Planning

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Christopher Lamb 5319/APP/2025/3066 Date Application Valid: 05.12.25 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 16.10.26 Application Type: Full Ward: Northwood Applicant: Mr D Shah Site Address: 5 Kewferry Road Northwood Hillingdon HA6 2NS Proposal: Change of use from dwelling (Use Class C3) to residential care home (Use Class C2) 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 – 14th October 2026 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 This application at no. 5 Kewferry Road, Northwood, seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the existing dwelling (Use Class C3) to a residential care home (Use Class C2) for up to four children / young persons between the ages of 10 and 17 years old. 1.2 A signed petition has been received from the public with a total of 74 valid signatures, and as such this application has been called to Committee for determination. Concerns raised in the petition relate to the location and highways impacts, namely inadequate on-site parking. These matters have been considered within the assessment section of the report below. 1.3 The proposed development would result in the loss of a C3 Use Class dwelling. However, a residential care home also serves as a form of residential accommodation for a specific section of the community. Furthermore, the proposed development would aid in meeting an identified need for C2 Use Class accommodation in the Borough and London as a whole. This has been demonstrated through the evidence provided by the applicant, as well as statements published nationally and by the Council. This is a significant planning consideration which weighs in favour of the development. 1.4 The application is considered to be acceptable in principle whilst, with no external changes proposed (save from a modest expansion of the existing front hardstanding), the property would continue to resemble a residential dwelling from the street scene, integrating with the local residential character. 1.5 A maximum of four children would be accommodated within the care home, to be secured by a condition. The overall scale of the proposal is modest, comprising a small residential care home that would be domestic in appearance, rather than a larger commercial care home facility. A recommended condition on the level of staff at the property at any given time (maximum four staff, including a registered manager) would ensure it remains similar in scale to a residential property rather than an over-intensified commercial care home. 1.6 The proposed parking and access arrangements have been reviewed by the Council’s Highways Officer, having regard to the scale of the proposed use, the site’s location and the parking restrictions on surrounding roads. The Highways Officer raises no objection and considers that the proposal would not materially increase congestion or parking pressure or give rise to unacceptable highway or pedestrian safety impacts. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 1.7 It is considered that the proposal would provide an appropriate living environment for future occupiers and would not unduly impact upon the residential amenity of neighbouring occupa nts. Sufficient internal space would be provided for both staff and prospective occupants of the proposed home. 1.8 A Management Plan, Noise Management Plan and Good Neighbour Policy have also been submitted with the proposal, demonstrating how the use would integrate within the local community without causing any significant harm to the wider neighbourhood in terms of comings and goings, noise and disturbance or anti -social behaviour. Given the modest size of the proposal (maximum of 4no. children and 4no. total staff), as well as the accompanying documentation, it is considered that the proposal would not cause any significant impact on the amenity of neighbouring residents or the wider community. 1.9 With consideration to the scale of th e proposal, proposed mitigation measures and recommended conditions, it is not considered that the proposal would cause harm to the local character of the area, impact the wider community or neighbouring amenity. It must however be noted that the Applicant would still require permission from Ofsted to run a care home from the property. This would include a vigorous assessment of the property and applicant suitability, including safeguarding measures to protect children. This assessment however would be outside the realms of the planning assessment. 1.10 Taking all relevant matters into account and giving due regard to local residents’ objections (including the petition against the application), it is concluded that the proposal complies with the overarching aims of the Development Plan and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. The planning application is therefore reco mmended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 No. 5 is a two-storey residential property with accommodation within the roof, located on the western side of Kewferry Road, Northwood. The property is of brick construction with render at first floor level, and is characterised by a hipped tile roof, front, rear and side dormers, two storey front gable projection, and single storey lean-to side projection. The property benefits from off street parking to the front, in addition to front and rear gardens. 2.2 The property lies within a residential area, predominantly characterised by detached, two storey dwellings of varying style and character. To the south of the site is the Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School . A public footpath runs between the school and the application site, adjacent to the southern boundary , providing access to Holy Trinity Church , a Grade II listed building which is located further to the west. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 2.3 The site lies within an area covered by a TPO (TPO 118). There are no other relevant constraints. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Figure 2: Front of Application Property as Viewed from Kewferry Road Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3: Front of Application Property as Viewed from Public Footpath Figure 4: Rear of Application Property as Viewed from Public Footpath Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 5: Rear / Side of Application Property as Viewed from Public Footpath Figure 6: Application Property in Context of the School Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Kewferry Road (Application Property and School on Right-Hand Side) 3 Proposal 3.1 This application seeks full planning permission for the change of use of the existing dwelling (Use Class C3) to a residential care home (Use Class C2), for up to four children / young persons between the ages of 10 and 17 years old. No external changes or additions are proposed, save from a modest expansion of the existing parking area to the front of the site. 3.2 The proposal would retain three of the existing first floor bedrooms and the second (loft) floor bedroom as bedrooms for the children, whilst the smallest existing bedroom on the first floor would be converted to a staff bedroom. The ground floor would largely remain as ex isting, with only the dining room being converted to a staff room. 3.3 The supporting documents submitted with the proposal indicate that there would be a maximum of 4no. staff on site at any given time , with the general rota confirmed by the applicant’s agent as follows: - 07:30 to 22:30 – three support staff (plus a Manager working Monday to Fridays, 09:00 - 17:00 only) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - 22:30 to 07:30 – two support staff (one waking and one sleeping) 3.4 The proposed care home would be designed to provide specialised support for children facing emotional behaviour and development needs , considered to be low-risk but with high care needs. This is stated to include those with mild learning difficulties, emotional or developmental delays, or challenges related to early trauma. 3.5 The submitted Statement of Need indicates that, as a first priority, the looked- after children would be those who are ordinarily resident in the London Borough of Hillingdon, and as a second priority, children who have been placed out-of- borough by Hillingdon Children's Services due to insufficient local provision, and who would benefit from return to the Borough. 3.6 In effect, the proposed care home seeks to offer a care model that caters to the needs of local children in the Hillingdon Borough, enabling children to maintain connections with their community, friends, and family. Figure 8: Existing Floor Plans (please note – a larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 9: Proposed Floor Plans Figure 10: Existing/Proposed Elevations (Unchanged) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 11: Proposed Parking Plan 4 Relevant Planning History 4.1 A full list of the planning history relating to the property can be found in Appendix 2. 4.2 The site history relates to the domestic use of the property and surrounding protected trees. None would be directly relevant to this application. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4, paragraph 1, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states: 5.3 “1. When preparing and considering development proposals, relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to: a. The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); b. The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and c. The degree of compliance of the relevant policies in the emerging plan with the policies for plan -making in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them).” Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.4 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replacing the previous versions of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. Given its early stage of preparation and the scope for representations to result in further change, only limited weight is afforded to the Draft London Plan at this stage. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 13 neighbouring proper ties, as well as the Northwood Residents Association, were originally consulted on the application on 23.12.2025, with the consultation period expiring on 16.01.2026. Following the receipt of a parking plan, a further consultation period was then issued, expiring on 12.10.2026. 6.2 In terms of the first consultation period, altogether: - A petition with a total of 74 valid signatures was received in objection to the proposal. - 27 representations, from 22 individuals, were received, in objection to the proposal. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - A representation from the Northwood Residents Association was received. - Representation from a local Councillor objecting to the proposal. 6.3 In terms of the second consultation period, at the time of writing of this report: - 13 representations were received, in objection to the proposal. A representation from the Northwood Residents Association was received. 6.4 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response Petition of 74 total valid signatures have been received against the application I. Inappropriate location (next to a primary school) II. Insufficient parking Discussed within paragraphs 7.86 - 7.98 of this report Discussed within paragraphs 7. 57 - 7.78 of this report. 27 individual letters of objection have been received (first consultation); 13 individual letters of objection have been received (second consultation) I. Concerns over location (unsuitable for residential area; commercialisation of a residential area; out of character for the area; next to a school; safeguarding concerns; land use incompatibility) Discussed within paragraphs 7.18-7.21, 7.86 - 7.98 of this report II. Highway and parking concerns (exacerbate existing on-street parking which is already saturated; already congestion due to the school; on- Discussed within paragraphs 7.57 - 7.78 of this report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press street parking may lead to knock-on highway safety issues) ; parking plan inadequate/does not resolve concerns previously raised. III. Impacts on neighbour amenity (intensification of use; noise; disturbance; loss of privacy with overlooking) Discussed within paragraphs 7.32 - 7.48 of this report. IV. Sets precedent for similar applications in the future Discussed within paragraphs 7.1 - 7.17 of this report. Each application is assessed on its own individual merits. Additionally, Policy DMH 8 within the Local Plan Part 2 also prevents an overconcentration of care home uses within a certain area. V. Management plans submitted are unenforceable from a planning perspective, supervision not 1:1 Compliance with the supporting documentation would be added as a planning condition, ensuring that the contents of the documentation can be broadly enforced where necessary. The level of staff is considered proportionate to the level of children from a planning perspective. Further comments provided within paragraphs 7. 95 - 7.98 of this report. VI. Concerns regarding credibility and The planning system is not discriminatory towards the apparent credibility or Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press transparency of the applicant practical experience of an applicant. This would therefore not be a material planning consideration. Further comments provided within paragraphs 7. 95 - 7.98 of this report. VII. Concerns regarding neighbour consultation process The neighbour consultation process was undertaken in accordance with established Council procedures and in full compliance with statutory requirements. VIII. Lack of clarity regarding staff accommodation, proposed gates, bin/cycle storage Amended floor plans were submitted. These now show the location of the staff accommodation and staff room. The application is for a change of use only: no gates are disclosed within the description of development nor shown in the proposed plans - no proposed gates are therefore considered to form part of the proposal. Suitable bin and cycle storage has been shown within the proposed parking plan. IX. Reduces value of neighbouring properties Potential reductions in property value are entirely speculative and are not a material planning consideration. X. General concerns regarding potential conduct of children Discussed within paragraphs 7.86 - 7.98 of this report Letter of objection from the Northwood Residents Association I. Concerns over location (unsuitable for residential area; next to a school; no state schools nearby) Discussed within paragraphs 7.86 - 7.98 of this report Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press II. Impact on neighbour amenity (noise, disturbance) Discussed within paragraphs 7.32 - 7.48 of this report III. Impact on highways / inadequate parking Discussed within paragraphs 7.57 - 7.78 of this report. Local Ward Councillor I am strongly against this application to turn a residential house in a quiet residential street into a children’s home. In my opinion this application is totally inappropriate being almost next to a Holy Trinity Primary School. Further, this appears to be the first and only property that the Soho Care Group intends to operate. The company was set up just over a year ago (December 2024) and has 2 directors, both of who are 24 years old. I would strongly suggest Hillingdon needs to ensure it has sufficient details of education and experience of the two directors and the manager/s expected to run the home, to ensure they have suitable backgrounds and experience to operate such a care facility ”. Officer Comment: Comments noted. Concerns regarding location are discussed within paragraphs 7.76 - 7.88 of this report. The planning system is not discriminatory towards the apparent credibility or practical experience of an applicant. This would therefore not be a material planning consideration. Further comments on this aspect are provided within paragraphs 7. 95 - 7.98 of this report. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Highways Officer: No Objections, subject to conditions. Final comments following submission of parking plan: Comments noted. It is agreed that the suggested conditions are imposed. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Site Characteristics and background The address is located next to a primary school which is positioned within a pr edominantly residential catchment in Northwood with a mix of unrestricted areas and parking controls including an adjacent school safety zone, double yellow lines and single yellow line restrictions fronting the address operating from Monday to Friday – 8am to 5pm. The location scores a public transport accessibility level (PTAL) rating of 2 suggesting an element of dependency on the use of private motor transport to and from the site. It is proposed to convert an existing detached 5- bedroom house to a residential care home catering for up to 4 children/young adults (between the ages of 10- 17) with up to 4 daytime staff and 2 in attendance overnight. The frontage area would accommodate 3 formally designated on -plot staff parking spaces together with a garage located to the side of the address. Vehicular access arrangements are to remain unaltered. Parking Provision 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 unless it can be demonstrated that a deviation from the standard would not result in a deleterious impact on the surrounding road network. Three on-plot spaces are to be provided and there is no prescriptive regional standard that can be applied to this use class. Howev er, the most appropriate council standard requires appraisal either by virtue of a Transport Assessment or 1 space per 4 dwelling units/occupants (with a minim um of 2 spaces) to be provided for a care home use (plus 1 warden/carer space). When applying the latter and accepting 4 children/young adults in attendance, this would therefore equate to a requirement of a maximum of 3 o n-plot spaces that should function independently of each other, and this level/arrangement is to be facilitated with satisf actory manoeuvring space associated with each proposed space as demonstrated by the submitted vehicle ‘Swept Path’ analysis. A welcome by -product of the extensive waiting restrictions encompassing the local roadways is that Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press they inherently encourage sustainable travel modes to and from the site which reduces potential for any notable/untoward additional daytime parking demand generated by the proposal. The limited overnight staff attendance (up to 2 in total) would be satisfactorily accommodated within the curtilage of the site without notable/undue displacement onto the public highway and hence does not raise issue or concern. Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP's) In accord with the Local Plan: Part 2 DMT 6 policy and parking standard, there is a requirement for EVCPs which would equate to a minimum facility of 5% of the total parking quantum for 'active' provision with a further 5% acting as 'passive' provision for future activation. As there is a strong move toward hybrid and fully electrified vehicles which will only increase in time, the proposal should incorporate 1 'active' and 2 'passive' spaces to futureproof for anticipated demand. This has not been confirmed by the applicant hence a planning condition should be applied to secure this aspect. Cycle Parking In terms of cycle parking, 1 secure & accessible space per 5 staff should be provided equating to one space. 4 cycle spaces are to be provided securely within the existing garage which is considered an acceptable quantum/arrangement. Vehicular Trip Generation Local Plan: Part 2 Policies - DMT 1 and DMT 2 require 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. Owing to the relatively small -scale of the scheme combined with the ‘low traffi c generator’ user profile (inclusive of infrequent vi sits/servicing) typically associated with care homes, the proposal would not be expected to generate measurable traffic burden on the surrounding roadways both during and outside of the most sensitive and therefore crucial peak morning Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press and late afternoon/evening hours given the anticipated low car usage levels which can, therefore can be absorbed within the local road network without notable detriment to traffic congestion and road safety implications. This is understandably of clear benefit to the primary school situated next door to the address which would not be expected to be exposed to any untoward impact. Staff Travel Plan (STP) To further substantiate the above, the principle of encouraging sustainable transport to and from the address mainly in the form of car -sharing by staff to reduce activity and parking demand should be acknowledged. Therefore in -line with established guidance afforded by Transport for London (TfL), a formal STP should be formalised post -permission by way of planning condition to ensure continued adherence in perpetuity. It will be a key tool in promoting sustainable travel and mitigating impacts on the local public realm and represents a long -term strategy for managing travel modes for all staff. Refuse Collection Refuse collection would continue via the roadway and bin storage placement should generally be placed within 10m of the collection point on the public highway to accord with the council's maximum waste collection distance standard. The applicant confirms that bin storage would be provided within the existing garage and an informal arrangement would be applied whereby refuse would be positioned in proximity to the public highway on collection days indicating conformity to the above requirement. There are no further observations. Synopsis It is noted that in some cases there can be measurable local opposition to this planning use class predominately associated wi th the principle of the change of use from a residential to what may arguably be construed as an “out of character” commercial use. The Highway Authority (HA) is of the opinion that although there may be justification for refusal based on other planning considerations (to be confirmed or otherwise), if a specific refusal reason based on the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press level of on-plot parking and/or traffic generation were to be pursued in this case and appealed thereafter, it is highly unlikely that the planning inspectorate would uphold such reasoning. This opinion is based on the level of on -plot parking provision which is ‘to standard’ coupled with the extensive waiting restrictions encompassing the local roadways which inherently encourage sustainable travel modes to and from the site thereby intrinsically reducing the potential for any further additional daytime parking demand generated by the proposal. Consequently, and as compared to the established residential use, the resultant moderate level of traffic generated by the proposal is not therefore predicted to notably burden the local road network. This view also reflects Policy TR6: (Paragraph 4) of the NPPF 2026 which directs refusal on highway grounds only if anticipated cumulative capacity/highway safety related impacts of a development are likely to be ‘severe’ which the HA believe is not the case. Accordingly, a corresponding transport/highway related refusal reason would not be recommended. Conclusion 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 Local Plan: Part 2 Development Plan (2020) Policies DMT 1, DMT 2 & DMT 6 and Policies T4, T5 and T6 of the London Plan (2021). Children’s Services There is a need for residential children’s care homes both locally and nationally and there are great benefits for Hillingdon childr en looked after to be living in the borough. Hillingdon's pref erence is for smaller children's home provision, as this is typically more conducive to delivering a homely environment and meeting the needs of look ed after children. Children Services welcome this additional care home facility subject to being approved by Ofsted as the regulator. There is an established need for Children’s Care facilities in the borough. The care home would be subject to approval by the regulator Ofsted. Ofsted registration is governed by a separate statutory regulatory regime. Prior to applying to Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Ofsted, the Applicant must submit evidence of the planning position with its registration. An informative has included reminding the applicant of this requirement. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 Planning permission is sought for the change of use of a two-storey detached residential dwelling house (Use Class C3 ) to a children’s care home with a maximum of four children (Use Class C2). 7.2 Policy DMH 1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) seeks to resist the net loss of existing self- contained housing unless the housing is replaced with at least equivalent residential floorspace. The proposal would lead to the loss of one C3 residential dwelling. Accordingly, this would normally be resisted, unless there are exceptional circumstances. This may include an unmet demand for another policy need within the Development Plan. 7.3 London Plan Policy H12 (2021) states that: “ the delivery, retention, and refurbishment of supported and specialised housing which meets an identified need should be supported. The form this takes will vary, and it should be designed to satisfy the requirements of th e specific use or group it is intended for, whilst providing options within the accommod ation offer for the diversity of London's population, including disabled Londoners (s ee Policy D7 Accessible housing) within a wider inclusive community setting”. The policy lists accommodation for young people with support needs as one of the key groups where there is a need. Para 4.13.14 of the Policy states there to be an under provision of C2 accommodation across London as a whole and references the need to provide an average of 867 care home beds per year until 2029 to meet demand. 7.4 The revised National Planning Policy Framework, published in August 2026, provides specific support for accommodation serving looked -after children. Policy HO7 states that substantial weight should be given to the benefits of providing accommodation which contributes towards meeting evidenced community needs. Policy HO9 further provides that specialist community-based accommodation should offer appropriate living conditions, be supported by a Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press management plan demonstrating how a safe and secure environment would be maintained, and be located where residents can safely access frequently used services. Subject to the proposal sati sfying these operational and locational requirements, its contribution towards meeting the accommodation needs of looked-after children attracts substantial positive weight. 7.5 Local Hillingdon Planning Po licies address the provision of residential care homes within the Borough . Policy DMH 8 of the Hill ingdon Local Plan Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) states: A) The development of residential care homes and other types of supported housing will be permitted provided that: i) it would not lead to an over concentration of similar uses detrimental to residential character or amenity and complies wi th Policy DMH 4: Residential Conversions; ii) it caters for need identified in the Council's Housing Market Assessment, in a needs assessment of a recognised public body, or within an appropriate needs assessment and is deemed to be responding to the needs identified by the Council or other recognised public body such as the Mental Health Trust; iii) the accommodation is fully integrated into the residential surroundings; and iv) in the case of sheltered housing, it is located near to shops and community facilities and is easily accessible by public transport. B) Proposals for residential care est ablishments which fall under Use Class C2 must demonstrate that they would provide levels of care as defined in Article 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended). 7.6 In this instance, the proposal would fall under the definition of care as defined in Article 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 (as amended) , which includes the personal care of children . To this extent, it is considered that the requirements of Part B of Policy DMH 8 would be satisfied. 7.7 Regarding Part A of Policy DMH 8, it is considered that: 7.8 In terms of part i), it is not considere d that the proposal would lead to an over concentration of similar uses, detrimental to residential character or amenity. Whilst it is noted that a four-child care home was approved at 36 Moor Park Road in February 2 025 (ref: 77170/APP/2024/1240) – approximately 0.3 miles from the application site. Furthermore, a planning history search of the immediate area suggests that there are no other similar uses / children’s care homes within proximity of the site. Kewferry Road and surrounding roads are overwhelmingly residential (Use Class C3) in nature, to an extent that the provision of a care home in this location would not lead to an overconcentration of similar uses. Wider impacts on residential amenity are discussed within the relevant section Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press of the report below, however overall it is considered there would be no detrimental impact. There would be no evid ent confliction with Policy DMH 4, given that the property has an internal area of over 120 sqm, whilst no other aspects of this policy would be applicable. To this extent, it is considered that the requirements of part i) of Part A of Policy DMH 8 would be fulfilled. 7.9 In terms of part ii), the applicant has submitted a Needs Assessment in support of the application. The Needs Assessment, having regard to a number of national and locally published documents, indicates that by the year ending 31 March 2024, the number of children looked after (CLA) by Local Authorities in England was 83,630, representing a 23% increase over the past decade . Of these CLA, 45% were having to be placed outside their home local authority . The Assessment indicates that the national shortage of children’s care homes is most acute in London. As at March 2023, the London region had only 164 registered children's homes providing 787 places, the lowest provision of any English region. 7.10 Although CLA would have other forms of accommodation and support from Local Planning Authorities, the figures above demonstrate a significant shortfall in places nationwide, as well as within the London context. It is also noted that, within the aforementioned recent application at 36 Moor Park Road, the Council’s Children's Care Team confirmed that “f rom a sufficiency perspective, we know there is an established need nationally and locally and there are great benefits for Hillingdon chil dren looked after to be living in the borough ”. The Council’s Children’s Care Team have again reaffirmed this position within the current application. 7.11 The submitted Needs Assessment is comprehensive and is considered to effectively demonstrate that the prop osal would cater for an identified need. Furthermore, the indicated referral system within the Assessment would ensure that the care home would prioritise local children who live in the Borough, contributing to the Council's strategy for developing services locally for local children. Given the above, it is considered that the requirements of part ii) of Part A of Policy DMH 8 would be fulfilled. 7.12 A further material consideration is a recent appeal decision at 31 Frithwood Avenue, Northwood (APP/R5510/W/25/3373721), allowed on 30 January 2026. The appeal concerned the conve rsion of a dwelling to a six -person Class C2 care home. 7.13 The Inspector accepted that the Counci l’s Adult Social Care Market Position Statement and Joint Strategic Needs Assessment demonstrated a need for care- home accommodation within Hillingdon. The Inspector found that Policy DMH8 does not require an applicant to demonstrate a separate need specifically within Northwood, undertake an audit of all exis ting accommodation or establish that alternative sites are unavailable. The pr oposal’s contribution towards meeting the identified borough-wide need was afforded very significant weight. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.14 The Inspector also considered the presence of a number of existing care and nursing homes within Northwood. These we re found to be dispersed across different roads and intermingled with a considerably greater number of conventional dwellings. Consequently, their presence, together with the appeal proposal, did not amount to an overco ncentration. The decision also confirms that the relevant consideration under Po licy DMH8 is not simply the number of similar establishments but whether their concentration would cause demonstrable harm to residential character or amenity. 7.15 While each proposal must be considered on its individual merits, the Frithwood Avenue decision establishes that a care-home use is not inherently incompatible with Northwood’s residential character. Subject to the scale of the development, its physical appearance, parking arrangements and appropriate operational controls, such a use can be successfully integrated within a residential area. 7.16 In terms of part iii), the proposal relates to an existing residential dwelling, in which no alterations or additions are propos ed. It is considered therefore that, from a visual perspective, the property would remain fully integrated into the residential surroundings, given that there would be no visible changes. As such, it is considered that the requirements of part iii) of Part A of Policy DMH 8 would be fulfilled. 7.17 The requirements of part iv) would not be applicable to this proposal. Based on all the above, the proposal would comply with all relevant requirements of Policy DMH 8, indicating that in principle the conv ersion of the property to care home use would be acceptable. Commercial Nature of Care Home 7.18 Some representations received raised concerns regarding the commercial nature of the use within a predominantly residential area. Whilst the care home does have a commercial element for it to function and manage in an appropriate manner, it would retain a residential character and aspect given its modest size. There are no external changes proposed which would change the appearance and character of the site as anything other than a form of residential accommodation. 7.19 The proposed care home would have a maximum of four children within the home at any time, and a maximum of fo ur staff during the day, and two staff overnight. These limits are recommended to be secured by condition. The level of children and staff in the property overnight would be similar to the amount of people allowed within a permitted residential C3(b) Care Use , which covers up to six people living together as a single household while receiving care. As a C2 Use, the proposed care home would be modest in numbers of both staff and children. On this basis, the commercial element is considered modest in scale and the proposal would ultimately be similar in nature to a residential dwelling or a household where care is provided for residents that is allowed under permitted development. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.20 The proposal would provide residential accommodation for a vulnerable section of the Hillingdon local population. Hillingdon’s Children’s Services team have also highlighted their preference for smaller children’s home to be integrated into the community thereby delivering a more homely environment which would meet the needs of the children in care. On this basis, the proposal would be more akin to a Care Home that normally is allowed under permitted development. The only reason a planning application is required is due to the care provision of Children. 7.21 Given the modest numbers, the change of use would not impact the local character nor result in an intensive co mmercial development along this residential street. It would continue to resemble a dwelling house. Overall, the location and modest scale would ensure that the proposed use would integrate well within the residential surroundings. Conclusion 7.22 The proposal would result in the loss of one family sized dwelling (Use Class C3). The safeguarding of existing housing is an important policy objective, and this loss weighs against the proposal. However, the proposed children’s care home would provide residential accommodation to meet a need identified in the application. The provision of supported accommodation is also recognised in national policy and supported by London Plan Policy H12. 7.23 Paragraph 4.5 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 recognises that exceptional circumstances may outweigh the loss of residential units where a proposal delivers other Local Plan policy objectives. In this case, the identified need for the proposed accommodation is considere d to outweigh the loss of the single dwelling. The exceptional circumstanc es envisaged by paragraph 4.5 are therefore considered to have been demonstrated. 7.24 Accordingly, the principle of the proposed use is considered acceptable, subject to the assessment of its other planning impacts below. Character and Appearance 7.25 Policy D3 of The London Plan (2021) states that developments should enhance the local context, be of high quality, and respond to a place's existing character. They should also respect, enhance, and utilise architectural features that contribute to the local character. 7.26 Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One - Strategic Policies (2012) seeks a quality of design in all new development 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 improve the quality of the public realm and respect local character. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.27 Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Loc al Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) advises that all development will be required to be designed to the highest standar ds and incorporate principles of good design. It should take into account aspects including the scale of the development considering the height, mass and bulk of adjacent structures; building plot sizes and established street patterns; building lines and streetscape rhythm and landscaping. 7.28 In this instance, no alterations or additions are proposed to the exterior of the property. As such, in a visual sense, there would be no change from the existing appearance: the application dwelling would retain the appearance of a detached residential dwelling, and there would be no impact to the character of the area or setting of the nearby Holy Trinity Church. 7.29 The proposed expanded parking area would require the removal of a portion of the lawn, however as is shown on the proposed parking plan, the existing hedgerow to the front of the site would be retained. The expanded parking area, in terms of size, would not be out of keeping with the character of the road, where large expanses of hardstanding to the front of properties are notable. No concerns would therefore be raised with regard to this aspect. 7.30 Cycle and bin storage facilities are shown to be provided within the existing garage. This would be an acceptable arra ngement in terms of accessibility and would also ensure there would be no additional visual clutter within the site frontage, as these storage areas would be placed internally. A condition is recommended to ensure these storage areas are installed prior to the first use of the proposed development. 7.31 Overall, it is considered that the proposal would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling or the surrounding area. The proposal is thereby considered to accord with the objectives of th e Development Plan with regard to character and appearance. Neighbouring Residential Amenity 7.32 Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Loc al Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) seeks to ensure that development proposals do not adversely impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. 7.33 The application site is a detached property. The adjacent site to the north is no. 7 Kewferry Road, a two storey residential property. To the south, the site borders a public footpath, with the Holy Trinity Church of England Primary School beyond. On the opposite side of the road are other detached residential properties. 7.34 As above, the proposal makes no alterations or additions to the existing dwelling, hence there would be no greater impact on neighbour amenity with regard to Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press overshadowing or overbearingness than th e existing relationship. Additionally, the proposal would not introduce any further windows into the property. Accordingly, there would be no greater impact on neighbour privacy than what already exists at the site. Noise Activity and Disturbance 7.35 In terms of noise impacts, numerous representations raised concerns regarding noise emanating from the potential use and the coming and goings from the property. 7.36 The proposed care home would be for a maximum of four children. It should be noted that the existing residential pro perty has five bedrooms, therefore could theoretically already be occupied by a lar ge family consisting of, for example, two adults and four children. A level of residential, domestic noise would therefore not be uncharacteristic, and in terms of full -time residents, it is not considered that the proposal would intensify the use to any unreasonable extent beyond its existing capabilities as a residential dwelling. 7.37 In any case, the application has been accompanied by several pieces of documentation detailing how the proposed children's care home would manage noise. These details provide guidance for staff on managing noise as well as how the use would be managed and integrated within the community without causing disruption to the local neighbours or the wider area. The accompanying documentation includes: - Noise Management Plan - Good Neighbour Policy - Management Plan 7.38 The Noise Management Plan (“NMP”) provides justification for the location of the care home, namely that it is adjacent to a primary school (which, when open, naturally generates a higher daytime ambient noise level than other residential areas), is a detached property, and only has one direct adjacent residential neighbour. These factors are noted and would contribute to mitigating any potential noise impact for neighbouring dwellings. 7.39 Additionally, the NMP submitted provides a supporting plan on how the use would operate and how potential noise impacts on neighbours would be further mitigated. This would be through, for ex ample, indoor noise control measures (double glazing, carpeting, TVs and devices at controlled volumes etc.), external noise control measures (restrictions on outdoor use to sociable hours, prohibitions on outdoor music etc.), vehicle noise management measures, a ‘quiet hours protocol’, b ehavioural controls supporting noise reduction, making a complaints procedure available, providing neighbours with contact information to report noise, and regular communication / monitoring of reports of noise between the manager and neighbours. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.40 The Good Neighbour Policy (“GNP”) outlines further good practice guidance which would be adopted, providing information on policies that would enable the care home to become a good neighbour within the community. These include maintaining a clear point of contact, that all trips off-site are staff-supervised, and restricting external play space to the rear garden only. 7.41 With regard to comings and goings, as has been mentioned, there would be a maximum of four staff on site at any given time, with the general rota as follows: - 07:30 to 22:30 – three support staff and a Manager (the manager would be weekdays, 09:00 to 17:00 only) - 22:30 to 07:30 – two support staff (one waking and one sleeping) This staffing rota arrangement is typica l of the standard hours of work for staff within a care home which involves longer hours than a typical working day. This is largely to provide consistency to the level of care provided . The hours of commencement and completion of the working day for each staff member would be acceptable as staff would commence and finish work outside established ‘quiet’ hours (generally recognised between hours of 11:00pm and 7:00am). 7.42 In accordance with the above, the submitted Management Plan indicates that most general staff day shifts would therefore last approximately 15 hours. This would therefore result in very limited v ehicular movements occurring during the day, and as the site is a detached property with only one adjacent neighbour, overall it is not envisaged that the regular comings and goings and changing of shifts would lead result in any significant noise impact over and above what would be reasonably expected for a comparable residential dwelling of the same size. 7.43 A similar conclusion was reached by the Planning Inspectorate in the recent appeal decision at 31 Frithwood Avenue (APP/R5510/W/25/3373721), which involved a Care Home for 6 persons with up to 5 staff. Within this decision, the Inspector found that staff movements, limited visitor trips, ordinary food and medication deliveries and occasional emergency attendance would not generate an unacceptable level of disturbance. Importantly, the Inspector did not regard a small C2 care use as inherently incompatib le with a residential setting. In the present case, the shift arrangements would be known and predictable and could be controlled through an approved operational management plan, including the agreed staffing levels, shift -change times, visiting arrangements, deliveries and measures to limit noise during unsociable hours. Subject to such controls, the proposed comings and goings are considered consistent with the residential character of the locality and would not materially diminish the amenity of neighbouring occupiers. 7.44 The NMP, GNP and Management Plan demonstrate a willingness by the applicant to engage with potential issues that may arise from the children’s care home setting, as well as having an open form of communication available to the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press residents, were any issues to arise. With the policies of these documents in place, to be secured by condition, as well as considering the modest number of children to be residing at the care home, and context of the siting, it is not considered that noise emanating from the site would result in any significant disruption for neighbours over and above what could reasonably be produced by a residential family of the same size. 7.45 A condition restricting the number of ch ildren accommodated at the care home to a maximum of 4 children would ensure that the use would not lead to an over intensification of the property over and above the typical family home . A condition is also recommended to ensure that there is a maximum of 4 staff within the home at any one time. This would ensure that the level of comings and goings from the property would not lead to substantial movements that could impact the wider neighbourhood. 7.46 It is also worth noting that the general noi se of future occupants, if generating harm or causing a statutory nuisance, would be a matter for the Council’s Environmental Health team to investigat e and resolve, if such an incident were to occur. Further regulations outside the planning remit include the Anti- Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 which give Local Authorities and Police powers to address anti-social behaviour including persistent noise nuisance. Conclusion 7.47 Based on the information provided and the modest scale of the proposed use, together with the recommended conditions, it is considered that the proposal would not cause a harmful impact on the local residents’ amenity, including noise and disturbanc e. Overall, it is considered that the number of people present would not be dissimilar to a residential dwelling of the same size and the comings and goings to the property would not be out of keeping with a residential area. 7.48 From a planning perspective, the proposal would comply with the objectives of the Development Plan with regard to the amenity of surrounding neighbours. Amenity of Future Occupiers 7.49 Policy DMHB 16 of the Hillingdon Loc al Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) states that all housing development should have an adequate provision of internal space in order to provide an appropriate living environment. Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) states that housing development should be of high- quality design and provide adequately sized rooms. 7.50 The proposed care home includes four bedrooms for the children and one additional bedroom for staff on the night shift. Each children’s bedroom would be of suitable size for a single person occupancy (ranging from approximately 9.8 sqm up to 24.9 sqm in size), in excess of the specified minimum 7.5 sqm required for a single bedspace. Furthermore, the bedrooms would have appropriate levels Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press of outlook and access to natural light. Bedrooms 1 and 4 would be served by en- suites, whilst Bedrooms 2 and 3 would share the first -floor bathroom. On the ground floor, there would be shared kitchen and lounge spaces. 7.51 The staff would be provided with a separate staff room on the ground floor, whilst the staff bedroom on the first floor wo uld also meet the minimum space standards. 7.52 The overall size and layout of the living and sleeping spaces is considered sufficient, given that the home would accommodate a maximum of four children. The layout of the proposed care home is considered fit for purpose as it comprises numerous shared and private spaces for the site's prospective residents and staff respectively. 7.53 Taking into consideration the above, t he proposal would provide an acceptable level of internal amenity for its future users. The proposal would therefore comply with Policy DMHB 16 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021). 7.54 In terms of external amenity space, Policy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) states that applications for residential development should provide adequate levels of private, well designed and located amenity space. 7.55 There are no specific private amenity space standards for C2 Uses in the Local Plan. However, given that this form of residential accommodation would be a primary residence for children, it would be important to provide sufficient private outdoor amenity space. In this instance, the existing rear garden is significant in size being over 300 sqm in area. This would be well over the 100 sqm of private amenity space which would ordinarily be required for residential dwellings with 4 bedrooms and over. As such, the overall quantum of the private amenity space would be considered acceptable for the level of occupancy , providing a good level of private amenity space. 7.56 Overall, the standards of accommodation are acceptable given the internal layout, private amenity space and locatio n, which is within reasonable walking distance of public transit, other green spaces and local services . The level of care itself would be subject to separate controls and regulation outside of the planning system , expanded upon below. From a planning perspective, the proposal would comply with the objectives of the Development Plan with regard to the living environment of future occupiers. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Parking and Highways Matters 7.57 Policy TR6 4 of the NPPF (2026) states that “development proposals should be refused if they would have a severe adverse impact on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion, including cumulative impacts), or an unacceptable impact on highway safety; taking into account any mitigation measures proposed”. 7.58 The application site is located in a residential context, next to a primary school. In the vicinity, there is a mix of unrestricted areas and parking controls, including an adjacent school safety zone, double yellow lines and single yellow line restrictions fronting the address operating from Monday to Friday – 8am to 5pm. 7.59 The site exhibits a public transport a ccessibility level (PTAL) rating of 2, suggesting an element of dependency on the use of private motor transport to and from the site. Notwithstanding, it is situated in relative proximity of Northwood London Underground (LU) station (approximately 15- minute walk) and local bus routes (the closest bus stop being approximately 2-minute walk). Parking 7.60 Policy DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) states that new deve lopment will only be permitted where it accords with the Council's adopted parking standards, unless it can be demonstrated that a deviation from the standard would not result in a deleterious impact on the surrounding road network. 7.61 There is no prescriptive overriding parking standard for this use type within the London Plan (2021), hence the parking standards as described in the Local Plan would take precedent. 7.62 Table 1(b) within the Hillingdon Loc al Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) states that, for care homes, the parking standard requires appraisal either by virtue of a Transport Assessment or 1 space per 4 dwelling units/occupants (with a minimum of 2 spaces), plus 1 warden space. When applying the latter standard, on the basis of four residents, this would therefore equate to a requirement of a maximum of 3 off-street parking spaces. 7.63 The existing site has off-street parking for 3 vehicles (three on the driveway), which would satisfy the parking requirem ent, however the current layout would not allow for each parking space to be accessed freely, resulting in inconvenience. 7.64 A parking plan has subsequently been submitted, showing that the existing hardstanding to the front of the property would be enlarged as part of the proposal. The proposed parking plan shows that the site frontage would continue to accommodate three vehicles, however each space would now be freely Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press accessible from one another, whilst the sweep path analysis plans demonstrates that each space could be safely accessed via both forward and reversing manoeuvres contained within the site frontage. 7.65 In providing three independently accessible off-street parking spaces, the proposal would comply with the Council’s parking standards for this type of use and thereby conform to Policy DMT 6. 7.66 The proposed care home would have a maximum of four staff on site at any one time. Whilst it is recognised that the three proposed parking spaces would not accommodate four staff vehicles simultan eously, should every member of staff drive to work, the number of staff pr esent does not necessarily equate to the number of vehicles requiring a space – whilst as above, the three spaces proposed would fully comply with the Council’s parking standards for this use class. 7.67 Additionally, the Highways Officer has considered the scale of the use, its likely travel demand and the parking restrictions on surrounding roads and does not anticipate a material increase in local pa rking pressure. A staff travel plan is recommended to encourage travel by means other than private car. The Highways Officer also considers that, give n the relatively small scale of the proposed care home, associated vehicle movements would not materially affect traffic conditions or pedestrian safety, including in the vicinity of the neighbouring school. Subject to ensuring the proposed parking layout is installed prior to the first us e of the development, and the submission of a staff travel plan, the proposed parking arrangement is considered to be acceptable in highways terms. Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCPs) 7.68 In accordance with Policy DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two -

