no. passive electric vehicle charge point spaces. In addition, as part of the consented scheme of the wider site, a total of 13no. short-stay parking spaces would be provided adjacent to the proposed Visitor Reception Centre. These spaces would have a maximum ‘waiting time’ sufficient to allow visitors to safely park their vehicles whilst undergoing security checks and site safety briefings prior to gaining site access. This standard of car parking is slightly lower than the standard approved at other data centres in the borough but is still considered acceptable. Eight cycle parking spaces would be provided together with end of journey facilities including changing rooms, locker and showers. The Highway Authority requires that these cycle spaces are sheltered, secure and accessible in accordance with London Cycle Design Standards. The Highway Authority notes that the number of cycle parking spaces to be provided is based the floor area of the offices. This is considered reasonable taking into account the workforce density within the data centre itself would be very low and in any case, it is anticipated these people are likely to have desk space also within the office. Trip generation The proposed data centre would be operational 24 hours a day, seven days per week. The facility management and security staff would work day and night shifts with management and administration staff working more conventional hours between 8.30am and 5.30pm. Based on this the applicant reports Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press there would be approximately 29no. people on-site during normal business hours. Whilst there would be just 14no. car parking spaces, there are opportunities for travel to the site by sustainable means including, bus, rail, walking and cycling. There would be a Travel Plan to encourage and enable the use of these options. The applicant highlights that the number of generated trips by car will not exceed the 14no. car parking spaces proposed. To establish the impact of the proposed development, the applicant has reviewed the existing trip generation of the site as it was in its original use – taxi repairs, against the proposed development and concluded there would be a net decrease in two-way vehicle trips in the weekday morning and evening peak periods respectively. Active Travel Zone assessment The consented scheme for Blocks 1-3 included an obligation to widen the footway and remove overgrown vegetation along North Hyde Garden to achieve the standard footway widths of 1.8m, thereby improving the safety and convenience of pedestrians using this link. A new zebra is also to be provided which will help improve pedestrian safety. Furthermore, to improve pedestrian connectivity from the Grand Union Canal to North Hyde Gardens, a new shared cycle and pedestrian link has already been constructed as part of the consented Blocks 1-3 development. The consented scheme secured a Transport for London Healthy Streets Scheme Contribution of £129,200 (s.106 agreement dated 14th April 2020). The Highway Authority require that another proportionate sum is secured. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Travel Plan A framework Travel Plan has been submitted to support the application. The targets seek to increase the level of Active Travel at this site from 44% to 48% over a five-year period. The Highway Authority requires a planning condition obliging the applicant to submit a Full Travel Plan. The targets in this Full Travel Plan should align with the ‘London Plan Policy T1: Strategic Approach to Transport’ which requires that development proposals support the Mayor’s strategic target for 80% of all trips in London to be made by foot, cycle, or public transport by 2041, as Hillingdon is an outer London Borough the target is 56%. Conclusion There are no highway objections to this proposal subject to the necessary planning conditions and obligations. Noise Specialist: Sufficient information has been provided by the Applicant to make a recommendation on noise. It is recommended that no objection is made on noise grounds subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions which should be met based on the design information provided and considering measurement and prediction uncertainty. Noise limit conditions are proposed for normal operation and emergency back-up operation scenarios. The Noise Specialist comments are noted. Conditions 8 and 9 and proposed to be secured. Planning Policy Officer: The Infrastructure Statement outlines how necessary power for the extension is already secured as part of the redevelopment of Union Park data centre campus. The Planning Policy Officer comments are noted. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Urban Design Officer: This proposal seeks the addition of a fourth data centre block at North Hyde Gardens, adjacent to the Hayes Village redevelopment. Given the in-principle support for a data centre use on the wider site and for this extension, the scheme is largely driven by capacity demands, the applicant’s business case, and operational requirements relating to access, infrastructure arrangement (construction and long-term maintenance logistics, energy supply, ventilation and cooling), and security considerations. Given this planning context and the design of the proposed appearance and landscaping, we are broadly supportive of the proposal, which comprises UP4 (main data centre use) and EC4 (ancillary energy centre use). However, a number of points require further clarification or resolution, including: x Verified pedestrian-level townscape views (including rooftop plant and services). x Further justification for the proposed use of concertina razor wire, and exploration of less utilitarian alternatives. x Confirmation that underground utilities will not impede landscaping delivery or establishment. x Clarification regarding the “species-rich reinforced grass” specification. x Strengthening of the canal-side green buffer to mitigate visual impacts, alongside appropriate fence colouring. Suggested Conditions x External materials, finishes, and detailed design drawings (including cladding, landscaping features, and boundary treatments). x Landscaping strategy, including planting quantum, species selection, and distribution. The Urban Design Officer comments are noted. Matters relating to design are addressed in paras 7.16 to 7.29 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press x Green buffer enhancement plan and delivery (subject to agreement with the Canal & River Trust, if applicable). Waste Strategy Officer: No comments or objections. The Waste Strategy Officer comments are noted. 7 Planning Assessment Land Use Principles Industrial Use 7.1 This application seeks permission for the redevelopment of the site to deliver an extension to the existing Union Park data centre campus. This would consist of (a) free standing data centre building; (b) energy, power, and water infrastructure; (c) site access and internal roads; (d) site security arrangements; (e) hard and soft, green landscaping; and (f) other ancillary and auxiliary forms of development. 7.2 The application site is located within the Hayes Strategic Industrial Location (SIL) in the Hillingdon Local Plan. SILs are key locations for industrial, logistics, and digital infrastructure uses, ensuring that such areas continue to support London's economic and employment needs. Policy E4 of the London Plan recognises data centres as an emerging industrial-type activity that falls within the broader B8 (storage and distribution) classification, making the proposed use appropriate within this desi gnated SIL. 7.3 Policy E7 of the London Plan (2021) encourages the intensification of industrial land, particularly in SILs, to optimise capacity while ensuring that existing industrial functions are not compromi sed. The proposed development would deliver 18,898m2 floorspace and would appropriately intensify the use of the site. The proposed office floorspace would be ancillary to the primary data centre use and is therefore considered acceptable in principle. Emplo yment Use 7.4 It is noted that Policy E2 of the London Plan (2021) requires that B Use Class business uses should be fit for purpose. Policy E4 of the London Plan (2021) states that additional industrial capacity should be prioritised in locations that are accessible. 7.5 The submission states that each MW of data space generates, on average, 2.29 Technical Support Staff/MW(IT); and 3.45 Client Staff/MW(IT). The IT capacity of the proposed development is 28MW, and so based on this avera ge density, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press this translates into 64 Site Based Technical Support Staff; and 97 Site Based Client Staff. This equates to 161 jobs. 7.6 The Applicant acknowledges that this would appear to be a high estimate of direct jobs created and therefore adjusts the number of jobs down to between 50 and 100. Jobs in data centres tend to be highly skilled and therefore command higher salaries compared to more traditional sites and industries. This job creation wei ghs in favour of the scheme in the planning balance. 7.7 It should be acknowledged that the benefit of the number of jobs generated is somewhat diminished by the fact that the site did previously generate jobs under its former use as Addison Lee garages. 7.8 Notwithstanding, the Planning Statement notes an aspiration to establish a local apprenticeship scheme which would be supported. 7.9 Policy E11 of the London Plan (2021) states that development proposals should support employment, skills development, apprenticeships, and other education and training opportunities in both the construction and end-use phases, including through Section 106 obligations where appropriate. In accordance with this, the Council's Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (2014) requires that developments with estimated construction costs of over £2 million and a construction period of three months or more deliver an in-kind employment and training scheme or financial contributions towards training and employment in the borough. An employment strategy and construction training scheme is proposed to be secured by a Section 106 legal agreement under Head of Term (viii). Economy 7.10 The economic benefit of information and communications technology infrastructure is acknowledged and supported by national, regional and local planning policies. As noted under Paragraph 85 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024), significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and produc tivity. There will be substantial economic benefits arising from the proposed development in terms of employment. The national non-domestic rates (NNDR) and gross value added (GVA) increases are also significant. The assessment also highlights the need for this additional data capacity to be located within London to be as close as possible to its end users and support the broader economy. These benefits and considerations are given si gnificant weight in the overall assessment of the planning balance. Power Infrastructure 7.11 The NPPF (2024) emphasises the need for development to be supported by appropriate infrastructure. Policy D2 of the London Plan requires consideration to be given to the impact on local infrastructure capacity where planning infrastructure capacit y will be exceeded. Polic y SI2 of the London Plan (2021) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press requires major developments to demonstr ate how energy infrastructure will be integrated and supported. 7.12 Given the substantial power demand associated with data centres, the applicant has outlined the strategy in the Infrastructure Statement. It is noted that this site would be an effective extension of the existing data centre campus adjacent to the site. It is noted that the proposed development would utilise the 37MVA already secured as part of the wider site via a contractual agreement with National Grid. The documentation submitted states that the National Grid connection for the broader site was energised in January 2023 via National Grid’s substation at North Hyde. The GLA have confirmed that they have no further comment on this matter in the Sta ge 1 report. 7.13 In the event of a power loss, such as a temporary grid blackout, emergency back- up generators would automatically activate to maintain power to essential systems until mains power is restored. As such, reliable power infrastructure is in place to support the development’s res ilience. This is subject to air quality considerations addressed in para graphs 7.54 to 7.59 of this report. 7.14 The Council has continued to engage with the Greater London Authority's Infrastructure Coordinate Service, who have been leading on the issue of West London electricity capacity constraints. The relevant infrastructure providers are continuing to deploy solutions to resolve capacity issues for residential and mixed-use schemes in the short term. This has resulted in almost all the residential schemes previously known to be stalled due to this issue having a connection secured. Upgrades to the electricity transmission network serving West London remain planned to address the issue over the long-term. The Greater London Authority continue to host an update on the issue of West London Electricity Capacity Constraints on its website with full details of the latest position. 7.15 Therefore, the development has secured a power supply and would not overburden the local grid capacity and is not considered to result in detrimental impacts connected to ener gy infrastructure. Desi gn 7.16 This application seeks permission for the redevelopment of the site to deliver an extension to the existing Union Park data centre campus. This would consist of (a) free standing data centre building; (b) energy, power, and water infrastructure; (c) site access and internal roads; (d) site security arrangements; (e) hard and soft, green landscaping; and (f) other ancillary and auxiliary forms of development 7.17 More specifically, the development would comprise a data centre building (Union Park 4 or UP4), an Energy Centre building (EC4) and an ancillary building (AB5) to connect the two main elements of development, totalling 15,410 m2 Gross Internal Area. The development would sit ad jacent to and connect with AB4 and

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Rhian Thomas 78334/APP/2025/1334 Date Application Valid: 29.05.25 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 08.09.25 Application Type: Full Ward: Colham & Cowley Applicant: London Borough Of Hillingdon Site Address: Former Garages Site adjacent No. 43 St Christopher Road, Uxbridge, UB8 3SG Proposal: Demolition of existing lock-up garages and erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings with associated parking and external works. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 6 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (the Council is the Applicant) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summary 1.1 The application seeks planning permission for the demolition of existing lock-up garages and erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings with associated parking and external works. 1.2 The application is required to be determined at planning committee as the Council is the applicant. 1.3 The committee report seeks to provide a comprehensive assessment of the full planning application and supporting documentation. All material planning considerations have been considered. 1.4 The garages within the site are underutilised. Their demolition and replacement with 2 new dwellings is supported in principle, given the development plan’s support for the optimisation of brownfield sites to provide new housing. Furthermore, the proposal seeks consent for 2 x 3 bed dwellings, which would contribute towards meeting an identified need across the borough. These benefits weigh in favour of the proposal. 1.5 During the assessment of the application, revised plans were secured which include the adoption of a more contemporary design to suit this backland location. It is noted that the site is constrained, in particular the rear gardens of the dwellings to the north present a challenge in terms of overlooking and privacy. The more contemporary design has allowed for the front facing windows which serve habitable rooms to be designed as oriels without compromising the key design features. As such, the proposal safeguards neighbour amenity in terms of privacy and overshadowing. 1.6 The dwellings would be served by 1 car parking space per dwelling. Although the site is subject to a low PTAL rating (PTAL 1b) , the Highway Authority is content with a 1:1 parking ratio and this would adhere to the London Plan maximum car parking standards. 1.7 It is recommended that planning permission is granted subject to conditions (Appendix 1), by virtue that the development would not have a significant impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties, nor would it harm the character and appearance of the area, and it would not have a harmful impact on the highway network. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site comprises a former garage plot located on land adjacent to No. 43 St Christopher Road, within a predominantly residential area of Uxbridge. The site currently comprises single storey vacant garage structures. The land is bounded by residential properties to the north, south and west with Manor Farm located east of the site. The land adjoining east of the site lies within the Green Belt, an Archaeological Priority Area and Cowley Church (St. Laurence) Conservation Area. 2.2 The site has a PTAL ranking of 1b (poor). 2.3 The surrounding properties are predominantly two storey semi-detached and terraced in character. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Images of the Application Site Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of existing garages and erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings with associated parking and external works. 3.2 During the process of the application, revised drawings were received amending the design of the dwellings. 3.3 Figure 3: Proposed Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Existing Site Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Site Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Floor and Roof Plans Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Elevations Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Sections 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 10 neighbouring properties were consulted on the application by letter dated 03/06/25. 6.2 During the process of the application, revised drawings were received, and neighbours were re-consulted. The consultation period expired 22/08/25. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 6.3 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response 4 letters of objection have been received. I. Parking concerns. One parking space per property is not enough. Discussed at paragraphs 7.27 to 7.38 of this report. II. Concerns regarding decreased water pressure This is not a material planning consideration. III. Noise and dust from construction Discussed at paragraph 7.33 of this report. IV. Loss of privacy Discussed at paragraphs 7.16 to 7.20 of this report. V. Residents did not receive consultation letters. The LPA has followed the statutory requirements set out in in Article 15 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order. These regulations require publicity for this type of application to be carried out either: (a)by site display in at least one place on or near the land to which the application relates for not less than 21 days; or (b)by serving the notice on any adjoining owner or occupier. 10 adjoining neighbouring properties were consulted Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press on the application by letter dated 03-06-25. During the process of the application, the design of development was amended a nd these neighbouring properties were re-consulted for 14 days. One comment in support has been received I. Redevelopment of site that has been subject to antisocial behaviour Noted Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Tree and Landscape Officer: No objection subject to tree retention and methodology conditions . The comments have been noted, and a condition has been secured for further tree protection measures. Access Officer: No objections subject to standard conditions relating to compliance with the relevant accessible standards . The comments have been noted, and the relevant conditions have been added. Waste Services: No comments/ objections . Noted. Highways Authority: No objections, subject to conditions pertaining to cycle storage, car parking details, a construction management plan and informative notes. The comments have been noted, and the relevant conditions have been added. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.1 The application site is comprised of two rows of lock-up garages. The site would be considered as ‘back land’ and as such, Policy DMH 6 of the Local Plan, Part 2 (2020) would apply. 7.2 Policy DMH 6 requires back land sites to be more intimate in mass and scale and lower than frontage properties. The proposed development is set back from the highway and would replace existing dilapidated garages which have been prone to anti -social behaviour. The revised proposal has been well designed and would be a betterment of the existing site context. Whilst the built form itself would not be considered as more intimate in mass and scale to the surrounding properties, when viewed within their individual plots, the buildings would benefit from significant space to the front and rear, the pitched roof forms and stepped design add both articulation and reduce the appearance of the scale and mass of the buildings from street level. The design is appropriate for this back land location and the more dynamic approach to designing a scheme which addresses the constraints is welcomed. The development is considered appropriate within this setting and would not detract from the character and appearance o f the area, as discussed further within paragraphs 7.5 – 7.10 of this report. 7.3 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) encourages the effective use of land by promoting the re -use of previously developed (brownfield) land, particularly where this can contribute to meeting identified housing needs and support sustainable develop ment. Paragraph 125 (d) of the NPPF specifically states that planning decisions should pr omote and support the development of under-utilised land and buildings, especially where this would help meet identified needs for housing, economic regeneration, or o ther strategic priorities. The proposed development would provide 2 additional 3-bedroom family sized dwellings for which there is an identified need within the borough. 7.4 The principle of re-development of this site for residential use is acceptable in principle and is considered to comply with Policies H2 of the London Plan (2021), the aims of Policy DMH 6 of the Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and the NFFP (2024). The principle of development is therefore accepted. Design / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.5 The proposed development involves the demolition of existing garages and erection of two semi -detached properties with associated landscaping, amenity space and car parking. During the processing of the application, the design of the dwellings was amended. The properties would measure approx. 7.8m in width, 8.1m in depth and 8.6m in height characterised with hipped roofs. The two properties would be staggered in depth with overlapping eaves feature. 7.6 The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character, comprising mainly of two storey semi -detached and terraced properties set back from the highway with front gardens or off -street parking. The properties are finished in brickwork and feature gable end roof forms. To the east of the site lies Manor farm and associated buildings which lies within a Conservation Area and the Green Belt. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.7 The proposed development is more contemporary in its design compared to the immediate surrounding properties, as the proposed properties include features such as hipped roofs, and oriel projecting bay windows . However, this is considered appropriate for this back land site as it is set back from the highway, separated by an access road and i s considered to form its own street scene. Whilst views of the proposed properties would be seen from St Christophers Road, they are not considered to be over dominant , given their set back from the street scene by the existing access road. 7.8 The site is clearly subject to physical constraints. Furthermore the existing garages contribute poorly to the character and appearance of the streetscene due to there form and poor state of repair. The design has been revised to respond to the site constraints whilst improving the local character. The pitched roofs, projecting bays and stepped building lines create a form of development which integrates with the traditional character of the neighbouring dwellings. Figure 4 View of the site from St Christopher Road 7.9 The proposed dwellings would not appear cr amped within the plot as they have been designed to be set in from the site boundaries by approx. 1.4m. They would feature generously sized, private rear gardens and front landscaping for additional greening, which is considered to make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the area. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.10 The proposed development is considered a betterment to the existing site context. The existing garages at the site are prone to anti- social behaviour and are considered an eyesore within the street. A site visi t confirmed multiple of the garages displayed graffiti and were damaged. Littering was also commonly seen. Figure 5 Site Photographs showing existing site. Graffiti, damages and littering Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.11 The proposed development would provide a more attractive environment by providing increased landscaping and on-site passive surveillance for additional security. 7.12 As described above, the design of the scheme is not considered to be harmful to the character and appearance and visual amenities of the area, and as such the proposed development complies with Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies and Policies DMH 6, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), as well as relevant design guidance contained within the London Plan (2021) and NPPF (2024). Heritage 7.13 The site itself is not located within any heritage designations; however, the east of the site is bounded by Cowley Church (St Laurence) Conservation Area. 7.14 The development is considered as a betterment to the existing site context, given it would introduce soft landscaping and greening to the site and reduce anti-social behaviour. This coupled with its separation distance between the proposed development and the designated heritage asset and accounting for the scope of the development it is not considered that the development would cause harm to the significance of the heritage asset. Impact on the Green Belt 7.15 Whilst the boundary of the Green Belt extends up to the site edge, the development itself would be located outside the parameters of the Green Belt and the development would not therefore conflict with the relevant local and national policy provisions relating to development within the Green Belt. Residential Amenity 7.16 Number 43 St. Christopher Road is located no rth of the application site. The site is separated from this neighbour by a 2m high brick wall which is proposed to be retained. The proposed development would be sited approx.1.3m away from the shared boundary. The proposed dwellings would be set back from the front elevation of thi s neighbour and would not project beyond the rear elevation of the extensions at this neighbouring property. Given the separation distance between the proposed development and this neighbour, it is not considered there would be any harmful loss of light, overshadowing or overbearing impact. There is one upper floor side w indow at this neighbouring property that would face the proposed development, however this is a very small window that serves a non- habitable room. There would be no side windows within the development that would overlook this neighbour, however it should be noted that there would be a side facing oriel window that serves the first-floor front facing bedrooms that would face this direction of this neighbour. However, this is not considered to create any significant overlooking, given it would lar gely face the side elevation of this Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press neighbour and front garden rather than habitable room windows or private amenity space. 7.17 Number 45 St Christopher Road is located west of the application site. The front elevation of the proposed development would be located approx. 14.3m away from the side elevation of this neighbouring property and its rear garden. The proposed development would include upper floor oriel windows that would include obscurely glazed windows up to a height of 1.7m for the panels facing this property to prevent overlooking of th e neighbouring garden. The angled sections of the windows would not be obscure glazed, so as to provide an appropriate degree of outlook for future occupiers . The proposed ground floor kitchen window would not be obscurely glazed; however, this is not considered to cause any harmful overlooking given this is located at gr ound floor level and would largely face existing boundary treatment and proposed landscaping at the site. The proposed development would not cause any harmful oversha dowing or loss of light to this neighbour given the separation distance. 7.18 Numbers 13 and 15 St Luke Close are located south of the application site. The proposed development is separated from these properties by rear and side gardens. Given the separation distances between the development and these neighbouring properties it is not considered there would be any harmful loss of light or overshadowing. The development would include oriel over hanging front windows to serve the first-floor front facing bedroom which would have a clear glass side window in the direction of these neighbours. However, this is not considered to cause a significant level of overlooking or loss of privacy as it would not face any habitable room windows within the neighbouring properties and would not give a full view of the garden area. 7.19 Manor Farm and, SMB Sheet Metal Works are located east of the application site. The proposed development is not considered to give rise to any harm to the amenities of these neighbouring properties given the separation distance. 7.20 Regarding the impact to each of the proposed dwellings, it is not considered that the proposed oriel front facing window s would cause a significant level of overlooking or loss of privacy to each pr operty given the stepped front elevation. The wide window panels would not face directly at each other, rather they would provide oblique angles. Whilst some views may be visible this is not considered significant enough to refuse the application and the harm is outweighed by the benefits of the development by providing two additional family sized units. Quality of Residential Accommodation (Internal and External) Internal 7.21 The proposed development provides 2 x 3 bed 6 person dwellings and would have a GIA of approx. 108sqm. Policy D6 of the London Plan requires a property of this size to have at least 102sqm of GIA and as such the development complies with this standard. The proposed section drawi ng indicates that both floors of the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press dwellings would have a floor to ceiling height of 2.5m complying with the standards within Policy D6 of the London Plan 2021. 7.22 It is considered that all habitable room s would have an adequate source of light and outlook. The proposed first floor front facing bedroom would feature an oriel window with obscure glazing to a height of 1.7m, however these bedrooms would be served by clear glass side windows and clear glass top panel to provide a source of light and outlook which is considered appropriate. 7.23 As such, it is considered that future occupiers would have a good standard of living accommodation complying with Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan, Part 2 (2020). External 7.24 Table 5.3 of Policy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 states that houses with 2 and 3 bedrooms should provide a minimum of 60 square metres of private usable amenity space. 7.25 The proposed development would provide plot 1 with approx. 74sqm of useable, private rear garden space , and plot two would have approx. 66sqm (discounting the side access paths). As such, the development would comply with this standard. 7.26 As such, the development would comply with Policy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan, Part 2 (2020). Highways and Parking 7.27 The proposal site has a PTAL rating of 1b, indicating that comparatively to London as a whole, the sites access to public transport is poor, suggesting that there will be a reliance on the private car for journeys. 7.28 The London Plan (2021) Table 10.3 - Maximum Residential Parking Standards allows dwellings in Outer London PTAL ranking of 1b to have a maximum 1.5no. spaces each, therefore the development should provide a maximum of 3no. car parking spaces. The proposal would include the provision of 1 c ar parking space per dwelling. 7.29 The existing garages are served by an access road that forms an access onto St Christophers Road. The access road is approximately 3.0m wide and 17m long before it reaches the main body of the site. Visibility at the access onto St Christophers Road is good, due to the location on the outside of the bend. 7.30 The proposed site layout drawing shows the retention of the access road which will lead to a parking and turning area for the 2 houses. Each house will be provided with one parking spac e. It is likely that the traffic generation for the proposed houses would be in the order of 4 to 6 movements per house per day i.e. a total of up to 12 daily traffic movements. The existing garages if all were Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press occupied would have a traffic generati on of circa 40 movement per day. The proposed development would result in a material reduction in activity when compared to the full use of the existing garages. The reduction in traffic movements from the site will offer a benefit in highway safety terms, and traffic movement terms, for residents in the section of St Christophers Road close to the site. 7.31 The applicant has submitted a Transport Statement which has set out the site- specific circumstances. The site is within 560m to bus stops – High Street Route 222, 820m to Tesco’s Store, West Drayton, 1200m to Rabbsfarm Primary School and 1600m to West Drayton Railway Station. The Highway Authority have been consulted on the application and have confirmed that given the site specific conditions, 1 car parking space per dwell ing is acceptable and promotes the use of more sustainable transport. It is not expected that the proposed deve lopment would increase parking stress on the adjacent roads. 7.32 The submitted drawings illustrate the prov ision of cycle storage within the rear gardens of the properties which is considered an acceptable location. A condition has been secured for details to be provided of secure and accessible cycle storage for 2 cycles per unit. 7.33 Given the location and constraints of the site, it is considered necessary for a Demolition and Construction Management P lan to be submitted for review. As such, a condition has been secured for these details. 7.34 The Highway Authority have been consulted on the application and have no objection to the development subject to the implementation of conditions. The development is considered to comply with Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, DMT 5 & DMT 6 and Policies T4, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2021) and would not result in a more dangerous highway network or increase parking stress. Noise 7.35 The site would be used in an exclusively residential capacity. As such, in terms of the operational phase of the proposed development, no significant issues are raised by the proposal, in respect to noise. Air Quality 7.36 The site is located within an Air Qualit y Management Area. Given the proposed development is for two new dwellings, it is not considered that the proposal would cause unacceptable levels of dust and disturbance during the construction phase. 7.37 The control of dust and construction hours is governed under separate legislation and the relevant informative note has been added to the decision to remind the applicant of this. Accessibility Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.38 The Council’s Access Officer has been cons ulted on the application and has no concerns regarding accessibility, subject to conditions regarding step free access and compliance with the technical specifications for an M4(2) dwelling which will be added to the decision should the application be approved. Trees and Landscaping 7.39 The application site comprises 20 lock-up garages with a large area of hard surfacing, a small area of soft landscaping and one small tree within the site. 7.40 The applicant has provided an Arboricu ltural Survey that shows there is one category C tree on site, 2 category C hedges outside of the site and 2 category C trees outside of the site. The proposed site plan indicates that the on -site category C tree would be removed as part of the development, however all off site trees and hedges would be retained. The Council’s Tree Officer has been consulted on the application and has confirmed that the existing trees will benefit from the proposed development , due to t he introduction of gardens and green areas as opposed to hard surfacing and structures. Further replacement trees are proposed to mitigate the removal of a tree; however, a methodology is required for during the construction works to show how the retained trees will be protected and ensure the removal of the hard surfacing will not impact the root protection zone. As such an Arboricultural Method Statement and Protection Plan has been secured via condition. 7.41 The proposed development is considered to improve the site in terms of its landscaping and biodiversity given the existing site is comprised mainly of hardstanding and built structures. Whilst indicative landscaping works have been provided on the proposed site plan (drawing 2025/D/353/P/03 Rev A), a condition is recommended that secures full landscaping details. Biodiversity Net gain and Ecology 7.42 The applicant has provided the statutory small sites metric to establish the number of existing baseline habitat units at the site. The metric indicates that there are 0.0378 habitat units at the site pre-development and the post development habitat units would be increased to 0.0769 which demonstrates a 103.71% biodiversity net gain increase at the site, complying with the above standards. 7.43 The development has demonstrated that a 10% increase in BNG can be provided on site and as such a 30 -year habitat management plan condition has been secured. Flooding and Drainage 7.44 The proposed development site is not located in Flood Zones 2 or 3. Nor is it located within a critical drainage area, or an area known for surface water flooding. Should the application be granted, a condition will be added requiring a sustainable water management plan for th e site to be submitted and approved. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press The plan will ensure that appropriate and sufficient drainage is provided for the new dwellings. Waste Management 7.45 The proposed site plan does not indicate a position for refuse storage; however, it is considered that there would be adequate space on site to provide a covered and protected refu se storage area. As such, a condition has been secured for these details. 7.46 The submitted Design and Access Statement states that the household and garden waste collection arrangements will remain as existing with future residents expected to leave their waste bags and sacks at the end of the path for weekly collection. The refu se storage areas should be positioned in line with the maximum carry/drag distances for refu se collectors i.e. residents should not have to carry sacks more than 30m to the collection point. 