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Ed Maddern 12444/APP/2026/747 Date Application Valid: 22.04.2026 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 16.10.2026 Application Type: Householder Ward: Northwood Hills Applicant: Mr Patel Site Address: 15 Woodside Road, Northwood, HA6 3QE Proposal: Erection of a single storey rear extension and creation of basement level, with associated works. 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 – 14th October 2026 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 proposes a single-storey rear extension with a basement to number 15 Woodside Road. The application is brought forward to Committee due to a Petition received which raised concerns regarding the impact of the basement on the protected tree within the rear garden and the potential implications of flooding within the area. 1.2 The main planning considerations for a development of this nature are impacts to residential amenities, design impacts (inclusive of heritage), highways, trees, and drainage. 1.3 The single storey extension is situated to the rear and is considered acceptable in terms of size, scale and design. It would maintain a subordinate design in the context of the existing dwelli ng and the prevailing local character. Cumulatively, the proposed extensions (including basement) are considered to comply with the objectives of the relevant planning policies and the proposal would not give rise to any significant harm to the character and appearance of the host dwelling, street scene or Area of Special Local Character in which the site is situated. 1.4 The proposal would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenity and would not adversely affect highway safety, or cause harm in other respects. 1.5 As part of the development, a basement is proposed beneath the rear extension, extending partially beneath the existing dwelling and rear garden. A Basement Impact Assessment has been submitted in support of the application, together with supporting drainage information. The Council’s Flood Officer has reviewed the proposals and recommended additional mitigation measures, including the incorporation of a rainwater harvesti ng system. The submitted plans have subsequently been amended to incorporate these measures and compliance would be secured by conditions. Subject to these safeguards, the proposed development is not considered to give rise to an unacceptable risk of flooding or drainage impacts. 1.6 The Council’s Tree Officer has also reviewed the proposed basement works in the context of the existing garden tree. Having regard to the position and extent of the basement excavation, the Tree Officer is satisfied that the works would not result in unacceptable harm to the health or long-term retention of the protected tree. Appropriate tree protection conditions would be secured during construction phase. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 1.7 Due regard has been given to local resid ents’ objections, including the petition against the application, however it is conc luded that the proposal complies with the Development Plan and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. 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 application site consists of an ex isting two storey detached dwelling to the western side of Woodside Road, with a well landscaped rear garden and a large hard-surfaced front driveway. 2.2 The surrounding area is residential and consists of large, detached dwellings within generous plots of varying scale, desig n, and character. The property lies within Gatehill Farm Estate Area of Special Local Character. It is noted that there is mature landscaped garden situated to th e rear of the site with several large protected trees of value including a category B tree. The site is situated within Flood Zone 1 an d also within a Critical Drainage Area. There are no other constraints on the site. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Image of the Application Property Figure 3: Existing rear elevation Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3 Proposal 3.1 The proposed development consists of the erection of a single storey rear extension and creation of basement level, with associated works. 3.2 The proposed single storey rear extension would project out from the southern flank wall measuring (5m out from this wall) and infilling an area between the existing reception room and the kitchen. The width would measure approximately 7.6m with the extension protecting a pproximately 3m in depth beyond the kitchen/dining rear wall. It would be finished with a hipped style roof with a maximum height of 3.5m above finished ground level. 3.3 The proposed basement room would be partially situated under the existing dwelling, proposed extension and partially under the existing patio area. In total, it would measure 7m in depth (approximately 1.6m in depth beyond the proposed extension ), 11m in width. The level of excavation would extend approximately 3.3m below ground level to allow for foundations and floor to ceiling height. The basement would provide an incidental room associated with the dwelling (cinema). Figure 4: Proposed Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 5: Proposed rear elevation showing single storey extension and basement Figure 6: Proposed flank elevation showing extension and basement in red Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Proposed ground floor plan showing rear extension in red Figure 8: Proposed basement floor plan 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 12444/APP/2020/782 (Lawful certificate) – Two detached outbuildings Refused – Dismissed at appeal 4.3 12444/APP/2019/3060 (Lawful certificate) – Two detached outbuildings Refused 4.4 12444/APP/2000/2253 – Erection of a two- storey rear extension, single storey side and rear extension. (Refused 21/12/01) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 4.5 12444/APP/2001/1592 – Erection of two storey side and rear extensions together with conversion of roof space to form a habitable room and installation of front and rear dormer windows. (Allowed at appeal). 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4, paragraph 1, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states: “1. When preparing and considering development proposals, relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to: a. The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); b. The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objection s, the greater the weight that may be given); and c. The degree of compliance of the relevant policies in the emerging plan with the policies for plan -making in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them).” Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.3 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replacing the previous version of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.4 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Nine neighbouring properties were consulted on 29 th April 2026. A petition was received with 42 valid signatures. Comments were also received from Gatehill Northwood Hills, and Northwood Residents Associations. 6.2 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 1 (below). Consultee responses re ceived are summarised in Table 2 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Table 1: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response A Petition in objection was received with 21 valid signatures. Concerns regarding the impact of the proposed basement excavation on the mature eucalyptus tree, including potential damage to its root system, effects on neighbouring land, and the contribution the tree makes to the character of the Area of Special Local Character. The Tree Officer has reviewed the Tree Survey and is satisfied that the works to create a basement would not cause any concerns to the long- term future of the protected tree. Conditions are recommended to protect the root areas of the tree. This is discussed within paragraphs 7.45 -7.54 of this report. Concerns relating to flood risk, groundwater, surface water drainage and the site's location within a Critical Drainage Area, including the absence of detailed mitigation measures and the potential for increased runoff onto neighbouring properties. The Flood Officer had reviewed the application and requested further mitigations works which have been included in the additional plans received. These include rainwater harvesting system No objections subject to conditions. This is addressed at paragraphs 7.55 -7.63 of the report. Concerns regarding the lack of landscaping proposals, including the extent of hard surfacing and the potential need for permeable surfacing and soft landscaping above the proposed basement structure. The proposed basement would be located predominantly beneath the existing dwelling and proposed extension, with only a limited projection beneath an area of existing hardstanding. It would therefore not result in the loss of existing soft landscaping, and the site would retain a generous level of established soft landscaping. Additional landscaping is not considered necessary. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Flood and drainage matters have been considered separately by the Council’s Flood and Water Management Officer, with appropriate mitigation measures incorporated and/or secured by condition. A response was also received by Northwood Residents’ Association. Concerns regarding the adequacy of the submitted Flood Risk Assessment, particularly its failure to address evidence from a neighbouring property experiencing standing water during periods of rainfall and the potential flood risk implications of the proposed basement development. This is addressed at paragraphs 7.55-7.63 of the report. Concerns regarding the potential impact of the proposed basement excavation on the mature eucalyptus tree adjacent to the boundary with No. 13, including possible damage to its root system and the long -term health and stability of the tree and its contribution to the Area of Special Local Character. This is addressed at paragraphs 7.45-7.54 of the report. Objection to the proposed basement element of the development and the associated impacts arising from its construction. Structural matters are address within the principle section of the report at paragraphs 7.4 -7.9 and also at paragraphs 7.64- 7.66. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press A response was also received by Gatehill Residents’ Association. Concerns that the submitted groundwater investigation is insufficient to fully understand the groundwater conditions at the site and the potential implications for neighbouring properties. An additional drainage plan and harvesting system was provided which has been further reviewed by the Flood Officer. The response recommended 2 conditions which would ensure that the basement would not lead to additional flood issues. Concerns regarding the lack of details relating to landscaping proposals above the basement structure, including the absence of permeable surfacing and soft landscaping measures to assist with drainage. The proposed basement would be located predominantly beneath the existing dwelling and proposed extension, with only a limited projection beneath an area of existing hardstanding. It would therefore not result in the loss of existing soft landscaping, and the site would retain a generous level of established soft landscaping. Additional landscaping is not considered necessary. Flood and drainage matters have been considered separately by the Council’s Flood and Water Management Officer, with appropriate mitigation measures incorporated and/or secured by condition. Concerns regarding the potential impact of the basement excavation on the mature eucalyptus tree, including possible damage to the root system and the risk of harm to neighbouring property should the tree's stability This is addressed at paragraphs 7.45-7.54 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press be affected. The tree which contributes positively to the character and appearance of the Gatehill Estate Area of Special Local Character Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Internal Consultation Conservation Officer Response received to state no comment on the design of the development. Noted. Tree Officer Following the submission of the Arboricultural method statement in relation to trees (Section 7.3 of Basement Impact Assessment, Rev. C2), no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions being attached to any approval of permission in respect of adherence to the statement and tree protection measu res. This is addressed at paragraphs 7.45-7.54 Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) Commented to recommend further information to be submitted which: - Provides a drainage plan to confirm the proposed drainage layout, including the rainwater harvesting tank and the proposed point of discharge. - Provides a drawing demonstrating the direction of exceedance flow routes. Further details which included a drainage plan and harvesting tank were submitted by the applicant. Following receipt of these additional plans, a further consultation was undertake n. The Flood Officer confirmed that the scheme was acceptable subject to conditions securing the finer details of the sustainable drainage system including maintenance. A Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press further condition to secure details to demonstrate the drainage scheme for the site has been completed prior to the development occupation. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 For the purposes of the NPPF (2026), the application site is located within a settlement. Accordingly, the proposal requires to be assessed against Policies S3 and S4 of the Framework. Policy S4 states that development proposals within settlements should be approved unless the benefits of doing so would be substantially outweighed by any adverse effects when assessed against the national decision-making policies of the Framework 7.2 Policies DMHB 11 and DMHD 12 states that new development proposals should ensure that development contributes positively to the built environment and enhances the character and quality of places in Hillingdon and improve the quality of streets. Policy DMHB 5 seeks to prot ect the unique character and appearance of Areas of Special Local Character. 7.3 The Gatehill Farm Estate Area of Special Local Character is a non-designated heritage asset. The existing property is not a statutory listed building, nor is it a locally listed building. The design section of the report deals with this in more detail however in the general the level of development is modest in overall scale and proportionate to the site curtilage. Its location to the rear of the site also ensure that the impact on the Area of Special Local Character is minimised. Principle of the Basement extension 7.4 The proposal includes the excavation and formation of a single basement level to the rear of the dwelling. The basement would extend partly beneath the existing dwelling/proposed single -storey rear extension and partly beneath the rear garden/hardstanding. The basement would accommodate a cinema room accessed internally from the dwelli ng and would therefore remain wholly ancillary to the residential use of the property. 7.5 Policy DMHD 3 of the Hi llingdon Local Plan: Part Two – Development Management Policies (2020) relate s specifically to basement and other underground development. The policy does not preclude basement development in principle or esta blish a prescribed maximum basement Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press floorspace. Rather, proposals are required to demonstrate that they would safeguard the structural stability of the existing and neighbouring buildings, avoid unacceptable impacts upon drainage and groundwater conditions, protect neighbouring amenity and trees and landscaping, and preserve the character and appearance of the site and surrounding area. Given the location of the basement, it would not cause any detrimental impact on the neighbours amenity in terms of noise and disturbance. 7.6 The proposed basement would be wholly subterranean and, notwithstanding its footprint extending beyond that of the existing dwelling and beneath part of the rear garden, would have limited visual presence once the development is completed. Furthermore, the accommodation would be ancillary to the existing dwelling and would not result in the creation of a separate residential unit. Accordingly, no objection is raised to the principle of providing basement accommodation in this location. 7.7 The detailed acceptability of the basement is nevertheless dependent upon compliance with the relevant criteria of Policy DMHD 3. As set out in later sections of the report, a Basement Impact Assessment (BIA) has been submitted which has been produced by a suitably qualified engineer. The detail within the assessment does address issues of structural stability, groundwater and drainage, flood risk and the potential implications for existing trees and landscaping are considered separately within this report. 7.8 In terms of the detailed structural design and construction of the basement, this is principally controlled through the separate Building Regulations legislation. Were the basement to be approved through the planning process, a separate Building Regs application would be required which would further scrutinise the structural integrity of the basement under Part A (Structure) and Part C ( Site preparation and resistance to contaminants and moisture) of the Building Control Regulations. An informative is recommended to advise the applicant accordingly. 7.9 As such, the principle of development is supported by nat ional, regional and local planning policies, subject to the considerations set out below. Design / Impact on the Area of Special Local Character 7.10 Policy BE1 (Built Environment) of The Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One Strategic Policies (2012) seeks a quality of design in all new development 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 improve the quality of the public realm and respect local character 7.11 Policy DMHB 11 (Design of New Development) of Hill ingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) advises that all development will be required to be designed to the highest standards and incorporate principles of good design. It should take into account aspects including the scale of the development considering the height, mass and bulk of adjacent structures; Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press building plot sizes and established street patterns; building lines and streetscape rhythm and landscaping. It should also not have an adverse impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. 7.12 Policy DMHD 1 (Alterations and Extensions to Residential Dwellings) requires that alterations and extension of dwellings would not have an adverse cumulative impact on the character and appearance of the street scene and should appear subordinate to the main dwelling. It also requires that there is no unacceptable loss of outlook to neighbouring occupiers. 7.13 With regard to single storey rear extension Policy DMHD 1 states the following: i) single storey rear extensions on terraced or semi-detached houses with a plot width of 5 metres or less should not exce ed 3.3 metres in depth or 3.6 metres where the plot width is 5 metres or more; ii) single storey rear extensions to detached houses with a plot width of 5 metres or more should not exceed 4.0 metres in depth; iii) flat roofed single storey extensions should not exceed 3.0 metres in height and any pitched or sloping roofs should not exceed 3.4 metres in height, measured from ground level; iv) balconies or access to flat roofs which result in loss of privacy to nearby dwellings or gardens will not be permitted. 7.14 The development represents an extension to a detached dwelling on a large plot which would extend 5.0 metres from the existing part of the rear wall of the dwelling. It has a crown roof under 3.4 metres in height and does not include a balcony. The proposal therefore complies with all points of DMHD1 and would not be considered to cause any significant harm to this regard. 7.15 The existing building is a large, detached, two-storey dwelling on a spacious plot. The site also includes a large garden. Given the small scale of the development proposal, it is considered that the single-storey extension would be clearly visually subordinate to the main dwelling. The form of the proposed extension assimilates with the angles and building lines of the existing dwelling well, ensuring that there is no harm to th e design of the original dwelling. The angle and form of the roof pitch is also in keeping with the main building. The materials are similar in appearance to that of the main dwelling. 7.16 The proposed extension has been designed as a clearly subordinate addition to the host dwelling. Its single-storey form, limited projection and positioning to the rear ensure that the established two -storey scale, form and architectural composition of the original dwelling would remain readily identifiable and visually dominant. The extension responds to the angular form of the existing building rather than introducing an unrelated form of development, while its crown roof limits its overall bulk and visual prominence when viewed from the surrounding garden and neighbouring properties. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 9: Proposed development shown (in red) is proportionate to the rear garden 7.17 Furthermore, the extension would be cont ained within a substantial residential plot and would retain a generous rear garden around and beyond the development. This is demonstrated with in figure 9 above. The existing rear garden is generous in overall size with a length of over 30m and a width of 29m. This would be approximately 900sqm in overall area. The overall footprint of the extension/basement would encroach into a small proportion of this garden. In percentage terms this level of devel opment would amount to approximately 8-10% of the garden area. 7.18 Consequently, the proposal would not result in an excessive or cramped form of development, nor would it materially alter the spacious relationship between the dwelling and its plot. Its location predominant ly to the rear also means that the established appearance of the dwelling within the street scene would remain largely unchanged. Basement (Design) 7.19 As highlighted earlier in the report, the proposal also includes the formation of a basement extending beneath part of the existing dwelling, the proposed rear extension and a limited area beyond the building footprint. The basement would measure approximately 7 metres in depth by 11 metres in width and would involve excavation to a depth of approximately 3.3 metres below ground level. 7.20 In considering the principle of the basement, regard has been given to its scale and extent in the context of the application site as a whole. The basement would Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press be concentrated in close proximity to the existing dwelling and proposed extension and would occupy only a relative ly limited proportion of the overall garden area. A substantial area of rear garden would remain unaffected by the subterranean development. Accordingly, the basement would not represent a disproportionate form of development relative to the size of the plot, nor would it undermine the spacious and landscaped character of the site. 7.21 Furthermore, given its subterranean nature, the basement would have no visual impact above ground as there are no lightwells included within the application. It would not materially increase the perceived scale or bulk of the dwelling when viewed from within the site, neighbouring pr operties or the wider Gatehill Farm Estate Area of Special Local Character. The proposal would therefore retain the spacious relationship between the dwelling, its garden and surrounding development. 7.22 The potential effects arising from the excavation itself, including matters relating to ground conditions, land stability, drainage and surrounding features, are considered separately through the submitted Basement Impact Assessment and the relevant technical assessments. 7.23 The scale, design, and materials are all therefore considered to be sympathetic to the main dwelling and the immediate setting in respect of their character and appearance. It is considered that the proposal would not cause any harm to visual amenity in line with Policies BE1 and DMHB11 as set out above. Heritage 7.24 The application site lies within the Gat ehill Farm Estate Area of Special Local Character (ASLC). This area consists of primarily large detached dwellings on spacious plots, with various age, character and design. Most dwellings are of a red-brick finish, however, some render is seen within the area, as well as hanging tiles. Pitched roofs are prevalent, though there are examples of gables, hipped roofs, some flat -roof extensions, and several dormers. Ultimately, the character and appearance of the area is mixed, though mature vegetation and significant trees are seen throughout the ASLC. 7.25 Policy DMHB 5 of Hillingdo n Local Plan: Part Two aims to protect ASLCs. It states: A) Within Areas of Special Local Character, new development should reflect the character of the area and its original layout. Alterations should respect the established scale, building lines, height, design and materials of the area. B) Extensions to dwellings should be subservient to, and respect the architectural style of the original buildings and allow sufficient space for appropriate landscaping, particularly between, and in front of, buildings. C) The replacement of buildings which positively contribute to the character and local importance of Areas of Special Local Character will normally be resisted. 7.26 The special local character of the Gatehill Farm Estate derives principally from its spacious, low-density residential character, comprising individually designed Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press detached dwellings set within generous landscaped plots. While there is variation in the architectural form and det ailing of individual properties, the relatively generous separation between buildings, established building lines, verdant garden settings and presence of mature trees and landscaping collectively contribute to the distinctive character and appearance of the ASLC. 7.27 The Council’s Conservation Officer raised no comments on the proposal put forward. As noted in the design evaluation above, the proposed development is minimal scale, particularly in the context of the large host dwelling. It is noted that, owing to the mature vegetation which is prominent in the area, as well as the large buildings, the development would be a significant distance from the road, and screened by the existing large dwellings and trees. 7.28 The extension would be considered subservient to the main dwelling, respecting the architectural style, and would allow sufficient space for any landscaping due to the size of the rear garden as set out above. It is of a scale which represents appropriate development in its setting, has architectural characteristics such as form and massing reflective of the area, and would be highly screened from viewpoints within the public realm due to aforementioned features of the ASLC. 7.29 In this context, the proposed deve lopment would preserve these defining characteristics. The extension would remain subordinate to the dwelling, would be largely contained to the rear of the property and would not materially affect the established building line or spacious relationship between properties. 7.30 Importantly, sufficient garden and landscaped space would be retained such that the verdant and spacious character of the plot, and its contribution to the wider ASLC of Special Local Character, would continue to be appreciated. It is considered that the proposal complies with Policy DMHB 5 to this regard. Residential Amenity 7.31 Polices DMHB 11 and DMHD 1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) seek to ensure that development proposals do not adversely impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. 7.32 The closest dwelling to the proposed de velopment is no. 13 Woodside Road. This dwelling lies approximately 1 me tre from the boundary. The closest habitable room at this dwelling to the application site is that of the kitchen to the northern corner, the mid-point of which is around 3.2 metres from the boundary with the application site. The proposed extension is approximately 1.1 metres away from the same boundary. 7.33 The proposed extension would project past a 45-degree line taken from this closest habitable room window at ground -floor level. The current dwelling crossing this 45 -degree line, the single- storey nature and sloping roof of the development away from the boundary, and the existing mature tree line between the properties, are all factors which mitigate any significant harm caused by this Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press crossing of the 45-degree line. Given the existing vegetation on the neighbours side, it would largely screen the extension from their garden. 7.34 It is not considered that the pr oposed development would cause any unacceptable level of harm to the residentia l amenities of the current or future occupiers of the neighbouring dwelling at 13 Woodside Road. 7.35 The rear garden of the dwelling at the application site is approximately 30 metres from the closest point of the existing rear wall. The northern site boundary is approximately 17 metres from the proposed extension. All sides of the boundary to the garden of the application site are bound by mature vegetation and dense tree lines. It is therefore considered that any other dwellings are of a distance from the development, together with significant levels of screening, which would allow for any impacts to be concluded as insignificant to this regard also. 7.36 The development is considered to comply with the aims of Policies DMHB 11 and DMHD 1 to this regard. Quality of Residential Accommodation 7.37 Policy DMHB 16 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two states that all housing development should have an adequate prov ision of internal space in order to provide an appropriate living environment. 7.38 The proposed development consists of a basement level and a ground-floor level. The basement is annotated on the proposed drawings as a cinema room, with a reception room on the ground floor. The cinema room measures approximately 49sqm, and the reception room approximately 32sqm. Both rooms accommodated within the proposed extension are a sufficient size for their proposed uses. In the context of t he properties within this local area, the additional floorspace is also proportionate and as highlighted earlier in the report would be less than 10% of the garden. 7.39 Whilst the cinema room is a habitable space, and therefore typically requiring light and outlook, the specific proposed use is noted. A cinema room would not generally be expected to be provided with light and outlook due to the typical requirement of the room be ing dark and focus being on the screen. It is also noted here that the existing dwelling accommodates a vast number of habitable spaces with sufficient light and outlook and therefore provides the ability of the occupiers to utilise these other rooms for such purposes. It is thus deemed acceptable that the basement level should be afforded no light and outlook. 7.40 The ground floor room is proposed to be a reception room with adequate light and outlook provided by the bifold doors to the rear elevation. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Highways and Parking 7.41 The proposed development would not cause any impact on highway safety, nor parking. 7.42 Policy DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020) states that development proposals must comply with the parking standards outlined in Appendix C Table 1 in order to facilitate sustainable development and address issues relating to congestion and amenity. 7.43 The table demonstrates that a dwelling of this scale requires 2 no. Parking spaces – a requirement which is unchanged due to the development. It is clear from the drawings provided that two spaces can adequately be accommodated. There are also no changes to access, and subsequently no additional issues surrounding highway safety. 7.44 Given the nature of the proposed wo rks, including the excavation and construction associated with the basement, it is considered appropriate to secure a Construction Management Plan by condition. This would ensure that construction activities, including the movement of construction vehicles, storage of materials, removal of excavated material and measures to prevent mud and debris being deposited on the public highway, are appropriately managed so as to minimise disruption and safeguard highway safety. Overall the proposal is in line with Policy DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two, and therefore acceptable to this regard. Trees and Landscaping 7.45 Policy DMHB 14 of Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two aims to protect existing trees. It is also noted here that the development site is within a Tree Preservation Area, and thus the trees must be adequately protected. 7.46 There are several trees within the applic ation site. Most notably, a Category B Eucalyptus tree (T1) and a Category C Sycamore tree (T2) adjacent to the boundary of the property with no. 13 Woodside Road. The trunks of these trees are adjacent to the patio immediately to the rear of the dwelling. The Eucalyptus Tree is of great value rising to a height of 26m (see image 9 below), with visibility from the wider local area. It would therefore be important to ensure its long term future. 7.47 Given their locations, these specific tree s, therefore, have the potential to be affected by the construction of the proposed development. Particular regard should be paid to the Root Protection Area (RPA) of the trees to ensure that roots are not damaged through excavation works during construction 7.48 An arboricultural report was submitted with the application to deal with this issue. This concludes (6.7) “The area in question currently exists as a patio and is a Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press well-engineered structure with an assumed sub base in excess of 300mm... given the existing patio and retaining wall, it is highly unlikely there are any significant roots from this tree in the area where the new basement will sit.” It is also claimed that the basement will encroach on the RPA by 3%. Figure 10: Photograph showing the pr otected Eucalyptus tree along the boundary with No 13 Woodside Road. 7.49 This 3% figure is very low, thus togeth er with the existence of the built development of this patio and retaining wall, the development should not damage any significant tree roots and therefore would be unlikely to impact on the overall health and integrity of the tree. 7.50 The Council’s Tree Officer for the application agrees that, taking this into account, “it is unlikely there are any signif icant roots within the area the (proposed) basement outline is.” 7.51 There were, however, concerns regar ding the construction methods of the basement. As such, an arboricultural method statement was requested by the LPA, detailing how the tree will be protected, specifically in relation to the construction of the basement. 7.52 In response, further technical information was provided regarding the proposed method of basement construction. The ground conditions comprise well- Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press consolidated London Clay, which is considered suitable for vertically supported excavation. The basement wall adjacent to the protected tree would be constructed using a sequential ‘hit-and-miss’ method with trench sheeting. This would allow the excavation to be contained within the line of the proposed basement wall, without the need for battered or open-cut excavation towards the tree. Accordingly, there would be no additional over-dig into the Root Protection Area (RPA) during construction. These measures have subsequently been incorporated into the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement. 7.53 The Council’s Tree Officer has reviewed the additional information and raises no objection to the development, subject to a condition requiring the works to be undertaken in accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan. A further condition has been recommended whereby works to the basement should cease immed iately in the event any significant tree roots are encountered. In this instance, further tree protection measures would need to be submitted to the LPA in consultation with the Tree Officer. Subject to compliance with these measures, it is considered that the basement can be constructed without unacceptable harm to the health, stability or long- term retention of the protected tree. 7.54 It is deemed that subject to condition, the protected trees will be adequately maintained following the development, and the proposal complies with Policy DMHB 14 as set out above to this regard. Drainage/Flooding 7.55 Policies DMEI 9 and DMEI 10 of Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two aim to manage impacts of flood risk, water management, efficiency, and quality. Policy DMHD 3 states that when determining proposals for basement and other underground development, the Council require an assessment of the scheme’s impact on drainage, flooding, groundwater conditions and structural stability. Information to this regard was provided by the appl icant in the form of a Basement Impact Assessment (BIA). 7.56 The site lies within Flood Zone 1 which is the lowest category of flood risk. This is land with less than a 0.1% of river or sea flooding which represents less than 1 in 1000 risk. It is however noted that the site is within a Critical Drainage Area whereby there has been particular problems to surface water runoff and drainage infrastructure. 7.57 Comments received through public consultation raised concern over flood risk. Specifically, this related to flooding of the property adjacent to the proposed development due to an apparent existing trend of surface water flooding within the garden. As such, whilst it is not a st atutory requirement for development of this scale and location, a comment from the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) was requested in connection with the application. 7.58 LLFA reviewed the BIA and requested further information in respect of flooding. This was for information which: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - Provides a drainage plan to confirm the proposed drainage layout, including the rainwater harvesting tank and the proposed point of discharge. - Provides a drawing demonstrating the direction of exceedance flow routes 7.59 This information was subsequently received by the LPA. “The updated SuDS Layout (C3717-03 Rev. F) identifies an above-ground rainwater harvesting tank adjacent to the extension and identifie s an existing surface water drainage connection to the Thames Water asset within Woodside Road.” Exceedance flow routes have also been demonstrated through the updated Impermeable Areas Plan (C3717-01 Rev. C). 7.60 The additional information has subsequ ently been reviewed by the LLFA. The LLFA notes that the submitted drainage drawing identifies the location of the proposed wall -mounted rainwater harvesting tank and an existing drainage connection within Woodside Road. However, the information does not conclusively demonstrate how the propos ed rainwater harvesting tank at the rear of the property would connect to the existing surface water drainage network. The LLFA therefore recommends that the final drainage arrangement, including confirmation that the rainwa ter harvesting tank can connect to an existing surface water connection, is secured by condition. 7.61 The submitted pre- and post-development impermeable area plans also identify proposed exceedance flow routes. The LLFA notes that the post -development exceedance flow is shown as being directed towards the proposed ground-floor extension. Accordingly, whilst exc eedance flow information has now been provided, the LLFA recommends that a condition secures a final exceedance flow route plan demonstrating that flows would be safely managed within the site and would not increase flood risk to buildings or adjoining land. 7.62 Notwithstanding these outstanding detail ed matters, the LLFA has confirmed that it recommends approval of the application subject to conditions. The recommended conditions require the submission and approval of a detailed sustainable water management scheme prior to commencement of the relevant phase of development. This would secure, amongst other matters, the final surface water discharge arrangements, appropriate SuDS measures, runoff rates and drainage calculations, safe exceedance flow routes and a site-specific ground investigation to verify groundwater conditions and the local water table in relation to the proposed basement. Long-term management and maintenance arrangements would also be secured. 7.63 Officers therefore consider that, notwit hstanding the concerns raised through public consultation regarding localised flooding, the technical evidence does not demonstrate that the proposed development would result in an unacceptable increase in flood risk. In particular, the LLFA records that the site is within Flood Zone 1 and is at low risk of surface water, groundwater and fluvial flooding. The Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press submitted assessment also identifies only a negligible increase in impermeable area, from 895 sq.m to 897 sq.m, while th e LLFA’s assessment concludes that the corresponding increases in runoff rates and volumes would be negligible. Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal is therefore considered acceptable with regard to drainage and flood risk and would accord with Policies DMEI 9 and DMEI 10 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two and Policies SI 12 and SI 13 of the London Plan. Structural Stability 7.64 Policy DMHD 3 requires basement development to demonstrate that it would not adversely affect the structural stability of the application property or neighbouring buildings. A Basement Impact Assessment has been submitted in support of the application, which considers the implicat ions of the proposed excavation and basement construction. 7.65 No evidence has been identified through the assessment to indicate that the basement could not be constructed without unacceptable implications for the structural stability of the existing dwell ing or adjoining proper ties. The detailed structural design, construction method ology and execution of the basement works are matters principally controlled through the Building Regulations and other relevant construction legislation. Accordingly, subject to the appropriate Building Regulations approvals, no objecti on is raised in respect of structural stability for planning purposes. 7.66 Notwithstanding the above, as an additional safeguard, a condition is recommended requiring the basement works to be overseen by the author of the Basement Impact Assessment, or an appropriately qualified structural engineer. This would ensure that the works are undertaken in accordance with the approved assessment and that appropriate professional oversight is maintained throughout the relevant stages of construction. 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. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 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 As from 1 April 2012, all planning appr ovals for schemes with a net additional internal floor area of 100m2 or more wi ll be liable for the Mayoral Community Infrastructure Levy (Mayoral CIL), as legislated by the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and the Community Infrastructure Levy (Amendment) Regulations 2011. The London Borough of Hillingdon is a collecting authority for the Mayor of London and this liability shall be paid to LBH in the first instance. 8.4 In addition, the development represents Chargeable Development under the Hillingdon Community Infrastructure Levy, which came into effect on 1st August 2014. 8.5 Please note, this commentary has been provided for the purpose of assisting in the determination of the planning application only. If approved, the final CIL liability would be set out in the CIL Liability Notice following determination of the application in line with the CIL Regulations. This would be issued following a full review of all the material available to the Council's Planning Obligations Team at that time. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The proposal has been assessed in depth within section 7 of this report. The single storey rear extension is cons idered acceptable in scale and design. It would sit comfortably within the site without causing harm to the Area of Special Local Character. There would be no adverse impact on the adjoining residents in terms of their amenity or highways 9.2 Given the nature of the development which involves a basement, a BIA had been undertaken by a recognised qualitied engi neer. The primary concerns raised though the consultation process related to flood risk and trees. Following the aforementioned further information received in respect of construction methods for the basement, it has been considered that no significant harm to the existing trees would likely occur as a result of the development, subject to those matters recommended to be conditioned. Sufficient information has now also been received to conclude that there is no li kely significant impact on drainage, nor flood risk, subject to a condition in relation to the adherence to the plans submitted 9.3 The proposal is therefore considered to a ccord with the relevant policies of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part One – Strategic Policies (2012), the Hillingdon Local Plan Part Two – Development Management Policies (2020), the London Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press (2021) and the relevant provisions of the NPPF. No material considerations have been identified that would justify a decis ion contrary to the Development Plan. Accordingly, 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 inf ormation) 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 applications 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 10.2 This report has been prepared with reference to the background papers listed below, which have been relied upon to a mate rial extent in its preparation and are available for public inspection, subject to any necessary redaction for exempt or confidential information. 10.3 Internal consultee comments: x Conservation Officer x Tree Officer x Lead Local Flood Authority AAPPENDICES Planning Application 12444/APP/2026/747 Hillingdon Planning Committee - 14th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 12 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. HO1 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. HO2 A Accordance with approved The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out except in complete accordance with the details shown on Drawing Numbers: Location plan: PP-14771726v3 Proposed site plan: 5123 - PL(A) 100 - Rev C Proposed floorplans: 5123 - PL(A) 110 - Rev E Proposed elevations: 5123 - PL(A) 120 - Rev E Proposed drainage plan: C3717-03 Rev. F 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) and Part 2 (2020), and the London Plan (2021). 3. HO4 M Materials The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the application form and approved drawings 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) 4. NONSC C Construction Management Plan Prior to development commencing, a demolition and construction management plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall detail: (i) The phasing of development works Hillingdon Planning Committee - 14th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 12 (ii) The hours during which development works will occur (please refer to informative I15 for maximum permitted working hours). (iii)Measures to prevent mud and dirt tracking onto footways and adjoining roads (including wheel washing facilities). (iv) 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. (vi) 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 DMHB11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) 5 5. NONSC S Sustainable Water Management (Details) Prior to commencement (except for demolition, ground and enabling work) any relevant phase of this 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 in consultation with the relevant stakeholders. The scheme shall clearly demonstrate how it manages water and demonstrate ways of controlling the surface water on site by providing information on: a) Sustainable Drainage features: i. Surface water discharge - the submitted drainage strategy must identify the proposed method and location of discharging collected surface water from the site in accordance with the hierarchy set out in Policy SI 13 of the London Plan (2021). Where the proposal does not utilise the most sustainable solution, justification must be provided. ii. SuDS - the submitted drainage strategy should incorporate Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) elements that are embedded, where practicable, within the landscaping plan for the development. Preference should be given to above-ground SuDS elements that control water at source and provide wider biodiversity, water quality and amenity benefits. iii. Runoff rates - provide the greenfield and proposed runoff rates for a variety of return periods including 1 in 1 year, 1 in 30, 1 in 100, and 1 in 100 plus 40% climate change. Developments should aim to meet greenfield runoff rates unless a suitable justification can be provided. iv. Drainage calculations - include calculations to demonstrate that the volume of storage and size of drainage features provided is adequate to control surface water for a range of storm duration and rainfall intensities for the entire site area for events up to and including the critical 1 in 100 plus 40% climate change rainfall event. v. Exceedance routes - provide a plan showing the route surface water will take through the development for rainfall events exceeding the 1 in 100 year event. The plan shall Hillingdon Planning Committee - 14th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 12 demonstrate that exceedance flows are managed safely on site and do not increase flood risk to buildings or adjacent land. Where it is intended to store water on the ground surface, the maximum extent of overland flooding shall be mapped and the depth of flooding confirmed. Safe access and egress from the site must be demonstrated. vi. A site-specific ground investigation should be undertaken to verify groundwater conditions and confirm the local water table level in relation to the proposed basement. b) Long-term management and maintenance of the drainage system. i. Provide a Management and Maintenance Plan for the drainage system that includes clear plans showing all of the drainage network above and below ground, and identifies the responsibility of different parties for each component of the drainage network. ii. Include details of the necessary inspection regimes and maintenance frequencies. 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 and to ensure the development does not increase flood risk, in compliance with Policy EM6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 (2012), Policy DMEI 9 and DMEI 10 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020), Policies SI 12 and SI 13 of the London Plan (2021), the National Planning Policy Framework (2021); and Planning Practice Guidance (Flood Risk and Coastal Change March 2014). 6 6. NONSC S Sustainable Drainage Scheme Evidence (Details) No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until evidence (photographs and installation contracts) is submitted to demonstrate that the sustainable drainage scheme for the site has been completed in accordance with the submitted details. The sustainable drainage scheme shall be managed and maintained thereafter in accordance with the agreed management and maintenance plan for all of the proposed drainage components. Reason: To comply with the Non-Statutory Technical Standards for Sustainable Drainage Systems, the National Planning Policy Framework (Paragraph 103), the London Plan (Policies SI 12 and SI 13) along with associated guidance to these policies and Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Policy EM6. 7. NONSC A Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan produced by GHA Tree Aboricultural Consultancy reference GHA/DS/160278:26 dated 10th March 2026, including the tree protection measures and methodology for the construction and excavation of the basement. All tree protection measures shall be installed prior to the commencement of the relevant construction works and shall be retained and maintained for the duration of the works in accordance with the approved details. In particular, the excavation and construction of the basement adjacent to the retained tree shall be undertaken in accordance with the methodology specified within the approved Hillingdon Planning Committee - 14th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 12

Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Emilie Bateman 8905/APP/2026/1385 Date Application Valid: 29-06-26 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 22.09.2026 Application Type: Full Ward: Ickenham and South Harefield Applicant: Oracle Global Investments Ltd Site Address: 90 Long Lane, Ickenham Proposal: Demolition of the existing dwellinghouse and the erection of a 9 no. 1, 2 and 3 bed flats with associated parking and amenities. 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 – 14th October 2026 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 Full planning permission is sought for th e demolition of the existing detached dwelling and the erection of a new building, comprising 2x one-bedroom flats, 5x two-bedroom flats and 2x three- bedroom flats, with associated 9 car parking spaces, 20 cycle spaces and amenities. The application site is located within the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. 1.2 The application is presented to Planning Committee following the receipt of two petitions objecting to the proposed development. 1.3 A previous application for a similar dev elopment (ref: 8905/APP/2024/2478) was refused by the Planning Committee in May 2025, citing three reasons for refusal summarised as follows: x Harmful impact on character and appearance of the streetscene and Ickenham Village Conservation Area; x Adverse effects on neighbouring amenity in terms of overbearing impact, harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook; and x Inadequate Fire Safety information. 1.4 The current application seeks to address these three previous reasons for refusal. It is noted that a similar planning application (ref: 8905/APP/2023/2419) was refused by the Planning Committee in Apri l 2024, citing six reasons for refusal, including the three reasons above, plus inappropriate housing mix, highway safety concerns, and loss of valuable trees . 1.5 The proposed housing mix includes 2x three-bedroom units capable of supporting family living, aligning wi th the Hillingdon Local Plan, the London Plan, and the National Planning Policy Framework 2026 (NPPF). The latest revision is an improvement to the previous two refused schemes through reductions in the proposed width, depth and overall massing, alongside amendments to the design of the rear wing and overall appearance and materials. Due to these changes, it is considered that the proposal as am ended would not result in a significant harmful impact on the character, appearan ce, and visual amenities of the street scene and the setting of the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. It is also considered that the scheme as amended would not result in any significant impact to the amenity of surrounding residential properties. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 1.6 The proposal is therefore considered to cause less than substantial harm to the Ickenham Village Conservat ion Area, mainly through changes to its setting. In accordance with Policy HE6 of the NPPF (2026), where harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset is identified, that harm must be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. Significant weight is afforded to the contribution that the proposal makes towards the Borough’s housing supply (a net contribution of 8 residential units). Th is is particularly important because the Council has an evidenced unmet housing need as it cannot currently demonstrate a five -year supply of deliverable housing sites (the most recent position statement published on 1st April 2026 confirmed a 2.5 year supply). The public benefits offered would therefore outweigh the identified ‘less than substantial harm’ to the Conservation Area. 1.7 The proposal would be acceptable in terms of its impact on the public highway as it would generate a limited uplift in vehicle movements. It would also provide acceptable living accommodation and sufficient outdoor amenity space for future residents. 1.8 The proposed development would not impact any significant trees in the locality and would be acceptable in landscaping terms. Furthermore, it would achieve a biodiversity net gain of approximately 15% and would retain the verdant character of the site through tree retention and enhanced landscaping, exceeding the minimum uplift of 10% as required by the Environment Act 2021. 1.9 A revised Fire Statement has been submitted which fully meets the requirements of Policy D12 of the London Plan and is therefore considered to be acceptable. 1.10 Subject to the planning conditions recommended, the proposed development has overcome the previous three reasons for refusal and is considered acceptable with respect to design, heritage, amenity, environmental issues, and transport. 1.11 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 indica te otherwise. For the reasons outlined above and within the main body of the report, the application is considered to comply with the Development Plan. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval, subject to securing the planning conditions set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site, as outlined in red in Figure 1 below, is located on the north- western side of Long Lane, approximately 80m northeast of its junction with Swakeleys Drive. The site comprises a detached inter -war dwelling set within a spacious residential plot, characterised by a substantial front garden, mature landscaping and a deep rear garden. The property is set back from the highway behind a boundary wall and covered entran ce gate, with vegetation along the frontage providing soft screening from the street scene. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 2.2 The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character and forms part of the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. Long Lane is characterised by individually designed detached and semidetached dwellings set within generous plots, with mature landscaping and trees making a significant contribution to the verdant character of the area. Properties are generally set well back from the road behind landscaped front gardens, creating an attractive and spacious street scene. 2.3 The adjoining property to the north-east, No. 88 Long Lane, comprises a recently constructed flatted development, whilst No. 92 Long Lane to the south -west is a detached dwelling of individual architectural interest. Beyond No. 88 lies the Douay Martyrs School Cardinal Hume Campus, which includes a locally listed building. The site contains a number of mature trees which contribute positively to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and the wider street scene. 2.4 The site lies within Flood Zone 1 and has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 3, on a scale of 0 to 6b where 6b is the highest, indicating a moderate accessibility to public transport. The appl ication site is also located within the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. The application site to the rear and the neighbouring property to the rear (known as Dormy House) are also covered by Tree Preservation Orders (TPOs 438 and 482a). Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Image of the Application Property Figure 3: Existing Rear Elevation of the Application Property 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing detached dwellinghouse and the redevelopment of the site to provide a purpose- built residential development comprising 9 self-contained flats, consisting of 2 one- Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press bedroom, 5 two-bedroom and 2 three-bedroom units. The proposal includes associated car parking, cycle storage, refuse and recycling facilities, private and communal amenity space, landscaping and other ancillary works. Figure 4 below shows the proposed site plan of the proposal. 3.2 In particular, the development would be accommodated within a two-storey building with accommodation in the roofspace. The building would measure approximately 18.8m in width, 21.3m in depth at ground floor level, reducing to 19m at upper floor levels, and would have a maximum height of approximately 9.8m. The scheme has been revised from the previous refused proposal through reductions in its width, depth and overall massing, alongside amendments to the design of the rear wing and overall appearance and materials. The proposed appearance, materials and elevations are shown in Figures 6 and 7 below. 3.3 The proposal would provide 9 car parking spaces, including one disabled parking bay, 20 cycle parking spaces, visitor cycle parking, refuse and recycling storage, private amenity space in the form of balconies and terraces, and communal landscaped amenity space. The development would utilise the existing vehicular access from Long Lane and retain a separate pedestrian access. Figure 4: Proposed landscaped Site Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 5: Proposed floor plans (ground, first and roof plans) Figure 6: 3D of front elevation Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Existing & Proposed Street scenes 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 Planning application reference 8905/APP/2024/2478 is of particular note, given the similarities. The application was refused in May 2025 ( Demolition of the existing detached, single dwelling and the erection of a building consisting of 4 no. three-bed flats and 5 no. two- bedroom flats, with associated parking and amenities) for the following reasons: 1. ‘The proposed development, by reason of its siting, size, width, scale, massing and overall design would result in an incongruous visually prominent form of development that would fail to harmonise with the character and architectural composition of the su rrounding properties, resulting in a visually dominant building which would be detrimental to the character, appearance and visual amenity of the street scene and the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press setting of Ickenham Village Conservation Area. The limited public benefits would not outweigh the harm to the I ckenham Village Conservation Area. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies BE1 and HE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One - Strategic Policies (2012), Policies DMHB 1, DMHB 4, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two – Development Management Policies (2020), Policies HC1, D1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan (2021) and Chapters 12 and 16 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2024). 2. Due to its depth, scale, bulk, siting and overall design, the proposed development would have an overbearing impact on the adjoining residents leading to a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook to the residents of Nos 88 and 92 Long Lane. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One - Strategic Policies (2012), Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2024). 3. The proposal fails to demonstrate through a comprehensive fire statement how the development would achieve the highest standards of fire safety in regard to its design in incorporating appropriate features which reduce the risk to life in the event of a fire, its construction methods, means of escape, strategy of evacuation and providing suitable access and equipment for firefighting appropriate for the si ze and residential nature of the development. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies D5 and D12 of the London Plan (2021) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2024).’ 4.3 The current application seeks to overcome these three reasons for refusal. 4.4 Planning application reference 8905/APP/2023/ 2419 is also of note, as it is the first refusal of a similar scheme. The application was refused in April 2024 (Demolition of the existing detached, single dwelling and the erection of a building consisting of 9 no.two -bedroom flats, with associated parking and amenities) for the following reasons: 1. ‘The proposed development fails to provide any three or more bedroom (family sized) units. Robust justification has not been provided to demonstrate that the provision of family sized units would be unsuitable or unviable. The proposal would therefore not provide a suitable mix of housing to support sustainable, inclusive and mixed communities contrary to Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020), Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2023). 2. The proposed development, by reason of its siting, size, width, scale, massing and overall design would result in an incongruous visually prominent form of development that would fail to harmonise with the character and architectural composit ion of the surrounding properties, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press resulting in a visually dominant building which would be detrimental to the character, appearance and visual amenity of the street scene and the setting of Ickenham Village Conservation Area. The proposal therefore conflicts with Policies BE1 and HE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One - Strategic Policies (2012), Policies DMHB 1, DMHB 4, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), Policies HC1, D1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan (2021) and the NPPF (2023). 3. Due to its depth, scale, bulk, siting and overall design, the proposed development would have an overbearing impact on the adjoining residents leading to a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook to the residents of Nos 88 and 92 Long Lane. Furtherm ore, in the absence of a BRE daylight and sunlight assessment the application has failed to demonstrate that the proposed development would not lead to a loss of light or significant overshadowing to both adjoining neighbouring properties. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One Strategic Policies (2012), Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2023). 4. The proposal would fail to prov ide acceptable pedestrian, cycle and vehicular access to the application site which due to the increased number of vehicular movements onto a classified road would result in danger and inconvenience which fails to concur with the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020), Policies DMT 1, DMT 2 and DMT 6 and Policies T2, T4 and T5 of the London Plan (2021) and NPPF (2023). The application also fails to concur with the Mayor's Transport Strategy which aims to encourage cycling, walking and the use of public transport. 5. The application has failed to justify the need for the layout of development which includes the removal of category A and B value trees. Accordingly, the development would result in adverse and irreversible impacts to landscaping, trees, biodiversity or ot her natural features of merit, detrimental to the visual amenities of the area and Ickenham Village Conservation Area, contrary to paragra ph 136 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2023), Policy G7 of the London Plan (2021), and Policies DMHB 4, DMH B 11, DMHB 12 and DMHB 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020). 6. The proposal fails to demonstrate through a comprehensive fire statement how the development would achieve the highest standards of fire safety in regard to its design in incorporating appropriate features which reduce the risk to life in the event of a fire, its construction methods, means of escape, strategy of evacuation and providing suitable access and equipment for firefighting appropriate for the si ze and residential nature of the development. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policies D5 and Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press D12 of the London Plan (2021) and the National Planning Policy Framework (2023).’ 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to t he consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4, paragraph 1, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states: “1. When preparing and considering development proposals, relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to: a. The stage of preparation of the em erging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); b. The extent to which there are unresolve d objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and c. The degree of compliance of the relevant policies in the emerging plan with the policies for plan-making in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them).” Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.3 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replaci ng the previous version of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.4 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 A total of 35 no. letters were sent to neighbouring properties on 3rd July 2026, site notices were displayed on 21st July 2026 and an advert was posted in the local paper on 11 th August 2026. The consultation process expired on 1 st September 2026. Two petitions in objection were received; one with 53 valid signatures, from nearby residents, and one with 23 valid signatures, from residents of Long Lane. 5 separate objections were also received from nearby residents. The Ickenham Residents' Association also submitted letters of objection. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 6.2 Representations received in response to the 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 2 Petitions in objection received with 53 and 23 valid signatures. Both Petitions seek refusal of the planning application within Ickenham Village Conservation Area Section 7 of the planning report below seeks to address the planning merits of the case based on the current local and national policies including the recent NPPF changes. The impact on the conservation area is recognised however other aspects of the Development Plan are a consideration including the lack of 5 year housing supply. 5 objections received. The proposal would represent an overdevelopment of the site and an excessive form of development. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.12 to 7.22 of the report. The scale, height, width, bulk and massing of the building would be overwhelming and out of character with the surrounding area. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.12 to 7.22 of the report. Harm to the character and appearance of the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.12 to 7.22 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Loss of privacy and overlooking from windows, balconies and rear -facing openings. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.26 to 7.27 of the report. Overbearing impact, loss of outlook, loss of light and sense of enclosure to neighbouring occupiers, particularly Nos. 88 and 92 Long Lane. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.28 to 7.32 of the report. Increased traffic generation, congestion and parking pressures along Long Lane. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.55 to 7.65 of the report. Highway and pedestrian safety concerns, particularly given the proximity to local schools. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.55 to 7.65 of the report. Concerns regarding the impact on mature trees, Tree Preservation Order trees, ecology and biodiversity. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.66 to 7.70, and Paragraphs 7. 75 to 7.78 of the report. Concerns regarding construction impacts, including damage to neighbouring buildings and tree roots. A Construction Management Plan Condition 4 is recommended as set out in Appendix 1 of the report, and an informative regarding Control of Environmental Nuisance from Construction Work. Noise, disturbance and anti-social behaviour arising from additional occupiers. It has been noted from the comments received that the site had some alleged previous criminal activity. However, this current application does not propose any illegal activities. In terms of security by design, the scheme would create new units thereby improving the security of the site due to the level of presence and surveillance from windows. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press This is likely therefore to reduce any potential antisocial behaviour if the site is occupied. Concerns regarding pressure on local infrastructure and cumulative impacts arising from surrounding developments. This is not a material planning consideration for this application. In the event of an approval, Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) would be applicable. Loss of family housing and inappropriate intensification of the site. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.2 to 7.11 of the report. Potential impact on property values This is not a material planning consideration for this application. Property values are not planning matters. The Ickenham Residents' Association also submitted letters of objection. ‘This is yet another application for this site. Although the configuration of the flats has changed there are still 9 flats proposed. Our previous objections still stand. We are aware that the Inspectorate had removed the 10% rule allowed for flats in residential roads, but it is worrying to think of the extra traffic and parking involved, should this development go ahead especially given the flat development at no. 88. There would be a minimum of 9 cars adding to the traffic congestion, which s already extremely high in Long Lane. We accept that there is a block of flats at no 88 but this was approved despite local objections and the fact that it falls within the The points raised by Ickenham Residents' Association have been noted. Material planning considerations are discussed in the following sections of this report. The 10% rule is addressed in paragraph 7.6 The design and conservation concerns have been address at 7.12-7.22 of this report. Traffic and parking concerns have been addressed at 7.55-7.65 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press conservation area. We strongly object to this application. We will be submitting a petition. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Internal Consultation Conservation Officer Objects to the proposal. Advises that the existing dwelling makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. Whilst the proposal incorporates some Tudor -inspired detailing, the replacement building would be significantly larger in scale, bulk and massing and would detract from the established character of the Conservation Area. The proposal is considered to result in less than substantial harm and refusal is recommended. The Conservation Officer’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Highways Authority No objection subject to conditions relating to cycle parking, a Parking Design and Management Plan and a Construction Management Plan. The Highways Authority’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Please refer to Conditions 4, 8 and 10 as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Air Quality Officer No objection subject to air quality mitigation contribution and conditions to secure control of dust and emissions from construction and demolition, and control of Non-Road Mobile Machinery. The Air Quality Officer’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Please refer to Conditions 4 and 16 as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7 Planning Assessment 7.1 This application is the re-submission of a revised scheme following the previously refused ref: 8905/APP/2024/2478 which related to the d emolition of the existing detached dwelling and the erection of a building, consisting of 4 no. three-bed flats and 5 no. two -bedroom flats, with associated parking and amenities . This application was refused on three grounds; that the proposal would be detrimental to the character, appearance and visual amenity of the street scene and the setting of Ickenham Village Conservation Area , would have an overbearing impact on the adjoining residents , leading to a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook to the residents of Nos 88 and 92 Long Lane, and that was accompanied by inadequate fire safety provision. It will be considered below in order to ascertain whether the previous reasons for refusal have been overcome and against other material planning considerations. Principle of Development Residential Redevelopment 7.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF 2026) requires the Local Planning Authorities to promote an effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, while safeguardin g and improving the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living conditions, in a way that makes as much use as possible of previously developed land. 7.3 The London Plan 2021 encourages intensification and optimising of land subject to justification within the local context. Policies GG2 and H1 of the London Plan support the need for additional residential development within London and also encourage optimising the potential of brownfield sites for residential use, where they are compatible with the surrounding development context. Policy H1 (Housing Growth) of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Plan 1 - Strategic Policies (2012) requires that the borough meets and exceed its minimum strategic dwelling requirement in accordance with other Local Plan policies. The Borough's target was increased as part of the London Plan (2021). 7.4 In line with the NPPF and Policy H1 of the London Plan, the site would represent a suitable site for the delivery of residential development which optimises the potential for housing delivery. Moreover, it is acknowledged that the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five -year supply of deliverable housing sites (the most recent position statement published on 01/04/26 confirmed a 2.5 year supply). This contributes to an evidenced unmet housing need within the Borough. In accordance with Policy HO7 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF - August 2026), substantial weight should be given to the benefits of providing homes that contribute towards meeting identified housing needs. 7.5 For the purposes of the NPPF (2026), the application site is located within a settlement. Accordingly, the proposal requires to be assessed against Policies S3 and S4 of the Framework. Policy S4 states that development proposals within Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press settlements should be approved unless the benefits of doing so would be substantially outweighed by any adverse effects when assessed against the national decision-making policies of the Framework. 7.6 In addition to the above, Policy DMH 4 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) seeks to ensure there is no overconcentration of flat redevelopments within a street with the policy restri cting the number of conversions to no more than ten percent of the properties . It is noted that there is an existing conversion at the neighbouring property at No 88 Long Lane which received planning permission in 2016 for the existing dwelling to be demolished and replaced with flats (ref. 29164/APP/201/4622). A survey of the properties along Long Lane (500m in both directions from the application site) confirms that the majority of properties are dwelling houses, and the level of conv ersions would be below ten percent. As such it would not lead to an overconc entration of flat developments within the area. 7.7 The existing property is greater than 120 sq.m in floorspace and, although this is being replaced, it would still meet that criteria set out for redevelopment of dwellings within Policy DMH 4 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020). Although there would be more than one flat per floor, these are considered to be of suitable quality, and they are designed to provide a high-quality of internal accommodation in accordance with Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021). It is therefore considered that the proposal passes the relevant tests set out in Policy DMH 4 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020). 7.8 The proposal is considered to comply with the Development Plan. Furthermore, when assessed against the national decision -making policies of the Framework taken as a whole, the identified adverse effects would not substantially outweigh the benefits of the development. Significant weight is therefore afforded to the proposal's contribution towards addressing the Borough's identified housing needs . It is therefore considered that the application site lies within an established residential area where residential development is acceptable in principle, subject to all wider implications which are assessed further below. The proposal would result in a net increase of eight residential units and would contribute towards the Borough's housing supply. Housing Mix 7.9 Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021) states that applicants and decision-makers should have regard to the need for additional family housing. Family housing is defined within the glossary of the London P lan (2021) and advises that it must generally, be of a size that has three or more bedrooms. The Secretary of State directed changes to Policy H10 to place greater emphasis on the delivery of new family homes, aiming to reduce the displacement of families from London. These changes were reflected in the final version of the London Plan (2021). Similarly, the adoption of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) marked a significant shift in housing size mix policy, aligning with the strategic focus on meeting identified Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press housing needs. 7.10 Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) states that new developments should provide a mix of housing sizes that reflect the Council's latest evidence of need, including a clear requirement for larger homes, particularly three -bedroom units, as identified in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2016. The proposal is considered to provide an appropriate housing mix, in line with the Council's housing strategy and in compliance with Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) and Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021). 7.11 The proposed housing mix comprises 2 one-bedroom units, 5 two-bedroom units and 2 three-bedroom units. The existing detached dwelling on the site is a family- sized unit, and the inclusion of one additional family unit is therefore welcomed. The overall housing mix would provide a balanced mix of properties suitable for both families and individuals; whilst providing an uplift of an additional 8 homes which allows for an appropriate increase in the density of development. On balance, the proposed mix is considere d acceptable and would broadly accord with Policy DMH2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan and Policy H10 of the London Plan. Design & Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area and Heritage Assets 7.12 Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 places a statutory duty on Local Planning Authorities to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of Conservation Areas when exercising their planning functions. 7.13 Policies D3 of the London Plan (2021), BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 (2012), DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) are all directly relevant to the proposal. In summary, they seek 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 improve the quality of the public realm and respect local character. Policy HE6 of the NPPF (2026), Policy HC1 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy DMHB 1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) state that development proposals are expected to avoid harm to the historic environment. These aims are also supported by the NPPF (2026). 7.14 The application site is located within the Ickenham Village Conservation Area, an area characterised by spacious residential plots, mature landscaping and individually designed detached dwellings set within generous gardens. The established character of this section of Long Lane derives from the appearance of individual buildings and the spacious relationship between them, including the visual gaps, mature landscaping and verdant setting that contribute positively to the significance of the Conservation Area. 7.15 A key characteristic of the site is its position between the neighbouring recent flatted development at No. 88 Long Lane and the detached dwelling at No. 92 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Long Lane. As such, any redevelopment is required to provide an appropriate transition between these very different forms of development. T he current proposal has been revised following the previous refusal via reductions to the overall width (from 19m to 18.8m), depth (from 23.5m to 21.3m) and height/massing of the building (from 10m height to 9.8m height) together with revisions to the rear wing (from 1.2m to 2.4m rear wing steps on each side) and elevational treatment. The proposal would incorporate mock Tudor features to reflect the existing dwelling , the neighbouring flats at No. 88, and the two- storey detached houses on the opposite side of Long Lane. 7.16 The proposed development as amended would be of a similar overall height to No. 88, but when comparing the building/plot width ratio, it would provide less ratio (67%) than No.88 (86%). Therefore, the proposal would be proportionately less wide than No.88 , and the resulting amended scale and massing would , on balance, provide an appropriate transition between the neighbouring developments, without appearing visually dominant within the site. 7.17 Furthermore, the spacious character of this part of Long Lane is reinforced by mature landscaping, visual separation between buildings and the perception of development sitting comfortably within generous plots. The proposal would retain a large front and rear garden and would continue to be well- landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, by retaining a number of trees. The proposal would therefore be well-screened from views from the road and would maintain the sylvan character of the local street scene within this part of the Conservation Area. 7.18 Regarding the revised appearance of the proposal, mock Tudor features are now proposed to reflect the existing dwelling and the neighbouring flats at No. 88, along with two-storey detached houses on the opposite side of Long Lane. The proposed materials would be brick to the ground floor, timber with render to the first floor and horizontal timber banding to the front gable and dormers with red plain clay tiles to match neighbouring buildings. Additional design details would include contrasting lintels and cills, brick plinth and horizontal timber boarding to the first-floor gable and dormer faces. The fenestration on the rear elevation has been simplified and the number of openings in the flank elevation has been significantly reduced compared to the refused scheme (from 9 to 3 openings). 7.19 Taking all the above into consideration, it is concluded that the replacement of the existing dwelling with the proposed amended flatted development would , on balance, not have a significant harmful impact on the character and appearance of the streetscene and the Ickenham Village Conservation Area. The proposal would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the designated heritage asset. 7.20 It is noted that the Council’s Conservation Officer notes that the harm would be less than substantial and at a moderate level, but this would need to be balanced by the officer against the public benefits of the scheme. 7.21 In accordance with Policy HE6 of the NPPF (2026), substantial weight should be given to the conservation of designated heritage assets and any harm to their Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press significance is a matter of considerable importance and weight. Policy HE6 further requires that harm to the significance of a designated heritage asset is weighed against any public benefits resulting from the proposal. The proposal would result in a net increase of 8 residential units and would make a positive contribution towards housing delivery within the Borough . As previously stated, the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five -year supply of deliverable housing sites (the most recent position statement published on 01/04/2026 confirmed a 2.5 year supply) and therefore has an evidenced unm et housing need. Positive weight is therefore afforded to the contribution of the proposal towards meeting the Borough's identified housing needs. 7.22 As a result, the above public benefits are considered to outweigh that harm, and the proposal has therefore overcome the previous design reason for refusal, satisfying the requirements of the NPPF and relevant London Plan heritage policies. Residential Amenity 7.23 Policy DMHB 11 of the Hi llingdon 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. 7.24 Paragraphs 5.38-5.41 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) state that a minimum of 21 metres separation distance between windows of habitable rooms will be required to maintain levels of privacy and to prevent the possibility of overlooking. In addition, the Council will expect new development proposals to carefully consider layout and massing in order to ensure development does not result in an increased sense of enclosure and loss of outlook. The Council will also seek to ensure that the design of new development optimises the levels of daylight and sunlight. 7.25 The nearest neighbouring properties for consideration are No. 88 Long Lane to the north-east and No. 92 Long Lane to the south-west. As previously stated, the current application seeks to address the previous neighbouring impact concerns (overbearing impact, loss of outlook and sense of enclosure ) through reductions in the width, depth and overall bulk of the development, amendments to the rear wing and the submission of a daylight and sunlight assessment. Privacy 7.26 The front elevation windows of the proposed development would front Long Lane, maintaining a separation distance of appr oximately 50 metres from properties opposite. As such, no concerns are raised in relation to overlooking or loss of privacy for those occupiers. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.27 Limited upper-floor side-facing openings are proposed to secondary windows and, where necessary, these are recommended to be secured as obscure-glazed and non-opening below 1.8m by condition 14. Similarly, privacy screening is secured through condition 12 for the balconies. Views from rear- facing windows would broadly replicate the existing situation. Accordingly, the proposal is considered acceptable regarding privacy. Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing 7.28 The application is supported by a Daylight, Sunlight and Overshadowing Assessment prepared in accordance with current BRE guidance. The assessment considers the impact of the development upon neighbouring properties at Nos. 88 and 92 Long Lane. The submitted analysis concludes that all assessed windows meet the relevant BRE criteria in respect of daylight, sunlight and daylight distribution. Furthermore, the assessment concludes that the proposal would not give rise to unacceptable overshadowing of neighbouring gardens. 7.29 It is worth noting that the previous scheme identified minor shortfalls for 4 windows, which have now been resolved as a result of the improved scheme assessed under this current application, 7.30 Given the above, the proposal is considered acceptable regarding daylight, sunlight and overshadowing impacts. Outlook, Sense of Enclosure and Overbearing Impact 7.31 The previous refusal identified that the depth, scale and bulk of the proposed development would result in an overbearing impact upon adjoining occupiers, leading to a harmful sense of enclosure and loss of outlook. 7.32 The relationship with the adjoining properties has improved when compared with the previously refused scheme. The revi sed proposals reduce the depth of the rear projecting element and incorporate a stepped form which lessens the extent to which the development projects beyond the neighbouring building lines. The proposal as amended would be setba ck from No.92’s rear conservatory. Consequently, the degree of enclosure experienced from the rear -facing rooms serving Nos 88 and 92 would be reduced when compared to the previous proposal. Whilst the building would remain a prominent feature when viewed from this neighbouring property, it is acknowledged that the amendments have reduced the degree of harm previously identified and the neighbouring amenity concerns identified under the previous refusal have been overcome. Noise and Disturbance 7.33 The application site is located within an established residential area and would continue to be used for residential purposes. Whilst the proposal would intensify the use of the site, it is not considered that the level of activity generated would Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press result in unacceptable noise or disturbance beyond that normally associated with residential occupation. Any impacts arising during the construction phase would be appropriately mitigated through the recommended Construction Management Plan secured by condition 4. 7.34 Overall, subject to the recommended conditions, it is considered that the proposal would not result in an y significant adverse impact on any adjoining occupiers, in accordance with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020). Quality of Residential Accommodation) Internal Amenity Space 7.35 Policy DMHB 16 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) states that all housing development should have an adequate prov ision of internal space in order to provide an appropriate living environment. 7.36 Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) states that housing development should be of high-quality design and provide adequately sized rooms. Table 3.1 requires the following: - One storey 1-bed 2-person unit: minimum 50 square metres GIA; - One storey 2-bed 4-person unit: minimum 70 square metres GIA; and - One storey 3-bed 4-person unit: minimum 74 square metres GIA. 7.37 The proposed development would provide the following residential accommodation: Flat 1 (2B4P) - 70sqm Flat 2 (2B4P) - 70sqm Flat 3 (3B4P) - 74.4sqm Flat 4 (3B4P) - 74.4sqm Flat 5 (2B4P) - 70sqm Flat 6 (2B4P) - 70sqm Flat 7 (1B2P) - 54.5sqm Flat 8 (1B2P) - 54.5sqm Flat 9 (2B4P) - 120sqm 7.38 The submitted plans demonstrate that all units would meet or exceed the relevant minimum internal space standards contained within the London Plan. In particular, Flat 9 significantly exceeds the minimum standard and would provide a high level of accommodation for future occupiers. 7.39 The submitted sections indicate floor-to-ceiling heights of approximately 2.5m at ground and first floor level and approximately 2.65m at the highest point within the roof accommodation. Whilst areas within Flat 9 would experience reduced headroom as a consequence of the sloping roof form, the unit would provide approximately 120sqm of internal accommodation, significantly exceeding the minimum space standards. Having regard to the overall floorspace available, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press sufficient usable accommodation would be achieved and the flat would provide an acceptable standard of residential amenity. 7.40 In terms of layout and outlook, the majorit y of units would benefit from a primary outlook either towards the front or rear of the site. It is noted that the ground floor primary bedrooms serving Flats 1 and 2 would face towards the frontage parking area. Whilst this results in a less attractive outlook than elsewhere within the development, the proposed boundary treatment and landscaping would provide a degree of screening and separation and the relationship is not considered unacceptable. Similarly, some secondary bedrooms serving Flats 3 and 4 would principally face side boundaries and fencing. However, these rooms would continue to receive natural light and ventilation and are not therefore considered to result in unacceptable living conditions. 7.41 Having regard to the above, it is considered that the proposed development would provide an acceptable standard of accommodation for future occupiers and would comply with Policy DMHB16 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) and Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021). External Amenity Space 7.42 Policy DMHB 18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) requires new developments to provide good quality an d usable private outdoor amenity space in accordance with the standards set out in Table 5.3. In summary, each unit type should provide at least the following levels of amenity space: - 1-bedroom flats: 20sqm, - 2-bedroom flats: 25sqm, and - 3-bedroom flats and larger: 30sqm. 7.43 At the same time, the London Plan Policy D6 requires that each new flat is provided with a minimum amenity space of 5sqm for 1 to 2 -person flats with an additional 1 sqm for each additional person. 7.44 The development would provide a combination of private and communal amenity space. Ground floor units would benefit from private terrace and garden areas, whilst upper floor units would be served by balconies and a roof terrace. In addition, all future occupiers would have access to a substantial communal garden located to the rear of the site. 7.45 Whilst some of the private amenity areas are modest in scale, particularly the balconies serving the upper floor flats, the development benefits from a significant amount of communal amenity space. The submitted Planning Statement advises that the communal garden would exceed 1,000sqm and would retain much of the landscaped character of the site. It is therefore considered that the overall quantity and quality of external amenity space would provide an acceptable standard of amenity for future occupiers. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.46 Subject to the submission of a detailed landscaping scheme via condition 8, the proposal is considered to comply with Policy DMHB18 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 and Policy D6 of the London Plan. Accessibility 7.47 Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021) states that development proposals should achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design. Policy D7 of the London Plan (2021) specifically requires at least 10 per cent of dwellings meet Building Regulation requirement M4(3) ‘wheelchair user dwellings’ with the remaining dwellings to meet Building Reg ulation requirement M4(2) ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’. 7.48 The submitted plans indicate that Flats 1 and 2 at ground floor level would be designed to wheelchair user standards, whilst the remaining units would meet accessible and adaptable dwelling standards. Step-free access would be provided to the building and the development includes an accessible parking space positioned close to the main entrance. 7.49 Subject to condition 15 securing compliance with Building Regulation requirements M4(2) and M4(3), the proposal is considered acceptable in accessibility terms and would comply with Polic ies D5 and D7 of the London Plan (2021). Fire Safety 7.50 Policy D12 (A) of the London Plan (2021) requires development proposals to achieve the highest standards of fire safety and demonstrate that fire safety has been considered throughout the design process. This includes consideration of means of escape, evacuation procedures, compartmentation, firefighting access and emergency response arrangements. 7.51 The previous application (ref. 8905/APP/2024/2478) was refused, in part, due to the absence of sufficient information demonstrating how the development would achieve the highest standards of fire safety and emergency evacuation arrangements. The current application seeks to address this concern through the submission of a detailed Fire Safety St rategy prepared by Bancil Property Consultants Ltd. 7.52 The submitted Fire Safety Strategy confirms that the building has been designed as a small residential building served by a single protected staircase and incorporates a range of active and passive fire safety measures. These include 60 -minute fire compart mentation between flats, corridors and stair enclosures, FD30S and FD60 fire doors, smoke det ection and alarm systems, automatic opening vents to the staircase, emergency lighting, escape signage and dedicated firefighting access arrangements. The strategy also sets out the proposed means of escape, travel distances, smoke control measures and evacuation procedures. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.53 The submitted information demonstrates that fire safety has been considered as part of the design process and provides a significantly greater level of detail than was available under the previous application. The strategy concludes that, subject to implementation of the identified measures, the development would satisfy the functional requirements of Part B of the Building Regulations and relevant British Standards. 7.54 Whilst detailed fire safety matters would ultimately be subject to separate Building Regulations approval, sufficient information has now been provided to demonstrate compliance with the objectives of Policy D12 of the London Plan. Subject to compliance co ndition 13, the proposed development would accord with the requirements of Policy D12 of the London Plan (2021). Transport 7.55 Policies T4, T6, T6.2 of the London Plan (2021), DMT 1 and DMT 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) are all directly relevant to the proposed development. In summary, they seek to deliver development which is sustainable in transport terms and safeguards highway and pedestrian safety. These aims are also supported by the NPPF (2026), inc luding Policy TR6 of the NPPF (2026) which states that developments should only be refused if they would have a severe adverse impact on the transport network, or an unacceptable impact on highway safety. 7.56 The application site is located on B466 Long Lane, a classified road subject to a 30mph speed limit. The site has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) of 3, indicating a moderate level of accessibility to public transport, and is located within walking distance of local bus services and Hillingdon Underground Station. Access 7.57 The proposed development would utilise the existing vehicular access from Long Lane, with the existing access gates re moved. A separate pedestrian and cycle access is also proposed approximately 8m to the south of the vehicular access. The submitted Transport Note demonstrates that the access would achieve appropriate visibility splays and vehicle tracking has been provided to demonstrate that vehicles are able to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The Council's Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposed access arrangements. Vehicular Trip Generation 7.58 The submitted Transport Note identifies that the development would generate a limited uplift in vehicle movements, with approximately three two-way vehicle trips during the weekday AM peak and two two -way vehicle trips during the PM peak period. Given the modest level of trip generation, the Council’s Highways Authority considers that the proposal would not give rise to a material impact on the operation of the local highway network or highway safety. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Parking Provision 7.59 The London Plan (2021) Table 10.3 - Maximum Residential Parking Standards requires all dwellings in Outer London PTAL 2 to have a maximum 0.75no. spaces. The development would provide 9 off-street parking spaces, including one disabled parking bay. Whilst this margin ally exceeds the London Plan maximum parking standards, the Council’s Highway Authority considers the level of provision acceptable in this instance, subject to the submission of a Parking Design and Management Plan to ensure allocation and management of spaces, which is recommended to be secured by condition 8. Electric Vehicle Charging Points (EVCP's) 7.60 The London Plan (2021) requires that an EVCP is provided for the proposed parking spaces. The proposal would include 2no. active and 7no. passive ECVPs which would be acceptable. Condition 8 would secure the provision and retention of these points. Cycle Parking and safety 7.61 The London Plan (2021) Table 10.2 - Minimum Cycle Parking Standards requires one-bedroom dwellings to have a minimum 1.5no. cycle spaces and all other dwellings to have- a minimum of 2no. cycle parking spaces and that developments of 5-40 dwellings provide 2 visitor cycle parking space which should be provided with acceptable access between the dwelling, the cycle storage and the adopted highway. 7.62 The scheme would provide 20 secure cycle parking spaces together with two visitor cycle parking spaces. The level of provision exceeds the minimum London Plan standards and is considered acceptable , subject to condition 8 securing further cycle details. Construction Logistics Plan 7.63 The Council’s Highways Authority comments that a Demolition and Construction Logistics Plan would be required, given the constraints and sensitivities of the local road network to avoid/minimise potential detriment to the public realm. Condition 4 is therefore recommended accordingly. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Refuse provision 7.64 Refuse collection would continue via the roadway (Long Lane). The bin storage positioning should allow for conformity with the accepted 'waste distance' collection standards which encourage waste collection distances to be within 10m from the point of collection on the public highway with carrying distances from each unit not exceeding 30m. The Council’s Highways Authority comments that a storage area is proposed on the property frontage , which is in relative proximity of the highway and therefore suggests adherence to the above parameters. Condition 8 is therefore recommended to secure this. Transport Conclusion 7.65 Subject to the necessary planning conditions, the proposed development would not be considered to prejudice conditions on the local highways network, in accordance with Policies DMT 1, DM T 2, DMT 5 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) and Policies T4 and T7 of the London Plan (2021). Environmental Issues Trees and landscaping 7.66 Policies G1 and G5 of the London Plan (2021), DMEI 1, DMHB 11 and DMHB 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) are all directly relevant to the proposed development. In summary, they seek to safeguard existing trees and deliver high- quality landscaping to enhance amenity, biodiversity and green infrastructure. These aims are also supported by the NPPF (2026). 7.67 The site contains a number of mature trees which contribute positively to the character and appearance of the Conserva tion Area and is also subject to Tree Preservation Order 482A. The submi tted Arboricultural Impact Assessment identifies that the proposal would require the removal of three frontage trees (T1, T8 and T9) and two dead trees (T32 and T37). The report concludes that these losses would not materially harm the overall arboreal character of the area. 7.68 The majority of the site's significant trees would be retained, including Category A trees T2, T5 and T38. This broadly reflects the approach taken under the previous application, where no arboricultural objection was raised. The submitted report confirms that retained trees can be ad equately protected through tree protection measures, ground protection and arboricultural supervision. Conditions 18 and 19 is therefore recommended accordingly. 7.69 Replacement tree and shrub planting is pr oposed to mitigate the losses and the Arboricultural Report concludes that, subject to the implementation of the recommended protection measures, the proposal would not result in unacceptable impacts on retained tre es. No arboricultural objection is therefore raised.