8 Other Matters Human Rights 8.1 The development has been assessed against the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and in particular Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the Act itself. This Act gives further effect to the rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development rights and expectations which have been balanced and weighed against the wider community interests, as expressed through third party interests / the Devel opment Plan and Central Government Guidance. Equality 8.2 Due consideration has been given to Section 149 of the Equality Act with regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in the assessment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Local Finance Considerations and CIL 8.3 The Council adopted its own Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on 1st August 2014. The Hillingdon CIL charge for resi dential developments is £95 per square metre of additional floor space. This is in addition to the Mayoral CIL charge of £60 per square metre. CIL rates are in dex linked. The proposal involves the erection of new dwellings and is therefore CIL liable if planning permission is granted. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 9.1 The proposed development would have a satisfactory impact on the character and appearance of the area and would not significantly harm the amenities of any neighbouring property. It is not considered to harm the highway network; additionally adequate living accommodation would be provided for future occupiers . The proposal is considered to comply with the Development Plan and no material considerations indicate th at a contrary decision should be taken. Consequently, the application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 10 Background Papers 10.1 Relevant published policies and documents taken into account in respect of this application are set out in the report. Documents associated with the application (except exempt or confidential information) are available on the Council's website here, by entering the planning application number at the top of this report and using the search facility. Planning appl ications are also available to inspect electronically at the Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW upon appointment, by contacting Planning Services at planning@hillingdon.gov.uk. AAPPENDICES Planning Application 78334/APP/2025/1334 Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 17 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. RES3 T Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. REASON To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. RES4 A Accordance with Approved Plans The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on submitted plans numbers: 2025/D/353/P/01 2025/D/353/P/03 Rev A 2025/D/353/P/04 Rev A 2025/D/353/P/05 Rev A 2025/D/353/P/06 Rev A and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012), Part 2 (2020) and the London Plan (2021). 3. COM5 G General compliance with supporting documentation The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the following has been completed in accordance with the specified supporting plans and/or documents: Arboricultural Survey - BS5837:2012 completed by arbtech dated 29 July 2025 Transport Statement completed by Highway Planning Ltd dated August 2025 Biodiversity Gain Plan dated 08/08/25 Design and Access Statement 2025/D/353/P Version 3 Thereafter the development shall be retained/maintained in accordance with these details for as long as the development remains in existence REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012), Part 2 (2020) and the London Plan (2021). Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 17 44. RES7 M Materials (Submission) Save for demolition and site clearance works, no above ground works shall take place until details of all materials and external surfaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such. Details should include information relating to make, product/type, colour and photographs/images. REASON To ensure that the development presents a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 5. COM9 L Landscaping (car parking & refuse/cycle storage) No development shall take place until a landscape scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include: - 1. Details of Soft Landscaping 1.a Planting plans (at not less than a scale of 1:100), including a like for like replacement of trees in terms of quantum. 1.b Written specification of planting and cultivation works to be undertaken, 1.c Schedule of plants giving species (including pollution absorbing species), plant sizes, and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate 2. Details of Hard Landscaping 2.a Refuse Storage 2.b Cycle Storage (secure and covered for 2 spaces per dwelling) 2.c Means of enclosure/boundary treatments 2.d Car Parking Layouts (including demonstration that the spaces are to be served by 1 active 7Kw electrical charging point per dwelling) 2.e Hard Surfacing Materials 2.f External Lighting 3. Details of Landscape Maintenance 3.a Landscape Maintenance Schedule for a minimum period of 5 years. 3.b Proposals for the replacement of any tree, shrub, or area of turfing/seeding within the landscaping scheme which dies or in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority becomes seriously damaged or diseased. Thereafter the development shall be carried out and maintained in full accordance with the approved details. REASON To ensure that the proposed development will preserve and enhance the visual amenities of Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 17 the locality and provide adequate facilities in compliance with Policies DMHB 11, DMHB 14, DMEI 1 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 66. RES8 T Tree Protection No site clearance or construction work shall take place until the details have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority with respect to: 1. A method statement outlining the sequence of development on the site including demolition, building works and tree protection measures. 2. Detailed drawings showing the position and type of fencing to protect the entire root areas/crown spread of trees, hedges and other vegetation to be retained shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. No site clearance works or development shall be commenced until these drawings have been approved and the fencing has been erected in accordance with the details approved. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such fencing should be a minimum height of 1.5 metres. Thereafter, the development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. The fencing shall be retained in position until development is completed. The area within the approved protective fencing shall remain undisturbed during the course of the works and in particular in these areas: 2.a There shall be no changes in ground levels; 2.b No materials or plant shall be stored; 2.c No buildings or temporary buildings shall be erected or stationed. 2.d No materials or waste shall be burnt; and. 2.e No drain runs or other trenches shall be dug or otherwise created, without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. 3. Where the arboricultural method statement recommends that the tree protection measures for a site will be monitored and supervised by an arboricultural consultant at key stages of the development, records of the site inspections / meetings shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. REASON To ensure that trees and other vegetation can and will be retained on site and not damaged during construction work and to ensure that the development conforms with Policy DMHB 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 7. OM19 D Demolition and Construction Management Plan Prior to development commencing, the applicant shall submit a demolition and construction management plan to the Local Planning Authority for its approval. The plan shall detail: (i) The phasing of development works (ii) The hours during which development works will occur (please refer to informative I15 for Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 17 maximum permitted working hours). (iii) A programme to demonstrate that the most valuable or potentially contaminating materials and fittings can be removed safely and intact for later re-use or processing. (iv)Measures to prevent mud and dirt tracking onto footways and adjoining roads (including wheel washing facilities). (v) Traffic management and access arrangements (vehicular and pedestrian) and parking provisions for contractors during the development process (including measures to reduce the numbers of construction vehicles accessing the site during peak hours). (vi) Measures to reduce the impact of the development on local air quality and dust through minimising emissions throughout the demolition and construction process. (vii) The storage of demolition/construction materials on site. The approved details shall be implemented and maintained throughout the duration of the demolition and construction process. REASON To safeguard the amenity of surrounding areas in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 8 8. NONSC S Step Free Access Prior to any works on site above damp proof course level, details of step free access via all points of entry and exit shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The measures implemented as approved shall be retained thereafter. REASON To ensure housing of an inclusive design is achieved and maintained in accordance with Policies D5 and D7 of the London Plan (2021). 9. NONSC S SUDs Prior to commencement of the hereby approved development, (excluding demolition and site clearance) a scheme for the provision of sustainable water management shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall clearly demonstrate how the approved development will incorporate sustainable urban drainage (SuDs) in accordance with the hierarchy set out in Policy 5.13 of the London Plan and will: i. provide information on all SuDs features including the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and: ii. provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development of arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme throughout its lifetime. Including appropriate details of Inspection regimes, appropriate performance specification. The scheme shall also demonstrate the use of methods to minimise the use of potable water through water collection, reuse and recycling and will: iii. provide details of water collection facilities to capture excess rainwater; and how water usage will be reduced in the development. Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 5 of 17 Thereafter the development shall be implemented and retained/maintained in accordance with these details for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure that surface water run off is controlled to ensure the development does not increase the risk of flooding and is to be handled as close to its source as possible and to conserve water supplies in compliance with Policy EM6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012), Policy DMEI 10 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) as well as relevant SuDs guidance contained within the London Plan (2021) and NPPF (2024). 1 10. NONSC H Habitat Management Plan No development shall take place on any part of the site until a written 30 year Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved HMP shall be strictly adhered to and development commenced and operated in accordance with it. The HMP should, as a minimum, include; a) Description and evaluation of the features to be managed; b) Aims, objectives and targets for management c) Description of the management operations necessary to achieving aims and objectives; d) Prescriptions for management actions; e) Preparation of a works schedule, including annual works schedule; f) Details of the monitoring needed to measure the effectiveness of management; g) Details of the timetable for each element of the monitoring programme; and h) Details of the persons responsible for the implementation and monitoring; i) Reporting to the Council routinely as to the state of the Biodiversity Net Gain requirements of the development on years 1 (post completion), 3, 5, 10, 20 and 30, with biodiversity reconciliation calculations at each stage. REASON To ensure the development delivers a biodiversity net gain within the borough and secures the protection and effective management of the remaining habitat on site in accordance with Policy EM7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1, Policies DMEI 7 and DMHB 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two, Policy G6 of the London Plan and Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and the Environment Act 2021. 11. RES10 T Tree to be retained Trees, hedges and shrubs shown to be retained on the approved plan(s) shall not be damaged, uprooted, felled, lopped or topped without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. If any retained tree, hedge or shrub is removed or severely damaged during (or after) construction, or is found to be seriously diseased or dying, another tree, hedge or shrub shall be planted at the same place or, if planting in the same place would leave the new tree, hedge or shrub susceptible to disease, then the planting should be in a position to be first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority and shall be of a size and species to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be planted in Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 6 of 17 the first planting season following the completion of the development or the occupation of the buildings, whichever is the earlier. Where damage is less severe, a schedule of remedial works necessary to ameliorate the effect of damage by tree surgery, feeding or groundwork shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. New planting should comply with BS 3936 (1992) 'Nursery Stock, Part 1, Specification for Trees and Shrubs' Remedial work should be carried out to BS BS 3998:2010 'Tree work - Recommendations' and BS 4428 (1989) 'Code of Practice for General Landscape Operations (Excluding Hard Surfaces)'. The agreed work shall be completed in the first planting season following the completion of the development or the occupation of the buildings, whichever is the earlier. REASON To ensure that the trees and other vegetation continue to make a valuable contribution to the amenity of the area in accordance with Policy DMHB 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and to comply with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 1 12. HO6 O Obscure Glazing All of the first floor front facing window panes directly facing number 45 St Christopher Road shall be glazed with permanently obscured glass to at least scale 4 on the Pilkington scale and be non-opening below a height of 1.7 metres taken from internal finished floor level for so long as the development remains in existence. REASON To prevent overlooking to adjoining properties in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 13. RES12 N No additional windows or doors Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no additional windows, doors or other openings shall be constructed in the walls or roof slopes of the development hereby approved. REASON To prevent overlooking to adjoining properties in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 14. NONSC M M4(2) Compliance The dwellings hereby approved shall accord with the requirements of Policy D7 of the London Plan and shall not be occupied until certification of compliance with the technical specifications for an M4(2) dwelling, as set out in Approved Document M to the Building Regulations (2010) 2015, has been submitted to, and approved in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. All such provisions must remain in place for the life of the building. Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 7 of 17 REASON To not only allow the Building Control body to require the development to comply with the optional Building Regulations standards, but to also ensure the appropriate quantity and standard of accessible and adaptable housing is constructed and maintained in accordance with Policy D7 of the London Plan (2021). 1 15. RES14 O Outbuildings, extensions and roof alterations Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(England) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification); no garage(s), shed(s) or other outbuilding(s), nor extension or roof alteration to any dwellinghouse(s) subject of this permission shall be erected without the grant of further specific permission from the Local Planning Authority. REASON To protect the character and appearance of the area and amenity of residential occupiers in accordance with Policies DMHB 11 and DMHD 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 16. RES6 L Levels No development shall take place until plans of the site showing the existing and proposed ground levels and the proposed finished floor levels of all proposed buildings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such levels shall be shown in relation to a fixed and know datum point. Thereafter the development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the approved details. REASON To ensure that the development relates satisfactorily to adjoining properties in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). Informatives 1. I23 W Works affecting the Public Highway - Vehicle Crossover The development requires the formation of a vehicular crossover, which will be constructed by the Council. This work is also subject to the issuing of a separate licence to obstruct or open up the public highway. For further information and advice contact: - Highways Maintenance Operations, 4W/07, Civic Centre, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW. 2. The effect of paragraph 13 of Schedule 7A to the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 is that planning permission granted for the development of land in England is deemed to have been granted subject to the condition "(the biodiversity gain condition") that development may not begin unless: Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 8 of 17 (a) a Biodiversity Gain Plan has been submitted to the planning authority, and (b) the planning authority has approved the plan. The planning authority, for the purposes of determining whether to approve a Biodiversity Gain Plan if one is required in respect of this permission would be the London Borough of Hillingdon. There are statutory exemptions and transitional arrangements which mean that the biodiversity gain condition does not always apply. These are listed below. Based on the information available this permission is considered to be one which will require the approval of a biodiversity gain plan before development is begun because none of the statutory exemptions or transitional arrangements listed below are considered to apply. Statutory exemptions and transitional arrangements in respect of the biodiversity gain condition. 1. The application for planning permission was made before 12 February 2024. 2. The planning permission relates to development to which section 73A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (planning permission for development already carried out) applies. 3. The planning permission was granted on an application made under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and (i) the original planning permission to which the section 73 planning permission relates* was granted before 12 February 2024; or (ii) the application for the original planning permission* to which the section 73 planning permission relates was made before 12 February 2024. 4. The permission which has been granted is for development which is exempt being: 4.1 Development which is not 'major development' (within the meaning of article 2(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015) where: i) the application for planning permission was made before 2 April 2024; ii) planning permission is granted which has effect before 2 April 2024; or iii) planning permission is granted on an application made under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 where the original permission to which the section 73 permission relates* was exempt by virtue of (i) or (ii). 