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Wai Hing Tse 35810/APP/2026/735 Date Application Valid: 23-03-26 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 14/10/2026 Application Type: Full Ward: YIEWSLEY 2022 Applicant: Linea UB7 Ltd. Site Address: TAVISTOCK WORKS, TAVISTOCK ROAD Proposal: Demolition of existing building and replacement with a 6 -storey building comprising residential units, landscaping and amenity space. 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 – 14th October 2026 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. A Section 278 agreement to implement all necessary off-site Highways Works to the footpath adjoining the site II. Early and Late Stage Afford able Housing Viability Review III. An Employment/ Construction Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD IV. A Carbon Offset contribution of £29,134 V. A financial contribution of £41,500 for new, enhanced or improved access to open space within the London Borough of Hillingdon VI. Provision of 1 car club space on Tavistock Road VII. Residential Parking Permits restriction (excluding Blue Badge holders) VIII. 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 preparation of 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 wording of the heads of terms, the proposed Legal 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: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press ‘The applicant has failed to secure the planning obligations necessary to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development, including obligations relating to highway works, affordable-housing viability reviews, employment and construction training , carbon offset, public open space, sustainable travel, residents parking and monitoring. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021), Policies DMCI 4, DMCI 7, DMEI 2, DMT 1 and DMT 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two (2020), and the Council’s Plan ning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document.' 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 Planning permission is sought for the demoli tion of the existing office building and redevelopment of the site with a six -storey residential building comprising 31 flats, landscaping, private and communal amenity space, children’s play space, cycle parking and one accessible car-parking space. The development would provide 17 one -bedroom, 10 two-bedroom and four three- bedroom homes on an allocated, previously developed site close to West Drayton Station and Yiewsley/West Drayton Town Centre. 1.2 The principle of residential redevelopmen t is supported by the site allocation and relevant planning history. Although the previous residential permission has expired and is not treated as an extant fallback, the appeal decision and subsequent permissions remain material considerations. The current proposal would be two storeys lower and provide seven fewer dwellings than the most recently approved scheme. Its reduced height, revised material palette and improved entrance treatment would provide an acceptable relationship with Padcroft Works and the surrounding townscape, subject to conditions securing the detailed materials and architectural finishes. 1.3 The proposal would deliver additional housing on a brownfield site, within a sustainable location, all dwellings would meet the applicable minimum internal floorspace standards and receive satisfactory natural light. The report identifies some shortcomings, including the absence of affordable housing at the present time, the proportion of single -aspect dwellings and a shortfall against the Council’s external amenity -space standard. However, the accommodation would remain functional, no single -aspect dwelling would face wholly north, every dwelling would have private outdoo r space, and substantial communal amenity areas would be provided. The current scheme would also provide a greater proportion of the required amenity space than the previous permissions. 1.4 The Council’s independent viability re view concludes that the development cannot currently support affordable housing or an upfront payment in lieu. Early and Late-Stage Viability Review mech anisms would therefore be secured Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press through the Section 106 agreement to capture an affordable housing contribution if viability improves. Th e legal agreement would also secure adjoining highway works, residential parking -permit restrictions, employment and construction training, a £29,134 carbon -offset contribution, a £41,500 public open-space contribution, and one car-club space on Tavistock Road. 1.5 The development would be substantially car-free and would provide policy- compliant cycle parking, one accessible parking space and sustainable -travel measures. Subject to the recommended conditions and planning obligations, the proposal would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety, neighbouring residential amenity, noise, air quality, flood risk, fire safety or other environmental considerations. The contributions towards housing delivery and the effective use of an allocated brownfield site are afforded significant weight, particularly given the Council’s identified shortfall in deliverable housing land. 1.6 Due regard has been given to the 36 objections and the petition containing 29 valid signatures. The concerns raised regarding density, design, daylight and sunlight, privacy, outlook, traffic, pa rking, noise and fire safety have been considered in the relevant sections of the report. On balance, the proposal is considered to accord with the development plan when read as a whole, and no material considerations indicate that permission should be withheld. Approval is therefore recommended, subject to completion of the Section 106 agreement and the conditions set out in Appendix 1. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The site lies approximately 150m west of West Drayton Railway Station on the northern side of Tavistock Road and immediately to the rear of the properties fronting Yiewsley High Street. The site has an area of 670 sqm and comprises a part one, part two -storey office building which is currently occupied as an office. 2.2 The site is bound by the Padcroft works development comprising 315 residential units to the north and east. To the west is an industrial site, referred to as COMAG, which has received consent for 104 residential units and ground level community space. The site is allocated as Site C in Policy SA38 within the Site Allocations and Designations (2020). It is designated as a site within Yiewsley/West Drayton Town Centre and has a Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) rating of 3. The site is not located within a Conservation Area. The nearest Area of Special Local Character is situated approximately 180m to the south of the site. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Photograph showing the existing building from Tavistock Road (from the southeast) Figure 3: Photograph showing the existing building from Tavistock Road (from the southwest) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for de molition of existing building and replacement with a 6 -storey building comprising residential units, landscaping and amenity space. The proposed scheme would provide a total of 31 residential units (17 x one-bedroom flats, 10 x two-bedroom flats and 4 x three- bedroom flats). 3.2 The proposed main entrance would be located on the southern frontage abutting Tavistock Road. One no. of disabled parking space would be provided on G/F accessible from Tavistock Road. 67 long -stay cycle parking would be provided within the cycle store on G/F whilst two Sheffield stands for 4 short- stay cycle parking would be installed next to the proposed entrance abutting Tavistock Road. 3.3 The proposed 6-storey building would be 22.5m high above ground level (including roof-top lift-overrun). A communal amenity space would be provided on the roof level. Figure 4: Proposed Ground Floor Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 5: Proposed Southern Elevation Figure 6: Proposed Section Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Proposed 3D Aerial View 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 Planning application reference 35810/APP/2021/1234 sought permission on the Tavistock Works site for the demolition of the existing building and development of an 8 -storey building comprising resident ial units and associated car parking, landscaping and amenity space. The appl ication was refused on 25th June 2021 for the following reasons: 1) The proposed development, by reason of its overall height, scale and siting in close proximity to Fitzroy Court would result in a cramped and overbearing visual relationship between the proposed development and the existing Fitzroy Court development result ing in harm to the setting of Fitzroy Court, in particular the appreciation of the a rchitectural composition of the south eastern facade. Due to its layout and des ign, particularly the design of the refuse store, the development would fail to provide conve nient and easily accessible refuse and recycling storage . Due to the poor quality street frontage along Tavistock Road, the proposal would be detrimental to the visual amenities of the street scene and the character and appearance of the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press wider area, contrary to Po licy BE1 of the Local Plan: Part One (November 2012), Policies DMHB 10, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Local Plan: Part Two Development Management Polices (2020), Policies D1-D3, D6, D8, D9 of the London Plan (2021) and Paragraphs 127 and 130, 131 of the NPPF (2019) and NPPF Draft text for consultation (2020). 2) The proposed development, due to its siting, layout, height and massing cumulatively would have an unacceptably harmful impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties at Fitzroy Court resulting in unacceptable loss of outlook, creation of undue sense of enclosure, loss of light to neighbouring habitable rooms and result in an overbearing impact. The proposal is therefore considered contrary to Policy BE1 of the Local Plan: Part One (2012) and Policy DMHB 11 of the Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020), Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Paragraph 127 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and The Building Research Establishment (BRE) guidelines "Site Layout Planning for Daylight and Sunlight: A Guide to Good Practice" (1991). 3) The proposed development, by virtue of its failure to provide amenity space of sufficient size and quality commensurate to the size and layout of the said units would result in an over- development of the site detrimental to the residential amenity of existing and future occupiers. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policy DMHB 18 of the emerging Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two - Development Management Policies (2020). 4) The proposed development, in the absence of a Section 106 legal agreement, fails to provide contributions towards the improvement of services and facilities as a consequence of demands created by the proposed development (in respect of air quality contribu tions, affordable housing, construction training, highways works, carbon offset, employment and training, permit free parking, ca r club space delivery and project management and monitoring). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policy DMCI 7 of the Hillingd on Local Plan: Part Two Development management Policies (2020), the London Borough of Hillingdon Supplementary Planning Document on Planning Obligations, Policy DF1 of the London Plan (2021) and paras 54-57 of the NPPF 2019. 4.3 The decision to refuse the application was appealed in December 2021 under planning appeal reference APP/R5510/W/21/3288333 and was allowed on the 21st September 2022. The Planning Inspector concluded by stating: 67. The proposal would underprovide on-site external space and result in a reduction in daylight to neighbouring flats, resulting in a material deterioration in their living conditions using BR E Guidelines and the VSC measure. However, the consideration of the mirror image effect as an alternative measure, has shown that an alternative scheme, mirroring Fitzroy Court, would result in a substantially greate r reduction in daylight levels to the affected bedroom windows. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 68. In contrast, the proposal would accord with allocation policy SA38 and would deliver a scheme that is well designed and responds positively to the site and its surroundings. The scheme would complement Padcroft Works and would align with the scale of both this and the expired consent of Comag. Therefore, the proposal wouId accord with the allocation's inherent expectation for development on site to complement adjacent plots and the site's urban context. Furthermore, the proposal would deliver housing on previously developed land in a location with good accessibility and make a small contribution towards affordable housing. 69. The proposal would extend and continue the existing grain of development and contribute to the comprehensive redevelopment of this allocated site. On this basis, the proposed development would have an acceptable impact on neighbouring living conditions and its benefits would outweigh the under provision of external amenity space. 70. There are no material considerations that indicate the application should be determined other than in accordance wi th the development plan. For the reasons given, the appeal should be allowed, and the scheme approved subject to the attached conditions and s106 Legal Agreement. 4.4 Following the allowed ap peal, application refere nce 35810/A PP/2023/2106 permitted the following: x Minor material amendment (s73) to vary Conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 13 (Energy) of Planning Inspectorate decision letter dated 21-09- 2022 for appeal reference APP/R5510/W/21/3 288333 (LPA planning reference 35810/APP/2021/1234) for the Demolition of ex isting building and replacement with an up to 8- storey building comprising residential units, landscaping and amenity space. 4.5 The proposed amendments included the replacement of the winter gardens with balconies and the replacement of the reference to the energy statement within Condition 13 to reflect an updated energy statement. Subject to securing the necessary conditions and a Deed of Variation to the original Unilateral Undertaking, including a reduction to the carbon offsetting financial contribution (from £44,622 to £31,000), the application was approved. 4.6 Following the above grant of permission, application reference 35810/APP/2024/243 also permitted the following: x Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans), 3 (Supporting Documentation), 5 (Landscape Scheme) and 17 (Parking Allocation Scheme) of planning permission ref. 35810/APP/2023/2106 dated 25-01- 2024 (Minor material amendment (s73) to vary Conditions 2 (Approved Plans) and 13 (Energy) of Planning Inspectorate decision letter dated 21-09-2022 for appeal reference APP/R5510/W/21/3288333 (LPA planning reference 35810/APP/2021/1234) for the Demolition of existing building and Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press replacement with an up to 8-storey bu ilding comprising residential units, landscaping and amenity space) 4.7 The proposed amendments included the introduction of a second stair core and reconfiguration of the ground floor car parking and servicing arrangement, including the addition of a 1 bedroom 2 person unit. Subject to securing the necessary conditions and a Deed of Variation to the original Unilateral Undertaking, including a reduction to the carbon offsetting financial contribution (from £44,622 to £31,000) and increase in the public open space contribution (from £42,500 to £44,000) the application was recommended for approval. 4.8 Following the above grant of permission, application reference 35810/APP/2024/1651 also permitted the following: x Variation of Conditions 2 (Approved Plans), 3 (Supporting Documentation), 5 (Landscape Scheme) and 13 (Energy) of Planning Inspectorate decision letter dated 21-09- 2022 for appeal reference APP/R5510/W/21/3288333 (LPA planning reference 35810/APP/2021/1234 ) (Demolition of existing building and replacement with an up to 8- storey building comprising residential units, landscaping and amenity space) 4.9 The proposed amendments included the replacement of winter gardens with balconies, reduction of car parking to pr ovide 1no. blue badge car parking space, provision of an additional stair core, re configuration of ground floor service layout, and provision of 6 additional residential units. Subject to securing the necessary conditions and a Deed of Variation to the original Unilateral Undertaking, including amended obligations to secure an upfront affordable housing payment in lieu equal to £94,417, a reduced carbon offsetting financial contribution (from £44,622 to £36,000) and increased in the public open space contribution (from £42,500 to £51,000), the application is recommended for approval. 4.10 The comparison between the current scheme and the latest approved scheme under 35810/APP/2024/1651 is tabulated below. Table 1: Comparison between the Current Scheme and Approved Scheme Current Scheme Approved Scheme under 35810/APP/2024/1651 No. of Storey 6 8 Max. Building Height 22.5m above ground (including roof-top plant room) 28.5m above ground (including roof-top plant room) No. of Flats 31 38 Flat Mix - 8 x 1B1P (26%); - 9 x 1B2P (29%); - 4 x 2B3P (13%); - 6 x 2B4P (19%); and - 4 x 3B4P (13%). - 2 x 1B1P (5.3%); - 16 x 1B2P (42.1%); - 15 x 2B3P (39.5%); - 1 x 2B4P (2.6%); and - 4 x 3B4P (10.5%). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Car Parking 1 disabled parking space 1 disabled parking space Cycle Parking 67 long-stay + 4 short- stay 67 long-stay + 4 short-stay 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4 of the National Planning Policy Framewor k (NPPF) 2026 states that 'Local Planning Authorities may give wei ght to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: (a) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); (b) the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and (c) the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).’ Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.3 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replacing the previous versions of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.4 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 A total of 79 no. letters were sent to neighbouring properties, site notices were displayed and an advert was posted in the local paper. The neighbour consultation process expired on 30th April 2026, and 36 objections were received from residents. A petition in objection was also received with 29 valid signatures, from the residents of Padcroft Works. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 6.2 Representations received in response to public consultation are summarised in Table 2 (below). Consultee responses received are summarised in Table 3 (below). Full copies of the responses have also separately been made available to Members. Table 2: Summary of Representations Received Representations Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response 36 objections received Petition in objection received with 29 valid signatures. Excessive density, overdevelopment, and inappropriate height, scale and massing. These matters are addressed in the Density (p aragraphs 7.24 to 7.28) and Design (paragraphs 7.29 to 7.35) sections of this report. Overbearing impact, loss of outlook and increased enclosure to residents of Fitzroy Court. These matters are addressed in the Residential Amenity section (paragraphs 7.36 to 7.44) of this report. The proposal’s height, siting, separation and relationship with neighbouring windows have been assessed and are considered acceptable on balance. Inadequate separation, overlooking and loss of privacy, including from windows, balconies and the rooftop amenity space. These matters are addressed in the Residential Amenity section (paragraphs 7.36 to 7.44) of this report. Conditions would secure obscure glazing, additional privacy measures and the detailed landscaping scheme of the rooftop space. Loss of daylight and sunlight to neighbouring dwellings and amenity spaces. Concerns are also raised about the methodology and absence of Average Daylight Factor calculations. These matters are addressed in the Residential Amenity section (paragraphs 7.36 to 7.44) of this report. The assessment considers the proposal against the relevant BRE tests . Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Insufficient parking, parking displacement, traffic congestion and highway -safety concerns on Tavistock Road and surrounding streets. These matters are addressed in the Highways and Parking section (paragraphs 7.69 to 7.84) of this report. The car-free development is considered acceptable given the site’s accessibility. Parking - permit restrictions, cycle parking, car-club provision, highway works and construction and servicing controls would be secured via conditions and S106 agreement . Pressure on local infrastructure, amenities, public services and public transport. The development would be liable for Mayoral and Hillingdon CIL. The Section 106 agreement would also secure public open -space, carbon-offset, employment and transport obligations. Noise and disturbance from residents, deliveries, rooftop activity and plant equipment. This matter is addressed in the Noise section (paragraphs 7.89 to 7.92) of this report. The Council’s Noise Specialist raises no objection subject to conditions controlling operational noise and securing acceptable internal noise levels. Fire-safety concerns, particularly the proximity of the development and rooftop elements to Fitzroy Court. This matter is addressed in the Fire Safety section (paragraphs 7.120 to 7.121) of this report. The application is supported by a Fire Statement , and a condition would secure compliance with its principles and submission of final fire -safety information before occupation. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Insufficient private and communal amenity space and children’s play space. These matters are addressed in the Amenity Spa ce (paragraphs 7.53 to 7.60) and Play Space (paragraphs 7.61 to 7.63) sections of this report. The amenity-space shortfall is acknowledged and weighed against the proposal. The negligible play -space shortfall would be addressed through the final landscaping scheme. Absence of affordable housing and the need for independent viability scrutiny. This matter is addressed in the Affordable Housing section (paragraphs 7.16 to 7.23) of this report. The applicant’s viability assessment has been independently reviewed. Early and Late -Stage Viability Reviews would capture any affordable housing contribution arising from improved viability. Concern that the development would increase crime and anti- social behaviour. This matter is addressed in the Security section (paragraphs 7.118 to 7.119) of this report. A condition would require Secured by Design accreditation before occupation. Lack of meaningful pre- application consultation with residents. Developer-led consultation is encouraged but is not a statutory requirement. The Council has undertaken the required consultation and has considered all representations received. The previous permission has expired and there is no fallback position. Previous This matter is addressed in the Planning History (paragraphs 4.1 to 4.10) and Principle of Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press refusals should be given significant weight. Development (paragraphs 7.1 to 7.7) sections of this report. The previous permission is not treated as an extant fallback. The current proposal has been assessed afresh, while the full planning history remains a material consideration. Adverse effects on residents’ health, wellbeing and quality of life. The underlying material impacts, including daylight, sunlight, privacy, outlook, and noise, are assessed in the relevant sections of the report . Loss of property value. Effects on private property values are not a material planning consideration. Table 3: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Contaminated Land Officer No objection subject to a condition requiring the submission of a scheme to deal with unacceptable contamination, to be submitted prior to the commencement of development. The Contaminated Land Officer comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Please refer to Condition 8 (Contamination) as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Noise Officer No objection subject to conditions to secure appropriate levels of noise for residential occupiers. The Noise Officer comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Please refer to Conditions 9 and 10 (Noise Levels) as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Air Quality Officer The Air Quality Officer comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press No objection subject to conditions securing submission of Construction Logistics and Management Plan. Please refer to Condition 13 (Construction Logistics and Management Plan) as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Highways Authority No objection is raised on highway grounds, subject to appropriate conditions and planning obligations. The proposal is considered capable of being accommodated within the local highway network without an unacceptable impact on highway safety or a severe residual impact on traffic congestion. Conditions are requested to secure a Construction Logistics Plan and a Delivery and Servicing Plan. Planning obligations are also sought to secure adjoining highway works and restrictions preventing future occupiers, other than Blue Badge holders, from obtaining residential parking permits. The Highway Authority initially raised uncertainty regarding the deliverability of the proposed car club and sought a Healthy Streets contribution instead. The applicant subsequently confirmed that a car -club operator is willing and able to operate the proposed car-club space. The Highway Authority’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. The relevant construction, servicing, parking and highway controls would be secured through conditions and the Section 106 agreement. The car -club provision would be retained. For the reasons set out in the Highways and Parking assessment (paragraphs 7.69 to 7.84), a separate Healthy Streets contribution has not been demonstrated to be necessary to make the development acceptable. Please refer to the Highways and Parking section and the relevant conditions and Heads of Terms. Planning Policy Officer No objection is raised to the proposed housing mix. Although family -sized units would represent 13% of the development, the site is sustainably located, has a PTAL rating of 3 and is close to West Drayton Station, public transport and local services. The proportion of family-sized dwellings is also comparable with the The Planning Policy Team’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Please refer to the Housing Mix section (Paragraphs 7.8 to 7.15) of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 12% secured under the original appeal scheme. Urban Design Officer The change from red brick to light - brown brick is welcomed and would improve the visual relationship with the adjoining Padcroft Works development. The revised principal entrance is also welcomed as an improvement to its legibility and sense of arrival. Further revisions are recommended to the glazed white brick, eastern elevation, corner balconies, roof -level balcony canopies, glazed balustrades, balcony fixings, bronze -coloured metalwork and balcony soffits. Detailed specifications of the brickwork, windows, balconies, external materials and architectural finishes should be secured by condition. The Urban Design Officer’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. Having reviewed the proposal against the design previously accepted at the site, officers have taken a balanced and pragmatic approach and consider the design acceptable on balance. The detailed materials, brickwork, windows, balcony construction, metalwor k and soffits would be secured through the proposed external materials condition. Please refer to the Design and Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area section (Paragraphs 7.29 to 7.35) and Condition 4 as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. HSE Fire Safety The proposal does not fall within the remit of Planning Gateway One because the proposed building would not meet the relevant height condition of at least 18 metres or seven storeys. No further response from the Building Safety Regulator is therefore required under the Planning Gateway One consultation process. The Building Safety Regulator’s comments are noted. Notwithstanding that the proposal falls outside Planning Gateway One, the application is supported by a Fire Statement. Condition 11 as set out in Appendix 1 of the report would secure compliance with the submitted fire-safety principles and require a final comprehensive Fire Statement before occupation. Thames Water No objection is raised regarding wastewater -network or sewage- treatment capacity. The development would be located within 15 metres of a strategic sewer. A condition is requested requiring the submission and approval of a piling Thames Water’s comments are noted and taken into consideration as part of the planning assessment. The requested piling condition would be imposed as Condition 20 as set out in Appendix 1 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press method statement and piling layout before any piling takes place, to prevent damage to underground sewerage infrastructure. Separate approvals may also be required for works within the vicinity of public sewers, groundwater discharge and any proposed surface -water connection to the public sewer. The developer should consult Thames Water regarding any necessary build- over agreement, groundwater permit or sewer connection approval. Informatives would also advise the developer of the potential need for a build -over agreement, groundwater-discharge permit and separate approval for any connection to the public sewer. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 The principle of residential development at the site has been established through the planning history set out in Section 4 of this report. Although planning application ref. 35810/APP/2021/1234 was refused by the Council and subsequently allowed on appeal, the Council raised no objection to the residential redevelopment of the site in principle. The subsequent Section 73 applications similarly proceeded on the basis that the residential use of the site remained acceptable. 7.2 Conditions 6 and 12(A) of the most recent permission, ref. 35810/APP/2024/1651, were discharged on 18 July 2025 and 21 July 2025 respectively. However, the discharge of pre-commencement conditions does not, in itself, demonstrate that a material operation was carried out within the relevant time limit so as to lawfully implement the permission. The permission has therefore expired and does not constitute an extant fallback capable of implementation. Nevertheless, the previous appeal decision and subsequent permissions remain part of the relevant planning history and are material considerations. Appropriate weight is afforded to the conclusions previously reached regarding the acceptability of residential development at the site and, where relevant, the design parameters previously accepted. 7.3 The previous applications were determined before publication of the revised NPPF in August 2026. The current application must therefore be determined against the development plan, the relevant policies of the revised NPPF and all other material considerations in force at the date of determination. 7.4 The site comprises previously developed la nd within the built-up area and is in a highly accessible location close to West Dr ayton Station. Policy L2 of the revised NPPF states that substantial weight shoul d be given to the benefits of proposals which make better use of vacant or underutilised land and buildings. Policy L3 also Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press requires residential development within se ttlements to contribute to an increase in the density of the area, unless there is a clear justification why this would be inappropriate or not possible, and requir es proposals within reasonable walking distance of a well-connected station to optimise the efficient use of land. 7.5 These national policies are consistent with London Plan Policy H1, Local Plan Part 1 Policy H1 and the allocation of the site under Policy SA 38 of the Local Plan Part 2. Policy SA 38 supports residential development on Site C and seeks the comprehensive development of the site wi th the adjoining allocated sites, subject to the relevant design and development plan requirements. 7.6 Accordingly, the revised NPPF does not al ter the previously accepted principle of residential redevelopment. The proposal wo uld make effective use of previously developed land within an established urba n area, deliver additional housing and redevelop an underutilised site in an accessible location. The previous appeal decision and subsequent permissions rema in material considerations, although they do not constitute an extant fallback. 7.7 The principle of residential development is therefore considered acceptable. However, this conclusion does not predeter mine the acceptability of the detailed proposal, which must be assessed against the current development plan and revised NPPF in relation to matters including design, height and density, housing mix and affordable housing, residential quality, neighbouring amenity, transport, accessibility, environmental impacts and planning obligations. Housing Mix 7.8 Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021) states that residential schemes should generally provide a range of unit sizes. In determining the appropriate mix, regard should be given to robust local evidence of need, the delivery of mixed and inclusive neighbourhoods, the need for homes at different price points, the mix of uses and the range of tenures proposed. Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) similarly requires residential developments to provide a mix of housing units of different sizes which reflects the Council’s latest evidence of housing need. 7.9 The Council’s Strategic Housing Marketing Assessment identifies a need for three- bedroom family sized homes and a broader requirement for affordable homes. In broad terms sites of more than 10 residential units should be providing at least 20% family sized homes to meet both existing and future demand. 7.10 Notwithstanding the position set out in the SHMA consideration should be given to the wider development plan and supplementary guidance. There is clear support within the NPPF, London Plan and Local Plan for higher density residential development within sustainable and town centre locations. Higher densities are achieved through the provision of smaller sized units therefore naturally a more flexible approach to unit mix is applied. 7.11 The application proposes 31 market housing units comprising: x 8 x one-bedroom, one-person units, or 26%; Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press x 9 x one-bedroom, two-person units, or 29%; x 4 x two-bedroom, three-person units, or 13%; x 6 x two-bedroom, four-person units, or 19%; and x 4 x three-bedroom, four-person units, or 13%. 7.12 When grouped by bedroom size, the proposal would provide 17 x 1 bed units (55%), 10 x 2 bed units (32%) and 4 x 3 bed units (13%). No units with four or more bedrooms are proposed. The proposed mix is therefore weighted towards smaller accommodation, particularly one and two bedroom units. 7.13 The proposal site is located within clos e proximity of a railway station and is therefore situated in a highly accessible and sustainable location. National planning policy seeks to make effective use of land in locations that are well-served by public transport, reducing reliance on private vehicles and supporting sustainable patterns of growth. The Government has further strengthened its support for residential development within reasonable walking distance of well -connected railway stations, introducing a policy presumption in favo ur of such development subject to compliance with relevant criteria relati ng to design, infrastructure capacity, environmental impacts and other material planning considerations. As such, significant weight is attributed to the site 's accessibility and its ability to contribute towards housing delivery in a sustainable location . The scheme would also provide ten two -bedroom units, including six two-bedroom, four- person units capable of accommodating smaller families. 7.14 The planning history is also a material consideration. The original 32-unit scheme allowed on appeal in 2022 included four three- bedroom units, representing 12.5% of the development. The latest 38 -unit permission granted in 2025 also included four three-bedroom units, representing 10.5% of that scheme. The current proposal retains the same number of three-bedroom homes, while increasing their proportion to approximately 13% due to the lower overall number of dwellings. 7.15 Appropriate weight has been afforded to the Government’s position on the presumption in favour of optimising hous ing delivery through higher densities on sites which are well connected and within walking distance to train stations. The site is located adjacent to West Drayton Train Station which is served by two separate mainline train services one being the Elizabeth Line. Further weight is afforded to the previous decisions on the site and the position on unit mix set within these decisions. On balance, having regard to the flatted nature of the scheme, the accessible location, the relevant planning history and the range of dwelling sizes proposed, the housing mix is considered acceptable. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Affordable Housing 7.16 Policy H5 of the London Plan (2021) seeks to maximise the delivery of affordable housing and establishes a threshold approach for major residential development. Schemes which do not meet the relevant affordable housing threshold are required to follow the Viability Tested Route. Policy H6 sets a strategic target for 50% of all new homes delivered across London to be genuinely affordable, while Policy H4 requires affordable housing to be provided on -site unless there are exceptional circumstances. 7.17 Policy H2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One (2012) seeks affordable housing on developments with a capacity of 10 or more units, subject to viability. The Council’s policy position is that 35% of new homes should be delivered as affordable housing, with an indicative te nure split of 70% Social Rent and 30% intermediate housing. 7.18 The proposed development comprises 31 residential units but does not include any on-site affordable housing or an affordable housing payment in lieu. The application has therefore been assessed under the Viability Tested Route and is supported by a Financial Viability Assessment. 7.19 The applicant’s assessment concluded that the proposed development, based on 100% private housing, would generate a deficit of approximately £2.468 million against its adopted viability benchmark. The applicant therefore contended that the development could not support any affordable housing provision. 7.20 The Council has procured an independent viability consultant to undertake a third party review of the Applicants FVA. Th is review involves the consultants undertaking a viability appraisal as well as the assessment of the Applicants FVA. Initial comments identified some differen ces in the key assumptions (such as the build costs) which has resulted in the subm ission of revised information. This information has been reviewed by the Councils independent consultant who has confirmed that the scheme would generate a deficit of £160,855 and the assumptions which result in the arrival of this figure have now been agreed by the Applicant. This agreement is significant to ensure that the assumptions which will form the baseline of the early and late-stage review mechanisms are agreed. 7.21 It is noted that the previous consents on the site also generated deficits, albeit the Applicant agreed to pay a financial contribution i n-lieu of an on site affordable provide, of up to £94,417. Taking into consideration the increase in build costs and other costs associated with residential development there is a genuine increase in risk for housebuilders which has been factored into the decision not to peruse an affordable housing contribution on this development. Moreover, there is no reasonable policy basis to do so which could be defended in the event of a refusal given the Council’s own ind ependent viability consultant has agreed that the development does result in a deficit rather than a surplus. 7.22 Notwithstanding the current position on affordable housing, the Applicant has agreed with the Councils position on the value of the deficit which would form the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press basis of an early and late-stage review mechanism. Both mechanisms would allow for a review of the assumptions at particular stages of the process beyond planning approval and should a surplus be identified the is a mechanism to secure a financial contribution in lieu of on site provision . 7.23 The detailed review provisions, including the triggers, appraisal methodology, treatment of surplus and any cap on additional contributions, would be agreed through the Section 106 agreement. Subject to securing these mechanisms, the affordable housing position is considered acceptable on viability grounds. Density 7.24 Policy DMHB 17 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) states that all new residential development should take acc ount of the Residential Density Matrix contained in Table 5.2. 7.25 Paragraph 5.67 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) states that Hillingdon will apply the density standards set out in the London Plan in a flexible manner, according to local circumstances. Large parts of the borough, including many areas in close proximity to town centres, are suburban in character and will lean heavily towards the applications of lower to mid range density scales. Table 5.2 represents a starting point for discussions on the is sue of residential density, which should ultimately be determined by a design led approach. 7.26 Policy D3 (Optimising Site Capacity th rough the Design-led Approach) of the London Plan (2021) further requires all development to make the best use of land following a design-led approach that optimises the capacity of sites, including site allocations and offers no density matrix figures. The policy further states that higher density developments should generally be promoted in locations that are well connected to jobs, services, infrastructure and amenities by public transport, walking and cycling. 7.27 The area surrounding the site is mixed in character. There is an established suburban character with low -rise residential properties located to the north and south. The immediate context, forming part of the site allocation, would be more urban in character with higher density development. The site has a moderate PTAL rating of 3 and is within 100m of the Yiewsley and West Drayton Town centre boundary, characteristics more akin to an urban setting. Whilst PTAL is a useful measuring tool it should not be relied upon to provide a substantive position on whether the site is in a sustainable location to provide a higher density form of development. It is important to note that this scheme provides a lower-level density than that previously accepted. It is in walking distance to a main and well-connected train station, it is on the edge of a town centre and primary shopping area meaning that it is very close to the amenities that future residential occupants will need for everyday living needs. 7.28 Contrary to the development plans support for the optimisation of brownfield sites, this could be viewed as an under optimisation given the previous permissions for a higher number of units. However, a key co nsideration is the viability of bringing Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press forward a denser development which would breach the threshold of gateway 2 fire safety regulations. Clearly this would have been explored during the live period of previous consents and was not viable to br ing forward. The principle of residential development has already been established on this site through the appeal allowed in 2022. With the reduction in number of units from 38 to 31 compared to the latest S73 permission in 2025, the proposed density would be reduced moderately and would be similar to that under the original scheme allowed at appeal in 2022. Therefore, the proposed density is considered acceptable in this location. Design and Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.29 Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020); Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1: Strategic Policies (2012) Policy BE1; as well as Policies D1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan (2021); in addition to Policy DP3 of the NPPF each seek to ensure that development achieves the highest standard of design, which integrates positively to the character its surroundings. 7.30 The proposed design approach broadly aligns with the design of the latest approved scheme under 35810/APP/2024/1651. The comparison of the key parameters between the current scheme and the approved scheme is summarised in Table 1 above. The most notable changes are the reduction in number of storeys from 8 to 6 and reduction in number of flats from 38 to 31. The applicant advised that such changes are proposed to address the increasing development costs, changing market condition a nd recent regulatory requirements such as the Building Safety Regulations’ Gateway process and Building Safety Levy. The current scheme with reduced building height would result in a more deliverable scheme in the current regulatory and market context. 7.31 The proposed reduction in height by two storeys, approximately 6 metres, is considered acceptable from an urban design and townscape perspective. The application site lies immediately south of the Padcroft Works development, which comprises an eight -storey block to the northwest and a six- storey block to the southeast. At six storeys, the proposed building would complement the stepped height profile of Padcroft Works and respond appropriately to the scale and form of the surrounding development. The submitted Heritage, Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment concludes that the pr oposal would have a negligible effect on the assessed public views, owing to the lower building height and the established scale and density of adjoining development. The most noticeable change would be from Tavistock Road, where the reduced height would improve the relationship between the proposed building and the street. In longer -distance views, the proposal would remain read as part of t he wider built context and would not result in any material change to the townscape. Accordingly, the reduction in height would not cause harm to the character or appearance of the area. Instead, it would provide an appropriate transition between the taller and lower elements of Padcroft Works. The proposed height and massing are therefore considered acceptable. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 8: Comparison of 3D aerial view between the Current Scheme (left) and the Approved Scheme (right) Figure 9: Comparison of 3D Tavistock Road Frontage view between the Current Scheme (left) and the Approved Scheme (right) 7.32 Following the initial comments of the Council’s Urban Design Officer, the applicant has made several improvements to the scheme. These include a revised material palette intended to improve the relationship with the adjoining Padcroft Works development, together with changes to the principal entrance to improve its legibility and sense of arrival. The principal facing material has been changed from the red brick previously proposed to a light-brown brick. This amendment is welcomed and would allow the building to respond more cl osely to the established architectural character and material palette of Padcroft Works. The revised entrance incorporates an angled wall and provision for building signage, which would give the entrance greater prominence and provide a clearer point of access. The detailed specifications of the brickwork, glazed white brick, windows, balconies, metalwork and soffits would be secured through a planning condition to ensure an appropriate quality, colour, texture and finish. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 10: Photograph showing the existing material and appearance of Padcroft Works Figure 11: 3D Illustration of the Proposed Entrance Design Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.33 The Urban Design Officer has raised further comments regarding elements of the elevation and fenestration design, including the treatment of the eastern elevation, the position and appearance of the corner balconies, the roof -level balcony canopies and the detailed design of the balcony balustrades. The preference for clear frameless glazing, discreet fixings and bronze-coloured metalwork and soffits can be appropriately addressed through the proposed external materials and detailing condition. The remaining comments regarding the position of the corner balconies and the general treatment of the eastern elevation are noted. However, these elements broadly reflect design f eatures included within the previously approved scheme. While the previous permission has expired and does not represent an extant fallback, the design previously found acceptable remains a relevant material consideration. Moreover, the identified elements are not considered to cause significant harm to the overall architectural composition or the character and appearance of the surrounding area. 7.34 Officers have therefore taken a balanced and pragmatic approach. Having regard to the improvements made during the application, the relationship with Padcroft Works, the planning history of the site a nd the ability to secure an appropriate standard of materials and architectural detailing through condition, the design is considered acceptable on balance. 7.35 Overall, the proposal would provide an appropriate architectural response to the site and surrounding context and would accord with Policy DP3 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2026), Policy D3 of the London Plan (2021), Policy BE1 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part One (2012), and Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part Two (2020). Residential Amenity 7.36 Policy DMHB 11 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part 2 seeks to ensure that development proposals do not adversely impact residential amenities, daylight, and sunlight of adjacent properties, and open space. The supporting text for this policy states that the Council will expect new development proposals to carefully consider layout and massing to ensure development does not result in an increased sense of enclosure and loss of outlook. 7.37 The nearest residential properties are within Fitzroy Court to the north and Yardley Court to the east, both forming part of the completed Padcroft Works development. The COMAG development lies to the west. The proposed building would be six storeys in height, two storeys lower than the previously approved scheme. The reduction in height would lessen the visual presence of the development and its potential daylight, sunlight and overbearing effects on adjoining occupiers. 7.38 The submitted Daylight and Sunlight Asse ssment has assessed the proposal in accordance with the BRE guidance. Under the Vertical Sky Component assessment, 26 of the 41 assessed neighbouring windows, equivalent to 63%, would meet the BRE recommendations. Although some windows would experience reductions beyond the recommended levels, the more detailed No Sky Line Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press assessment demonstrates that all neighbouring rooms capable of being assessed would retain acceptable daylight levels. The mirrored -massing assessment also identifies only three windows falling below the relevant comparative criteria. 7.39 Departures from the BRE recommendations are not unique to the current proposal. The assessment supporting the approved Section 73 scheme identified lower retained daylight levels to four windows within Fitzroy Court, serving one bedroom and three living, kitchen and dining rooms, together with a reduction in winter sunlight to one bedroom. These effects were previously considered acceptable because the affected living spaces were served by additional windows, the affected windows were secondary to the principal windows serving those rooms, and daylight and sunlight are generally less important to bedrooms. The bedroom affected by reduced winter sunlight also retained annual sunlight substantially above the BRE recommendation. This demonstrates that some departure from the BRE numerical guidance has previously been accepted as an unavoidable consequence of developing this constrained urban site. 7.40 In comparison, the current six-storey pr oposal is lower than the approved scheme and achieves improved overall daylight results. The previously accepted impacts therefore provide relevant context supporti ng the conclusion that the more limited departures identified under the current assessment are acceptable on balance. 7.41 The current proposal represents an improved position in several respects. Its VSC compliance rate is 63%, compared with 56% for the previously assessed scheme. All rooms tested under the more repres entative No Sky Line assessment would meet the BRE recommendations, compared with 83% under the previous assessment. 7.42 In terms of sunlight, 23 of the 26 assessed windows would meet both the annual and winter recommendations, with one further window meeting the annual recommendation. It is noted that some neighbouring balconies and external amenity spaces would experience reductions in sunlight. However, several of these spaces are already constrained by their vertically stacked design and the surrounding high- density built form. The overall sunlight effect would not be materially worse than that associated with the previously permitted development. 7.43 In relation to privacy, the principal habitable-room windows and balconies would face south towards Tavistock Road. Wind ows facing north towards Fitzroy Court would primarily serve circulation or ancilla ry spaces and would be obscure glazed where necessary. Windows facing east to wards Yardley Court would retain a separation of approximately 15 metres. While a degree of mutual overlooking is characteristic of this high -density setting, a condition would require obscure glazing and additional privacy measures to the relevant windows facing Yardley Court. 7.44 Overall, having regard to the reduced building height, the findings of the daylight and sunlight assessment, the improved performance relative to the approved Section 73 scheme, the previously accept

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Wai Hing Tse 2157/APP/2025/2060 Date Application Valid: 31-07-25 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 20-10-26 Application Type: Full Ward: Heathrow Villages Applicant: Landon Education Limited Site Address: THE LODGE, HARMONDSWORTH LANE, WEST DRAYTON Proposal: Change of use of the bu ilding from office (Use Class E) to non -residential education centre (SEND school) (Use Class F1) with minor external alterations including gates, fences, and cycle stores, and associated landscaping works. Summary of Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions Reason Reported to Committee: Required under Part 1 of the Planning Scheme of Delegation (Major application recommended for approval) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 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 change of use of The Lodge and its Annex from offices (Use Class E) to a non-residential education centre (SEND school) (Use Class F1), with minor external works including gates, fencing, cycle stores and landscaping. 1.2 The proposal would provide an 88 place SEND school (ages 5-19) with 66 staff and, alongside the existing/approved SEND school at Aviation House, to create a campus for 128 pupils and 96 staff in total. 1.3 The principle of the proposed educatio n use is acceptable, and there is no objection to the loss of office floorspace in this location. The proposal would not increase the building footprint or height, and the external alterations are modest and would preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the listed buildings and the character and appearance of the conservation area. 1.4 The development would retain 61 on-site parking spaces. Officers consider the parking provision acceptable in the context of comparable SEND schemes and subject to conditions requiring a Travel Plan and a Car Parking Management Plan, alongside controls on pupil and staff numbers. The planning application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 and Section 106 agreement. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site is accessed from the south side of Harmondsworth Lane, West Drayton, near the junction with Holloway Lane. It includes The Lodge with its Annex, Aviation House and the existing car park. 2.2 The Lodge is a 2-storey Grade II Listed Building (list entry number 1080217). The brick wall which bounds the Aviation House, The Lodge and Annex complex along Holloway Lane and Harmondsworth Lane is also Grade II listed (list entry number 1080218). The Lodge is currently used as offices (with some units vacant). 2.3 To the rear of The Lodge along the western boundary is the two-storey annex building which is a red brick and tiled building dating from the 20th century. It is connected to The Lodge by an access staircase. 2.4 Aviation House is a two-storey former office building subject to planning permission ref. 2157/APP/2023/3068 for a SEND school (Use Class F1). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 2.5 The application site is within the Harmondsworth Village Conservation Area and within two Archaeological Priority Ar eas (Heathrow APA and Harmondsworth APA). Part of the wider site (including part of Aviation House) lies within the Green Belt. The site is identified as Potentially Contaminated Land and is within an Air Quality Management Area. It is in Flood Zone 1 and has a PTAL rating of 1b. 2.6 Open fields designated as Green Belt extend to the south, west and east. The locally listed “Home Farm” abuts the wes tern boundary and is also within the Green Belt. The surrounding area is predominantly residential. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Street View Image of the Application Property 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for change of use of the building from office (Use Class E) to no n-residential education centre (SEND school) (Use Class F1) with minor external alterations including gates, fences, and cycle stores, and associated landscaping works. 3.2 The proposal would convert The Lodge and its Annex building into a private 88- place SEND school for pupils aged 5 to 19, with 66 staff. The Lodge would accommodate 24 pupils in 3 classrooms of 8 pupils. The Annex would accommodate 64 pupils in 8 classrooms of 8 pupils. 3.3 Alongside the approved Aviation House SEND school (40 pupils aged 5 to 11, and 30 staff), the wider campus would cumulatively accommodate up to 128 pupils aged 5 to 19 and 96 staff across the three buildings. 3.4 The proposal would not increase the building’s floor area or height. External works are modest and include safety/access features and associated landscaping. 3.5 During the course of the application, design amendments have been made to the proposal to allow wheelchair access into the proposed school. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3: Proposed Plan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) 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 Of specific relevance is application reference 2157/APP/2023/3068 which sought full planning permission for the change of use of the building from office (Use Class E) to non-residential education centre (SEND school) (Use Class F1) with external alterations including installation of two canopies, gates, fences, bin and cycle stores, and associated landscaping works . Permission was granted subject to conditions on 18/04/2024. The approved proposal has partially been implemented, and the SEND school has been in operation. The approved three-metre- wide footpath providing segregated pedestrian and cycle access from Holloway Lane to Aviation House along the side (west) of The Lodge and Annex has not been implemented. 4.3 Alongside the current planning application, the applicant has also submitted a Listed Building Consent No. 2157/APP/2025/2058 for a lterations to The Lodge (Listed Building Entry No: 1080217) incl uding, demolition of unoriginal internal walls, construction of internal walls and doors, replacement kitchen, balustrade on the roof terrace, replacement WCs, and replacement of a window to be fire rated on the south elevation as well as other decorative minor alteration s. In accordance with the Council ’s scheme of delegations, Listed Building Applications are not required to be delegated to the Planning Committee for determination. Given that Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press there was limited public response to the consultation, which was undertaken, a delegated approval was issued on 13-05-2026. This listed building application provides consent for the physical works to the building only but not the change of use which is subject to this full planning application. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4 of the National Planning Poli cy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states that 'Local Planning Authorities may give weight to relevant policies in emerging plans according to: (a) the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); (b) the extent to which there are unresolve d objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objecti ons, the greater the weight that may be given); and (c) the degree of consistency of the relev ant policies in the emerging plan to this Framework (the closer the policies in th e emerging plan to the policies in the Framework, the greater the weight that may be given).’ Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.3 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replacing the previous versions of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, t he draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Exa mination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.4 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 Public consultation has been undertaken. The Council consulted 87 neighbouring properties, Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents Association and Harmondsworth Conservation Area Advisory Panel on 14/08/2025. A site notice was displayed on 27/08/2025. 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 – 14 October 2026 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 One individual letter of objection ha s been received. Parking demand by school staff and potential parking pressure on the existing local highway network. Discussed in the Transport, Parking and Highway Safety section (p aragraphs 7.27 – 7.41) of this report. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Harmondsworth Conservation Area Advisory Panel Heritage impacts are acceptable given minimal external changes. Reservations about x traffic/parking impacts on the village; x accessibility; and x limited outdoor space Transport/parking matters are addressed in the assessment below, and conditions are recommended for a Travel Plan and Car Parking Management Plan . Accessibility has been considered including wheelchair access amendments. While the provision of outdoor play space would remain similar to that under the approved Aviation House scheme, the use of outdoor play space, i.e. during lunch breaks, would be purposefully staggered timings to safeguard younger students from older stude nts. The applicant has also clarified that traditional school play areas such as sports pitches and facilities are not required. Access Officer No impact on accessibility. Noted. Accessibility is considered acceptable. Land Contamination Officer No objection subject to recommended condition. An appropriately worded contamination condition is recommended to be Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press attached should the application be determined for approval. Noise Specialist No objection. Noted. Planning Policy Officer Principle established through adjacent permission 2157/APP/2023/3 068. Noted. Waste Services No comments / objections. Noted. School Place Planning and Policy Manager The Hillingdon Local Authority has a statutory responsibility to ensure sufficient school places are available for its residents and is actively delivering additional specialist provision in mainstream and special schools through capital investment programmes . On that basis, the Council does not currently require further independent special school places and is therefore unable to support the proposal for an additional 88- place special school catering for pupils up to 19 years of age. Noted. The objection relates principally to borough school place planning / commissioning need, rather than the land -use suitability of the site for SEND school use. SEND school use on the wider site has already been established through the approval of ref. 2157/APP/2023/3068 for a 40 -place primary-age SEND school, which has been at least partially implemented. The current proposal would broaden the education al offer within that established campus context by offering additional places for secondary and post-16 students. The officers consider that the proposal has the potential to support a more continuous SEND education offer within a familiar site setting. Urban Design and Conservation Officer No objection but advises resolving access/safety issues up front; seeks assurances that no further listed building changes will be required. The applicant has confirmed that no further alterations to the listed building would be required following approval. Any future works affecting the listed building would require listed building consent. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Highway Officer An objection has been raised but confirms that it is not related to the proposed footpath/pedestrian access, school drop -off arrangements, supervised collection points, safeguarding procedures or minibus/taxi movements, and that these matters can be accommodated. The objection relates solely to the proposed retention of 61 parking spaces , which is considered excessive and unjustified for the proposed SEND school use, together with the absence of a robust Travel Plan and sustainable transport mitigation. The Highway Authority considers that the existing office parking provision cannot simply be carried forward to justify the proposed F1 use, that re - marking three spaces as disabled bays does not amount to a reduction in parking provision, and that insufficient evidence has been submitted to demonstrate operational need for the level of parking proposed. The Highway Authority’s objection is noted. Having regard to the site’s PTAL of 1b, the existing on -site car park, the operational characteristics of SEND provision, comparable SEND school schemes, and the proposed Travel Plan and Car Parking Management Plan conditions, the level of parking proposed is acceptable in this case. The highway and parking issues raised are addressed in detail in the Highways and Parking section of this report (see paragraphs. 7.27 – 7.41). Air Quality Officer No objection subject to conditions to reduce emissions during the demolition and or construction Appropriately worded conditions are recommended to be attached should the application be determined for approval. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 The proposal involves the change of use of existing buildings from office (Use Class E) to a non -residential education use (SEND school) (Use Class F1) with minor external works. The principle of education and childcare facilities is supported by London Plan Policy S3, subject to matters such as appropriate Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press location, accessibility and the mitigation of any impacts. At national level, NPPF (2026) Policy HC4 requires substantial weight to be given to the benefits of new or improved public service infrastructure or community facilities where proposals also make a demonstrable contribution to promoting good health, preventing ill- health, reducing health inequalities or supporting social interaction. 7.2 Office use is considered as a main town centre use under the NPPF. Policies TC3 and TC4 address new main town centre uses proposed outside town centres whilst London Plan Policy E1 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DME 3 direct office development to preferred locations (such as town centres and established office clusters) and, in this context, t he loss of office floorspace outside such preferred locations is not, in principle, resisted where it would not undermine designated employment areas. 7.3 There is no objection to the loss of this existing office space outside of a town centre and designated office growth area. The applicant has also submitted some evidence to demonstrate that despite continuous marketing effort, there has been lack of viable interest from the market on the existing office building. The proposed loss of office space in this locality would comply with the NPPF, Policy E1 of The London Plan, and Policy DME 3 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part Two Development Management Policies. 7.4 The Council's Policy Team has been consul ted and stated that the principle of development for a SEND school at this location has been established under the approved Aviation House scheme. 7.5 The Council's School Place Planning Manager does not support the current proposal on the basis that the Local Auth ority is already delivering additional specialist provision and does not currently require further independent special school places. 7.6 The comments are noted, however the proposal would broaden the educational offer on a si te where primary-age SEND provision has already been approved (under planning permission no. 2157/APP/2023/3068), extending the campus beyond the existing primary -age offer to provide additional classrooms and provision for older year groups (secondary-age and post-16) . The applicant has advised that the existing school is at capacity, with a waiting / consultation list of 35+ pupils and has provided referral data indicating increasing demand. The applicant also states that, for children with autism and other SEND needs, consistency and minimal change are particularly important. 7.7 The applicant has confirmed that the school operates a pupil pipeline planning approach which explicitly prioritises existing pupils as they move between phases, both from primary to secondary and from secondary to post -16 provision. As such, the proposed secondary-age and post-16 places would not simply add capacity but would provide a planned onward pathway for existing pupils within the same familiar educational environme nt and with consistent day-to- day travel arrangements. For pupils with severe autism and associated severe learning difficulties, the applicant explains that av oiding an enforced change of setting at Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press transition points is particularly impor tant in supporting wellbeing and educational progress. The proposal would therefore help to support a more continuous SEND education pathway on the site, reducing di sruption for pupils as they progress through age groups, whilst also assisting families and local authorities by reducing the need to secure new onward placements for learners with particularly complex placement needs. This continuity of provision attracts positive weight in the planning balance. 7.8 It should also be noted that the current planning assessment is based on the suitability of this site to accommodate sch ool use with associated alterations. As discussed in other sections in the report, the proposed development would not result in signific ant harms in various aspects. The proposed school use is therefore considered acceptable and in accordance with The London Plan. 7.9 Part of the wider site li es within the Green Belt. NPPF (2026) Poli cies GB6 and GB7, London Plan Policy G2, Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 Policy EM2 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMEI 4 attach great importance to protecting Green Belt land, with openness and permanence as its essential characteristics. The key test is therefore whether the pr oposal would amount to inappropriate development or otherwise harm Green Belt openness. 7.10 The proposal does not include additional external alteration on Greenbelt other than those approved under the Aviation House Scheme. The other external alterations to The Lodge and The Annex would be outside the boundary of Greenbelt and are considered minor, therefore would not harm the openness and setting of the Greenbelt. Design / Character and Impact on the Listed Building and Conservation Area 7.11 The Lodge is a Grade II listed building , and the boundary wall is also Grade II listed, and the site lies within the Harmondsworth Village Conservation Area. The National Planning Policy Framework (2026) Policies HE4, HE5, HE6 and HE9, London Plan Policy HC1, Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 Policy HE1 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policies DMHB 1, DMHB 2 and DMHB 4 seek to conserve and, where appropriate, enhance the significance of designated heritage assets and to ensure that development preserves or enhances the character and appearance of conservation areas. 7.12 In addition to the above, London Plan Policies D1, D3 and D4 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 Policy BE1, together with Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12, are directly relevant in seeking high quality design that responds positively to local character, context, scale and materials. These policies can be read in full in the Committee Report Part 3 – Policy Appendix and, in summary, require that proposals are sympathetic to their context and conserve the significance of heritage assets. 7.13 The proposed development would convert the existing listed building The Lodge from an office building into a SEND school without any substantial external alterations. Minor external alterations includes installation of rail metal balustrade, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press barrier guarding, handrails and window restrictors, in or der to ensure safety and accessibility. These minor alterations would be moderate in size and locate on the eastern and western elevations of The Lodge, therefore not readily visible from the streets cene. The propo sed internal alterations to The Lodge are considered minor in nature and necessary to support the proposed SEND school. 7.14 Similarly, the proposed external alterati ons in The Annex building, e.g. opaque glazing to existing windows, installation of window restrictors, are considered minor and would not be readily visible from the streetscene due to the set -back location away from Holloway Lane / Harmondsworth Lane. 7.15 As stated above the Council’s Heritage and Conservation Officer has raised no objection to the proposal. 7.16 Overall, it is considered that the proposal would preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the Grade II listed building which in turns benefits the setting of the Conservation Area. Residential Amenity 7.17 London Plan Policy D3 requires development to provide a high standard of amenity for existing and future users, including appropriate outlook and minimising adverse impacts. In respect of noise, London Plan Policy D13 (Agent of Change) requires that noise and other nuisance- generating development should put in place measures to mitigate and manage any impacts on neighbouring noise- sensitive uses. These aims are also reflected in Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 Policy EM8, which seeks to safeguard land, air and noise quality and ensure impacts can be adequately controlled and mitigated. Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMHB 11 seeks to ensure development does not adversely impact the amenity of adjacent occupiers (including daylight/sunlight, outlook and overbearing effects). The key considerations are therefore whether the change of use and associated works would result in unacceptable impacts in terms of residential amenity (including noise) and whether appropriate mitigation is secured. 7.18 The nearest residential properties and noise-sensitive receptors are on Holloway Lane and Harmondsworth Lane, to the north of the site across the public highway with a separation distance of at least 14m between the nearest residential property (i.e. No. 20 Ho lloway Lane) and the application site boundary . There are open fields to the south and east and barns to the west. 7.19 The applicant submitted a Noise Impact Assessment. It includes acoustic design details aimed to meet the recommendations of Building Bulletin 93 - Acoustic Design of Schools: Performance Standards. It also concludes that the proposed development and its external play areas would not result in any significant noise impacts to the identified noise sensitive receptors. 7.20 The Council's Noise Specialist has been consulted and has no comments or objections to the proposal. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.21 The proposal is considered to comply with Policy D13 of The London Plan and Policy EM8 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part One Strategic Policies. 7.22 The change of use and associated building and landscape alterations would be minor in scale and would not impact residential amenities, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties, and open space or create an increased sense of enclosure or loss of outlook. 7.23 The proposal complies with Policy D3 of The London Plan and Policy DMHB 11 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part Two Development Management Policies. Open Space / Play Space 7.24 London Plan (2021) Policy S3 states development proposals for education and childcare facilities should incorporate suitable, accessible outdoor space. 7.25 While the provision of outdoor play space would remain similar to that under the approved Aviation House scheme, the use of outdoor play space, i.e. during lunch breaks, would be purposefully staggered to safeguard younger students from older students. The applicant has also clar ified that traditional school play areas such as sports pitches and facilities are not required or useful for autistic children. Sports and team games require significant mental ability and awareness which is not possible for autistic children. 7.26 Therefore, the outdoor play space provision is considered sufficient and suitable for the proposed school use, in line with Policy S3 of the London Plan (2021). Highways and Parking 7.27 London Plan Policy T4 requires development proposals to reflect and be integrated with current and planned transport access, capacity and connectivity, and to ensure proposals do not increase road danger. London Plan Policy T5 requires development to support cyclin g and remove barriers to cycling, and London Plan Policy T6 requires car parking to be restrained and provided in line with public transport accessibility and co nnectivity, reflecting the sustainable transport hierarchy 7.28 At local level, Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMT 6 requires that developments must comply with the parking standards outlined in Appendix C Table 1. Table 1 does not detail any standard for SEND schools. However , given it is an educational facility th e standard under “Higher and Further Education Establishment (Vocational & Academic) Adult Training Centres and Schools” in Policy DMT6 can be applied , which states “on an individual basis using a transport assessment and (where applicable) a school travel plan / travel plan. Where relevant, provision should made for coach/bus access and parking”. 7.29 The application site has a PTAL level of 1b. The proposed development would include the retention of existing car park to provide 61 nos. car parking spaces (for 96 staff, equivalent to 0.6 space per st aff; including the approved 12 staff car Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press parking spaces under planning permission No. 2157/APP/2023/3068). A vehicle access would be provided at the northeastern corner of the site along Harmondsworth Lane and a drop -off point would be provided in front of Aviation House. These vehicle access and drop -off arrangement would be like that of the approved Aviation House scheme. 7.30 The applicant has advised that most of the pupils would arrive and depart from the school via organised, supervised transport predominantly in the form of local authority -arranged minibuses and taxis. Drop-off and pick- up times would be managed and staggered to ensure safe and orderly arrival and departure, with staff present to assist pupils from vehicles into the school building and vice versa. For other pupils who travel to and from the school on foot/ cycle, a separate pedestrian entrance and waiting / drop off area would be provided at the northwestern corner of the site on Holloway Lane to separate them from vehicular traffic. 7.31 Under the approved Aviation House sch eme, a three-metre-wide footpath providing segregated pedestrian and cycle access from Holloway Lane to Aviation House along the side (west) of The Lodge and Annex would be provided but has not been implemented to date nor included under the current proposal. The applicant has advised that the footpath is no longer required due to the comprehensive masterplan under the cu rrent application. Wheelchair access would still be available through the pedestrian entrance between the Lodge and the Annex. The width of such entrance would be 1.84m and is considered sufficient for all users. 7.32 As stated in Section 6 above, the Highw ay Authority (HA) has objected on the proposal based on its car parking levels and the lack of sustainable transport mitigation. 7.33 The applicant has provided a Transport assessment under the original submission and subsequently submitted a draft Travel Plan, a Responses -to-Highways Comments note and a supporting letter from the school operator to clarify the operational and parking needs, in response to the HA's objection. 7.34 It is noted that the approved Aviation House scheme (under planning permission No. 2157/APP/2023/3068) had proposed 0.4 parking space per staff (with 12 car parking spaces for approximately 30 members of staff) whilst 25 spaces out of the pre-existing 89 car parking spaces had been removed to facilitate the approved play space. Therefore, in the existing car park, there are 64 car parking spaces, with the 12 allocated to the Aviation House scheme and 52 retained for the existing office use. 7.35 The supporting letter from the school operator has advised that the proposed SEND secondary school operation at The Lodge and Annex would require approximately 15 specialist staff. Specialist staff with this combination of SEND expertise and secondary subject knowledge are in very limited supply. The recruitment pool is necessarily drawn fr om a wide geographical area, and these staff members are expected to travel to work by car from greater distances. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Therefore, approximately 25 of the car parking spaces would be allocated/ reserved for specialist staff (15 spaces) and occasional overflow for training events (10 space s). The remaining 36 car parking spaces serve approximately 81 standard (non-specialist) members of staff, producing a car-to- staff travel ratio of approximately 0.4, consistent with the approved and consented scheme at Aviation House. 7.36 In absence of a specific parking standard for SEND school under the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 and the London Plan, the officers have referred to comparable planning applications at Grangewood School, Fore Street, Eastcote (Ref: 2145/APP/2022/3534), Moorcroft School, Bramble Close, Hillingdon (Ref: 49008/APP/2020/1069) and Barra Hall, Wood End Green Road, Hayes (Ref: 8134/APP/2025/404). 7.37 At Moorcroft School, the car parking spaces to staff ratio was 1.02, at Grangewood School 0.85, and at Barra Hall 0.96. As such , having taken comparable applications into consideration car parking spaces proposed under the current application, with a parking to staff ratio of 0.6 is considered acceptable if supported by a robust Travel Plan. 7.38 The submitted draft Travel Plan has included some overarching principles to promote sustainable transport mode. Whilst detailed measures to achieve these principles and monitor/ review mechanism are not available in the submitted document, the officers have recommended conditions for submission and approval of revised and strengthened Travel Plan and Car Parking Management Plan, which is an opportunity to monitor the level of parking required and provided. 7.39 While the position taken by the HA is understood it is clear from a wider assessment, including comparable schemes, that the development as proposed would not present a significant departure from policy. There is an overarching aim to reduce car dependency and use , however in low PTAL areas such as 1b it is generally accepted that there would need to be a higher dependency on vehicle use to travel to and from the development site. Moreover, the submission includes evidence that supports a high ratio of parking as being required. Officers do not consider there to be a specific policy basis to refuse the application on the grounds of an over-provision of parking that would be defendable at appeal , particularly when Policy DMT 6 states standards should be “on an individual basis using a transport assessment and (where applicable) a school travel plan / travel plan.” In this case there is robust justification for the proposed quantum and conditions are proposed to monitor parking requirements on site to enable a reduction in parking quantum where feasible. 7.40 Officers understand that that there is a wider aspiration to reduce car dependency broadly set out in the London Plan, however the site is located within an area with very low sustainab le transport options an d proposes a change of use which supports children with special education needs. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.41 Subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal is considered on the whole to comply with Policies T4, T5, and T6 of The London Plan and Policy DMT 6 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part Two Development Management Policies. Air Quality 7.42 The application site is in an Air Quality Management Area (Hillingdon AQMA). London Plan Policy SI1 requires development proposals to tackle poor air quality, protect health and meet legal obligations, including ensuring proposals do not lead to further deterioration of existing poor air quality and are at least Air Quality Neutral where applicable. These aims are reflected locally in Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 Policy EM8 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMEI 14, which require development to avoid unacceptable risk from air pollution to sensitive receptors and, as a minimum, be air quality neut ral and include appropriate mitigation, particularly within the AQMA. 7.43 The applicant submitted an Air Quality Assessment and subsequent technical clarification. During preparation of the co mmittee report, the operational traffic assumptions were revisited alongside the transport evidence. A revised modal split and trip estima te has since been agreed with the Highway Authority, including a more cautious assumption for staff car travel informed by the average mode split for people working in the borough. 7.44 The additional information has been review ed by the Air Quality Officer who has agreed with the adjustment to the modal split and raises no objection. As such, subject to conditions pertaining to dust management , the proposal is considered acceptable in air quality terms and compliant with NPPF 2026 Policy P3, London Plan Policy SI1, Local Plan Part 1 Policy EM8 and Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMEI 14. Biodiversity Net Gain 7.45 Biodiversity net gain is a way of creating and improving biodiversity by requiring development to have a positive impact ('net gain') on biodiversity. 7.46 In England, Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) is mandatory under Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as inserted by Schedule 14 of the Environment Act 2021). It became mandatory for major developments on 12 February 2024 and small sites on 2 A pril 2024. Developers must deliver a BNG of at least 10%. This means a development will result in more or better-quality natural habitat than there was before development. The land owner is legally responsible for creating or enhancing the habitat and managing that habitat for at least 30 years to achieve the target condition. The NPPF states that planning decisions should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on and providing net gains for biodiversity. 7.47 In the BNG section of the application fo rm that the applicant has suggested that the development is subject to the de minimis exemption. As shown on the existing and proposed landscape plans and as confirmed by the applicant, no existing Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press habitat would be removed. The proposal would not affect more than 25sqm of 'onsite habitat that has biodiversity value greater than zero'. 7.48 On this basis, it is considered that the development would fall under the de minimis exemption. Tree and Landscaping 7.49 London Plan Policy G5 seeks to secure urban greening as a fundamental element of site and building design, including high-quality landscaping, and supports the use of the Urban Greening Factor (UGF) as a measure to achieve this. London Plan Policy G7 also seeks to ensure that existing trees of value are retained wherever possible. 7.50 As per the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment, 1no. formally maintained tree group (G38) and 1no. buddleja shrub (S36) only, which in BS5837 terms are Category C (i.e., low -quality) would be removed due to their poor current condition. The proposed removal is considered unlikely to significantly impact the overall condition of the existing trees within the application site. Three proposed new trees would be planted in the landscaped area within the car park. 7.51 The applicant proposes an UGF of 0.44, which exceeds Policy G5 of The London Plan. 7.52 Subject to conditions ensuring protection of trees and implementation of UGF measures, the proposal would comply with Policy G5 of The Lon don Plan and Policy DMHB 14 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part Two Development Management Policies. Appropriate conditions have attached. Archaeology 7.53 NPPF (2026) Policy HE5(5) requires an appropriate desk-based assessment and, where necessary, field evaluation where a proposal involves, or has the potential to involve, a heritage asset with archaeological interest. Policy HE10 further states that archaeological assets should be preserved in situ where feasible, with appropriate investi gation, recording, dissemination and archiving where on -site preservation is not possible. London Plan Policy HC1 requires development affecting heritage assets (including arc haeology) to conserve significance and, where relevant, make provision for the protection and investigation/recording of archaeological remains. At local level, Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMHB 7 seeks to ensure that sites of archaeo logical interest are not disturbed; where disturbance cannot be avoided, it requires appropriate archaeological investigation, recording, archiving and reporting secured through suitable measures. The key consideration is ther efore whether the proposal would result in ground disturbance with potential to harm archaeological remains, and if so, whether proportionate assessment and mitigation is required. 7.54 The site is within the Heathrow and Harmondsworth Archaeological Priority Areas. Historic England's Greater London Archaeological Advisory Panel (GLAAS) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press defines developments without basements on sites with areas of less than 0.5 hectares as 'very minor'. 'Very minor' de velopments in Tier 1 APAs would have medium risk, while developments in Tier 2 and Tier 3 APAs would have negligible risk. Negligible risk means 'developments only rarely causing harm to heritage assets of archaeological interest and hardly ever causing significant harm.' 7.55 The application is mainly for a change of use. Minor dig works are limited to landscape alterations. As such, it would be smaller in scale than a typical householder application. Hillingdon Council does not yet have APA tiers , and the site is not within 50 metres of a scheduled monument. Therefore, it is not referable to the GLAAS. Notwithstanding this point, GLAAS were consulted but to date no comments have been received. As groundworks are minimal and the scheme does not meet the threshold for GLAAS assessment and comment, it is considered acceptable in the context of Policies HE5 and HE10 of the NPPF, Policy HC1 of the London Plan, and Policy DMHB 7 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part Two. Accessibility 7.56 Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021) (I nclusive Design) seeks to ensure that development is designed to be inclusive and accessible to all users. 7.57 Design amendments have been made to the proposal to allow wheelchair access into the proposed school. The proposal has been reviewed by the Council’s Accessibility Officer who has consider this proposal to have no impact on accessibility. Therefore, the development is therefore considered to comply with Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021). Flooding and Drainage 7.58 NPPF (2026) Policies F4 to F8 require flood risk from all sources to be considered and development to remain safe throughout its lifetime with out increasing flood risk elsewhere. London Plan Policies SI12 and SI13 and Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMEI 10 similarly requir e development to minimise flood risk, manage surface-water runoff appropriately and incorporate sustainable drainage measures in accordance with the drainage hierarchy. 7.59 The application site is not located within Flood Zone 2 or Flood Zone 3 and is therefore at low risk of fluvial flooding. Whilst a small area in front of the eastern elevation of The Lodge lies within an area identified as being at risk of surface water flooding. 7.60 It is noted that the proposed SEND school would be a more vulnerable form of development in flood risk terms than the existing office use, but the area with risk of surface water flooding is limited in extent and does not coincide with the external play / amenity areas where a future pupil might stay for a prolonged period of time. No additional building footprint, material increase in impermeable surfacing or alteration to site levels is proposed. The submitted Flood Risk Assessment concludes that the development would remain safe throughout its lifetime and would not increase flood risk elsewhere. The assessment also proposes drainage Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press betterment within areas of external works, including permeable surfacing, granular sub-base storage and rain-garden planting. 7.61 Having regard to the limited extent of the surface water risk area, the location of the main pupil activity areas elsewhere within the site, and the absence of additional built form in the affected area, the proposal is considered acceptable in flood risk and drainage terms subject to a condition for sustainable drainage measures. Land Contamination 7.62 The application site is identified as Potentially Contamina ted Land. Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Policy DMEI 12 requires development on land affected by contamination to ensure that risks to human health, property and the wider environment are appropriately assessed and remediated. 7.63 A Land Contamination Assessment has been submitted. The Council’s Land Contamination Officer raises no objection to the proposal subject to a condition to secure the recommended contamination assessment/mitigation measures (as applicable), to ensure the site is suitable for the propos ed use. This condition is recommended to be attached, should the application be determined for approval. 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. The proposed development is not CIL liable. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 The proposed change of use to a SEND school is acceptable in principle. The minor external works would preserve the char acter and significance of the listed building and conservation area and would not harm Green Belt openness. 9.2 The Highway Authority maintains an objection regarding parking levels and sustainable transport mitigation. Officers consider that, in the context of the low PTAL, the operational characteristics of SEND provision and comparable schemes, the parking provision can be accepted subject to conditions securing a robust Travel Plan and a Car Parking Management Plan, together with controls on pupil and staff numbers. 9.3 The proposal is considered to comply with the Development Plan when read as a whole and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. The application is recommended for approval subject to the conditions set ou t in Appendix 1 and a Section 106 legal agreement to secure the recommended obligations. 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. 10.2 This report has been prepared with reference to the background papers listed below, which have been relied upon to a material extent in its preparation and are available for public inspection, subject to any necessary redaction for exempt or confidential information. 10.3 Internal Consultee Comments: x Contaminated Land Officer x Access Officer x Noise Officer x Air Quality Officer x Highways Officer x Planning Policy Officer x Conservation Officer x Waste Officer x School Place Planning and Policy Manager 10.4 External Consultee Comments: x Harmondsworth Conservation Area Advisory Panel Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press AAPPENDICES Planning Application 2157/APP/2025/2060 Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 15 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, numbers: 745-CDA-ZZ-ZZ-DR-A-00-0100-REV 02-Site Location Plan 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-05-0406-REV 01-Proposed Section-The Lodge West Entrance 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-05-0111-REV 05-Proposed Landscape Plan 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-05-0407-REV 01-Proposed Section - The Annex Main Entrance Lobby 745-CDA-2-00-DR-A-05-0100-REV 05-Proposed Ground Floor Plan - The Annex 745-CDA-2-01-DR-A-05-0101-REV 04-Proposed First Floor Plan - The Annex 745-CDA-2-02-DR-A-05-0102-REV 02-Proposed Roof Plan - The Annex 745-CDA-1-B1-DR-A-05-0099-REV 04-Proposed Lower Ground Floor - The Lodge 745-CDA-1-00-DR-A-05-0100-REV 04-Proposed Ground Floor Plan - The Lodge 745-CDA-1-01-DR-A-05-0101-REV 02-Proposed First Floor Plan - The Lodge 745-CDA-1-02-DR-A-05-0102-REV 02-Proposed Roof Plan - The Lodge 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-10-0099-REV 02- Proposed Lower Ground Floor Block Plan 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-10-0100-REV 03- Proposed Ground Floor Block Plan 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-10-0101-REV 03-Proposed First Floor Block Plan 745-CDA-1-02-DR-A-05-0102-REV 02-Proposed Roof Floor Plan 745-CDA-1-ZZ-DR-A-05-0200-REV 02-Proposed North Elevation 745-CDA-1-ZZ-DR-A-05-0201-REV 02-Proposed East Elevation 745-CDA-1-ZZ-DR-A-05-0202-REV 02-Proposed South Elevation 745-CDA-1-ZZ-DR-A-05-0203-REV 02-Proposed West Elevation 745-CDA-2-00-DR-A-05-0100-REV 02-Proposed Ground Floor Plan 745-CDA-2-02-DR-A-05-0102-REV 02-Proposed Roof Plan 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0200-REV 02-Proposed North Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0201-REV 02-Proposed East Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0202-REV 02-Proposed South Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0203-REV 02-Proposed West Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0204-REV 02-Proposed North Inner Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0205-REV 02-Proposed East Inner Elevation 745-CDA-2-ZZ-DR-A-05-0206-REV 02-Proposed South Inner Elevation Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 15 745-CDA-X-ZZ-DR-A-05-1112-REV 01-UGF Plan J8/04009-Details of Bowtop Fencing 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 London Plan (2021) and Hillingdon 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: Fire Statement prepared by Apex Strategies; Heritage Statement prepared by Cogent Heritage; Transport Statement prepared by Kronen Ltd; Noise Impact Assessment prepared by Syntegra Group; BREEAM Pre-Assessment prepared by Syntegra Group; Air Quality Assessment prepared by Syntegra Group; Flood Risk Assessment and Sustainable Urban Drainage Strategy by Syntegra Group; Arboriculture Impact Assessment prepared by TMA Environmental Consultants; Phase 1 Desktop Study and Preliminary Risk Assessment Report (3x Parts) by GeoSmart Information Ltd; Covering Letter-Supporting Letter-Travel Plan 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 London Plan (2021) and Hillingdon Local Plan Parts 1 (2012) and 2 (2020). 