4.2 Development below the de minimis threshold, meaning development which: i) does not impact an onsite priority habitat (a habitat specified in a list published under section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006); and ii) impacts less than 25 square metres of onsite habitat that has biodiversity value greater than zero and less than 5 metres in length of onsite linear habitat (as defined in the statutory metric). 4.3 Development which is subject of a householder application within the meaning of article 2(1) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. A "householder application" means an application for planning permission for development for an existing dwellinghouse, or development within the curtilage of such a dwellinghouse for any purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse which is not H Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 9 of 17 an application for change of use or an application to change the number of dwellings in a building. 4.4 Development of a biodiversity gain site, meaning development which is undertaken solely or mainly for the purpose of fulfilling, in whole or in part, the Biodiversity Gain Planning condition which applies in relation to another development, (no account is to be taken of any facility for the public to access or to use the site for educational or recreational purposes, if that access or use is permitted without the payment of a fee). 4.5 Self and Custom Build Development, meaning development which: i) consists of no more than 9 dwellings; ii) is carried out on a site which has an area no larger than 0.5 hectares; and iii) consists exclusively of dwellings which are self-build or custom housebuilding (as defined in section 1(A1) of the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015). 4.5 Development forming part of, or ancillary to, the high speed railway transport network (High Speed 2) comprising connections between all or any of the places or parts of the transport network specified in section 1(2) of the High Speed Rail (Preparation) Act 2013. * "original planning permission means the permission to which the section 73 planning permission relates" means a planning permission which is the first in a sequence of two or more planning permissions, where the second and any subsequent planning permissions are section 73 planning permissions. Irreplaceable habitat If the onsite habitat includes irreplaceable habitat (within the meaning of the Biodiversity Gain Requirements (Irreplaceable Habitat) Regulations 2024) there are additional requirements for the content and approval of Biodiversity Gain Plans. The Biodiversity Gain Plan must include, in addition to information about steps taken or to be taken to minimise any adverse effect of the development on the habitat, information on arrangements for compensation for any impact the development has on the biodiversity of the irreplaceable habitat. The planning authority can only approve a Biodiversity Gain Plan if satisfied that the adverse effect of the development on the biodiversity of the irreplaceable habitat is minimised and appropriate arrangements have been made for the purpose of compensating for any impact which do not include the use of biodiversity credits. The effect of section 73D of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 If planning permission is granted on an application made under section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (application to develop land without compliance with conditions previously attached) and a Biodiversity Gain Plan was approved in relation to the previous planning permission ("the earlier Biodiversity Gain Plan") there are circumstances when the earlier Biodiversity Gain Plan is regarded as approved for the purpose of discharging the biodiversity gain condition subject to which the section 73 planning permission is granted. Those circumstances are that the conditions subject to which the section 73 permission is granted: i) do not affect the post-development value of the onsite habitat as specified in the earlier H Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 10 of 17 Biodiversity Gain Plan, and ii) in the case of planning permission for a development where all or any part of the onsite habitat is irreplaceable habitat the conditions do not change the effect of the development on the biodiversity of that onsite habitat (including any arrangements made to compensate for any such effect) as specified in the earlier Biodiversity Gain Plan. 3 3. The applicant is advised that the storage of materials associated with the construction of this development should be provided within the site on land which is not public highway, and the use of such areas must not interfere with the public highway. 4. It is an offence under section 137 of the Highways Act 1980 for any person, without lawful authority or excuse, in any way to wilfully obstruct the free passage along a highway or public right of way. If this development is likely to result in the public highway or public right of way network becoming routinely blocked (fully or partly) the applicant must contact the Highway Authority to obtain their permission and requirements before construction works commence. 5. It is an offence under section 148 of the Highways Act 1980 to deposit mud or other debris on the public highway, and section 149 of the same Act gives the Highway Authority powers to remove such material at the expense of the party responsible. Therefore, best practical means shall be taken at all times to ensure that all vehicles leaving the site during construction of the development are in a condition such as not to emit dust or deposit mud, slurry or other debris on the highway. 6. I52 C Compulsory Informative (1) The decision to GRANT planning permission has been taken having regard to all relevant planning legislation, regulations, guidance, circulars and Council policies, including The Human Rights Act (1998) (HRA 1998) which makes it unlawful for the Council to act incompatibly with Convention rights, specifically Article 6 (right to a fair hearing); Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life); Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination). 7. I73 C Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) (Granting Consent) Under the terms of the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 (as amended), this development is liable to pay the London Borough of Hillingdon Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and the Mayor of London's Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This will be calculated in accordance with the London Borough of Hillingdon CIL Charging Schedule 2014 and the Mayor of London's CIL Charging Schedule 2012. Before commencement of works the development parties must notify the London Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 11 of 17 Borough of Hillingdon of the commencement date for the construction works (by submitting a Commencement Notice) and assume liability to pay CIL (by submitting an Assumption of Liability Notice) to the Council at planning@hillingdon.gov.uk. The Council will then issue a Demand Notice setting out the date and the amount of CIL that is payable. Failure to submit a valid Assumption of Liability Notice and Commencement Notice prior to commencement of the development may result in surcharges being imposed. The above forms can be found on the planning portal at: www.planningportal.gov.uk/planning/applications/howtoapply/whattosubmit/cil Pre-Commencement Conditions: These conditions are important from a CIL liability perspective as a scheme will not become CIL liable until all of the pre-commencement conditions have been discharged/complied with. 8 8. I2 E Encroachment You are advised that if any part of the development hereby permitted encroaches by either its roof, walls, eaves, gutters, or foundations, then a new planning application may have to be submitted. The validity of this planning permission may be challengeable by third parties if the development results in any form of encroachment onto land outside the applicant's control for which the appropriate Notice under Article 13 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 has not been served. 9. I15 C Control of Environmental Nuisance from Construction Work Nuisance from demolition and construction works is subject to control under The Control of Pollution Act 1974, the Clean Air Acts and other related legislation. In particular, you should ensure that the following are complied with:- A. Demolition and construction works which are audible at the site boundary shall only be carried out between the hours of 08.00 and 18.00 hours Monday to Friday and between the hours of 08.00 hours and 13.00 hours on Saturday. No works shall be carried out on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays. B. All noise generated during such works shall be controlled in compliance with British Standard Code of Practice BS 5228:2009. C. Dust emissions shall be controlled in compliance with the Mayor of London's Best Practice Guidance' The Control of dust and emissions from construction and

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Alan Corcoran 829/APP/2023/312 Date Application Valid: 19.05.2023 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 14.09.2025 Application Type: Full Ward: Heathrow Villages Applicant: Phull Empire Ltd Site Address: 560 Sipson Road, West Drayton, UB7 0JD Proposal: Redevelopment of the site to accommodate a 7- storey 108 -room hotel incorporating communal functions on the ground floor level and a basement level with associated parking and external landscaping works including coach parking, servicing areas, and planting. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to section 106 legal agreement and conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 1 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Major application recommended for approval) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the completion of a satisfactory section 106 legal agreement to secure the heads of terms set out below, and subject to the conditions as set out in Appendix 1. It is recommended that delegated powers be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to grant planning permission subject to the following: A) That the Council enter into a legal agreement with the applicant under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) or any other legislation to secure the following: i. Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £974,383. ii. A Carbon Offset sum based on an Updated Energy Strategy to discharge Condition 22, with the offset calculation based on £95 per tonne of CO2 over a 30- year period. iii. A Construction Employment Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. iv. An End-User Employment Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. v. A Section 278 agreement to implement the proposed off-site Highways Works and street tree planting on Sipson Road. vi. A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. B) That in respect of the application for planning permission, the applicant meets the Council's reasonable costs in preparing the Section 106 Agreement and any abortive work as a result of the agreement not being completed. C) That officers be authorised to negotiate and agree the detailed terms of the proposed agreement and conditions of approval. D) That, if the Legal Agreement has not been finalised within 6 months (or such other time frame as may be agreed by the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth ), delegated authority be given to the Director of Planning and Sustainable Growth to refuse planning permission for the following reason: 'The applicant has failed to mitigate the impacts posed by the proposed development (in respect of A ir Quality, Carbon Emissions, Employment and Highways works). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policies DMCI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 ( 2020); the adopted Planning Obligations Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Supplementary Planning Document (2014); Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021); and paragraphs 56 -58 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).' E) That if the application is approved, that the permission is subject to the Conditions as set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summary 1.1 The vacant 0.27-hectare application site is located to the north of Heathrow Airport on the western side of Sipson Road. The Site is within Potentially Contaminated Land, an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), an Air Quality Focus Area (Sipson Focus Area), and an Archaeological Priority Zone (Heathrow). It is within Flood Zone 1 - the lowest probability of flooding, and Surface Water Flooding does not affect the Site. It is, however, within a Critical Drainage Area. The Site is not Listed or located within a Conservation Area or Area of Special Local Character. 1.2 The Council previously granted planning permission in 2018 (application reference 829/APP/2016/3167) for a seven-storey 108-room hotel on this Site. This consent has not been implemented. The current proposal consists of the redevelopment of the Site to accommodate a seven-storey 108-room hotel incorporating communal functions on the ground floor level and a basement level with associated parking and external landscaping works, including coach parking, servicing areas, and planting. 1.3 Given the Site’s planning history (planning consent to construct a hotel in 2013 and 2018), and on review of the submitted Sequential Test, the principle of developing a hotel on this site is acceptable. The building’s height, scale, and mass are comparable to the surrounding context, and it would not impact residential amenity. There are no objections from the Council’s Urban Design Officer, Landscape Officer, or Highways Officers. While located on Potentially Contaminated Land, the Council’s Land Contamination Officer has no concerns subject to the recommended condition. Noting the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and Air Quality Focus Area, which the Site is within, the Council’s Air Quality Officer has no objections subject to an air quality mitigation contribution of £974,383 (contained within the Section 106 Heads of Terms) and planning conditions, which have been recommended. Whilst the Site is within an Archaeological Priority Zone (Heathrow), Historic England’s Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS) has no objection subject to the attached conditions. 1.4 The Council received one objection from the Heathrow Villages Conservation Area Advisory Panel, which raised concerns regarding soft landscaping. Additional soft Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press landscaping has been added, and a green roof. Street trees would be planted through the Section 278 Agreement. 1.5 The proposal is acceptable and would be consistent with the relevant development plan policies. 1.6 The planning application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions contained in Appendix 1 and Section 106 Heads of Terms detailed on the previous page. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The 0.27-hectare application Site is located to the north of Heathrow Airport on the western side of Sipson Road, a classified A road (A408). The Site is to the east of the M4 motorway and north of the A4 (Bath Road), the latter forming the northern boundary to Heathrow Airport. The Site is vacant and has been for several years. It previously comprised a two -storey building used as a clubhouse for the Royal British Legion. 2.2 The Site is within Potentially Contaminated Land, an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA), an Air Quality Focus Area (Sipson Focus Area), and an Archaeological Priority Zone (Heathrow). It is within Flood Zone 1 - the lowest probability of flooding, and Surface Water Flooding does not affect the Site. It is, however, within a Critical Drainage Area. The Site is not Listed or located within a Conservation Area or Area of Special Local Character. 2.3 Existing vehicle access is off Sipson Road, with an expanse of hard surface that previously accommodated the parking and servicing space for the clubhouse. The Site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 3, on a scale of 0 to 6b, where 6b is the highest. 2.4 The Site forms part of a larger 'island' block that transport infrastructure surrounds. Within the 'island', there is a large hotel, with associated health & fitness and restaurant facilities, and significant levels of surface car parking. These buildings are generally between four and six storeys high. To the northeast of the Site and Sipson Road is Sipson Farm, designated Green Belt land, which has consent for sand and gravel extraction. To the east of the Site, located over 100 metres away, on the opposite side of Sipson Road, is a children's nursery accommodated within two buildings known as Sipson Court and Sipson House. Sipson House is Grade II Listed. The nearest residential dwellings to the Site are located over 110 metres to the south of the Site and on the opposite side of Sipson Road. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Figure 2: Aerial View of the Application Site Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3: Street View Images of the Application Property View from Sipson Road Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press View from Sipson Road 3 Proposal 3.1 On 10.09.2018, the Council approved the following on this application site (application reference 829/APP/2016/3167): ‘Redevelopment of the site to accommodate a 7 -storey 108 room hotel incorporating breakfast area and working/living zone at ground floor level; a basement level with associated parking; and external landscaping works including provision of parking, servicing areas, and planting.’ 3.2 The current application is broadly a resubmission of the previously approved scheme (application reference 829/APP/2016/3167), which the developer did not construct. This current application seeks planning permission to redevelop the site to accommodate a seven-storey 108- room hotel incorporating communal functions on the ground floor level and a basement level with associated parking and external landscaping works, including coach parking, servicing areas, and planting. 3.3 The hotel would measure approximately 31 metres wide at the front, narrowing to 15 metres at the rear. It would be approximately 29 metres deep and have a height of 21 metres (seven storeys). It would have a gross internal floor area of 5,619 sq. m. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3.4 Vehicle and pedestrian access to the development would continue from Sipson Road. Two car lifts would be provided to allow cars to enter and exit the basement car parking area. A total of 19 car parking spaces would be provided. Two of the car parking spaces would be designated as disabled -person parking bays. Three spaces would have active electric vehicle charging points. 16 cycle parking spaces would be provided. Coaches and taxis would enter the forecourt at the front of the Site to collect and drop off hotel guests. Figure 4: Proposed Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Proposed Site Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Front Elevation Proposed 3-D Visual from Sipson Road Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Front Elevation of the Previoulsy Approved Hotel on the Site (application reference 829/APP/2016/3167) that the Developer did not Construct. 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 The Council sent consultation letters to 31 neighbouring properties and the Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents Association on 26-05-2023. The Council also advertised the application with a site notice and press notice on 07 -06-2023. The initial consultation expired on 28 -06-2023. The Council carried out a full reconsultation on 18-10-2024. The reconsultation period expired on 07-11-2024. 6.2 The Council received one objection in response to public consultation from the Heathrow Villages Conservation Area Advisory Panel, which raised concerns regarding the proposed landscaping. Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response The Council received one objection from the Heathrow Villages Conservation Area Advisory Panel. Concerns regarding the lack of soft landscaping and green roof. The Applicant submitted revised landscape plans and details regarding a green roof to address these concerns. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response External Consultee Comments Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GLAAS): No objection subject to condition and informative regarding a Written Scheme of Investigation. A condition and informative have been recommended in line with GLAAS’ recommendations. Transport for London (TfL): No objection subject to condition s regarding Coach Parking Management Plan, Delivery and Servicing Management Plan and Construction Logistics Plan, cycle parking, and electric vehicle charging provision. Conditions have been recommended in line with the TfL’s recommendations. Metropolitan Police Design Out Crime: No objection subject to a condition regarding ‘Secured by Design’ accreditation. A condition has been recommended in line with the Metropolitan Police’s recommendations. National Air Traffic Services: No objection. Noted. Heathrow Airport: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press No objection. Informative recommended regarding cranes. An informative has been recommended in line with Heathrow Airport’s recommendation. Thames Water Utilities: No objection subject to a condition regarding a Piling Method Statement and informative. A condition has been recommended in line with the Thames Water Utilities’ recommendations. Internal Consultee Comments Urban Design Officer: No objection subject to a condition regarding external materials. A condition has been recommended in line with the Urban Design Officer’s request. Landscape Officer: No objection subject to conditions regarding landscaping. Conditions have been recommended in line with the Landscape Officer’s recommendations. Economic Development: No objection subject to a Construction Employment Training Scheme and an End -User Employment Scheme being secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD via a Section 106 Agreement. This request is a recommended Heads of Terms to be secured in the Section 106 Agreement. Accessibility Officer: No objection subject to conditions regarding the car park lift, disabled person car parking provision, and hotel room accessibility. Conditions have been recommended in line with the Accessibility Officer’s recommendations. Refuse and Recycling Officer: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press No objection. Noted. Planning Policy Officer: No objection. Noted. Highways Officer: No objection subject to conditions regarding car parking lift maintenance, swept paths, Service and Delivery Plan, Construction Logistics Plan, Travel Plan, and a Section 278 Agreement to implement the proposed off-site Highways Works. Condition s have been recommended in line with the Highways Officer’s recommendations, and a Section 278 clause is included in the recommended Heads of Terms. Air Quality Officer: No objection subject to an Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £974,383 secured by a Section 106 Agreement and a condition regarding reducing emissions from demolition and construction. A Section 106 financial contribut ion is included in the recommended Heads of Terms and a condition has been recommended in line with the Air Quality Officer’s recommendations. Noise Pollution Officer: No objection. Noted. Environmental Health Officer (Land Contamination): No objection subject to a condition regarding land contamination. A condition has been recommended in line with the Land Contamination Officer’s recommendations. Environmental Specialist (Energy and Biodiversity): Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press No objection subject to a condition requiring a revised Energy Strategy and a carbon offset contribution based on the updated Energy Strategy and ‘be seen’ energy monitoring condition. A Section 106 carbon offset contribution obligation is proposed in the recommended Heads of Terms. Conditions have been recommended in line with the Environmental Specialist (Energy and Biodiversity). Flood Risk and Drainage Consultant: No objection subject to Detailed Drainage Design and Sustainable Drainage Scheme planning conditions. Conditions have been recommended in line with the Flood Risk and Drainage Consultant’s recommendations. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 The application Site has been vacant for several years. The planning history is relevant to the consideration of whether the principle of hotel use on this site is deemed acceptable. However, it should be noted that there have been significant policy changes since the approval of the most recent application (829/APP/2016/3167) was determined in 2018. 7.2 More specifically the Hilli ngdon Local Plan Part Two was adopted in 2020 and specific locations for which hotel development should be focused. These include Town Centres and designated locations for hotel growth. Notably this site is not located within an area designated for hotel growth or a Town Centre. As such for the principle of development to be deemed acceptable the applicant must submit a sequential test. 7.3 The Applicant submitted a Sequential Test (Sequential Assessment Scoping Note, prepared by Turley and Sequential Assessment, reference G AAP3000, prepared by Turley, dated November 2023) to demonstrate why it is an appropriate hotel location, despite not being in a Town Centre or Hotel Growth Location. 7.4 The Council's Planning Policy Team has been consulted and has reviewed the submission documents. They do not raise any objection to this proposed hotel development, advising that the Sequential Test provides evidence of the limited availability of land for hotels in relevant Town Centres. When this is considered Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press against the strategic need for serviced visitor accommodation set out in The London Plan (2021) and its associated evidence base, it is apparent that the need for serviced visitor accommodation cannot be met on Town Centre and Edge-of- Centre sites alone. A refusal of the application on this basis is therefore not justified or recommended. 7.5 As such, the proposal complies with Policy E10 of The London Plan, Policy E2 of the Hilli ngdon Local Plan Part 1, and Policy DME 5 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2. Design / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.6 The application site is a pocket of vacant land located north of the Raddison and Park Inn hotels. Both neighbouring hotels benefit from much greater sized plots. The Radisson is 4-6 stories in height and features 6 arms orientated off a central horizontal spine. The Park Inn is a 5 storey L-shaped building constructed of red brick and a cladded frame. This frame and the angled brickwork which helps create the angled windows adds visual interest and articulation to a building which features extensively wide façades. Both neighbouring hotels feature reasonably large car parks but are set within a boundary of mature trees and planting which softens the hard surfaced dominated areas to the front and rear of the buildings. 7.7 The proposed building is similar in all aspects of design and appearance compared with the previously approved hotel development on the Site (application reference 829/APP/2016/3167). The proposed seven -storey building height would reflect the local context and surrounding developments, particularly the adjacent six-storey hotel. The proposed building's footprint and overall scale would be smaller than the neighbouring hotel complex and would respect the area's prevailing scale of development. The building's elevations would include vertical protruding fins to appropriately articulate the facade and provide visual relief to the building's elevations. Its appearance would be in keeping with the area's character, and the proposed building would sit comfortably within the streetscene. The double -height entrance with a canopy across the facade would ensure a legible front elevation, and when combined with the upper floor setback would ensure a visually appropriate appearance from the street 7.8 The Council’s Urban Design Officer has been consulted and has no objections regarding the proposed design subject to a condition regarding materials which has been recommended. 7.9 The proposal complies with Paragraph 131 of the NPPF, Policies D3 of The London Plan, Policy BE1 of the Local Plan Part 1, and Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Local Plan Part 2. Residential Amenity 7.10 There are no homes within 100 metres of the Site and the nearest residential dwellings are on the other side of Sipson Road. The pr oposal would not impact the outlook, privacy, daylight, or sunlight of nearby homes or open spaces, given its height, scale, mass, use, and location away from residential properties. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.11 The closest neighbouring buildings are hotels. The proposed hotel would not contain a large internal floor area allocated for conference or banqueting purposes. As such, the proposal would not cause undue noise disturbance to surrounding properties. 7.12 Please see relevant sections below regarding noise. 7.13 The proposed scheme is supported and complies with Policy D3 of The London Plan (2021) and Policy DMHB 11 of the Local Plan Part 2 (2020). Highways and Parking 7.14 Sipson Road is a two-way local distributor road that connects with Bath Road (A4) to the south and Holloway Lane (A408) to the north. It has one carriageway in either direction, a 30mph speed limit, double yellow line parking restrictions, and a pedestrian footway on the southern side of the carriageway, together with a grass verge and street lighting at regular intervals. The site is situated in a location with a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 3, where a score of 0 indicates very poor access to public transport and 6 indicates excellent access. 7.15 The proposed development would have 19 on-site basement car parking spaces. Two of these would be allocated for disabled person parking and three would be fitted with active electric vehicle charge points (EVCPs). Access to the basement parking would be provided by two car lifts and there would be capacity for two cars to wait onsite in the hotel’s forecourt before entering the lifts to the basement. There would be provision for coaches and taxis to enter the hotel forecourt to pick- up/drop-off guests. 7.16 Policy T6.4 of The London Plan (2021) is non-prescriptive for hotel car parking. It states that hotel car parking ' should be assessed on a case-by- case basis'. Similarly, the Hilli ngdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) is also non -prescriptive, stating that car parking numbers should be determined on an ' individual basis'. Considering the good availability of long- stay car parking in the vicinity of the Site, the Site's PTAL of 3, and the available travel choices, the proposed 19 car parking spaces are appropriate and would not lead to parking displacement or stress. Conditions are recommended to ensure the delivery and ongoing availability of the disabled person parking and EVCPs. 7.17 Sixteen covered cycle parking spaces would also be provided within the hotel’s forecourt. Two of these would be designated for larger adaptable bicycles. The proposed cycle parking provision aligns with The London Plan and Local Plan standards. Conditions are recommended to ensure their delivery and ongoing availability. 7.18 To allow the new site accesses to be built the Highway Authority require that the Applicant enter a Section 278 Agreement thereby allowing contractors to work on the Council’s highway in collaboration with Council’s highway officers. As part of these works, the footway and grass verge either side of these accesses shall be reinstated. The Highway Authority require that the full length of the footway in Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press between each access is reinstated together along with the provision of street trees. 7.19 The Council’s Highways Team has been consulted and raise no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions regarding car parking lift maintenance, swept paths, Service and Delivery Plan, Construction Logistics Plan, Travel Plan, and a Section 278 Agreement to implement the proposed off- site Highways Works. Appropriate highways conditions are recommended in this planning assessment and recommendation, and a Section 278 clause is included in the recommended Heads of Terms. 7.20 Subject to the recommended conditions and Section 278 Agreement, the proposal complies with Paragraph 116 of the NPPF, Policies T2, T4, T5, T6, and T7 of The London Plan, and Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, DMT 5, and DMT 6 of the Local Plan Part 2. Air Quality 7.21 The Site is within an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and an Air Quality Focus Area (Sipson Focus Area). 7.22 The Applicant submitted an Air Quality Assessment (reference, AQ2114, prepared by GEM Air Quality Ltd, dated July 2022). 7.23 The proposed development would not be air quality neutral or air quality positive. Therefore, further appropriate mitigation is required. 7.24 Mitigation measures to reduce emissions can be applied on-site or off-site. Where this is not practical or desirable, pollutant off- setting will be applied. The level of mitigation required associated with the operation phase of the proposed development is calculated using Defra’s Damage Cost Toolkit in this instance. Any mitigation measures proposed will be evaluated in terms of likely emission reductions onto local air quality. Wherever quantifiable, these are calculated and subtracted from the overall value due. When no quantification is possible, a flat rate discount is applied. Mitigation required to offset the proposed development's traffic emissions is £974,383. 7.25 The Council’s Air Quality Officer has been consulted and raised no objection subject to an air quality mitigation contribution of £974,383 secured by a Section 106 Agreement and a condition regarding reducing emissions from demolition and construction. This Section 106 financial contribution is included in the recommended Heads of Terms and a condition has been recommended in line with the Air Quality Officer’s recommendations. 7.26 Subject to legal agreement and the recommended conditions, the proposal complies with Policies SI 1 and GG3 of The London Plan, Policy EM8 of the Local Plan Part 1, and Policy DMEI 14 of the Local Plan Part 2. Noise Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.27 The Applicant submitted a Noise Impact Assessment (reference 23907.NIA.01, prepared by KP Acoustics, dated 13.07.2022) assessing daytime and night- time levels likely to be experienced by the proposed development. To mitigate internal noise levels, the Applicant proposed a robust glazing specification . Their report concludes that no further mitigation measures are required to protect the internal spaces from external noise. 7.28 As previously stated, the nearest residential dwellings to the Site are located over 110 metres to the south of the Site and on the opposite side of Sipson Road. Given the notable separation distance, the proposed development would not cause undue noise disturbance to nearby residents. 7.29 The Council's Noise Pollution Officer has reviewed the submission and raised no objection or concerns about noise and vibration g iven the nature and context of the proposed development. 7.30 A Construction Management Plan condition is recommended to mitigate and manage potential noise disturbances. 7.31 The proposal complies with Policies D13 and D14 of The London Plan. Accessibility 7.32 The supporting Design and Access Statement (Rev-P01, prepared by GAA, dated 18.07.2023), and plans demonstrate inclusive access. Nine per cent of hotel rooms are proposed to be fully accessible to wheelchair -using guests. A further one per cent are proposed to have a fixed tracked -hoist system or a similar. All en-suite bathrooms within the Univer sal Access guestrooms are designed to the layout detailed in BS 8300 -1:2018, figure 30. 75 per cent of the en- suite bathrooms within the accessible bedrooms are proposed to have level access showering facilities. Lifts are proposed to comply with BS 8300:2018+A1:2010, and a fire evacuation lift to BS EN 81-76 standard is proposed. 7.33 The proposal includes two disabled person car parking spaces and two adaptable cycle parking spaces. This level of disabled person car and cycle parking is supported. 7.34 The Council’s Accessibility Officer has reviewed the pr oposal and raised no objection subject to conditions regarding the car park lift, disabled person car parking provision, and hotel room accessibility. Appropriate accessibility planning conditions are recommended as part of the planning assessment and planning recommendation. 7.35 Subject to compliance with the recommended conditions, the proposed development complies with Policies D5 and D12 of The London Plan. Urban Greening, Landscaping, and Public Realm 7.36 The existing site suffers from an evident lack of greening. It consists of hardstanding. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.37 The Applicant submitted an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (reference HWA10759-APIII, prepared by Ha llwood Associates, dated 20.06.2022), which detailed trees on and close to the S ite, the tree species, and their quality and spread. None of the trees are protected by a Tree Preservation Order or by Conservation Area designations. The only on-site tree is a Sycamore that is of 'U' grade and would be removed as part of the proposal. During the planning process, the Council worked with the Applicant to secure revised landscaping, namely additional planting. The front and sides of the Site are proposed to contain raised planters with soft landscaping. The Applicant submitted revised plans that propose a biodiverse green roof to cover 105 sq. m., which is secured by condition. The Council’s Landscape Officer advised that ‘the updated proposals have satisfied the Urban Green Factor by providing a green/brown roof.’ Additionally, trees would be planted on Sipson Road in front of the Site. These are secured by the Section 278 Agreement. The proposed uplift in planting compared with the previous approval and the existing Site is acceptable. 7.38 Policy DMEI 1 of the Local Plan Part 2 requires all major development to incorporate living roofs and/or walls. The proposal includes a green roof. 7.39 Subject to conditions, the proposal would comply with the aims Policy G5 of The London Plan and Policy DMHB 14 of the Local Plan Part 2. Biodiversity 7.40 The Applicant submitted a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (prepared by Henriette Westergaard, dated 04.07.2022), which details that the existing Site comprises developed land of negligible ecological importance. 7.41 As the application was submitted in 2023, it is not subject to recent Biodiversity Net Gain requirements. Nonetheless, the proposal would see an uplift in biodiversity on the Site as the current Site is entirely hardstanding at present, and the proposed Site would contain soft landscaping and planting features at ground level. Furthermore, there would be a 105 sq. m. biodiverse green roof (drawing reference 10513-LA-01-Rev-P1) that would enhance the Site’s biodiversity. 7.42 The Council’s Environmental Specialist (Energy and Biodiversity) reviewed the submitted biodiversity details and raised no objection regarding the proposed development. 7.43 The proposed development complies with the aims of Policy 15 of the NPPF, Policy G6 and Paragraph 8.6.6 of The London Plan, and Policy DMEI 7 and Paragraph 6.28 of the Local Plan Part 2. Flooding and Drainage 7.44 The Site is in Flood Zone 1 (lowest flood risk) and is not impacted by Surface Water Flooding. It is , however, within a Critical Drainage Area. The existing Site comprises hardstanding. As such, there are no natural forms of attenuation within the Site boundary. It is fully impermeable. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.45 The Applicant submitted a Drainage Strategy (Rev-P03, reference 18403-RLL-22- XX-RP-C-001, prepared by RLRE Consulting Engineers, dated 30.06.2022). It states that a s there are no watercourses in proximity of the Site, the developer has chosen an outfall to the adjacent surface water sewer in accordance with the hierarchy for SuDS to provide sufficient attenuation to ensure that there would be no off-site flooding for return periods up to and including the one in 100 year plus 40 per cent climate change event. The Applicant proposes to attenuate flows within a blue roof system (providing 45.7m3 storage), the permeable sub -base (providing 27.3m3 total storage), and two below -ground tanks (providing 12m3 total storage) on the podium deck outside the building’s entrance. Additionally, the Applicant proposes rainwater harvesting via a 12m3 storage tank in the basement. Water treatment would generally be provided via the underdrained swale and permeable sub-base on the podium slab.a private management company would maintain the SuDS features.The Applicant proposes to pump foul flows from the Site via a private pumping station within the basement. The pumped flows would outfall to a break chamber within the Site boundary before draining via gravity to the existing Thames Water foul sewer in Sipson Road. 7.46 The Council’s Flood Risk and Drainage Consultant has reviewed the submission and raised no objection subject to Detailed Drainage Design condition and Sustainable Drainage Scheme condition. Appropriate drainage conditions are recommended as part of this planning recommendation. 7.47 Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposed development is acceptable with regard to Flooding and Drainage and complies with Policies SI12 and SI13 of The London Plan, Policy EM6 of the Local Plan Part 1, and Policies DMEI 9 and DMEI 10 of the Local Plan Part 2. Water Efficiency 7.48 To ensure the development would minimise the use of mains water, a compliance planning condition is recommended for it to achieve at least the BREEAM excellent standard for the ‘Wat 01’ water category or equivalent (commercial development), and incorporate measures such as smart metering, water saving, and recycling measures, including retrofitting. 7.49 Subject to the recommended condition, the proposal complies with Policy SI 5 of The London Plan. Energy and Sustainability 7.50 The Applicant has submitted an Energy Strategy Report (reference 20-8895, prepared by Syntegra, dated 16.07.2022) and BREEAM Pre-Assessment Report (Reference 21-8895, prepared by Syntegra, dated 03.08.2022). 7.51 That submission states that the hotel would achieve a Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM) Rating 'Excellent', with a score of at least 71.15 percent based on the latest BREEAM NC Technical guidance. Air Source Heat Pumps (ASHP) would be used to generate heating, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press cooling, and hot water for the proposed development. To bring the development's carbon savings up to 100 per cent, carbon emissions are to be offset through a carbon offset payment. A carbon offset payment, priced at £95 per tonne of CO2 per year (over 30 years) is to be paid via a Section 106 to the Council following review of a revised Energy Strategy, which is recommended by condition. Policy DMEI 2 of the Hilli ngdon Local Plan requires all major developments to be designed to connect to a District Energy Network and to connect to ones within 500 metres of the development. As there are no networks within 500 metres from the proposed development, no plans are in place to connect to any existing network. This is accepted. 7.52 The Council’s Environmental Specialist (Energy and Biodiversity) reviewed the submitted details and raised no objection subject to a condition requiring a revised Energy Strategy and a carbon offset contribution based on the updated Energy Strategy and ‘be seen’ energy monitoring condition. 7.53 Subject to legal agreement and the recommended conditions, the proposal would comply with Policies SI2 and SI3 of The London Plan, Policy EM1 of the Local Plan Part 1, and Policies DMEI 2 and DMEI 3 of the Local Plan Part 2. Waste Management 7.54 The Applicant submitted a Servicing and Waste Management Plan (Rev-P1.0, prepared by Patrick Parsons, dated 06.07.2022). The refuse storage is illustrated on proposed ground floor plans. The maximum distances that refuse operatives should be require d to wheel containers, measured from the furthest point within the storage/collection area to the loading position at the back of the vehicle is 20 metres; this is achievable from the refuse storage area. The Applicant proposes using a private waste collection company. 7.55 The Council’s Waste Services Team has reviewed the submitted documents and raised no objection to the proposed development. 7.56 Subject to condition, the proposal would comply with Policy SI 7 of The London Plan and DMHB 11 of the Local Plan Part 2. Land Contamination 7.57 The Site is within a Potentially Contaminated Land area. 7.58 The Applicant submitted a Land Contamination Assessment (Desk Study and Conceptual Site Model -V1.0, Reference: LS 0717, prepared by Land Science, dated 25.03.2023). The Assessment’s conceptual site model identified parameters for further intrusive ground investigations. 7.59 The Council’s Land Contamination Officer has been consulted and advised that they have no objection to the proposed development. The Officer recommended a land contamination condition which has been attached to this recommendation. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.60 Subject to condition, the proposal complies with Policies DMEI 11 and DMEI 12 of the Local Plan Part 2. Fire Safety 7.61 The Applicant submitted a Fire Statement (prepared by Fire Safety South East, dated 11.07.2022), detailing the key fire safety features of the building. 7.62 The technical aspects of the materials to be used in any development, in relation to fire safety, are considered under the Building Act (1984) and specifically the Building Regulations, Approved Document B amended version (2022). These require minimum standards for any development, although the standards would vary between residential and commercial uses and in relation to new build and change of use/conversions. The Regulations cover a range of areas including structure and fire safety. Any person or organisation carrying out development can appoint either the Council’s Building Control Service or a Registered Building Control Approver to act as the Building Control Body (BCB), to ensure the requirements of the Building Regulations are met. The BCB carry out an examination of drawings for the proposed works and make site inspections during construction work to ensure the works are carried out correctly. On completion of work the BCB would issue a Completion Certificate to confirm that the works comply with the requirement of the Building Regulations. 7.63 The fire strategy will be subject of further review during the detailed design stages to ensure compliance with relevant building design codes of practice and guidance. 7.64 The proposal complies with the aims of Policy D12 of The London Plan. Archaeological Impact 7.65 The Site is within an Archaeological Priority Zone – Heathrow. 7.66 Accordingly, the Applicant submitted a Written Scheme of Investigation (reference LP4196L-WSI-v1.2, prepared by LP Archaeology, dated July 2022). 7.67 The Local Planning Authority consulted Historic England’s Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GL AAS), which reviewed the submission and stated that ‘the development could cause harm to archaeological remains and field evaluation is needed to determine appropriate mitigation. However, although the NPPF envisages evaluation being undertaken prior to determination, in this case consideration of the nature of the development, the archaeological interest and/or practical constraints are such that I consider a two-stage archaeological condition could provide an acceptable safeguard.’ GLASS concluded they had no objection to the proposed development subject to condition and informative regarding a Written Scheme of Investigation. 7.68 A Written Scheme of Investigation condition and informative is recommended. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.69 Subject to condition, the proposal complies with the NPPF, Policy HC1 of The London Plan, and Policy DMHB 7 of the Local Plan Part 2. Heritage 7.70 Sipson House is Grade II Listed and is located 1.2km north of the site. Given the significant distance between the two sites the proposal would have no impact upon the setting of the designated heritage asset. As such the proposed development accords with Policy DMHB 2 of the Local Plan Part 2. Green Belt 7.71 The Site is not located within the Green Belt, however, the land to the north of the Site, on the opposite side of Sipson Road, is designated Green Belt. The Site is separated from the Green Belt land to the northeast by Sipson Road, and the submitted documents demonstrate that the proposal would integrate with the surrounding larger developments. Furthermore, the proposal would not have a greater impact on the Green Belt than the previously approved scheme. 7.72 The proposal complies with Policy G2 of The London Plan, Policy EM2 of the Local Plan Part 1, and Policy DMEI 4 of the Local Plan Part 2, and is supported. Odour 7.73 The proposed hotel includes an ancillary kitchen. A planning condition is recommended regarding extraction and odour control to protect amenity. 7.74 Subject to condition, the proposal complies with Policy D13 of the London Plan and Policies DMHB 11 of the Local Plan Part 2. Airport Safeguarding 7.75 The application site is located within the 3-kilometre Heathrow Airport Safeguarding Zone . The height of development within these zones is restricted to protect air traffic routes. The proposal is for a 7-storey building set within an area of similar and taller height buildings. Heathrow Airport Safeguarding and the National Air Traffic Services are statutory consultees for developments within designated zones, both have been consulted and have raised no objection subject to standard informative relating to the use of cranes to construct the development. As such the proposal accords with Policy DMAV 1 of the Local Plan Part 2. Planning Obligations 7.76 Policy DMCI 7 of the Local Plan Part 2 states to ensure development is sustainable, planning permission will only be granted for development that clearly demonstrates there will be sufficient infrastructure of all types to support it. Infrastructure requirements will be predominantly addressed through the Council's Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Planning obligations will be sought on a scheme-by-scheme basis to secure the provision of affordable housing in relation to residential development schemes, where development has infrastructure needs Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press that are not addressed through CIL, and to ensure that development proposals provide or fund improvements to mitigate site -specific impacts made necessary by the proposal. Applications that fail to secure an appropriate Planning Obligation to make the proposal acceptable will be refused. 7.77 The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulation 2010 (Regulations issued Pursuant to the 2008 Act) and the NPPF have put three tests on the use of planning obligations into law. It is unlawful (since 6 April 2010) to request planning obligations that do not meet the following tests: i. necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms ii. directly related to the development, and iii. fairly and reasonable related in scale and kind to the development 7.78 The effect of the Regulations is that the Council must apply the tests much more strictly and can only request planning obligations that are genuinely necessary and directly related to the development. Should the Council request planning obligations that do not meet the policy tests, the Council would have acted unlawfully and could be subject to a High Court challenge. 7.79 Section 106 Heads of Terms are as follows: 1. Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £974,383. 2. A Carbon Offset sum based on an Updated Energy Strategy to discharge Condition 22, with the offset calculation based on £95 per tonne of CO2 over a 30-year period. 3. A Construction Employment Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. 4. An End-User Employment Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. 5. A Section 278 agreement to implement the proposed off-site Highways Works and street tree planting on Sipson Road. 6. A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equa lling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. 8 Other Matters Human Rights 8.1 The development has been assessed against the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and in particular Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the Act itself. This Act gives further effect to the rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development rights and expectations which have been balanced and weighed against the wider community interests, as expressed through third party interests / the Development Plan and Central Government Guidance. Equality Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 8.2 Due consideration has been given to Section 149 of the Equality Act with regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in the assessment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Local Finance Considerations and CIL 8.3 As of 1 April 2012, all planning approvals for schemes with a net additional internal floor area of 100 sq. m. or more were liable for the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), as legislated by the CIL Regulations 2010 and The CIL (Amendment) Regulations 2011. From April 2019, the liab ility payable is £60 per sq. m. The MCIL2 charging schedule rate, including indexation for calendar year 2025, is £71.09 per sq. m. 8.4 The London Borough of Hilli ngdon Council is a collecting authority for the Mayor of London, and this liability shall be paid to the London Borough of Hillingdon Council in the first instance. 8.5 In addition to MCIL2, the development represents Chargeable Development under the Hillin gdon CIL, which came into effect on 1 August 2014. The liability payable is as follows: Hotels – £40 per sq. m. 8.6 This CIL liability is in addition to the Section 106 planning obligations. 8.7 The proposed development consists of the following floor areas: 8.8 Hotel (Use Class C1) – 5,619 sq. m. 8.9 8.10 The construction of these floor areas results in the following CIL charges: Local CIL – £370,806.58 Mayoral CIL – £399,459.82 Please note this has been calculated based on the information available to the officer. The final amount will be reviewed post -determination by the Council's Planning Obligations Team and set out to the liable party in line with the CIL Regulations. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The principle of redeveloping the Site for a Hotel is supported in this instance. The building’s height, scale, and mass are compatible with the height and scale of surrounding development. The development would not have any detrimental impact on the street scene, upon residential amenity, or upon the setting of the Green Belt land opposite the Site. The Local Planning Authority has worked with the Applicant to refine the development’s design during the full planning application process, securing additional planting and a reduction in hardstanding to the front of the Site to improve the street and public realm. There are no Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press objections from the Council’s Urban Design Officer, Landscape Officer, or Highways Officers. While located on Potentially Contaminated Land, the Council’s Land Contamination Officer has no concerns subject to the recommended condition. Similarly, whilst within an Archaeological Priority Zone, Historic England’s Greater London Archaeological Advisory Service (GL AAS) has no objection subject to the attached conditions. Noting the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and Air Quality Focus Area, which the Site is within, the Council’s Air Quality Officer has no objections subject to an air quality mitigation contribution of £974,383 (contained within the Section 106 Heads of Terms) and planning conditions, which have been recommended. 9.2 The proposal is acceptable and would be consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework, The London Plan, and Hillin gdon Local Plan. 9.3 The planning application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 and Section 106 Heads of Terms detailed on the previous page. 10 Background Papers 10.1 Relevant published policies and documents taken into account in respect of this application are set out in the report. Documents associated with the application (except exempt or confidential information) are available on the Council's website here, by entering the planning application number at the top of this report and using the search fac ility. Planning applications are also available to inspect electronically at the Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW upon appointment, by contacting Planning Services at planning@h illingdon.gov.uk. AAPPENDICES Planning Application 829/APP/2023/312 Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 28 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. COM3 T Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. REASON To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. COM4 A Accordance with Approved Plans The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted plans: 19040-GAA-ZZ-00-DR-T-0101 (Location and Block Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-B1-DR-T-2001 (Proposed Basement GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-00-DR-T-2002-Rev-P06.06 (Proposed Ground Floor Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-00-DR-T-2002-Rev-P06.05 (Revised Proposed Ground Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-01-DR-T-2003 (Proposed First Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-02-DR-T-2004 (Proposed Second Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-03-DR-T-2005 (Proposed Third Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-04-DR-T-2006 (Proposed Fourth Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-05-DR-T-2007 (Proposed Fifth Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-06-DR-T-2008 (Proposed Sixth Floor GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-07-DR-T-2009 (Proposed Roof Access GA Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-RF-DR-T-2010 (Proposed Roof Plan) 10513-LA-01-Rev-P1 (Proposed Biodiverse Green Roof Plan) 10513-LA-02-Rev-X (Proposed Landscape Plan) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2101 (Proposed Front/North Elevation) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2102 (Proposed Rear/South Elevation) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2103 (Proposed Side/East Elevation) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2104 (Proposed Side/West Elevation) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2201 (Proposed Section A-A) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2500-Rev-P01.1 (Proposed Front Facade Details) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2500-Rev-P01.1 (Proposed Front Facade Section Details) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2501-Rev-P01 (Proposed Front Facade Details) 19040-GAA-ZZ-XX-DR-T-2500-Rev-P01 (Proposed Front Facade Section Details) CGV-1103-02-Rev-P2 (Swept Paths) SPS-PPC-00-XX-DR-C-001 (Swept Path Analysis) CGV-1103-101-Rev-P1 (Proposed Access) and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 28 existence. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of The London Plan (2021) and the Local Plan Parts 1 (2012) and 2 (2020). 3 3. COM5 G General compliance with supporting documentation The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on the submitted documents, references: - Preliminary Basement Impact Assessment-Rev-0, reference SRW-PPC-00-XX-RP-G-0012, prepared by Patrick Parsons, dated 19.05.2023 _ received 04.10.24 - BREEAM Pre-Assessment Report, Reference 21-8895, prepared by Syntegra, dated 03.08.2022 _ received 04.10.24 - Desk Study and Conceptual Site Model-V1.0, Reference: LS 0717, prepared by Land Science, dated 25.03.2023 _Part 1 of 3 _ received 04.10.24 - Drainage Strategy-Rev-P03, reference 18403-RLL-22-XX-RP-C-001, prepared by RLRE Consulting Engineers, dated 30.06.2022 - Air Quality Assessment, reference, AQ2114, prepared by GEM Air Quality Ltd, dated July 2022 - Arboricultural Impact Assessment, reference HWA10759-APIII, prepared by Hallwood Associates, dated 20.06.2022 - Bird Hazard Management Report, prepared Henriette Westergaard, dated June 2022 - Design and Access Statement-Rev-P01, prepared by GAA, dated 18.07.2023 - Fire Statement, prepared by Fire Safety South East, dated 11.07.2022 - Noise Impact Assessment, reference 23907.NIA.01, prepared by KP Acoustics, dated 13.07.2022 - Planning Statement, reference JCC6291, prepared by Cunnane Town Planning, dated August 2022 - Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, prepared by Henriette Westergaard, dated 04.07.2022 - Sequential Assessment Scoping Note, prepared by Turley - Sequential Assessment, reference GAAP3000, prepared by Turley, dated November 2023 - Servicing and Waste Management Plan-Rev-P1.0, prepared by Patrick Parsons, dated 06.07.2022 - Transport Statement-Rev-1.0, prepared by Patrick Parsons, dated 30.06.2022 - Travel Plan-Rev-1.0, prepared by Patrick Parsons, dated 06.07.2022 - Written Scheme of Investigation, reference LP4196L-WSI-v1.2, prepared by LP Archaeology, dated July 2022 Thereafter the development shall be retained/maintained in accordance with these details for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure that the development complies with the objectives of The London Plan (2021) and the Local Plan Parts 1 (2012) and 2 (2020). Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 28 44. NONSC N Non Standard Condition The development hereby approved is for a hotel with 108 bedrooms. This is the maximum number of bedrooms permitted by this consent and any subdivision or creation of new bedrooms above this number would require separate planning consent. REASON To ensure the hotel is used as proposed in accordance with Policies E10 and D6 of The London Plan (2021) and Policies DME 5 and DMHB 16 of the Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 5. COM7 M Materials (Submission) Notwithstanding the approved drawings, prior to the commencement of any works on the facade or the supporting structure/substructure, details of all materials and external surfaces shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details shall include information relating to make, product/type, colour, and photographs/images. Thereafter the development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details and be retained as such. REASON To ensure that the development presents a satisfactory appearance in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 6. NONSC C Construction Management Plan Prior to the commencement of development (including demolition, site clearance, and initial ground investigation works), a Construction Management Plan shall be submitted to, and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Transport for London. The plan shall detail: (i) The phasing of development works. (ii) The hours during which development works will occur. (iii) A programme to demonstrate that the most valuable or potentially contaminating materials and fittings can be removed safely and intact for later re-use or processing. (iv) Measures to prevent mud and dirt tracking onto footways and adjoining roads (including wheel washing facilities). (v) Traffic management and access arrangements (vehicular and pedestrian) and parking provisions for contractors during the development process (including measures to reduce the numbers of construction vehicles accessing the site during peak hours). (vi) Measures to reduce the impact of the development on local air quality and dust through minimising emissions throughout the demolition and construction process. (vii) The storage of demolition/construction materials on site. (ix) Measures to demonstrate compliance with the GLA's Control of Dust and Emissions from Construction and Demolition SPG. (x) All Non-Road Mobile Machinery (NRMM) of net power of 37kW and up to and including 560kW used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases shall comply Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 28 with the emission standards set out in https://www.london.gov.uk/programmes-and- strategies/environment-and-climate-change/pollution-and-air-quality/nrmm. Unless it complies with these standards, no NRMM shall be on site, at any time, whether in use or not, without the prior written consent of the local planning authority. The developer shall keep an up-to-date list of all NRMM used during the demolition, site preparation and construction phases of the development on the online register at https://nrmm.london/. (xi) Details of cranes and other tall construction equipment (including the details of obstacle lighting) in consultation with the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The approved details shall be implemented and maintained throughout the demolition and construction process. REASON To reduce the impact on air quality during construction, protect amenity, and ensure highways safety and to ensure that construction work and construction equipment on the site and adjoining land does not obstruct air traffic movements or otherwise impede the effective operation of air traffic navigation transmitter/receiver systems in compliance with Policies T7, GG3, and SI 1 of The London Plan (2021), The GLA's Control of Dust and Emissions during Construction and Demolition SPG, and Policy DMAV 1 of the Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 7 7. NONSC C Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) Prior to the commencement of development (including demolition, site clearance, and initial ground investigation works) a Detailed Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) shall be submitted to and approved by the

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Haydon Richardson 31917/APP/2025/996 Date Application Valid: 02/06/2025 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 05/09/25 Application Type: Full Ward: Hayes Town Applicant: Rebecca Selby/LBH Site Address: Unit 5, 12 Powerhouse Lane, Hayes Proposal: Temporary change of use (for five years) from cafe (Use Class E) to Local Community Use (Use Class F2) Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 6 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (the Council is the Applicant) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 1 Executive Summary 1.1 Planning permission is sought for the te mporary change of use (for five years) from cafe (Use Class E) to Local Community Use (Use Class F2). 1.2 In terms of physical works, the proposed development includes no external alterations to the building, other than the replacement of an entrance door. Internally, the development involves the blocking up of an existing door, allowing for storage space to be created. 1.3 The proposed development would involve repurposing a vacant café to provide a community facility for existing and future residents within Hayes and The Old Vinal Factory (TOVF) area. The existing building has been vacant since 2019, the reuse of it is therefore welcomed, as is the provision of a community facility in an area with a growing residential presence. 1.4 Due to the limited physical works proposed , location of the development and its car free design, t he proposal would cause no harm to heritage assets, the appearance of the building, character of the area, local highways network or living conditions of neighbouring occupiers. Nor would it have any adverse air quality, contamination, flooding, BNG, fire, waste or drainage related impacts. 1.5 The loss of the commercial space is regret table, however it is for a temporary period of 5 years, after which it would be reinstated to its former use. 1.6 The planning application is therefore recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The development site is located on the west side of Powerhouse Lane. The site comprises a two-storey partially locally listed building known as the Powerhouse building. In terms of design the building is made up of two segments, a modern warehouse style section and brick section with historic arch that is locally listed. Within the modern non-locally listed part of the building is Unit 5 , which is the element of the building subject to this application. 2.2 The building is located within The Old V inyl Factory (TOVF) site. The TOVF is approximately 6.6 hectares of land set in an irregular quadrilateral shaped site. W ithin the wider site are The Boiler House , The Shipping Building, The Cabinet Building, The Record Store, The Material Store and the Pressing Plant. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 2.3 The site is located within The Botwell: Thorn EMI Conservation Area and Locally Listed Buildings exist within the area. It is also within an Air Quality Focus Area, Air Quality Management Area and is located upon potentially contaminated land. The site is in Flood Zone 1 and has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 4 (Good). Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Image of the Development Site 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for the te mporary change of use (for five years) from cafe (Use Class E) to Local Community Use (Use Class F2). 3.2 In terms of physical works, the prop osed development includes no external alterations to the building , other than the replacement of an entrance door. Internally, the development involves the blocking up of an existing door, allowing for storage space to be created. Figure 3: Existing and Proposed Plans (please note – larger version of plan(s) can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Existing Ground Floor Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Ground Floor Plan Existing Rear (South) and Side Elevation (East) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Proposed Rear (South) and Side Elevation (East) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A list of the relevant planning history related to the property can be found in Appendix 2. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to t he consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 472 neighbouring properties were consulted on the application by letter dated 11- 06-25. The consultation period expired 02-07-25. No objections or responses were received from the properties notified. 6.2 Internal and external consultations were also issued. Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response Hayes Conservation Area Advisory Panel If the temporary use will be for the benefit of those living nearby, we have no objection to the proposed temporary change of use. Noted. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Access Officer: No objection subject to an informative to ensure that consideration is given to the equalities act when determining the case and whilst the use is in situ. Noted and informative added Highways Officer: No objection Discussed at paragraphs 7.12 to 7.14 of this report. Planning Policy Officer: No objection received Discussed at paragraphs 7.1 to 7.4 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development Loss of Cafe 7.1 The proposed loss of commercial space (Class E) is regrettable; however, it would be for a temporary period of 5 years and is therefore considered to be acceptable having regard to the proposed community use which is intended to serve local residents and increase vitality to the area. Furthermore, the café has been vacant since 2019, so the temporary utilisation of the space is supported. Proposed community facility 7.2 Policy DMCI 2 of the Local Plan Part 2 states that proposals for the refurbishment and re-use of existing premises for comm unity facilities will be supported. The submitted Design and Access Statement states that the proposed community facility is to provide floor space which would allow for community engagement and use within the area. The facility would be available for a variety of groups and local organisations. 7.3 The building is located within the Hayes Town ward, connecting key areas like Hayes High Street and TOVF, allowing for easy access by Hayes residents. This location ensures that the facility is within the community or catchment area of the community it is intended to serve. The submitted Policy Compliance Statement highlights that community needs were identified through an internal engagement report and feasibility studies with community groups and residents, demonstrating that the facility is wanted and intended to meet the specific needs of the local population. Furthermore, the unit would aid in providing a community facility within the TOVF Area, which has and will continue to become increasingly residential over the years. The provision of the facility is therefore supported. 7.4 Further support is outlined for the re purposing of vacant buildings within commercial and or town centre locations to provide community use floor space. It is recognised that if designed and located appropriately they can provide the type of space to foster community cohesion and safeguard or enhance the vitality of town centres. Whilst the site is not located within the Town Centre is it an edge of Town Centre site and within a mixed use area comprising of a good quantum of commercial floorspace. Overall, the principle of the proposed development is accepted and is considered to comply with the Development Plan. A condition is to be imposed to restrict the use of the floor space to Use Class F2(B), (“a hall or meeting place for the principal use of the local community”) only in order to ensure that it is available for the purposes in which permission is sought and the benefits of the proposal are delivered. Design / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.5 The site is located on the west side of Powerhouse Lane. The site comprises a two-storey building known as the Powerhouse building. In terms of design the building is made up of two segments, a modern warehouse functional designed element that includes Unit 5, which is subj ect to this application, and a more traditional locally listed brick element with historic arch. 7.6 In terms of physical works, the prop osed development includes no external alterations to the building, other than the replacement of an entrance door. A condition has been recommended to ensure that the entrance door is of similar design and material to the existing do or. The remaining works are internal and would therefore have no visual impact. The wider area is mixed use, as such the proposed use would not be out of charac ter. Taking into consideration these points the proposed development would cause no harm to appearance of the building, site or wider area, in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Local Plan Part 2. Heritage 7.7 The building within which the change of use is proposed is partially locally listed, though not that element subject to the application . In addition the sit e is located within the Botwell: Thorn EMI Conservation Area. As such the applicant must demonstrate through design, that the proposed development would either preserve or enhance the historic characteristics of the designated heritage assets. 7.8 Taking into consideration the mixture of uses which exist within the area, the limited external works to the building and internal alterations, the proposed development is considered to prese rve the significance, character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would therefore comply with Policies DMHB 2 and DMHB 4 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020). Residential Amenity 7.9 The proposed development involves no extension to the building and would therefore cause no loss of light or outlook to nearby residents. No additional windows are proposed; therefore, the development would cause no additional loss of privacy to neighbours. 7.10 The proposed community facility would be the same size as the existing café. Given its location within a busy mixed use area background noise levels would be high, the proposed change of use is therefor e not considered to generate noise or activity levels which would be harmful to those living nearby. The hours of operation are proposed to be restricted by way of condition to protect residential amenity. As stated above, a condition is also recommended to be imposed to restrict the use of the floor space to Use Class F2(B), (“a hall or meeting place for the principal use of the local community”) only. 7.11 Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact on the living conditions of neighbouring occupiers. It would Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press therefore comply with Poli cy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Highways and Parking 7.12 The proposed development is located within PTAL 4, indicating that the site is well connected to forms of public transport. The unit does not benefit from allocated parking therefore neither the existing café nor replacement use would benefit from allocated parking. However, given the nature of the community use proposed it is unlikely that the unit would serve those outside of the local community. As such it is considered that most users would be located within walking distance within the Hayes Town Centre Area and would not need to drive to and from the site. 7.13 Notwithstanding the above, if parking were to be required, then this could be found within the Town Centre itself where there are two public car parks and a small variety of pay and display spaces. 7.14 Owing to the high PTAL rating and the loc ation of the local service users the car free nature of the development is support ed. The Local Highway Authority has reviewed the proposal and is supportive , offering no objection. The proposal is therefore deemed in accordance with Policy DMT 6 of the Local Plan Part 2. Contamination 7.15 Due to the nature of the proposed development and fact that the works involve no excavation, the proposal is considered to have no adverse contamination related impacts nor to warrant a condition requi ring the submission of a Ground Investigation Report. Air Quality 7.16 As mentioned within the highways se ction of the report, the proposed development would include no parking provision and is not likely to result in increased traffic generation. The development is therefore considered to have no adverse air quality related impacts. Biodiversity Net Gain 7.17 The proposal is for the change of use of existing floor space and involves no physical external works other than the replacement of the entrance door. As such the development would meet the de -minimis exemption set out within the framework. Accessibility 7.18 The proposed internal layout would have been constructed to comply with the relevant accessible standards. The inte rnal and external works are limited to works to the openings which are minor and have been assessed by the Councils Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Accessibility Officer who has raised no objection subject to a standard informative relating to inclusive design. This informative has been included in Appendix 1. Flooding and Drainage 7.19 The site lies within Flood Zone 1 of the Environment Agency's Flood Risk Map. This means the site is classified as being at low risk and defined as having a less than 1 in 1,000 probabilities of fluvial and tidal flooding. As such, there are no restrictions on development, including more vulnerable development in this location, in terms of fluvial and tidal flood risk. 7.20 In terms of drainage, the proposed devel opment would utilise the sites existing drainage systems and due to the minor nature of the proposed works the submission of a SUDS strategy is not considered to be necessary. Overall, it is considered that the development would cause no adverse flooding or drainage related impacts. The proposed development is therefore in accordance with Policy DMEI 9 of the Local Plan Part 2. Waste Management 7.21 The submitted plans show that at present the café has a bin store used for refuse and recycling storage. The store is located ne xt to the road and is to be retained and utilised for the proposed development. The development is therefore considered to be acceptable with re gards to refuse and recycling storage . The proposal complies with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan (2020). Sustainability 7.22 The proposed development is of a minor scale therefore whilst the principle of SI 2 ( Carbon R eduction) is applicable, the London Plan Policy applies more specifically to major scale applications. The applicant is therefore not required to submit an energy statement with the application or to demonstrate a policy level of on-site savings. 