4. NONSC E Electric vehicle charging Three 7Kw active electric vehicle charging point and one 7kw passive electric vehicle charging point, prior to the first use of the development hereby approved. The four electric vehicle charging points shall thereafter be retained as such, unless upgrading the passive electric vehicle charging point to an active electric vehicle charging point. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of Policy T6 of The London Plan (2021). 5. NONSC T Travel Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 15 Prior to occupation of the development hereby permitted, a Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan, as submitted shall follow the current Travel Plan Development Control Guidance issued by Transport for London and will include: (1)targets for sustainable travel arrangements; (2)effective measures for the ongoing monitoring of the Travel Plan; (3)a commitment to delivering the Travel Plan objectives; and (4)effective mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the Travel Plan by both present and future occupiers of the development. The development shall be implemented only in accordance with the approved Travel Plan. REASON To promote sustainable transport and reduce the impact of the development on the surrounding road network in accordance with Policies DMT 1, DMT 4 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policies T2, T4 and T6 of the London Plan (2021). 6 6. NONSC P Parking Design and Management Plan Prior to occupation of the development hereby permitted, a Car Parking Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. It shall include the arrangements for all on-site parking, including provisions for managing, monitoring, enforcement and review. The vehicle parking provision and its management, as outlined in the approved Car Parking Management Plan, shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of the development, and so maintained in good working order, and the parking spaces shall not be used for any other purpose for the lifetime of the development. REASON To ensure the appropriate operation of the car parking spaces and to ensure that the proposed development provides adequate facilities in accordance with Policies DMT 1, DMT 2 and DMT 6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policy T6 of the London Plan (2021). 7. NONSC P Pupil and staff restrictions The total number of pupils attending the school hereby approved shall not exceed 128 pupils and the number of school staff shall not exceed 99 employees. REASON To prevent the generation of additional traffic that could give rise to problems of safety and congestion on the surrounding roads and to comply with Policy T4 of The London Plan (2021) and Policies DMT 1, DMT 2, and DMT6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 15 88. NONSC C Cycle parking 30 long-stay cycle parking spaces and 6 short-stay cycle parking spaces shall be installed and available for use in accordance with approved plans and the London Cycle Design Standards prior to the first use of the development hereby approved. The cycle parking shall thereafter be retained for the lifetime of the school development. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions of Policy T5 of The London Plan (2021). 9. NONSC T Tree Protection Prior to commencement of development (including ground works and site clearance) an Arboricultural Method Statement shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. All protection measures must detail each phase of the development process, considering site clearance works, all construction works and hard and soft landscaping works. Details shall include the following: -Full survey of all trees on site and those within influencing distance on adjacent sites in accordance with BS5837*, with tree works proposals. All trees must be plotted on a site plan**, clearly and accurately depicting trunk locations, root protection areas and canopy spreads; -A plan** detailing all trees and hedgerows planned for retention and removal; -A schedule of tree works for all the retained trees specifying pruning and other remedial or preventative work, whether for physiological, hazard abatement, aesthetic, or operational reasons. All tree works shall be carried out in accordance with BS 3998; -Soil assessments/survey; -Timing and phasing of works; -Site specific demolition and hard surface removal specifications; -Site specific construction specifications (e.g. in connection with foundations, bridging, water features, surfacing); -Access arrangements and car parking; -Level changes; -Landscaping proposals; -A Tree protection plan** in accordance with BS5837* detailing all methods of protection, including but not restricted to: locations of construction exclusion zones, root protection areas, fit for purpose fencing and ground protection, service routes, works access space, material/machinery/waste storage and permanent & temporary hard surfaces; -Soil remediation plans, where unauthorised access has damaged root protection areas in the construction exclusion zones; -Details of the arboricultural supervision schedule. All tree protection methods detailed in the approved Arboricultural Method Statement shall Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 5 of 15 be installed prior to commencement of development (including ground works and site clearance) and not be moved or removed, temporarily or otherwise, until all works including external works have been completed and all equipment, machinery, and surplus materials have been removed from the site. Any trees, shrubs, or hedges removed without consent, die, are severely damaged or become seriously diseased within five years from the completion of the approved development, shall be replaced with trees, shrubs, or hedges capable of achieving comparable quantity and quality. *Using the most recent revision the of the Standard **Plans must be of a minimum scale of 1:200 (unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority) REASON To ensure appropriate urban greening and tree protection in accordance with Policies G5 and G7 of The London Plan. 1 10. NONSC T Tree Monitoring (a) Prior to the commencement of development (including ground works and site clearance), the following shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority: A Tree Monitoring Plan to include: -Confirmation of who shall be the lead arboriculturalist for the development; -Confirmation of the Site Manager, key personnel, their key responsibilities and contact details; -Details of induction procedures for all personnel in relation to arboricultural matters; -A detailed timetable of events for arboricultural supervision concerning all tree protection measures within the approved Tree Protection Plan, including: - Initial implementation/installation of the tree protection measures; -Approved incursions into construction exclusion zones; -Final removal of the tree protection measures; -Procedures for dealing with non-approved incursions into the construction exclusion zones as detailed in the approved arboricultural plans and reports. (b) Within three months of first use of the development hereby approved, a report containing the following details shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority: -Results of each site visit by the lead arboriculturist with photos attached. -Assessment of the retained and planted trees, including any necessary remedial action because of damage incurred during construction. REASON To ensure appropriate urban greening and tree protection in accordance with Policies G5 and G7 of The London Plan. Hillingdon Planning Committee - PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 6 of 15

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Mike Kemp 74423/APP/2024/1908 Date Application Valid: 15/07/2024 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 13/11/2026 Application Type: Full Ward: Heathrow Villages Applicant: MBH Heathrow Ltd. Site Address: Land at Status Park, Nobel Drive, UB3 5FA Proposal: Erection of a residential building together with associated landscaping and car parking, and including the reconfiguration of the Vista Court, Atlantico House and Peninsula House residential car parks on Nobel Drive. 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 – 14th October 2026 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. Section 106 Legal Agreement Heads of Terms: 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. Affordable Housing contribution in lieu of £500,000. The obligation shall include an early and late-stage review mechanisms. ii. A financial contribution of £28,088 towards the delivery of an Employment Strategy and Training Scheme, secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. iii. A Carbon Offset contribution of £11,198. iv. Air Quality Mitigation contribution of £60,504. v. A Healthy Streets/Active Travel Zone contribution of £50,160. vi. London Healthy Urban Development Unit (HUDU) financial contribution of £58,893 to fund enhanced or new health facilities within the London Borough of Hillingdon. vii. Residential Parking Permits restriction (excluding Blue Badge holders). viii. Designation of public open space and play provision within the site to remain publicly accessible in perpetuity. i. 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 preparation of 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 wording of the heads of terms, the proposed Legal 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: Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press The applicant has failed to mitigate the impacts posed by the proposed development (in respect of affordable housing, air quality, carbon reduction. parking, provision of public open space, employment/construction training, health, highway safety and sustainable travel). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policies DMH 7, DMEI 2, DMEI 3 , DMCI 3, DMT 1, DMT 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020); the adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (2014); Polic ies DF1, DMCI 7, H4, SI 1, SI 2, SI 3, G4, T1, T4 of the London Plan (2021); and Policies DM3 and DM6 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2026).' 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 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a residential building varying between four and five storeys in scale containing a total of 51 apartments, comprising 18x 1-bedroom units; 20x 2 Bedroom units; and 13x 3-bedroom units. The building would be located on an area of surface level car parking to the east of Vista Court which functions as car parking to serve the residential, former office buildings of Atlantico House and Peninsula House. The remaining parking and landscaping on the site would be reconfigured to provide new areas of public open space. There would be an overall reduction of 99 parking spaces (40%) to serve the other residential, former office buildings on the site. 1.2 In line with Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF 2026 and Policy H1 of the London Plan, the application site would represent a suitable site for the delivery of a high- density development which optimises the potential for housing delivery. It is acknowledged that the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites (the mo st recent position statement published on 01/04/2026 confirmed a 2.5 -year supply). The provision of 51 new homes would make a substantial contribution towards addressing the Council’s existing shortfall in supply of homes , which must therefore be afforded substantial weight. In summary it is considered that the proposals represent an efficient and appropriate re-use of previously developed land, and t he principle of the proposed development is acceptable subject to wider assessment against the relevant planning framework. The development would align fully with the aims of Policies S4 and HO7 of the NPPF, which give substantial weight to the provision of new housing. 1.3 The Applicant submitted an FVA which has been reviewed by a viability consultant procured by the LPA. Following a detailed review, the Applicant has agreed to a payment in lieu of onsite affordable housing of £500,000. Officers are satisfied that the proposed financial contribution is acceptable in line with the policy position relating to viability testing as set out under Policy H5, Part C and Policy H4, Part B, of the London Plan (2021). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 1.4 The height and scale of development would be commensurate with the built form on the Status Park site and existing development along Bath Road and is considered appropriate affording due emphasis on the need to ensure that an optimum density of homes is delivered on the site in line with In line with Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF 2026 and Policy H1 of the London Plan. The design of the building would be of a good quality and is considered to respond appropriately to the site and its surroundings. The provision of new landscaped areas of public open space would enhance the appearance of the site compared with its present condition and would be of substantial benefit to the amenity of the occupiers of the buildings on the site. 1.5 The development would cause a minor degree of harm to the amenity of a relatively small number of adjoining residential properties to the north of the site in terms of a loss of privacy and loss of light/overshadowing, as well as the impact of the scale of the building which would affect outlook. These matters are addressed in detail within the residential amenity section of this report. Accounting for the site context the impact of development on daylight and sunlight to surrounding occupiers is considered appropriate on balance accounting for the need to deliver an effective use of the site and optimum density of development. It is considered that appropriate standards of amenity would retained for existing occupiers. Adequate standards of daylight/sunlight outlook would be achieved for future occupiers, and provision is made within the development for private balconies in the case of upper floor flat and gardens in the case of the ground floor flats. 1.6 Parking on -site to serve all the residential buildings on the Status Park site , including Vista Court, Atlantico House and Peninsula House would be reduced from 245 to 146 spaces. This would equate to a reduction of 99 spaces (40%). There are 127 residential dwellings on site and together with the proposed 51 units, there would be a parking ratio of 0.82 spaces per dwelling across this site. The site is located within an outer London Opportunity Area in which Table 10.3 of the London Plan identifies a maximum parking ratio of 0.5 spaces per dwelling. Of the retained parking spaces, 11 of these would serve the new building, of which 5 of these would be blue bad ge spaces. This would equate to a ratio of 0.21 spaces per unit for the new building which would be significantly below the London Plan maximum parking standards. The quantum of parking proposed and forecast trip generation associated with the scale of deve lopment and level of parking provision is considered to not impact adversely on highway safety and amenity. The development would therefore comply with Policy TR6 of the NPPF (2026), Policies T4, T5, T6, and T7 of The London Plan (2021), and Policies DMT 1, DMT 5, DMT 6, and DMT 2 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020). 1.7 Appropriate measures may be secured by condition or through relevant planning obligations to mitigate/control land contamination, drainage, air quality, noise impact, impact on existing trees, aviation safety; and to protect biodiversity and ensure the del ivery of biodiversity net gain. The development would therefore ensure appropriate standards of environmental protection. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press The planning application is therefore recommended for approval, subject to the conditions contained in Appendix 1; the Section 106 Heads of Terms detailed above. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The application site known as ‘Status Park’ consists of Atlantico House a 3- storey building and Peninsula House a four-storey building as well as areas of surface level car parking, soft landscaping, including several trees. The car parking within the site has existing capacity for approximately 245 vehicles. The site lies to the north of Heathrow Airport and to the south east of Harlington village. Atlantico House and Peninsula House are former office buildings, both of which have been converted to residential use. The site is accessed from Nobel Road via a roundabout with one arm serving the eastern car park of Penisula House, the other is used to access the car park of Atlantico House. Nobel Road itself is accessed via a dual-carriageway section of the Bath Road by a traffic light-controlled junction. 2.2 Vista Court located to the west of the site and Princess House to the north west of the house are also former office buildings which have been converted to residential use. The Ibis Hotel is located to the west of the site and extends up to 7 storeys. There are residential dwellings to the north west at Caroline Court which is three storeys in scale. The area surrounding the site is characterised by a range of uses including residential dwellings, commercial premises and hotels. The land to the north and east of the site consists of open agricultural land falling within the Metropolitan Green Belt. 2.3 The application site has a PTAL of 3. The site does not lie within the setting of any listed buildings and does not lie within, or within the setting of a conservation area. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: View of Site of Proposed Building from corner of Bath Road and Nobel Drive Figure 3: View of Site of Proposed Building from within Status Park Site with Vista Court to right of photograph. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 4: Photograph showing existing parking on the site serving Vista Court and Atlantico House, also shown on the photograph. Figure 5: Car park to east of Peninsula Court which would be remodelled and landscaped. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 3 Proposal 3.1 Planning permission is sought for the erection of a residential building varying between four and five storeys in scale containing a total of 51 apartments, comprising 18x 1-bedroom units; 20x 2 Bedroom units; and 13x 3-bedroom units. The building would be located on an area of surface level car parking to the east of Vista Court which functions as car parking to serve the former office buildings of Vista Court, Atlantico House and Peninsula House now used for residential purposes. 3.2 The remaining parking and landscaping on the site would be reconfigured and there would be an overall reduction of 99 parking spaces (40%) to serve the other residential, former office buildings on the site. The landscaping works include the creation of new areas of public open space adjoining the building adjacent to Vista Court, Bath Road and Nobel Drive. New areas of landscaped public open space are proposed to the north and east of Peninsula House and Atlantico House . Vehicular access into the site from Nobel Drive leading from the existing arm of the roundabout. 11 parking spaces are proposed to serve the new building, of which 5 of these would be blue badge spaces. New areas of soft landscaping, play and shared amenity space are proposed. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 6: Proposed Landscaping Masterplan (please note – larger version of plan can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 7: Proposed Ground Floor Plan Figure 8: Proposed Typical Upper Floor Plan Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 9: Proposed Elevations South and North Figure 10: Proposed Elevations East and West Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 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 Atlantico House located on the site to the north of the proposed building and south of Nobel Drive was converted to a residential use under prior approval application reference 69183/APP/2017/1363 granted in 2017. Planning permission was also granted in 2018 for a roof extension to provide four flats ( 69183/APP/2018/692). This permission has since been implemented. Peninsula House was also converted to a residential use under prior approval application reference 46616/APP/2016/4300 granted in 2017. 4.3 Vista Court was converted to a residential use under prior approval application reference 72408/APP/2017/3021 granted in 2017. Planning permission was also granted in 2018 for a roof extension to provide eight flats (72408/APP/2018/972) although this was not constructed. Vista Court does not form part of the application site, although the building is accessed through the site and parking provision on the Status Park site serves occupiers of this building. 4.4 Planning application 74423/APP/2023/755 was refused in December 2023 for the erection of a residential building together with associated landscaping and car parking, and including the reconfiguration of the Vista Court, Atlantico House and Peninsula House residential car parks on Nobel Drive. Permission was refused on grounds of design, impact on the amenity of existing residents of Vista Court, affordable housing provision, accessibility, the quality of external amenity space, air quality impact and adequacy of drainage. 4.5 Planning permission 74423/APP/2018/4437 was granted in April 2020 for the redevelopment of the existing car park to provide a 6 -storey building comprising 140-room hotel (Use Class C1) including the reconfiguring of car parking spaces across the site to secure 1:1 parking for the residential buildings (Buildings 2, 3 and 4), asso ciated access, car parking and hard and soft landscaping. This permission was not implemented and expired in April 2023. 5 Planning Policy 5.1 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Emerging Planning Policies 5.2 Policy DM4, paragraph 1, of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states: “1. When preparing and considering development proposals, relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to: a. The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); b. The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and c. The degree of compliance of the relevant policies in the emerging plan with the policies for plan-making in this Framework (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them).” Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.3 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15 th October 2026 with the intention of replacing the previous version of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.4 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 A total of 495 surrounding properties were directly notified regarding the development. Site notices were posted in multiple locations surrounding the site on 18-12-24, whilst the application was advertised in the West London Gazette newspaper on 18-12-24. 6.2 Following amendments to the site location plan, full readvertisement was carried with all neighbouring properties previously notified, whilst amended site notices were posted on 22nd September 2026, and the application was readvertised in the West London Gazette newspaper on 22nd September 2026. It is noted that the expiry dates for comments following reconsultation will be 13th October 2026 and any comments received following publication of this report will be reported verbally to members of the committee. 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 total of 3 public comments have been received in 1. The proposals would be an overdevelopment of the site. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.1 to 7.9 and 7.16 to 7.28 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press objection to the planning application. 2. The development would impact on outlook and daylight/sunlight This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.37 to 7.43 of the report. 3. Clear detail has not been provided regarding the size, height, number of residential units, or overall footprint of the proposed building. Revised information has been submitted during the application process, and the number and size of units is clarified. Scaled plans are provided which indicate the scale of the individual units (also annotated on the drawings) and may be used to calculate the height of the building and footprint. 4. Concern regarding pressure on local services. In relation to the impact on health services, this matter in addressed in Paragraphs 7.71 to 7.74 of the report. CIL contributions would also be payable in relation to the proposals. 5. Impact on road network and insufficient parking provision. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.53 to 7.61 of the report. 6. Impact on local character and design as area is not primarily residential in character. This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.16 to 7.28 of the report. 7. Site should be used for a community use or for shops. The principle of residential development on the site is considered acceptable in planning terms as This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.1 to 7.9 of the report. 8. A financial viability assessment should have been submitted in support of the This matter is addressed in Paragraphs 7.13 to 7.15 of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press application. No affordable housing is proposed and the expected target of 50% affordable housing set out in the London Plan should be provided. 1 comment in support of the application has been received. 1) Support as more residential dwellings are needed. Comments received in support are noted. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Airport Safeguarding - Heathrow No objection subject to submission of a Bird Hazard Management Plan, details of crane installation and a Glint and Glare Assessment to be secured by planning condition. The suggested conditions are attached to the recommended list of planning conditions. NAT’s (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 has no safeguarding objection to the proposal. Noted. Thames Water No objection in relation to foul or surface water drainage. Advise that a condition is require specifying that no piling is carried out until a Piling Method Statement is submitted. The suggested condition is attached to the recommended list of planning conditions. Transport for London Spatial Planning Team No objection subject to the submission of a Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP), Construction Logistics Plan (CLP), Car Parking Management Plan and details relating to electric charging infrastructure. Parking is addressed in further detail in Paragraph 7.53 to 7.61 of the report. A Car Parking Management Plan, Delivery and Servicing Plan (DSP) and Construction Logistics Plan (CLP) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press would be secured by condition as recommended. Transport for London Infrastructure Protection No comment to make on this planning application regarding the impact of the development on railway assets or engineering infrastructure. Noted. London Fire Brigade It should be ensured that the roof coverings are in accordance with table B2 of Approved Document B: 2019, with substrate depths provided as necessary. Furthermore, it should be confirmed that, where no permanent irrigation system is installed, the organic content is limited to less than 20% of the growing medium and peat free organic material is used. Please also note the requirements for fire breaks on green roofs which should be provided around perimeters, openings and every 40 metres on larger roofs. The Applicant is advised to ensure the plans conform to Part B of Approved Document of the Building Regulations and that the application is submitted to Building Control/Approved Inspector who in some circumstances may be obliged to consult the Fire Authority. The comments received by the London Fire Brigade are noted. The design of the building would be subject to building control review at the detailed design stage. Officers recommend that a final comprehensive Fire Statement and Building Control Decision Notice or equivalent is submitted for approval. Cadent Gas No objection Noted. Internal Consultees Economic Development Supportive of the application and would expect the applicant to submit a construction employment training scheme and payment in lieu of £167,957.22 towards the creation of training and employment opportunities. Noted, the suggested financial contribution towards the creation of training and employment opportunities is included within the draft Heads of Terms. Quintic Advisory LLP (Financial Viability Consultants commissioned by London of Hillingdon Council. Our March 2025 report concluded that the proposed Development with 100% private housing would be able to provide a payment in lieu. Noted, the matters relating to viability are discussed further in the paragraphs 7.13 to 7.15 of the report below. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press In the event that costs and values were updated to current day (without any adjustment to the viability benchmark), we consider the payment in lieu of affordable housing proposed by the Applicant of £500,000 to be reasonable. Air Quality Officer No objection, subject to a financial contribution of £67,226 to secure mitigation for traffic emissions to be paid for Hillingdon to deliver its air quality local action plan and/or implement specific measures on/along the road network affected by the proposal. A S106 financial contribution is included in the recommended Heads of Terms, whilst recommended conditions are also proposed to be attached. Waste Strategy Officer The developer should also plan for one additional food waste communal bin per 9 flats. Everything else looks appropriate from a waste and recycling perspective. Noted, the applicant is advised that the additional food waste bin should be provided within the Delivery, Servicing and Waste Management Plan to be secured by planning condition. Local Lead Flood Authority (Metis) No objection subject to submission of a detailed surface water drainage strategy to be secured by planning condition prior to the commencement of development and evidence confirming the completion of the approved drainage scheme to be secured before first occupation of the development. Comments confirming no objection to the development are noted and the recommended conditions are attached to this report. Urban Design Officer The proposed scheme is broadly supportable. Concerns remain regarding the ground floor frontage and activation of the urban frontage along Bath Road as the current proposal foregoes the opportunity to provide a series of small front gardens (approximately 1.5m clear depth) and private entrances along Bath Road, instead introducing private outdoor amenity spaces screened off by a continuous hedge. It is therefore recommended that the location of private amenity space is revised to address these issues. It is noted that the overall design approach is supported. Regarding the treatment of the amenity spaces it is considered that an acceptable balance is achieved between providing an appropriate density of development, providing outdoor amenity space and retaining active Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press frontages. Details relating to all boundary treatments would be provided in a final landscaping plan to be secured by condition. Access Officer This development proposal has been revisited, noting the provision of marked accessible parking bays and taxi drop off area within 50 m of the principal communal entrance. Further details can be secured by way of a suitable planning condition relating to the materials palette with reference to accessibility and how these materials meet the installation requirements set out in BS 8300:2018 in addition to details of accessible play. The comments received are noted. Details relating to the materials palette and details of accessible play would be secured by planning condition as recommended. Noise Officer Sufficient information has been provided by the Applicant to make a recommendation on noise. It is recommended that no objection subject to conditions pertaining to maximum noise standards in perpetuity. A relevant condition is attached to ensure that appropriate noise mitigation is secured. Contaminated Land Officer No objection subject to submission of a scheme to deal with contamination, remediation strategy and verification report to be secured by planning condition. The suggested conditions are attached to the recommended list of planning conditions. Highways No objection subject to securing final details of cycle parking and EV charging infrastructure by condition. The Highways Authority would seek to restrict the residents of the development from requesting residential parking permits subject to a legal agreement. An agreement would be secured through the S106 to exclude residents from obtaining access to parking permits in the adjacent controlled parking zone. Final details relating to cycle parking and electric charging points would be secured by planning condition. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Planning Policy We would not advocate for high levels of 3+ bedroom units due to site constraints. Sufficient private outdoor amenity space and public open space should be conditioned to occur prior to occupation. It is considered that a balanced mix of units is proposed. Where larger units are proposed appropriate standards of outdoor amenity space would be required. A strategy for the delivery of public open space would be secured through the accompanying S106 agreement. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development Provision of Housing 7.1 Policy H1 of the Local Plan requires that the Council will meet and exceed its minimum strategic dwelling requirement in accordance with other Local Plan policies. 7.2 The site is not included with the Council’s site allocations and Designations Local Plan Part 2; however the site lies within the built-up area of the borough and comprises previously developed land in the form of surface level car parking. Former office buildings surrounding the site (Atlantico House, Peninsula House, Vista Court and Princess House) have each been converted to residential use. 7.3 For development inside settlements Policy S4 of the NPPF 2026 states that development should be approved unless its benefits would be substantially outweighed by adverse effects, assessed against the national decision -making policies. HO7 requires substantial weight for homes contributing to evidenced accommodation needs, including the needs of different groups. 7.4 Policy L2 of the NPPF 2026 states that s ubstantial weight should be given to the benefits where a development proposal would achieve the remediation of despoiled, degraded, derelict, contaminated or unstable land ; and making better use of vacant and underutilised land and buildings. 7.5 Policy L3 of the NPPF 2026 states that development proposals should make efficient use of land, taking into account the identified need for different types of housing and other development, local market conditions, the availability of infrastructure (including that supporting sustainable transpo rt modes) and its scope for improvement, a site’s connectivity and the importance of securing well - designed, attractive and healthy places. This includes ensuring that within Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press settlements, development proposals for residential and mixed -use development should contribute to an increase in the density of the area in which they are situated. 7.6 Policy H1 of the London Plan states that Boroughs should optimise the potential for housing delivery on all suitable and available brownfield sites through their Development Plans and planning decisions. The Policy states that this is particularly the case on sites with existing or planned public transport access levels (PTALs) 3-6 or which are located within 800m distance of a station or town centre boundary. This applies to the application site which lies has a PTAL of 3. 7.7 In line with Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF 2026 and Policy H1 of the London Plan, the site would represent a suitable site in principle for the delivery of a high- density development which optimises the potential for housing delivery. 7.8 In relation to the quantum of units proposed, Policy DMHB 17 of the Local Plan Part 2 requires that all new residential development should take account of the Residential Density Matrix contained in Table 5.3. In line with Policy DMHB 17 of the Local Plan the site would be classed as falling within an ‘other non-town centre area’ whereby for a mainly flatted development would be expected to provide a density of 35-100 units per hectare. A total of 51 dwellings is proposed, which aligns with the minimum density of development required under Policy DMHB 17 of the Local Plan Part 2 . In principle, where considering the emphasis placed on achieving an optimum density of development under Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF 2026 and Policy H1 of the London Plan. 7.9 It is acknowledged that the Council cannot currently demonstrate a five -year supply of deliverable housing sites (the most recent position statement published on 01/04/2026 confirmed a 2.5-year supply). The provision of 51 new homes would make a substantial contribution towards addressing the Councils existing shortfall in supply of homes which must therefore be afforded substantial weight. In summary , it is considered that the proposals represent an efficient and appropriate re-use of previously developed land, and that principle of the proposed development is therefore acceptable , subject to wider assessment against the relevant planning framework. Housing Mix 7.10 Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021) states that schemes should generally consist of a range of unit sizes. Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) states that the Council will require the provision of a m ix of housing units of different sizes in schemes of residential development to reflect the Council's latest information on housing need. Paragraph 4.6 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) states that the Council's current information on housing need indicates a substantial borough-wide requirement for larger affordable and private market units, particularly three -bedroom properties. Applicants proposing residential schemes will be required to demonstrate that this need has been taken into account. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.11 The proposed mix of dwelling sizes is as follows: • 18 one-bedroom units (35%) • 20 two-bedroom units (39%) • 13 three-bedroom units (26%) 7.12 The proposals would provide a balanced mix of different dwelling sizes including a high percentage of larger family homes (3 bedrooms). Accounting of this the proposals are considered to comply with Policy H10 of the London Plan (2021) and Policy DMH 2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Affordable Housing 7.13 As per Policy DMH 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan (2020) and Policies H5 and H6 of the London Plan (2021), the development will need to provide affordable housing. Policy DMH 7 states that development with a capacity to provide 10 or more units will be required to maximise the delivery of on-site affordable housing. 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 a tenure split of 70% social/affordable rent and 30% intermediate, as set out in Policy H2 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1 (2012). Where an application does not meet the requirements set out in Policy H5, Part C, of the London Plan (2021) it must follow the viability tested route. Policy H4, Part B, of the London Plan (2021) also states that affordable housing should be provided on site and only provide off site or as a cash in lieu contribution in exceptional circumstances. 7.14 The applicant has proposed that the development would provide 100% market housing, as such the application has been subject to the submission of a viability appraisal. This appraisal has been reviewed by the Councils independent FVA consultant and upon review it was considered that an affordable housing contribution could be provided. An initial surplus which has been subsequently reduced following a further review of the build costs. Upon testing the assumptions by undertaking an independent appraisal of their own, the Council ’s viability consultant has confirmed that the Applicant’s offer of £500,000 as a cash in lieu payment towards affordable housing is the maximum reasonable which can be secured. The payment in lieu of affordable housing of £500,000 would be secured by legal agreement which would include both early and late -stage review mechanisms. 7.15 Considering the above assessment, o fficers are satisfied that the proposed financial contribution is acceptable in line with the policy position relating to viability testing as set out under Policy H5, Part C and Policy H4, Part B, of the London Plan (2021). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Design, Density and Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.16 Policies DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020); Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1: Strategic Policies (2012) Policy BE1; as well as Policies D1, D3 and D4 of the London Plan (2021); in addition to Policy DP3 of the NPPF 2026 each seek to ensure that development achieves the highest standard of design, which integrates positively to the character its surroundings. 7.17 The application site consists of surface level car parking and soft landscaping comprising trees and various shrub planting. The immediately adjoining buildings to the west, north west and north of the site consist of late 20 th century former office buildings featuring red brick and secondary grey cladding, with dark glazed windows. The buildings have since been converted into residential use comprising apartments. 7.20 The proposed building would be four to five storeys in height and would be arranged in an L shaped plan with the principal elevations facing Bath Road and Nobel Drive. The surrounding converted office buildings on the Status Park site are three to four storeys in scale, whilst surrounding hotel buildings on the northern side of Bath Road close to the site vary between five and seven storeys in maximum height and are typically large in scale. The height and scale of the development would be commensurate with the existing built form on the Status Park site and along Bath Road more generally, particularly affording emphasis on the need to ensure that an optimum density of homes is delivered on the site in line with In line with Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF 2026 and Policy H1 of the London Plan. 7.21 The architectural design approach includes variation in the massing of different parts of the building, such that the building would not appear overly bulky in volume. The design of the building responds appropriately to the geometry of the site and corner in which it sits between Bath Road and Nobel Drive. Active frontages are proposed along both primary public facing elevations adjoining Nobel Drive and Bath Road. 7.22 The surrounding buildings fronting Bath Road vary in architectural appearance and are not typically residential in character and consist of hotels, office buildings, or former office buildings converted to residential use , including those on the Status Park site. Whilst there are residential dwellings to the north west at Caroline Place and David Close, these buildings sit within a different context as the buildings do not face a key thoroughfare (Bath Road). The majority of the surrounding buildings feature brickwork, typically red in colour of varying tones. The external façade of the proposed building would feature buff brickwork. Whilst the materials would be lighter in colour than the other buildings on the Status Park site, this is considered acceptable and achieves some differentiation compared with the adjoining buildings. There is also variance in terms of the buildings along the northern side of Bath Road which feature cladding of differing colour/tone and brickwork. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.23 Overall, it is considered that the design of the new building would respond appropriately to the site and context including the surrounding built form in terms of scale, massing and architectural appearance. 7.24 The proposals include substantial new landscaping work to be delivered across the site, which involves the creation of 5120sqm of public open space split across seven different parts of the site. The distribution of the new areas of public open space is shown on figure 11 below: Figure 11 – Public open space provision. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.25 The areas of landscaping shown above would consist of the following: 1. Bath Road Meadow (1315sqm) 2. Western Ornamental Gardens (525sqm) 3. Northern Courtyard (870sqm) 4. Noble Lawn (300sqm) 5. Central Gardens (570sqm) 6. Northern Park (1100sqm) 7. Northern Lawn (440sqm) 7.26 As Peninsula Court, Atlantico House were each converted to residential use under the prior approval process , the apartments within these buildings benefit from minimal private amenity space , as under the prior approval process there is no requirement to provide public open space or play provision. The provision of new areas of public open space as proposed would be of substantial benefit to the amenity of the occupiers of these buildings. The quantum of amenity space provided for the future occupiers of the proposed dwellings is discussed in further detail in the amenity section of the report below. 7.27 In visual terms the proposed reduction in hardstanding/surface level car parking and replacement with soft landscaping in the form of tree and shrub planting is considered a positive change. Whilst the use of the site is now residential, the character of site continues to reflect the sites former commercial use and retains the character of a business park. The new hard and soft landscaping proposed would provide greening across the site and together with the proposed reduction in car parking would provide a more residential feel to the site, consistent with the site’s evolution from a commercial to residential use. Significant additional tree planting and landscaping is proposed alongside Bath Road and would enhance the standard of the public realm, providing further greening along a key throughfare which is neglected in places, including the application site. 7.28 Accounting for the general appropriateness of the design approach, it is considered that the development would comply with the provisions of policies DMHB 10, DMHB 11, DMHB 12 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2; Policies D2, D3, D4, D9, G2 of the London Plan 2021; and the NPPF 2026. Residential Amenity 7.29 DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan seeks to ensure a satisfactory relationship with adjacent dwellings and no unacceptable loss of outlook, amenity, daylight and sunlight to neighbouring occupiers. Part B of the policy states that development proposals should not adversely impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. 7.30 As noted, the former office buildings surrounding the site have been converted to residential use. Vista Court is the closest of these buildings to the site as this building is located immediately to the west. Atlantico House is located to the north west of the site. Consideration must be afforded to the impact of the development Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press on the amenity of the occupiers of these buildings. It is considered that the development would not impact substantially upon the amenity of any other surrounding residential dwellings or commercial uses close to the site accounting for the scale of development and retained separation distance. 7.31 Regarding the impact on Atlantico House, a separation distance of 40 metres would be retained between the new building and the residential apartments within this building. Considering the separation distance and the scale of the proposed building, it is considered that the development would not appear overbearing in scale and would not have a negative impact on outlook. 7.32 In relation to Vista Court, a separation distance of 18 metres would be retained between the side (west) elevation of the proposed building and the front (east) elevation of Vista Court. This is considered to represent a reasonable separation distance, such that the development would not have a substantially negative impact on the outlook of the occupiers of the apartments in Vista Court. The submitted plans for the new building have been amended during the course of the application to remove previously proposed side facing balconies located on the west elevation of the building, this is aside from the fourth floor of the building, which is recessed and located above the top floor level of the apartments in Vista Court. Within the amended plans submitted by the applicant, all side facing windows in the section of the west elevation of the building immedi ately facing Vista Court would be fitted with obscured glazing up to a height of 1.8 metres. This would protect the privacy of the adjoining occupiers. A condition is attached to ensure that the obscure glazing is installed before first occupation of the units. 7.33 Regarding daylight and sunlight impacts, the applicant has prepared a Daylight and Sunlight Assessment which provides an analysis of the impact of the development on the residential amenity of the adjoining residential dwellings. This includes and assessment against the Vertical Sky Component (VSC) and Annual Probable Sunlight Hours and Winter Probable Sunlight Hours (WPSH) (APSH) measures. The impact on Vista Court and Atlantico House is assessed within the applicants Daylight and Sunlight Assessment to be minimal and in terms of the impact on the surrounding residential dwellings, there would not be conflict with the relevant BRE criteria. The Daylight and Sunlight Assessment has been reviewed independently by Lambert Smith Hampton (LSH) consultants on behalf of London Borough of Hillingdon who have concluded that all windows tested would meet target values for daylight and sunlight supporting the findings of the applicant’s report. 7.34 It should be further noted that the GLA Housing Guide SPG 2016 advises that an appropriate degree of flexibility needs to be applied when using BRE guidelines to assess the daylight and sunlight impacts of new development on surrounding properties, as well as within new developments themselves. Guidelines should be applied sensitively to higher density development, especially in opportunity areas, town centres, large sites and accessible locations, where BRE advice suggests considering the use of alternative targets. This should account for local circumstances; the need to optimise housing capacity; and scope for the character and form of an area to change over time. The degree of harm to adjacent Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press properties and daylight targets within a proposed scheme should be assessed drawing on broadly comparable residential typologies within the area and of a similar nature across London. Decision makers should recognise that fully optimising housing potential on large sites may necessitate standards which depart from those presently experienced, but which still achieve satisfactory levels of residential amenity and avoid unacceptable harm. 7.35 The proposals would deliver an optimum density of housing on a sustainably located site. Whilst individual flats, would be impacted in terms of daylight/sunlight to a degree, it is appropriate to afford flexibility so that an appropriate density of development can be achieved in line with the aims of Policy H1 of the London Plan; and Policies L2 and L3 of the NPPF. As noted in the design section of this report, the scale of development on the site is commensurate with the scale of the surrounding built form on the Status Park site and along Bath Road as a whole. 7.36 In summary, it can be concluded that the development would not have a significantly adverse impact on the amenity of any adjoining properties and the development would comply with Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020). Quality of Residential Accommodation (Internal and External) 7.37 Policy D6 of the London Plan (2021) requires dwellings to meet minimum internal space standards, maximise dual -aspect layouts and provide suitable private amenity space. 7.38 Policy DMHB 16 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) requires housing developments to provide adequate internal living space. The submitted plans demonstrate compliance with the nationally described space standards, with over 90% of flats being dual aspect and all units benefiting from an acceptable outlook. The Mayor of London's Support for Housebuilding guidance (March 2026) provides greater flexibility regarding dual and single -aspect dwellings, subject to applicants demonstrating adequate ventilation, daylight, privacy and protection from overheating. 7.39 The applicants Daylight and Sunlight Assessment includes an appraisal of the development against the Target Daylight Factor method to determine natural internal luminance. It is concluded that all habitable rooms within the development would achieve BRE compliance for daylight in line with BRE requirements. The independent review of the Daylight and Sunlight Assessment undertaken by LSH confirms that the findings of the applicant’s assessment are sound. 7.40 Accounting for the above assessment, it is considered that appropriate standards of internal living space would be provided for residents in terms of outlook, size and daylight and sunlight and the development would comply with Policy DMHB 16 of the Local Plan Part 2. 7.41 Policy DMHB 18 of the Local Plan Part 2 requires that all new residential development and conversions provide good quality and useable private outdoor Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press amenity space in accordance with minimum amenity standards set out in Table 5.3. 7.42 In the case of all upper floor flats, each of these would be provided with one or more balconies or winter gardens , where noise constraints necessitate this as addressed further in the section of the report below. The ground floor flats would be provided with gardens. The applicant has provided a breakdown of the private amenity spaces provided for the individual flats which vary between 28 and 82sqm for the ground floor flats and 5 and 10sqm for the upper floor flats. Communal private amenity space is not proposed given the spatial constraints of the site. Cumulatively where applying the standards set out under Policy DMHB 18 of the Local Plan Part 2 there would be a requirement to provide 1250sqm of private amenity space within the development. Whilst several of the upper floor units would fall short of the required quantity of private amenity space as set out under Policy DMHB 18 of the Local Plan Part 2 , is has been proposed that 5120sqm of public open space would be provided across the wider site . This would be accessible and of a reasonable standard for future occupiers and is considered to mitigate for the under-provision of amenity space for the upper floor apartments. 7.43 It is therefore considered that the proposal would provide suitable accommodation for its residents and comply with Policy D6 of The London Plan (2021), The Mayor’s Housing Design Standards LPG, and Policies DMHB 16 and DMHB 18 of the Local Plan Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020). Noise 7.44 A primary source of noise is the Bath Road adjoining the site is a heavily trafficked route. The site is approximately 400 metres to the north east of the north runway at Heathrow Airport and consequently there is noise from planes landing and taking off from the airport. Notwithstanding this it is considered that the existing noise constraints can be appropriately mitigated through the design of the development through sound insulation, ventilation and faç ade design. To ensure that future occupiers benefit from appropriate standards of residential amenity a condition is recommended to ensure compliance with Guidance on Sound Insulation and Noise Reduction for Buildings' British Standard Institution BS8233: 2014. 7.45 The outdoor amenity spaces adjacent to the Bath Road would be exposed to noise from traffic using Bath Road and aircraft noise and it is therefore proposed that external balconies would be provided in the form of winter gardens. This is considered an acceptable in providing balance between delivering required outdoor amenity space and not exposing future occupiers to unacceptable levels of noise disturbance. The areas of public open space are noted to be less exposed to the existing sources of noise. Details relating to the phased delivery of public open space and play provision as addressed blow are required as part of the legal agreement accompanying the planning application . This is to ensure that these are delivered and within an appropriate timeframe such that the public benefits of the delivery of these amenities are realised. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.46 Subject to the provision of appropriate details to be secured by planning condition, it is considered that the development would not have a negative impact on the amenity of existing and future residents by reason of noise and therefore the development would comply with Policy D3 of The London Plan (2021) and Policy DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020). Play Provision 7.47 Policy DMCI 5 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020) states that for all major development proposals, the Council will apply Hillingdon's child yields and the London Plan SPG; 'Providing for Children and Young Peop les Play and Informal Recreation', which specifies that ten square metres of play space should be provided for each child and an accessibility standard of 400 metres to equipped playgrounds. In areas of deficiency, there will be a requirement for new provi sion to be made to meet the benchmark standards for accessibility to play provision. 7.48 Where applying the GLA’s child yield calculator, there would be a requirement to provide 106.2 sqm of play space. The applicants landscape design masterplan sets out that 170sqm of play space will be provided, consisting of 74.4sqm of play provision for ages 1-12 and 95.6sqm of play provision for ages 13+. The level of play provision would exceed the minimum required level of play provision as required under Policy S4 of The London Plan and Policy DMCI 5 of Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2. 7.49 It is noted that the early phases of development consented under the prior approval process did not include play provision as this is not required under this type of application. Play provision is limited in the area, the nearest play areas are located at Berkeley Meadow to the east (approximately 920 metres from the site) and Browngreaves Road in Harlington approximately 1.2km from the site. There would be notable benefits for the adjacent occupiers from providing play equipment on the site. Details of play provision, including accessible play equipment is required by condition. Transport, Highway Impact and Parking 7.50 Policy TR6 of the NPPF (2026) states that development proposals should be refused if they would have a severe adverse impact on the transport network (in terms of capacity and congestion, including cumulative impacts), or an unacceptable impact on highway safety; taking into account any mitigation measures proposed as well as any wider network improvements, including measures to support sustainable patterns of movement. This applies both during the construction phase and following completion. 7.51 Policies DMT 1 and DMT 2 of Hillingdon Council's Local Plan: Part 2 Development Management Policies (2020) require 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 Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14th October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press pedestrian safety. Policy DMT 5 states that development proposals will be required to meet the Council's cycle parking standards as set out in Appendix C Table 1. Policy DMT 6 requires that proposals comply with the Council's parking standards to facilitate sustainable development and address issues relating to congestion and amenity. 7.52 Policy T4 of The London Plan (2021) states that development proposals should not increase road danger. Policy T5 states that development proposals should help remove barriers to cycling and create a healthy environment in which people choose to cycle. Policy T6 states that new residential development should not exceed the maximum parking standards detailed in Table 10.3. Car -free development should be the starting point for all development proposed in places that are well-connected by public transport or that are planned to be. All residential car parking spaces must provide infrastructure for electric or Ultra- Low Emission vehicles. At least 20 per cent of spaces should have active charging facilities, with passive provision for all remaining spaces. Disabled person parking should be provided for new residential developments in accordance with Policy T6. Policy T7 states that development proposals should facilitate safe, clean, and efficient deliveries and servicing. Provision of adequate space for servicing, storage, and deliveries should be made off-street, with on street loading bays only used where this is not possible. Car Parking and Highways Impact 7.53 Policy T6 of the London Plan states that car parking should be restricted in line with levels of existing and future public transport accessibility and connectivity. Car-free development should be the starting point for all development proposals in places that are (or are planned to be) well -connected by public transport, with developments elsewhere designed to provide the minimum necessary parking (‘car-lite’). 7.54 The remaining parking and landscaping on the site would be reconfigured and parking on-site to serve all the residential buildings, including Vista Court, Atlantico House and Peninsula House would be reduced from 245 to 146 spaces . This would equate to a reduction of 99 spaces (40%). There are 127 residential dwellings currently on the Status Park site and together with the proposed 51 units, the proposed parking ratio would equate to 0.82 spaces per dwelling across th e site. The site is located within an outer London Opportunity Area in which Table 10.3 of the London Plan

Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Report of the Head of Development Management and Building Control Committee Report Case Officer: Christos Chrysanthou 1127/APP/2026/1323 Date Application Valid: 28-05-26 Statutory / Agreed Determination Deadline: 19-10-26 Application Type: Full Ward: Uxbridge Applicant: Harrow, Richmond and Uxbridge Colleges (HRUC) Site Address: Uxbridge College, Park Road, Uxbridge, UB8 1NQ Proposal: Demolition of an existing single-storey building and its replacement with a temporary three -storey portakabin building for a period of 5 years. 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 – 14 October 2026 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. 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: - Air Quality Mitigation Contribution of £5,184.00. - Off-site Biodiversity Net Gain. - Carbon Offset Contribution: A Carbon Offset sum based on an Updated Energy Strategy to be submitted to discharge Condition 11, with the offset calculation based on £95 per tonne of CO2 over a 5 year period. - An Employment/ Construction Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD - Project Management & Monitoring Fee: 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 preparation of 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 no t been finalised within 6 months (or such other timeframe 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 provide contributions towards the improvement of services and facilities as a consequence of demands created by the proposed development (in respect of Air Quality, Biodiversity Net Gain, Carbon Emission Reductions and Employme nt/ Construction Training). The scheme therefore conflicts with Policies DMCI 1A, DMCI 7, DMEI 2, DMEI 7 and DMEI 14 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020), the adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document (2014), and Policies DF1, E11, G6, SI1 and SI2 of the London Plan (2021).' E) That if the application is approved, that the permission is subject to the Conditions as set out in Appendix 1. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 1 Executive Summary 1.1 This application proposes the installation of a temporary three-storey Portakabin building for a period of 5 years. The building would be used in conjunction with the Institute of Technology to provide additional educational floorspace to deliver construction courses. It is understood the applicant is currently conducting a Place Strategy across the college which will include a permanent replacement for the proposed temporary building either to a new building or relocation of the floorspace to elsewhere within the campus. 1.2 The proposal would be sited on the footprint of a single storey building which has been removed from the site. The three storey proposal would be of a comparable scale to the adjoining college buildings. The design and materials are not considered to be representative of a high-quality development. Although finely balanced, based on the conditions proposed being secured in respect to a temporary consent, there are public benefits that would be derived from granting temporary planning consent. Having regard to these factors, coupled with the temporary nature of the proposal, to justify the grant of planning permission in this instance. 1.3 Due to the separation distances, the temporary proposed development would not cause undue harm to the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers. Some trees have been removed from the site to accommodate the development, however offset tree planting would be secured within the landscaping condition. The proposal is unlikely to significantly exacerbate parking demand or prejudice highway safety. 1.4 A s106 legal agreement would secure contributions towards air quality mitigation, off-site biodiversity net gain, carbon emissions reduction and employment/ construction training. 1.5 It is concluded that the proposal complies with the Development Plan, and no material considerations indicate that a contrary decision should be taken. The planning application is therefore reco mmended for approval subject to the conditions set out in Appendix 1 and s106 obligations outlined in this report. 2 The Site and Locality 2.1 The Park Road Campus is one of two campuses run by Uxbridge College in the London Borough of Hillingdon. The Campus is located in the southwest corner of a triangular piece of land, bounded by Park Road to the west, the A40 corridor in the north, and the M etropolitan Railway Line to the southeast, which historically formed part of Hillingdon House Farm. 2.2 The campus is immediately bounded by a residential development known as Darrell Charles Court to the southeas t, residential accommodation to the northwest comprising, Brookfield, a former residential home for the elderly, a Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press residential development adjacent to the student's car park and privately owned housing in Brearley Close. The Hillingdon Sports and Leisure Complex is located to the northeast. 2.3 London Underground railway lines run along the southern boundary of the College which is screened by a well vegetated bank, including mature Willow and Oak trees. Located between the application site and Darrell Charles Court is the ‘Uxbridge College Pond’ formall y known as Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan or Borough Grade I Importance: Darrell Charles Court. Figure 1: Location Plan (application site edged red) Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 2: Image of the Application Property (Building shown has now been removed) 3 Proposal 3.1 The proposal comprises a three storey building with a height of 10.5metres set under a flat roof with a maximum width of 50.8metres and depth of 9.8meters. The layout consists of four workshop areas across the ground and first floors along with five classrooms and a staff room on the second floor. The exterior walls would be finished in a vinyl wrapping to improve the visual appearance of the building. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 3: Proposed Plans and Elevations (please note – larger version of plans can be found in the Committee Plan Pack) 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 – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 5 Planning Policy 5.1 The proposed development would be assessed against the following plans and all other relevant supplementary planning guidance and documents: The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2026) The London Plan (2021) Local Plan: Part 1 - Strategic Policies (2012) Local Plan: Part 2 - Development Management Policies (2020) Local Plan: Part 2 - Site Allocations and Designations (2020) 5.2 The proposed development has been assessed against the policies and proposals in the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1 (2012) and Part 2 (2020), the London Plan (2021) including Supplementary Planning Guidance, and all relevant material considerations and natio nal guidance including the Na tional Planning Policy Framework. Emerging Planning Policies 5.3 Policy DM4 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2026 states that '1.When preparing and considering develop ment proposals, relevant policies in emerging development plans may be given weight according to: a. The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced its preparation, the greater the weight that may be given); b. The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and c. The degree of compliance of the relevant policies in the emerging plan with the policies for plan-making in this Framework (the c loser the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in this Framework, the greater the weight that may be given to them).’ Draft London Plan (July 2026) 5.4 The GLA are consulting on a draft new London Plan between 16th July and 15th October 2026 with the intention of replaci ng the previous versions of the existing London Plan. Following the consultation, the draft London Plan will be subject to an independent Examination in Public before final adoption, expected in early 2028. 5.5 As the unresolved objections have not yet been submitted and published for decision-makers to review, limited weight can be afforded to the Draft London Plan (July 2026) at present. 5.6 A list of planning policies relevant to the consideration of the application can be found in Appendix 3. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 6 Consultations and Representations 6.1 111 neighbouring properties and North Uxbridge Residents Association were consulted on 11-06-26. A site notice was erected on 02-07-26 and a newspaper advert placed on 02-07-26. 6.2 A full 21 day re-consultation was carried out on 25-08-26 following the receipt of additional information. The consultation period ended on 16-09-26. 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 Representati ons Summary of Issues Raised Planning Officer Response One letter of comments was received. 1. Noise and nuisance from construction works starting early. Discussed at paragraph 7.14 of this report. 2. Delivery of BNG and impact on biodiversity. Discussed at paragraphs 7.29 - 7.38 of this report. Table 2: Summary of Consultee Responses LBH Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Air Quality The development is not air quality neutral or air quality positive and an air quality mitigation contribution of £5,184 is required. The contribution is proposed to be secured within a s106 legal agreement should the application be determined for approval. Urban Design/Conservation Concerns raised around the removal of and works to trees and loss of biodiversity; deficient landscaping; materials proposed; and failure to meet carbon reduction targets. The matters raised are discussed in the main body of the report. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Contaminated Land No objection subject to an informative. Noted. Economic Development No objection subject to a Construction Training contribution. The contribution is proposed to be secured within a s106 legal agreement should the application be determined for approval. Highways No objection subject to conditions to update the existing wider travel plan. The condition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of a determination for approval. Local Lead Flood Authority Additional information is recommended to be submitted with regards to on -site drainage provisions and the management of flood risks. The condition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of a determination for approval. Noise Specialist No objection. Noted. External Consultee and Summary of Comments Planning Officer Response Affinity Water No objection. Noted. Heathrow Aerodrome Safeguarding No objection. Noted. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Historic England (GLAAS) No objection. Noted. London Fire Brigade None received. Noted Ministry Of Defence No objection subject to a condition to secure a Crane Management Plan. The condition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of a determination for approval. Natural England None received. Noted. TFL Infrastructure Protection No objection subject to a condition to secure further information with regards to the safeguarding of London Underground Infrastructure. The condition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of a determination for approval. Thames Water No objection subject to an informative regarding the requirement for a Groundwater Risk Management Permit. The informative is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of a determination for approval. 7 Planning Assessment Principle of Development 7.1 Policy S3 of the London Plan (2021) requires education and childcare facilities to be provided in areas of identified need, in accessible locations with good walking, cycling and public transport links. Facilities should be inclusive, provide suitable outdoor space, support community use, a nd promote safe and sustainable travel. The policy also seeks to safeguard existing education and childcare provision, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press ensuring there is no net loss of facilities unless it is demonstrated that there is no current or future need for them. 7.2 Policy DMCI 1A of the Hill ingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) requires new schools and school expansions to be of an appropriate size and location, compatible with surrounding land uses and planning designations, and to provide sufficient outdoor play and amenity space. Proposals must be accessible to their intended catchment, well-served by public transport, walking and cycling routes, and not adversely affect highway safety. The policy also seeks to ensure that school buildings contribute towards zero-carbon objectives through sustainable design. 7.3 The application seeks temporary planning permission for a new building to accommodate teaching and workshop facilities as a Construction Training Centre (CTC). This would enable the college to deliver courses in Plumbing and Electrical Installation for a period of 5 years. It is noted from the planning history that a 3-storey building to create a new Institute of Technology was approved under ref: 1127/APP/2018/4375. Officers note from the committee report for that scheme that the development was intended to deliver courses in Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, Plumbing, Rail and Air Transportation. It is understood that the college has experienced sustained demand for construction trades courses. The proposed building would enable the college to meet this demand by increasing education floorspace for plumbing and electrical installation courses and would temporarily increase the capacity of the college to accommodate an additional 90 students and 5 staff. 7.4 This temporary development would deliver an uplift of just under 1,000sqm of Class F1 floorspace on the same plot and is required to meet the identified need for expansion of construction training facilities in the short term for young people not in education, employment or training (NEETS) whilst also replacing a poor-quality and poorly configured existing building at the end of its natural life. The temporary development is required as there is ins ufficient suitable space within existing buildings, many of which are also ageing and in poor condition, to accommodate the relevant facilities required for construction training. As such, this need for specialist construction workshops could not be met elsewhere in the wider Uxbridge College campus in the immediate term. 7.5 Accordingly, this grant of temporary planning permission for this modular development would provide the most practical short -term outcome, providing a temporary development which can be deliv ered within a few months and easily removed later, and is not int ended to provide a long-term solution to meet this defined need. A maximum five-year period for temporary planning permission is sought to afford the Applicant sufficient time to bring forward a permanent development to meet this need in the long term, as part of a long -term Place Strategy, whilst allowing the College th e opportunity to immediately increase its intake to meet demand on a short -term basis using the existing plot at Uxbridge College. The Applicant is currently under taking masterplanning work across their portfolio to plan positively to meet long term educat ional demand for young people in the Borough. Underpinning this is a programme of capital funding which would, among other things, enable the refurbishment and extension or redevelopment of Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press the existing blocks within the Uxbridge College site to bring facilities these up to contemporary standards once this has been properly planned for. 7.6 The proposed extension to Uxbridge College is supported by the Local Plan, Regional and National policies and the prin ciple of development is therefore considered acceptable. As the proposal is temporary, a reinstatement plan has been submitted which sets out the removal of the development after the 5year period and the restoration of land to its previous co ndition. The submitted reinstatement plan provides an acceptable framework however a more detailed plan is recommended to be secured by condition. Design / Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area 7.7 The proposed building would comprise three storeys, with a height consistent with other buildings across the Uxbridge College campus including adjacent buildings. The design incorporates elevations covered in a vinyl wrapping , which adds some basic detailing to the exterior finish of the portakabins . The overall design of the building including the vinyl wrapping is not considered to represent a high quality development. The proposal lacks any architectural flair and would not match the build quality of the adjacent Institute of Technology or reflect recent developments elsewhere on the campus . It is considered that the design quality of the proposed development would not be appropriate for long-term use on the site. Notwithstanding this concern, the design does appear functional for its temporary need. 7.8 The Townscape and Visual Impact Assessment submitted in support of the application concludes that the proposed three -storey Construction Training Centre would be perceived as part of the established Uxbridge College campus and would have a negligible to neutral effect on both townscape character and visual amenity. Owing to its set-back location, surrounding vegetation and relationship with existing campus buildings, visibility of the development would be limited and would not result in significant adverse impacts on the wider townscape or neighbouring visual receptors. 7.9 It is noted that the proposal is for a temporary building with relatively limited visibility from the surrounding street. Although finely balanced, on the basis of a condition being secured in respect to a temporary consent and having regard to there being public benefits in the form of educational facilities that would be derived from granting temporary consent, it is consid ered that a 5year temporary permission could be supported. Details of means of enclosur es would be secured within the landscape condition. Impact on the Green Belt 7.10 The application site lies outside the Green Belt. The nearest designated Green Belt land is at Uxbridge Cricket Club on the northern side of Gatting Way and to the northeast of the site including the adjacen t Hillingdon Sports and Leisure Complex and open land to the east. The building would be screened by the existing adjacent Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press buildings within the campus and would not harm the openness of the nearby Green Belt. Residential Amenity 7.11 The nearest residential properties, at Darr ell Charles Court, which is located to the west of the site, are situated approximately 50 metres away from the proposed three- storey college building. There is significant tree planting around the pond between Darrell Charles Court and the proposed building which would be well screened. The separation between the development and dwellings to the east on Crosby Gardens is approximately 65 metres and the proposal would be largely screened by the adjacent building. The dwellings to the south on Honeycroft Hill are located approximately 80 metres away and are separated by the railway line and screened by the dense tree lined bank. Taking account of the significant separation distance, tree coverage and the relationship between the development and the neighbouring properties, the proposal would not give rise to any unacceptable harm to neighbouring residential amenity. Noise 7.12 A noise assessment has been submitted in support of the application. The assessment demonstrates that the proposed modular educational building would be able to achieve BB93 internal noise standards despite proximity to the railway and Park Road. As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Council’s Noise Specialist does not raise an objection and has concluded that the development would unlikely cause an adverse noise impact. 7.13 The use of the development would be occu rring in conjunction with the college where courses are mainly delivered during the day. The proposed building would be providing additional educational floor area within the existing campus. It is therefore considered that the development would not be generating a significant level of noise that would be harmful to the amenity of the area. 7.14 The comments made by a neighbouring resident regarding noise and nuisance from construction is noted. In the event of an approv al, an informative is recommended to be attached to the decision notice, which provides guidance on the control of environmental nuisance from construction work including appropriate construction hours. Highways and Parking 7.15 The proposal includes a new pedestrian pathway adjacent to the proposed building and would retain the existing pedestrian access arrangements through the campus. 7.16 A Transport Assessment has been submitted in support of the application. The TRICS data within the assessment forecast s that the development would generate approximately 22 additional person trips during the AM peak period and 13 additional person trips du ring the PM peak period. Of these, only approximately 5 vehicle trips during the AM peak and 3 vehicle trips during the PM peak would be Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press associated with private car travel. Given the modest increase in trip generation and in the context of the established college campus, it is not considered that the proposal would result in a severe impact on the local highway network. 7.17 The Transport Statement confirms that the ex isting campus provides a total of 375 car parking spaces across three parking areas. No additional parking spaces are proposed as part of the development. In addition, the campus also benefits from two covered cy cle parking areas containing 20 Sheffiel d stands, providing a total of 40 cycle parking spaces. Whilst the proposal would accommodate approximately 90 additional students and 3 staff members, the Transport Statement concludes that any increase in parking demand would be limited and that the negligible increase in vehicle trips would not materially affect parking conditions across the campus. 7.18 As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Highway Authority have no objection subject to a condition being attached in the event of approval to secure an updated version of the existing site -wide Travel Plan. A Construction Management Plan has been submitted by the applicant and has been reviewed by the Highway Authority and found to be acceptable. 7.19 The existing car and cycle parking and servicing arrangements are considered adequate to accommodate the proposed development. Subject to the above - mentioned condition, the proposal is considered to comply with Policies T4, T5, T6 and T7 of the London Plan (2021). Air Quality 7.20 The application site lies within Hillingdon Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and within the catchment of the Uxbridge Air Quality Focus Area (AQFA). In accordance with the development plan, there is a requirement for development to be air quality neutral and air quality positive in these areas. 7.21 As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Council’s Air Quality Officer has no objection subject to conditions to a plan to minimise emissions from demolition and construction and compliance with the GLAs SPD on the control of dust and emissions during construction and demolition. These conditions would be attached in the event of an approval. The development is air quality neutral however would not be air quality positive, therefore an air quality mitigation contribution of £5,184 is required and the obligation would be secured within the s106 legal agreement in the event of an approval. Accessibility 7.22 The submitted floor plans demonstrate sufficient internal circulation with adequate corridor widths, level access throughout, li ft access to all floors, accessible WC provision and refuge facilities linked to an emergency communication system. The proposed layout therefore indicates it is capable of accommodating wheelchair users and mobility -impaired visitors. In the event of an approval, a condition is recommended to provide step free access to the building. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.23 In this development, a lift is proposed offe ring a pragmatic solution for convenient, reliable, and dignified means of escape. It is however recommended that a condition is secured in the event of an approval requiring the use of the proposed passenger lift as an evacuation lift in accordance with Policies D5 Part B(5) and D12(A). 7.24 No accessibility concerns are evident from the submitted plans and subject to the above-mentioned conditions, the proposal wou ld broadly accord with the inclusive design objectives of Policy D5 and D12 of the London Plan. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Security 7.25 Policy DMHB 15 of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2 (2020) states that the Council will require all new development to ensure safe and attractive public and private spaces by referring to the Council's latest guidance on Secured by Design principles. 7.26 Any grant of planning permission would be subject to a secure by design condition to achieve appropriate accreditation. Trees and Landscaping 7.27 The submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment indicates that there has been some crown lifting to trees and three trees comprising 1no Category B tree and 2no Category C trees have been removed during site preparations. These trees were located within close proximity to the south of the building. To offset the loss of these trees, the planting of 3no new trees is proposed to the west of the building. The LPA would require the category of these replacement trees to be equal to or greater than the trees that have been felled. Specific details of the trees, a schedule of implementation and 5year management plan would be secured within the landscaping condition. 7.28 The submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment lists the remaining trees around the building as being retained. A Tree Protection Plan has also been submitted in support of the application which details protective measures that would be implemented during the construction phase to ensure that retained trees are safeguarded. Compliance would be secured by condition. Ecology 7.29 The submitted Preliminary Ecological Appraisal & Roost Assessment acknowledges that the development would result in partial loss of habitats and a net loss of on-site biodiversity. The report has been updated to reflect subsequent site changes, including the removal of three trees within the confines of the application site. 7.30 The development would be located largely on the footprint of the existing building that has been removed from the site . The proposal will result in the loss of some grassland, scrub, hedgerow and three mature trees that have already been removed. It is however important to note that the adjacent woodland and pond area which is identified as the most valuable habitat in proximity of the site, will be retained in full. No evidence of bats or other protected species was identified and no further ecological surveys are required. 7.31 Overall, the survey concludes that the application site has a relatively low ecological value and no significant protected species have been identified. The report recommends precautionary measures and working method, a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEMP) and a low impact lighting strategy. 7.32 Biodiversity enhancements are recommended within the report. These include the provision of bat boxes and bird boxes, bee bricks, the inclusion of log piles (created Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press from felled materials) and planting of areas of native shrubs to provide sheltering opportunities for reptiles and creating habitats for hedgehogs. 7.33 A compliance condition is recommended to be attached in the event of an approval to implement the precautionary measures and working method detailed in the report. A separate condition is recommended to secure the approval of the CEMP. Details of the lighting strategy and the ecological enhancements are recommended to be secured within the landscaping condition. 7.34 Subject to the above-mentioned conditions, the development is not considered to result in unacceptable harm to the adjacen t Nature Conservation Site. Biodiversity Net Gain is discussed below. Biodiversity Net Gain 7.35 Biodiversity net gain is a way of creati ng and improving biodiversity by requiring development to have a positive impact (' net gain') on biodiversity. In England, Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) is mandat ory under Schedule 7A of the Town and Country Planning A ct 1990 (as inserted by Schedule 14 of the Environment Act 2021). It became mandatory for major developments on 12 February 2024 and small sites on 2 April 2024. Developers must deliv er a BNG of at least 10%. This means a development will result in more or better-quality natural habitat than there was before development. The landowner is legally responsible for creating or enhancing the habitat and managing that habitat for at least 30 years to achieve the target condition. 7.36 The submitted Biodiversity Net Gain A ssessment demonstrates a net loss of - 79.87% of area based habitats (trees and shrubs) and a net loss of -100% of linear- based units (hedgerow). It is important to highlight that the loss of habitats refers to the area within the red line application site which does not include the full extent of the pond area within the Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan or Borough Grade I Importance: Darrell Charles Court (which is shown in blue in Figure 4 below). Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Figure 4 - Nature Conservation Site of Metropolitan or Borough Grade I Importance: Darrell Charles Court 7.37 The development would not achieve a 10% BNG through on-site measures and the following units are required: 2.55 habitat units and 0.01 hedgerow units. To achieve the 10% net gain, the Biodiversity Net Gain Assessment confirms the purchase of off -site units from Registered Habitat Banks which would be secured within the s106 legal agreement. Details of the proof of transaction would be part of the BNG Plan which would be secured by condition in the event of an approval. 7.38 Subject to satisfactory evidence and the securing of the required off-site units prior to commencement through a s106 legal agreement, the proposal can be considered compliant with the Environment Act 2021. Flooding and Drainage 7.39 The site lies within a Flood Zone 1 (low risk of flooding). A Flood Risk Assessment and Sustainable Drainage Strategy has been submitted in support of the application. As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) have reques ted additional information including the location of existing surface water sewer connections; the consideration of water butts; detailed run -off calculations and methodology; and the demonstrating that on -site exceedance flows will be managed. It is recom mended that these items are addressed through additional drainage information which could be secured by condition in the event of an approval along with a long-term management and maintenance plan as recommended by the LLFA. Subject to the above -mentioned condition, it is considered that the development would not increase flood risk. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Water Efficiency 7.40 The Water Efficiency Statement demonstrates that the proposed temporary educational building would incorporate water -efficient fittings and smart metering, resulting in a low level of water demand, with consumption estimated at 15.04 litres per person per day. Whilst compliance with the BREEAM Wat 01 ‘Excellent’ standard is only required for commercial developments, it is noted that opportunities for rainwater harvesting has been flagged by the LLFA and details would be secured with the Sustainable Water Ma nagement condition should the application be recommended for approval. Energy 7.41 In accordance with Policy SI2 of the London 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. 7.42 In the Energy Statement which has been su bmitted with the application under ‘be green’ (which incorporates energy efficiency measures) the report at Table 4.2 page 26 indicates emissions savings of 0.3%, which is well below the 35% London Plan target. The applicant has agreed to a condition to secure an updated Energy Statement to demonstrate how the target on site carbon reduction of 35% will be achieved. 7.43 The Energy Statement has been updat ed and acknowledges the development would not be zero carbon which is a requirement under Policy SI 2 of the London Plan and Policy DMCI 1A of the Hillingdon Local Plan. To achieve the zero carbon requirement, a carbon of fset contribution would be required and this would be secured through a s106 legal agreement. The sum would be calculated based on a 5year timeframe to cover the lifetime of the temporary building. The report indicates total residual emissions amounting to 24.7tonnes CO₂ over the five-year lifespan of the temporary building. A carbon offset contribution of £2,347, calculated using a rate of £95 per tonne of CO₂, would be secured through the Section 106 Agreement. 7.44 Notwithstanding the above, as an updated Energy Statement is recommended to be secured by condition in the event of an approval, the cash in -lieu contribution may be recalculated or not required if the updated Energy Statement can demonstrate a zero-carbon development. An obligation would be included within any associated legal agreement to provide the mechanism to secure a cash in-lieu contribution that may be required to achieve a zero-carbon development. Waste Management 7.45 Refuse and recycling would continue to be managed through the college's existing campus-wide waste management arrangements. The development would utilise the established servicing infrastructure and internal road network serving the campus, Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press with waste collection vehicles accessing the site in the same manner as existing servicing and maintenance operations. No changes to servicing arrangements are proposed. Airport Safeguarding 7.46 The application site falls within the safeguarding consultation zone of RAF Northolt. As detailed in Table 2 of this report, th e Ministry of Defence (MoD) have also been consulted and have recommended a condition to secure a Crane Management Plan. The cond ition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Railway Safeguarding 7.47 The London Underground railway line is located to the south and adjacent to the wider campus confines. As detailed in Tabl e 2 of this report, Transport for London (TFL) have been consulted and do not raise an objection subject to a condition to secure deta ils demonstrating that the development would not impact on London Underground infrastructure. The condition is recommended to be attached to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Subject to the condition, it is considered that the proposal would not interfere with the safe and efficient operation of the railway network in accordance with Policies T1 and T3 of the London Plan (2021). Land Contamination 7.48 The site is not located within a designated potentially contaminated land. As detailed in Table 2 of this report, the Council’s lan d contamination officer does not raise an objection subject to an informative being attached to the decision notice in the event of an approval. Fire Safety 7.49 Relevant information in the form of a Fire Safety Statement has been submitted with the application. The submitted Fire Safety Statement provides sufficient information to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of London Plan Policy D12. The statemen t identifies the building use and occupancy, means of escape strategy, evacuation procedures, active and passi ve fire safety measures, refuge arrangements for disabled users, assembly points and provisions for fire service access. The development incorpora tes two protected staircases, fire detection and alarm systems, emergency lighting, fire -resisting construction and fire-stopping measures. 7.50 The electrical layout drawing appended to the Fire Safety Statement incorporates a comprehensive fire alarm and emergency lighting system together with fire-stopping measures. The drawings indicate compliance with the relevant British Standards for fire de tection and emergency lighting and inc lude provision for disabled refuge facilities. The appended submitted BBA Certificate demonstrates that the proposed Portakabin Ultima Building System has been independently assessed and appears capable of achieving the fire resistance standards required by Building Regulations. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press 7.51 Taken together, the submitted information demonstrates that fire safety has been appropriately considered at the design stage and that the proposal is capable of achieving the highest standards of fire safety required by Policy D12 of the London Plan. Planning Obligations 7.52 On the basis of the NPPF and the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulation 2010, it is only considered appropriate to request planning obligations relating to the following: i. Air Quality Mitigation Contribution of £5,184.00 ii. Off-site Biodiversity Net Gain iii. Carbon Offset Contribution: A Carb on Offset sum base d on an Updated Energy Strategy to be submitted to discharge Condition 11, with the offset calculation based on £95 per tonne of CO2 over a 5 year period. iv. An Employment/ Construction Training Scheme secured in accordance with the Council's Planning Obligations SPD. v. A Project Management and Monitoring Fee, equalling 5% of the total financial contributions to be paid under this agreement. 7.53 The applicant has agreed in writing to the above obligations which would be secured by a s106 legal agreement. All financial contributions will be required prior to the commencement of the development 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 Ri ghts. In arriving at this recommendation, due regard has been given to the applicant's reasonable development ri ghts 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 asse ssment of this planning application. No adverse equality impacts are considered to arise from the proposal. Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press Local Finance Considerations and CIL 8.3 The development would not be liable for a CIL contribution based on the additional floorspace proposed. 8.4 Please note, this commentary has been provided for the purpose of assisting in the determination of the planning application onl y. If approved, the final CIL liability would be set out in the CIL Liability Notice following determination of the application in line with the CIL Regulations. This would be issued following a full review of all the material available to the Council's Planning Obligations Team at that time. 9 Conclusion / Planning Balance 9.1 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 (below). 