7.23 Furthermore, due to the nature of the proposed development (temporary change of use, with limited physical works) the proposal results in a unit which is as energy efficient as the existing unit. It should also be noted that this building is relatively new and would have been constructed to meet more modern thermal performance standards and would have been subject to the requirement for carbon saving requirements. 7.24 The proposal would therefore be compliant with Policy SI 2 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy DMEI 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Fire Safety Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.25 The application is not for major development, as such the submission of a fire strategy is not considered to be necessary. In terms of fire safety, the unit is at ground floor with easy access to the ma in road. Egress from the building in the event of a fire would be similar to the existing café, causing no increase in fire risk. Additionally, the internal fit out of the unit would need to comply with the fire safety standards set out within Building Regulations. 8 Other Matters Human Rights 8.1 The development has been assessed against the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and in particular Article 1 of the First Protocol and Article 8 of the Act itself. This Act gives further effect to the rights included in the European Convention on Human Rights. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development rights and expectations which have been balanced and weighed against the wider community interests, as expressed through third party interests / the Development Plan and Central Government Guidance. Equality 8.2 Due consideration has been given to Section 149 of the Equality Act with regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in the assessment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Local Finance Considerations and CIL 8.3 The Council adopted its own Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) on 1st August 2014. The proposal is not CIL liable. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The proposed temporary change of use offers the opportunity to bring occupation to a unit which has been vacant since 2019. The use would be a benefit for the local community and help safeguard the vibrancy of the area. The limited external works mean that the development would the preserve historic character of the Conservation Area and the street scene . The proposal would not result in a significant impact upon neighbour amenity or the local highway network. 9.2 The proposal is considered to comply with the Development Plan and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. Consequently, the application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 10 Background Papers 10.1 Relevant published policies and documents taken into account in respect of this application are set out in the report. Documents associated with the application Hillingdon Planning Committee – 4th September 2025 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press (except exempt or confidential information) are available on the Council's website here, by entering the planning application number at the top of this report and using the search facility. Planning appl ications are also available to inspect electronically at the Civic Centre, High Street, Uxbridge, UB8 1UW upon appointment, by contacting Planning Services at planning@hillingdon.gov.uk. AAPPENDICES Planning Application 31917/APP/2025/996 Hillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 6 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. COM3 T Time Limit The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. REASON To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2. NONSC N Non Standard Condition The development hereby permitted shall cease within 5 years from the date of this permission. After the 5 year period has expired, the proposed development and relevant site shall be returned to its former state and use within 8 weeks. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Parts 1 (November 2012) and 2 (January 2020) and the London Plan (2021). 3. COM4 A Accordance with Approved Plans The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on submitted plan numbers: Location Plan PH_001_000 PH_002_000 PH_001_100 PH_002_100 PH_001_200 PH_002_200 PH_001_201 PH_002_201; and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of the Hillingdon Local Plan Parts 1 (November 2012) and 2 (January 2020) and the London Plan (2021). 4. HO4 M Materials The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development Hillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 6 hereby permitted shall match those used in the existing building and shall thereafter be retained as such. REASON To safeguard the visual amenities of the area and to ensure that the proposed development does not have an adverse effect upon the appearance of the existing building in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 5 5. COM22 O Operating Hours The premises shall not be used except between:- 08:00 and 21:00, Mondays - Fridays 10:00 to 16:00 Saturdays 10:00 to 14:00 Sundays, Public or Bank Holidays. REASON To safeguard the residential amenity of the occupiers of adjoining and nearby properties in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020). 6. MCD16 R Restriction to Use Applied For Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 and the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any orders revoking and re-enacting either of these orders with or without modification), the unit shall be used only for purposes falling within Use Class F2 (B) and for no other purpose including any other purpose within Use Class F2 of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order 1987 (as amended). REASON To enable the Local Planning Authority to retain control over the use so as to ensure that it complies with Policies DMHB 11, DMT 1, DMT 2 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) and Policy D13 of The London Plan (2021). Informatives 1. The Equality Act seeks to protect people accessing goods, facilities and services from discrimination on the basis of a 'protected characteristic', which includes those with a disability. As part of the Act, service providers are obliged to improve access to and within the structure of their building, particularly in situations where reasonable adjustment can be incorporated with relative ease. The Act states that service providers should think ahead to take steps to address barriers that impede disabled people. Hillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 6 AAppendix 2: Relevant Planning History 59872/APP/2012/1838 The Old Vinyl Factory Site Blyth Road Hayes Outline planning application for a mixed use development of the Old Vinyl Factory site including the demolition of up to 12,643 sqm of buildings and construction of up to 112,953 sqm (112,953 sqm includes the retention and re-use of 784 sqm of the Power House and 901 sqm Pressing Plant) of new floorspace. Uses to include up to 510 residential units (maximum area of 49,000 sqm GEA), up to 7,886 sqm of new B1 floorspace, up to 4,000 sqm of A class uses (A1, A2, A3, A4, A5), up to 4,700 sqm of D1 and D2 uses, an energy centre (up to 950 sqm), car parking, works to access and creation of new accesses and landscaping. Decision: 19-04-2013 Approved 59872/APP/2013/3775 The Old Vinyl Factory Site Blyth Road Hayes Variation of Condition 4 (Phasing) of planning permission 59872/APP/2012/1838 dated 19/04/2013, to allow variations to phasing of approved development to allow the Boilerhouse and the Material Store to come forward as Phases 1 and 2, and to allow the Veneer Store and/or Record Stack carparks to come forward earlier than in the approved phasing. Decision: 18-03-2014 Approved 59872/APP/2015/665 The Old Vinyl Factory Blyth Road Hayes Reserved matters (appearance and landscaping) in compliance with conditions 2 and 3 for Phase 4 of The Old Vinyl Factory Masterplan - The Power House (Energy Centre, Music Venue/Restaurant and Cafe), of planning permission ref: 59872/APP/2013/3775, dated 31/07/2014 (Variation of condition 4 of outline planning application ref. 59872/APP/2012/1838 for a mixed use development of the Old Vinyl Factory site). Decision: 13-05-2015 Approved Hillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 6 AAppendix 3: List of Relevant Planning Policies The following Local Plan Policies are considered relevant to the application:- Part 1 Policies: Part 2 Policies: DMCI 2 New Community Infrastructure DMEI 12 Development of Land Affected by Contamination DMEI 14 Air Quality DMHB 1 Heritage Assets DMHB 11 Design of New Development DMHB 14 Trees and Landscaping DMHB 3 Locally Listed Buildings DMHB 4 Conservation Areas DMT 1 Managing Transport Impacts DMT 2 Highways Impacts DMT 6 Vehicle Parking LPP D3 (2021) Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach LPP D5 (2021) Inclusive design LPP HC1 (2021) Heritage conservation and growth LPP T4 (2021) Assessing and mitigating transport impacts LPP T6 (2021) Car parking NPPF11 -24 NPPF11 2024 - Making effective use of land NPPF12 -24 NPPF12 2024 - Achieving well-designed places NPPF15 -24 NPPF15 2024 - Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Hillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 5 of 6 NPPF16 -24 NPPF16 2024 - Conserving and enhancing the historic environment NPPF9 -24 NPPF9 2024 - Promoting sustainable transport HHillingdon Planning Committee - 4th September 2025 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 6 of 6

Meeting: Hillingdon Planning Committee Date: 4 September 2025 Time: 7:00pm Venue: Committee Room 5, Civic Centre ADDENDUM SHEET Item: 6 Location: Dyson Drive, Uxbridge Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: Since the completion of the committee report, a petition in objection to the proposal has been received with 67 signatures. The petition raises the following concerns: • The application for 9 new parking spaces on Dyson Drive creates an unsustainable overprovision of parking. The site’s 70 existing spaces already significantly exceed the maximum of 46.5 permitted for its 56 properties under the current London Plan standards. • This is a significant policy departure that would set a harmful precedent for future developments across our borough. It undermines policies on sustainable transport and causes the unnecessary loss of green space. We ask the Committee to uphold its planning policies and refuse this application. This petition is submitted with the full endorsement of the Hillingdon Alliance of Residents’ Associations. Noted. Since the completion of the committee report, an objection from Friends of the Earth has been received. A summary is provided below: • The application to increase allocated parking spaces on Dyson Drive from one to two per household is inconsistent with the London Plan 2021 and the original planning approval for the St Andrew’s Park development, which promotes sustainable transport. Evidence from Transport for London shows declining car ownership in Outer London, with the majority of households owning one or no vehicles. The proposal would encourage higher car ownership, contrary to policy and local travel trends. Noted. • Dyson Drive is well-connected, with close access to public transport and local amenities, making additional parking provision unnecessary. • The proposal would result in the loss of approximately 100 square metres of green space and represents a retrospective change that may undermine the development’s sustainability objectives. • There is concern that approval could jeopardise future phases of the St Andrew’s Park development, which require Greater London Authority involvement, for the benefit of a small number of households. Item: 7 Location: 35 Brookdene Drive, Northwood Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: 1) Drawing ref. CWLD-DSSA-BD-2480-01 Rev B replaced by Rev C and Conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 8 (Landscape Plan Implementation) updated accordingly. 2) Amend reference in Condition 16 to the 1995 version of the GPDO to the 2015 version. 3) Since the completion of the Committee Report two additional representations providing supplementary objections and observations (these neighbours have previously commented) has been received from neighbouring residents. These representations raised the following summarised matters: Representation 1 a) Misrepresentation of the existing building footprint. This neighbour believes that the existing conservatory should not be considered either part of the main building or as part of the existing building footprint. Requests that the separation from No. 34 Brookdene Drive and footprint of replacement dwelling is in accordance with the original plot arrangement (i.e. before the existing conservatory extension). b) Overbearing and loss of morning sun. c) Overlooking and loss of privacy. d) Lack of precedence to justify proposed siting and windows facing No. 34 Brookdene Drive. e) Does not comply with 45-degree rule for ground floor window at No. 34 Brookdene Drive. f) The location of the ASHP beneath a protected tree suggests that it may not be the final location. A full noise assessment should also be submitted. Any permission should be 1) The proposed bin storage area was relocated adjacent to the northern site boundary on the proposed site plan. As noted in the Committee Report, a revised proposed landscaping arrangement plan was requested and has since been received for consistency. Accordingly, Conditions 2 and 8 are updated to require compliance with this revised drawing. 2) Amended for clarity. 3) The responses to these additional representations are as follows. Please note that these representations do not raise any additional matters not already addressed in the Committee Report, but responses are provided for clarity. a) For clarity, the existing conservatory does form part of the existing building footprint. b) Sunlight and daylight matters are addressed in paragraphs 7.27- 7.30 of the Committee Report and are considered acceptable. c) Overlooking matters are addressed in paragraphs 7.33 of the Committee Report and conditioned to control the location, specification and operation of the ASHP. g) The bin storage has been relocated away from No. 34 Brookdene Drive but is also shown adjacent to this neighbouring property. Representation 2 h) Concerns maintained with the overall bulk and scale of the development. i) Concerns maintained with the proposed enclosure of a grassed verge and the proposed timber boundary treatment. j) Concerns with overbearing impact on neighbours Nos. 19, 20 and 21 Brookdene Drive. k) Concerns with highways safety from proposed vehicular crossover on narrow street, access for emergency vehicles, and limited pedestrian visibility splays affecting pedestrian and cyclist safety. l) Insufficient on-site parking. m) Concerns with the future use of the existing outbuilding. Condition 5 requires obscure glazing for side elevation windows facing No. 34 Brookdene Drive. d) There are numerous properties within Brookdene Drive that have side elevation windows, including the existing application site. The separation distances between property side boundaries also vary. The proposed development would maintain a separation distance of a minimum 1.2m from the shared property boundary. e) Sunlight and daylight matters are addressed in paragraphs 7.27- 7.30 of the Committee Report and are considered acceptable. With respect to the ground floor French door windows at No. 34 Brookdene Drive, it should be noted that adjacent to these windows is the existing side boundary treatment and a single storey conservatory at the application site. In demolishing the existing dwelling, the proposed flank wall would be set-back further from this shared boundary, achieving a greater separation distance of massing. In respect to the first-floor element, as the centre of the French doors is set-back further from the shared boundary than the first-floor window (45-degree line depicted on plans from this neighbouring window), the proposal would meet this 45-degree line in plan form. f) Condition 19 requires the ASHP to comply with noise emission restrictions, which includes the submission of technical specifications demonstrating compliance. Should the location need to be altered, this would be subject to a separate planning application. g) Amended plans have been received to remove the proposed bin store adjacent to the boundary with No. 34 Brookdene Drive. h) The scale and appearance of the proposal is discussed in paragraphs 7.10 - 7.18 of the Committee Report and considered acceptable. i) The proposed boundary treatment location is within the site curtilage, and the visual impact is discussed in paragraphs 7.20 - 7.23 of the Committee Report and considered acceptable. j) The potential residential amenity impact on the properties across the road from the site is discussed in paragraph 7.36 of the Committee Report. This is considered acceptable given the separation distance from the intervening highway. k) Highways safety impacts of the proposed crossover are discussed in paragraphs 7.43 and 7.44 of the Committee Report and considered acceptable. Condition 22 requires the maintenance of compliant pedestrian visibility splays. l) The proposed parking quantum complies with London Plan policy requirements and is acceptable. This is addressed in paragraph 7.46 of the Committee Report. m) Condition 15 prevents the existing outbuilding / garage from being used as anything other than for domestic purposes incidental to the enjoyment of the approved dwellinghouse. This is addressed in paragraph 7.4 of the Committee Report. Item: 8 Location: Haydon Drive, Eastcote Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: Correction to condition 2 (approved plans list): • Drawing no. APL304B to be replaced with Drawing no. APL303 A (revised) For clarity. Item: 9 Location: Morrisons Supermarket, Yiewsley, West Drayton Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: Amend Head of Term iii to read as (strikethrough deleted, underlined added): Canal and River Trust Contribution Canal Enhancement Contribution: A contribution for works to improve connections, access and enhancements to the Grand Union Canal, equal to £70,000. For clarity. Amend Head of Term v to read as (strikethrough deleted, underlined added): Highway Improvement Works Contribution Healthy Streets/Active Travel Zone Contribution: Financial contribution equal to £49,500. For clarity. Item: 10 Location: Union Park UP4, North Hyde Gardens Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: Amend Head of Term vii to read as (strikethrough deleted, underlined added): Canal and River Trust Contribution Canal Enhancement Contribution: A contribution for works to improve connections, access and enhancements to the Grand Union Canal, equal to £26,356. For clarity. Amend Condition 9 as follows (underlined added): The routine testing of equipment designed to operate only in an emergency shall only be carried out on any normal working day Monday to Friday, between the hours of 0800 and 2000, with the duration and frequency stipulated by the Operating Regime (including testing and maintenance), not to exceed an average of 15 hours per year per generator, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. For clarity. Amend Conditions 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 as follows (strikethrough deleted, underlined added): Thereafter the development shall be implemented and operated in accordance with these the approved details. For clarity. Item: 11 Location: Former garage site adjacent 43 St Christopher Road Amendments/Additional Information: Officer Comments: None. None. Item: 12 Location: 560 Sipson Road, West Drayton Amendments/ Additional Information: Officer Comments: Remove the following Heads of Term: v. A Section 278 agreement to implement the proposed off- site Highways Works and street tree planting on Sipson Road. Following investigations there is a significant level of utilities that result in tree planting being unviable in this location. Appropriate landscaping to be secured within the front of the site through Condition 17. Remaining Section 278 works are required to bring the development forward and therefore do not need to be captured by the Section 106 legal agreement. Item: 13 Location: Unit 5, 12 Powerhouse Lane, Hayes Amendments/ Additional Information: Officer Comments: None. None.