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 inf ormation) 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 applications 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. 10.2 This report has been prepared with reference to background papers including those listed below, which have been relied upon to a material extent in its preparation and are available for public inspection, subject to any necessary redaction for exempt or confidential information:- 10.3 Internal consultee comments: - Air Quality Officer - Contaminated Land Officer - Economic Development Officer - Highway Authority - Noise Officer - Planning Policy Officer - Urban Design Officer 10.4 External consultee comments: - Affinity Water - Historic England - HSE Fire Safety Hillingdon Planning Committee – 14 October 2026 PART 1 – Members, Public & Press - Ministry of Defence - Transport for London - Thames Water AAPPENDICES Planning Application 1127/APP/2026/1323 Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 1 of 23 AAppendix 1: Recommended Conditions and Informatives Conditions 1. T4 T Temporary Building - Removal and Reinstatement The development hereby permitted shall be removed on or before 5 years from the date of this decision notice. The land shall be restored in accordance with the details submitted and approved in compliance with Condition 14. REASON The Portakabin building, by reason of its scale, design and appearance is not considered suitable for permanent retention in compliance with Policies DMCI 1A and DMHB 11 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2(2020) and Policies S3 and D3 of the London Plan (2021). 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, numbers - UBC6789998212PNM Rev. F: Location Plan - HD/14722/02 Rev. H: Proposed Layout, Ultima Complex Building - HD/14722/02 Rev. H: Proposed Roof Plan, Ultima Complex Building - 3580 - L100: Landscape General Arrangement Plan - Arbtech TPP 02: Tree Protection Plan and shall thereafter be retained/maintained for as long as the development remains in existence. REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions Hillingdon Local Plan Parts 1 (November 2012) and 2 (January 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 Method Statement, 10 August 2026, Arbtech - Construction Management Plan, 05/05/26, Portakabin - Fire Safety Statement, Portakabin - Noise Assessment, Rev.2 17 August 2026, Cass Allen - Preliminary Ecological Appraisal & Roost Assessment, Issue 3.0, 11/09/2026, ArbTech - Transport Statement, August 2026, Iceni Thereafter the development shall be retained/maintained in accordance with these details for Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 2 of 23 as long as the development remains in existence REASON To ensure the development complies with the provisions Hillingdon Local Plan Parts 1 (November 2012) and 2 (January 2020) and the London Plan (2021). 4 4. NONSC S Step free access The development hereby approved shall provide step free access via all points of entry and exit, with all such provisions remaining in place for the life of the development. REASON To ensure an inclusive design is achieved and maintained in accordance with Policy D5 of the London Plan (2021). 5. NONSC E Evacuation lift The development hereby approved shall accord with London Plan policy D5(B5) and D12(A) to include a minimum of one fire evacuation lift designed to meet the technical standards set out in BS EN 81-76, BS 9991 and/or BS 9999, with all such provisions remaining in place for the life of the development. REASON To ensure the development can accommodate robust emergency evacuation procedures, including measure for those who require step-free egress, in accordance with Policies D5 and D12 of the London Plan (2021). 6. COM31 S Secured by Design The building(s) shall achieve 'Secured by Design' accreditation awarded by the Hillingdon Metropolitan Police Crime Prevention Design Adviser (CPDA) on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO). No building shall be occupied until accreditation has been achieved. REASON In pursuance of the Council's duty under section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 to consider crime and disorder implications in excising its planning functions; to promote the well being of the area in pursuance of the Council's powers under section 2 of the Local Government Act 2000 to ensure the development provides a safe and secure environment in accordance with Policy DMHB 15 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policies D11 and D12 of the London Plan (2021). 7. RES10 T Trees 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 Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 3 of 23 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 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), Policy G7 of the London Plan (2021) and to comply with Section 197 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 8 8. COM9 L Landscaping and Ecology No development shall take place above slab level until a landscape and ecology 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), 1.b Written specification of planting and cultivation works to be undertaken, 1.c Schedule of plants giving species, plant sizes, and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate. 2. Details of Hard Landscaping 2.a Hard Surfacing Materials 2.b Means of enclosure 2.c External Lighting scheme in accordance with the recommendations of the approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal & Roost Assessment, Issue 3.0, 11/09/2026, ArbTech. 2.d Details of ecological compensation and enhancements in accordance with the recommendations of the approved Preliminary Ecological Appraisal & Roost Assessment, Issue 3.0, 11/09/2026, ArbTech. 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 surfing/seeding within the landscaping scheme which dies or in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority becomes Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 4 of 23 seriously damaged or diseased. 4. Schedule for Implementation 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 the locality and provide adequate facilities in compliance with Policies DMHB 14 and DMEI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policies G6 and G7 of the London Plan (2021) 9 9. NONSC C CEMP No development shall take place above slab level until a Construction Ecological Management Plan (CEMP) has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out and maintained in full accordance with the approved details. REASON In the interest of protected species in accordance with Policy DMEI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policy G6 of the London Plan (2021). 10. NONSC B Biodiversity Net Gain No development shall take place above slab level until a Biodiversity Gain Plan for the site, demonstrating compliance with the 10% biodiversity net gain requirement in accordance with the Environment Act 2021, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Biodiversity Gain Plan should include: i. Baseline Biodiversity Assessment: Using the latest Defra Biodiversity Metric, a report of the site's pre-development biodiversity value; and ii. On-Site Enhancement and 30-year Habitat Management Plan (HMP) detailing measures to achieve BNG on-site, including species protection, habitat creation, and ongoing management strategies to maintain gains for a minimum of 30 years. 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 an 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. h) Details of the persons responsible for the implementation and monitoring. Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 5 of 23 i) Report to the Council routinely regarding the state of the Biodiversity Net Gain requirements for development in years 1 (post-completion), 3, 5, 10, 20, and 30, with biodiversity reconciliation calculations at each stage; or Where a biodiversity net gain of 10% is not achievable on site, in addition to the Baseline Biodiversity Assessment (i), the following shall be included in the BGP: iii. Off-Site Biodiversity Credits or Statutory Credits: Where on-site measures do not achieve the 10% net gain, confirmation of the purchase of off-site biodiversity credits or statutory credits must be provided, including a receipt or proof of transaction as part of the Plan The approved Biodiversity Gain Plan shall be strictly adhered to, and development shall commence and operate in accordance with it. REASON To ensure the development delivers a Biodiversity Net Gain and secures the protection and effective management of the remaining habitat on site in accordance with Policy DMEI 7 of the Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2 (2020) and Policy G6 of The London Plan (2021). 1 11. SUS6 T Travel Plan No development shall take place above slab level until an Updated Travel Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Travel Plan, as submitted shall follow the current Travel Plan Development Control Guidance issued by Transport for London and will include: (1) targets for sustainable travel arrangements; (2) effective measures for the ongoing monitoring of the Travel Plan; (3) a commitment to delivering the Travel Plan objectives; and (4) effective mechanisms to achieve the objectives of the Travel Plan by both present and future occupiers of the development. The development shall be implemented only in accordance with the approved Travel Plan. REASON To promote sustainable transport and reduce the impact of the development on the surrounding road network in accordance with Policy T4 of the London Plan (2021). 12. NONSC E Energy Strategy No development (excluding demolition and works below slab level), until an updated Energy Strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. In accordance with the Energy Hierarchy, the updated Energy Strategy shall demonstrate a minimum on-site reduction of at least 35 per cent beyond Building Regulations and demonstrate how the zero-carbon target would be met. Where the Energy Strategy demonstrates that the zero-carbon target cannot be fully achieved on-site, the shortfall Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 6 of 23 should be provided through a cash in lieu contribution to the borough's carbon offset fund. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON To ensure the development achieves zero carbon in accordance with Policy SI2 of the London Plan (2021). 1 13. NONSC T TfL Infrastructure Protection No development shall take place above slab level until the following documents (in consultation with TfL Infrastructure Protection), for each progressive stage of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority which: - Identify existing London Underground (LU) assets and structures to ensure that the works have no impacts on LU assets; - Before work commences on site, an assessment of railway noise and vibration shall be carried out and appropriate protective measures shall be taken, to protect the users of the property and of other properties potentially affected, against noise and vibration, as a result of the current development; - Before operation of any equipment likely to emit electromagnetic radiation, an EMC assessment shall be submitted to LUL for their consideration and written approval; - Provide detailed design and Risk Assessment and Method Statement for all temporary and permanent works including the site clearance, demolition, foundation and construction works; - Provide detailed design and Risk Assessment and Method Statement on the use of tall or heavy plant/scaffold/crane; - Provide assessment of ground movement impact on London Underground structures due to temporary and permanent changes in loading associated with the proposed demolition/modification/construction works. REASON To ensure that the development does not impact on existing London Underground/DLR transport infrastructure, in accordance with Policy T3 of the London Plan (2021) and Sustainable Transport Walking and Cycling London Plan Guidance 2022. 14. T4 R Reinstatement Plan No later than 6 calendar months before the expiry of this temporary 5 year permission, a scheme for the restoration of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall include the removal of all buildings, structures, plant, equipment and associated infrastructure approved under this permission and the reinstatement of the land to its former condition. The approved scheme shall be carried out in full within 6 months of the expiry of this permission. REASON Hillingdon Planning Committee - 6th October 2026 PART 1 - MEMBERS, PUBLIC & PRESS 7 of 23

Planning Committee Report Part 3: Planning Policy Appendix - Frequently Cited Policies 2 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press Frequently Cited Planning Policies Abbreviations LP – London Plan (2021) LP1 – Hillingdon Local Plan Part 1: Strategic Policies (2012) LP2 – Hillingdon Local Plan Part 2: Development Management Policies (2020) Topic Policy Page No. Householder Policies LP2 DMHD 1: Alterations and Extensions to Residential Dwellings 4 LP2 DMHD 2: Outbuildings 6 LP2 DMHD 3: Basement Development 6 Standard of Accommodation LP D6: Housing quality and standards 7 LP2 DMHB 16: Housing Standards 8 LP2 DMHB 18: Private Outdoor Amenity Space 8 Housing LP H2: Small sites 9 LP H4: Delivering Affordable Housing? 9 LP H10: Housing size mix 10 LP1 H1: Housing Growth 10 LP2 DMH 1: Safeguarding Existing Housing 11 LP2 DMH 2: Housing Mix 11 LP2 DMH 4: Residential Conversions and Redevelopment 11 LP2 DMH 5: Houses in Multiple Occupation 11 LP2 DMH 6: Garden and Backland Development 12 LP2 DMH 7: Provision of Affordable Housing 12 Design (Including Heritage, Trees / Landscaping and Accessibility) LP D3: Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach 13 LP D5: Inclusive design 15 LP D7: Accessible housing 15 LP D8: Public realm 15 LP D12: Fire safety 17 LP HC1: Heritage conservation and growth 18 LP G7: Trees and woodlands 19 LP1 BE1: Built Environment 19 LP2 DMHB 1: Heritage Assets 21 3 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMHB 2: Listed Buildings 22 LP2 DMHB 3: Locally Listed Buildings 22 LP2 DMHB 4: Conservation Areas 23 LP2 DMHB 5: Areas of Special Local Character 23 LP2 DMHB 11: Design of New Development 23 LP2 DMHB 12: Streets and Public Realm 24 LP2 DMHB 14: Trees and Landscaping 25 LP2 DMHB 15: Planning for Safer Places 25 Environmental LP D13: Agent of change 25 LP D14: Noise 26 LP SI2: Minimising greenhouse gas emissions 27 LP SI12: Flood risk management 27 LP SI13: Sustainable drainage 28 LP1 EM6: Flood Risk Management 29 LP1 EM8: Land, Water, Air and Noise 29 LP2 DMEI 2: Reducing Carbon Emissions 31 LP2 DMEI 9: Management of Flood Risk 31 LP2 DMEI 10: Water Management, Efficiency and Quality 31 LP2 DMEI 12: Development of Land Affected by Contamination 33 LP2 DMEI 14: Air Quality 33 Highways and Parking LP T4: Assessing and mitigating transport impacts 33 LP T5: Cycling 34 LP T6: Car parking 35 LP T6.1: Residential parking 36 LP2 DMT 1: Managing Transport Impacts 37 LP2 DMT 2: Highways Impacts 38 LP2 DMT 5: Pedestrians and Cyclists 38 LP2 DMT 6: Vehicle Parking 39 4 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMHD 1: Alterations and Extensions to Residential Dwellings A) Planning applications relating to alterations and extensions of dwellings will be required to ensure that: i) there is no adverse cumulative impact of the proposal on the character, appearance or quality of the existing street or wider area; ii) a satisfactory relationship with adjacent dwellings is achieved; iii) new extensions appear subordinate to the main dwelling in their floor area, width, depth and height; iv) new extensions respect the design of the original house and be of matching materials; v) there is no unacceptable loss of outlook to neighbouring occupiers; vi) adequate garden space is retained; vii) adequate off-street parking is retained, as set out in Table 1: Parking Standards in Appendix C; viii) trees, hedges and other landscaping features are retained; and ix) all extensions in Conservation Areas and Areas of Special Local Character, and to Listed and Locally Listed Buildings, are designed in keeping with the original house, in terms of layout, scale, proportions, roof form, window pattern, detailed design and materials. B) Rear Extensions i) single storey rear extensions on terraced or semi-detached houses with a plot width of 5 metres or less should not exceed 3.3 metres in depth or 3.6 metres where the plot width is 5 metres or more; ii) single storey rear extensions to detached houses with a plot width of 5 metres or more should not exceed 4.0 metres in depth; iii) flat roofed single storey extensions should not exceed 3.0 metres in height and any pitched or sloping roofs should not exceed 3.4 metres in height, measured from ground level; iv) in Conservation Areas and Areas of Special Local Character, flat roofed single storey extensions will be expected to be finished with a parapet; v) balconies or access to flat roofs which result in loss of privacy to nearby dwellings or gardens will not be permitted; vi) two storey extensions should not extend into an area provided by a 45-degree line of sight drawn from the centre of the nearest ground or first floor habitable room window of an adjacent property and should not contain windows or other openings that overlook other houses at a distance of less than 21 metres; vii) flat roofed two storey extensions will not be acceptable unless the design is in keeping with the particular character of the existing house; viii) pitched roofs on extensions should be of a similar pitch and materials to that of the original roof and subordinate to it in design. Large crown roofs on detached houses will not be supported; and ix) full width two storey rear extensions are not considered acceptable in designated areas or as extensions to Listed Buildings or Locally Listed Buildings. C) Side Extensions i) side extensions should not exceed half the width of the original property; ii) extensions to corner plots should ensure that the openness of the area is maintained and the return building line is not exceeded; 5 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press iii) garages should reflect the size guidelines set out in Appendix C Parking standards; iv) two storey side extensions should be set in a minimum of 1 metre from the side boundary or in the case of properties in the Copse Wood and Gatehill Estates, at least 1.5 metres, but more if on a wider than average plot, in order to maintain adequate visual separation and views between houses; v) two storey side extensions to detached and semi-detached properties should be set back a minimum of 1 metre behind the main front elevation; vi) where hip to gable roof extensions exist, a two storey side extension will not be supported; and vii) in Conservation Areas, single storey side extensions may be required to be set back. D) Front Extensions i) alterations and extensions to the front of a house must be minor and not alter the overall appearance of the house or dominate the character of the street. Front extensions extending across the entire frontage will be refused; ii) porches should be subordinate in scale and individually designed to respect the character and features of the original building; pastiche features will not be supported; and iii) notwithstanding the above, at least 25% of the front garden must be retained. E) Roof Extensions i) roof extensions should be located on the rear elevation only, be subservient to the scale of the existing roof and should not exceed more than two thirds the average width of the original roof. They should be located below the ridge tiles of the existing roof and retain a substantial element of the original roof slope above the eaves line; ii) the Council will not support poorly designed or over-large roof extensions including proposals to convert an existing hipped roof to a gable; iii) raising of a main roof above the existing ridgeline of a house will generally not be supported; iv) all roof extensions should employ appropriate external materials and architectural details to match the existing dwelling; and v) in Conservation Areas, Areas of Special Local Character and on Listed and Locally Listed Buildings, roof extensions should take the form of traditional 'dormer' windows, on the rear elevation, to harmonise with the existing building. The highest point of the dormer should be kept well within the back roof slope, away from the ridge, eaves or valleys, whilst each window should match the proportions, size and glazing pattern of the first floor windows. F) Front Gardens and Parking i) new or replacement driveways should use permeable (porous) surfacing. Surfaces of more than five square metres will need planning permission for laying traditional, impermeable driveways; and ii) the design, materials and height of any front boundary must be in keeping with the character of the area to ensure harmonisation with the existing street scene. 6 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMHD 2: Outbuildings The Council will require residential outbuildings to meet the following criteria: i) the building must be constructed to a high standard of design without compromising the amenity of neighbouring occupiers; ii) the developed footprint of the proposed building must be proportionate to the footprint of the dwelling house and to the residential curtilage in which it stands and have regard to existing trees; iii) the use shall be for a purpose incidental to the enjoyment of the dwelling house and not capable for use as independent residential accommodation; and iv) primary living accommodation such as a bedroom, bathroom, or kitchen will not be permitted. LP2 DMHD 3: Basement Development A) When determining proposals for basement and other underground development, the Council require an assessment of the scheme’s impact on drainage, flooding, groundwater conditions and structural stability. The Council will only permit basement and other underground development that does not cause harm to the built and natural environment and local amenity and does not result in flooding or ground instability. Developers will be required to demonstrate by methodologies appropriate to the site that their proposals: i) avoid adversely affecting drainage and run-off or causing other damage to the water environment; ii) avoid cumulative impacts upon structural stability or the water environment in the local area; B) Schemes should ensure that they: i) do not harm the amenity of neighbours; ii) do not lead to the loss of trees of townscape or amenity value; iii) do provide satisfactory landscaping, including adequate soil depth; iv) do not harm the appearance or setting of the property or the established character of the surrounding area, for example through the introduction of front lightwells; and v) do protect important archaeological remains. C) The Council will not permit basement schemes which include habitable rooms and other sensitive uses in areas prone to flooding. D) The Council will not permit basement schemes in Listed Buildings and will not permit them in Conservation Area locations where their introduction would harm the special architectural or historic character of the area. 7 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP D6: Housing Quality and Standards A) Housing development should be of high quality design and provide adequately- sized rooms (see Table 3.1) with comfortable and functional layouts which are fit for purpose and meet the needs of Londoners without differentiating between tenures. B) Qualitative aspects of a development are key to ensuring successful sustainable housing. Table 3.2 sets out key qualitative aspects which should be addressed in the design of housing developments. C) Housing development should maximise the provision of dual aspect dwellings and normally avoid the provision of single aspect dwellings. A single aspect dwelling should only be provided where it is considered a more appropriate design solution to meet the requirements of Part D in Policy D3 Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach than a dual aspect dwelling, and it can be demonstrated that it will have adequate passive ventilation, daylight and privacy, and avoid overheating. D) The design of development should provide sufficient daylight and sunlight to new and surrounding housing that is appropriate for its context, whilst avoiding overheating, minimising overshadowing and maximising the usability of outside amenity space. E) Housing should be designed with adequate and easily accessible storage space that supports the separate collection of dry recyclables (for at least card, paper, mixed plastics, metals, glass) and food waste as well as residual waste F) Housing developments are required to meet the minimum standards below which apply to all tenures and all residential accommodation that is self-contained. Private internal space 1. Dwellings must provide at least the gross internal floor area and built-in storage area set out in Table 3.1. 2. A dwelling with two or more bedspaces must have at least one double (or twin) bedroom that is at least 2.75m wide. Every other additional double (or twin) bedroom must be at least 2.55m wide. 3. A one bedspace single bedroom must have a floor area of at least 7.5 sq.m. and be at least 2.15m wide. 4. A two bedspace double (or twin) bedroom must have a floor area of at least 11.5 sq.m. 5. Any area with a headroom of less than 1.5m is not counted within the Gross Internal Area unless used solely for storage (If the area under the stairs is to be used for storage, assume a general floor area of 1 sq.m. within the Gross Internal Area). 6. Any other area that is used solely for storage and has a headroom of 0.9-1.5m (such as under eaves) can only be counted up to 50 per cent of its floor area, and any area lower than 0.9m is not counted at all. 7. A built-in wardrobe counts towards the Gross Internal Area and bedroom floor area requirements, but should not reduce the effective width of the room below the minimum widths set out above. Any built-in area in excess of 0.72 sq.m. in a double 8 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press bedroom and 0.36 sq.m. in a single bedroom counts towards the built-in storage requirement. 8. The minimum floor to ceiling height must be 2.5m for at least 75 per cent of the Gross Internal Area of each dwelling. Private outside space 9. Where there are no higher local standards in the borough Development Plan Documents, a minimum of 5 sq.m. of private outdoor space should be provided for 1- 2 person dwellings and an extra 1 sq.m. should be provided for each additional occupant, and it must achieve a minimum depth and width of 1.5m. This does not count towards the minimum Gross Internal Area space standards required in Table 3.1 G) The Mayor will produce guidance on the implementation of this policy for all housing tenures. LP2 DMHB 16: Housing Standards All housing development should have an adequate provision of internal space in order to provide an appropriate living environment. To achieve this all residential development or conversions should: i) meet or exceed the most up to date internal space standards, as set out in Table 5.1; and ii) in the case of major developments, provide at least 10% of new housing to be accessible or easily adaptable for wheelchair users. LP2 DMHB 18: Private Outdoor Amenity Space A) All new residential development and conversions will be required to provide good quality and useable private outdoor amenity space. Amenity space should be provided in accordance with the standards set out in Table 5.3. B) Balconies should have a depth of not less than 1.5 metres and a width of not less than 2 metres. C) Any ground floor and/or basement floor unit that is non-street facing should have a defensible space of not less than 3 metres in depth in front of any window to a bedroom or habitable room. However, for new developments in Conservation Areas, Areas of Special Local Character or for developments, which include Listed Buildings, the provision of private open space will be required to enhance the streetscene and the character of the buildings on the site. D) The design, materials and height of any front boundary must be in keeping with the character of the area to ensure harmonisation with the existing street scene. 9 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP H2: Small sites A) Boroughs should pro-actively support well-designed new homes on small sites (below 0.25 hectares in size) through both planning decisions and plan-making in order to: 1. significantly increase the contribution of small sites to meeting London’s housing needs 2. diversify the sources, locations, type and mix of housing supply 3. support small and medium-sized housebuilders 4. support those wishing to bring forward custom, self-build and community-led housing 5. achieve the minimum targets for small sites set out in Table 4.2 as a component of the overall housing targets set out in Table 4.1. B Boroughs should: 1. recognise in their Development Plans that local character evolves over time and will need to change in appropriate locations to accommodate additional housing on small sites 2. where appropriate, prepare site-specific briefs, masterplans and housing design codes for small sites 3. identify and allocate appropriate small sites for residential development 4. list these small sites on their brownfield registers 5. grant permission in principle on specific sites or prepare local development orders. LP H4: Delivering Affordable Housing A) The strategic target is for 50 per cent of all new homes delivered across London to be genuinely affordable. Specific measures to achieve this aim include: 1. requiring major developments which trigger affordable housing requirements to provide affordable housing through the threshold approach (Policy H5 Threshold approach to applications) 2. using grant to increase affordable housing delivery beyond the level that would otherwise be provided 3. all affordable housing providers with agreements with the Mayor delivering at least 50 per cent affordable housing across their development programme, and 60 per cent in the case of strategic partners 4. public sector land delivering at least 50 per cent affordable housing on each site and public sector landowners with agreements with the Mayor delivering at least 50 per cent affordable housing across their portfolio 5. industrial land appropriate for residential use in accordance with Policy E7 Industrial intensification, co-location and substitution, delivering at least 50 per cent affordable housing where the scheme would result in a net loss of industrial capacity. B) Affordable housing should be provided on site. Affordable housing must only be provided off-site or as a cash in lieu contribution in exceptional circumstances. 10 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP H10: Housing size mix A) Schemes should generally consist of a range of unit sizes. To determine the appropriate mix of unit sizes in relation to the number of bedrooms for a scheme, applicants and decision-makers should have regard to: 1. robust local evidence of need where available or, where this is not available, the range of housing need and demand identified by the 2017 London Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2. the requirement to deliver mixed and inclusive neighbourhoods 3. the need to deliver a range of unit types at different price points across London 4. the mix of uses in the scheme 5. the range of tenures in the scheme 6. 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 7. the aim to optimise housing potential on sites 8. the ability of new development to reduce pressure on conversion, sub-division and amalgamation of existing stock 9. the need for additional family housing and the role of one and two bed units in freeing up existing family housing. B For low-cost rent, boroughs should provide guidance on the size of units required (by number of bedrooms) to ensure affordable housing meets identified needs. This guidance should take account of: 1. evidence of local housing needs, including the local housing register and the numbers and types of overcrowded and under-occupying households 2. other criteria set out in Part A, including the strategic and local requirement for affordable family accommodation 3. the impact of welfare reform 4. the cost of delivering larger units and the availability of grant. LP1 H1: Housing Growth The Council will meet and exceed its minimum strategic dwelling requirement, where this can be achieved, in accordance with other Local Plan policies. The borough’s current target is to provide an additional 4,250 dwellings, annualised as 425 dwellings per year, for the ten year period between 2011 and 2021. Rolled forward to 2026, this target equates to a minimum provision of 6,375 dwellings over the period of the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 1- Strategic Policies. Sites that will contribute to the achievement of this target will be identified in the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2- Site Specific Allocations Local Development Document (LDD). 11 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMH 1: Safeguarding Existing Housing A) The net loss of existing self-contained3 housing, including affordable housing, will be resisted unless the housing is replaced with at least equivalent residential floorspace. B) The Council will grant planning permission for the subdivision of dwellings only if: i) car parking standards can be met within the curtilage of the site without being detrimental to the street scene; ii) all units are self contained with exclusive use of sanitary and kitchen facilities and provided with individual entrances and internal staircases to serve units above ground floor level; iii) adequate amenity space is provided for the benefit of residents; and iv) adequate living space standards are met. LP2 DMH 2: Housing Mix The Council will require the provision of a mix of housing units of different sizes in schemes of residential development to reflect the Council’s latest information on housing need. LP2 DMH 4: Residential Conversions and Redevelopment Residential conversions and the redevelopment of dwellings into new blocks of flats will only be permitted where: i) it is on a residential street where the proposal will not result in more than 10% of properties being redeveloped into flats; ii) On residential streets longer than 1km the proposed redevelopment site should be taken as the midpoint of a 1km length of road for assessment purposes; iii) the internal floor area of the original building to be converted is at least 120 sqm; and iv) units are limited to one unit per floor for residential conversions. LP2 DMH 5: Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) and Student Accommodation A) In all parts of the Borough Proposals for the provision of large HMOs, residential hostels, student accommodation and secure accommodation will be required to demonstrate that: i) there is good accessibility to local amenities and public transport; ii) they accord with the Accessible Homes standards and provide satisfactory living conditions for the intended occupiers; and iii) there will be no adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties or the character of the area. B) In wards covered by an Article 4 Direction for HMOs 12 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press Planning applications for the change of use from dwelling house (Use Class C3) to HMO (Use Class C4 and Sui Generis) will only be permitted: i) where it is in a neighbourhood area where less than 20% of properties are or would be exempt from paying council tax (or in the case of Conservation Areas 10%) because they are entirely occupied by full time students, recorded on the Council’s database as a licensed HMO, benefit from C4/Sui Generis HMO planning consent and are known to the Council to be HMOs; ii) in Conservation Areas where less than 10% of properties are exempt from paying council tax because they are entirely occupied by full time students, recorded on the Council’s database as a licensed HMO, benefit from C4/Sui Generis HMO planning consent and are known to the Council to be HMOs and the change of use does not form a consecutive HMO use in a street frontage; iii) where less than 15% of properties within 100 metres of a street length either side of an application property are exempt from paying council tax because they are entirely occupied by full time students, recorded on the Council’s database as a licensed HMO, benefit from C4/Sui Generis HMO planning consent and are known to the Council to be HMOs; and iv) where the accommodation complies with all other planning standards relating to car parking, waste storage, retention of amenity space and garages and will not have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of adjoining properties. LP2 DMH 6: Garden and Backland Development There is a presumption against the loss of gardens due to the need to maintain local character, amenity space and biodiversity. In exceptional cases a limited scale of backland development may be acceptable, subject to the following criteria: i) neighbouring residential amenity and privacy of existing homes and gardens must be maintained and unacceptable light spillage avoided; ii) vehicular access or car parking should not have an adverse impact on neighbours in terms of noise or light. Access roads between dwellings and unnecessarily long access roads will not normally be acceptable; iii) development on backland sites must be more intimate in mass and scale and lower than frontage properties; and iv) features such as trees, shrubs and wildlife habitat must be retained or re-provided. LP2 DMH 7: Provision of Affordable Housing A) In accordance with national policy: i) developments with a capacity to provide 10 or more units will be required to maximise the delivery of on-site affordable housing; ii) 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. 13 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press B) Affordable housing should be built to the same standards and should share the same level of amenity as private housing. C) Proposals that do not provide sufficient affordable housing will be resisted. D) To ensure that Policy H2: Affordable Housing of the Local Plan Part 1 is applied consistently and fairly on all proposed housing developments, the requirement for affordable housing will apply to: i) sites that are artificially sub-divided or partially developed; ii) phased developments where a housing development is part of a much larger development of 10 or more units (gross), affordable housing will be required as part of the overall scheme; and iii) additional units created through or subsequently amended planning applications, whereby the amount of affordable housing required will be calculated based on the new total number of units on the site. Affordable housing will be required where a development under the 10 unit threshold is amended to have 10 or more housing units in total (gross). E) In exceptional circumstances, where on-site provision of affordable housing cannot be delivered and as a last resort, a financial contribution will be required to provide off-site affordable housing on other sites which may be more appropriate or beneficial in meeting the Borough's identified affordable housing needs. LP D3: Optimising site capacity through the design-led approach The design-led approach A) All development must make the best use of land by following a design-led approach that optimises the capacity of sites, including site allocations. Optimising site capacity means ensuring that development is of the most appropriate form and land use for the site. 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 capacity (as set out in Policy D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities), and that best delivers the requirements set out in Part D. B) Higher density developments should generally be promoted in locations that are well connected to jobs, services, infrastructure and amenities by public transport, walking and cycling, in accordance with Policy D2 Infrastructure requirements for sustainable densities. Where these locations have existing areas of high density buildings, expansion of the areas should be positively considered by Boroughs where appropriate. This could also include expanding Opportunity Area boundaries where appropriate. C) In other areas, incremental densification should be actively encouraged by Boroughs to achieve a change in densities in the most appropriate way. This should be interpreted in the context of Policy H2 Small sites. 14 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press D) Development proposals should: Form and layout 1. enhance local context by delivering buildings and spaces that positively respond to local distinctiveness through their layout, orientation, scale, appearance and shape, with due regard to existing and emerging street hierarchy, building types, forms and proportions 2. encourage and facilitate active travel with convenient and inclusive pedestrian and cycling routes, crossing points, cycle parking, and legible entrances to buildings, that are aligned with peoples’ movement patterns and desire lines in the area 3. be street-based with clearly defined public and private environments 4. facilitate efficient servicing and maintenance of buildings and the public realm, as well as deliveries, that minimise negative impacts on the environment, public realm and vulnerable road users Experience 1. achieve safe, secure and inclusive environments 2. provide active frontages and positive reciprocal relationships between what happens inside the buildings and outside in the public realm to generate liveliness and interest 3. deliver appropriate outlook, privacy and amenity 4. provide conveniently located green and open spaces for social interaction, play, relaxation and physical activity 5. help prevent or mitigate the impacts of noise and poor air quality 6. achieve indoor and outdoor environments that are comfortable and inviting for people to use Quality and character 1. respond to the existing character of a place by identifying the special and valued features and characteristics that are unique to the locality and respect, enhance and utilise the heritage assets and architectural features that contribute towards the local character 2. be of high quality, with architecture that pays attention to detail, and gives thorough consideration to the practicality of use, flexibility, safety and building lifespan through appropriate construction methods and the use of attractive, robust materials which weather and mature well 3. aim for high sustainability standards (with reference to the policies within London Plan Chapters 8 and 9) and take into account the principles of the circular economy 4. provide spaces and buildings that maximise opportunities for urban greening to create attractive resilient places that can also help the management of surface water. E) Where development parameters for allocated sites have been set out in a Development Plan, development proposals that do not accord with the site capacity in a site allocation can be refused for this reason. 15 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP D5: Inclusive Design A) Boroughs, in preparing their Development Plans, should support the creation of inclusive neighbourhoods by embedding inclusive design, and collaborating with local communities in the development of planning policies that affect them. B) Development proposal should achieve the highest standards of accessible and inclusive design. They should: 1. be designed taking into account London’s diverse population 2. provide high quality people focused spaces that are designed to facilitate social interaction and inclusion 3. be convenient and welcoming with no disabling barriers, providing independent access without additional undue effort, separation or special treatment 4. be able to be entered, used and exited safely, easily and with dignity for all 5. be designed to incorporate safe and dignified emergency evacuation for all building users. In all developments where lifts are installed, as a minimum at least one lift per core (or more subject to capacity assessments) should be a suitably sized fire evacuation lift suitable to be used to evacuate people who require level access from the building. C) Design and Access Statements, submitted as part of development proposals, should include an inclusive design statement. LP D7: Accessible Housing A) To provide suitable housing and genuine choice for London’s diverse population, including disabled people, older people and families with young children, residential development must ensure that: 1. at least 10 per cent of dwellings (which are created via works to which Part M volume 1 of the Building Regulations applies) meet Building Regulation requirement M4(3) ‘wheelchair user dwellings’ 2. all other dwellings (which are created via works to which Part M volume 1 of the Building Regulations applies) meet Building Regulation requirement M4(2) ‘accessible and adaptable dwellings’. LP D8: Public Realm Development Plans and development proposals should: A) encourage and explore opportunities to create new public realm where appropriate B) ensure the public realm is well-designed, safe, accessible, inclusive, attractive, well-connected, related to the local and historic context, and easy to understand, service and maintain. Landscape treatment, planting, street furniture and surface materials should be of good quality, fit-for-purpose, durable and sustainable. Lighting, including for advertisements, should be carefully considered and well- 16 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press designed in order to minimise intrusive lighting infrastructure and reduce light pollution C) maximise the contribution that the public realm makes to encourage active travel and ensure its design discourages travel by car and excessive on-street parking, which can obstruct people’s safe enjoyment of the space. This includes design that reduces the impact of traffic noise and encourages appropriate vehicle speeds D) be based on an understanding of how the public realm in an area functions and creates a sense of place during different times of the day and night, days of the week and times of the year. In particular, they should demonstrate an understanding of how people use the public realm, and the types, location and relationship between public spaces in an area, identifying where there are deficits for certain activities, or barriers to movement that create severance for pedestrians and cyclists E) ensure both the movement function of the public realm and its function as a place are provided for and that the balance of space and time given to each reflects the individual characteristics of the area. The priority modes of travel for the area should be identified and catered for, as appropriate. Desire lines for people walking and cycling should be a particular focus, including the placement of street crossings, which should be regular, convenient and accessible F) ensure there is a mutually supportive relationship between the space, surrounding buildings and their uses, so that the public realm enhances the amenity and function of buildings and the design of buildings contributes to a vibrant public realm G) ensure buildings are of a design that activates and defines the public realm, and provides natural surveillance. Consideration should also be given to the local microclimate created by buildings, and the impact of service entrances and facades on the public realm H) ensure appropriate management and maintenance arrangements are in place for the public realm, which maximise public access and minimise rules governing the space to those required for its safe management in accordance with the Public London Charter I) incorporate green infrastructure such as street trees and other vegetation into the public realm to support rainwater management through sustainable drainage, reduce exposure to air pollution, moderate surface and air temperature and increase biodiversity J) ensure that appropriate shade, shelter, seating and, where possible, areas of direct sunlight are provided, with other microclimatic considerations, including temperature and wind, taken into account in order to encourage people to spend time in a place 17 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press K) ensure that street clutter, including street furniture that is poorly located, unsightly, in poor condition or without a clear function is removed, to ensure that pedestrian amenity is improved. Consideration should be given to the use, design and location of street furniture so that it complements the use and function of the space. Applications which seek to introduce unnecessary street furniture should be refused L) explore opportunities for innovative approaches to improving the public realm such as open street events and Play Streets M) create an engaging public realm for people of all ages, with opportunities for social activities, formal and informal play and social interaction during the daytime, evening and at night. This should include identifying opportunities for the meanwhile use of sites in early phases of development to create temporary public realm N) ensure that any on-street parking is designed so that it is not dominant or continuous, and that there is space for green infrastructure as well as cycle parking in the carriageway. Parking should not obstruct pedestrian lines O) ensure the provision and future management of free drinking water at appropriate locations in the new or redeveloped public realm. LP D12: Fire Safety A) In the interests of fire safety and to ensure the safety of all building users, all development proposals must achieve the highest standards of fire safety and ensure that they: 1. identify suitably positioned unobstructed outside space: a - for fire appliances to be positioned on b - appropriate for use as an evacuation assembly point 2. are designed to incorporate appropriate features which reduce the risk to life and the risk of serious injury in the event of a fire; including appropriate fire alarm systems and passive and active fire safety measures 3. are constructed in an appropriate way to minimise the risk of fire spread 4. provide suitable and convenient means of escape, and associated evacuation strategy for all building users 5. develop a robust strategy for evacuation which can be periodically updated and published, and which all building users can have confidence in 6. provide suitable access and equipment for firefighting which is appropriate for the size and use of the development. B) All major development proposals should be submitted with a Fire Statement, which is an independent fire strategy, produced by a third party, suitably qualified assessor. The statement should detail how the development proposal will function in terms of: 1. the building’s construction: methods, products and materials used, including manufacturers’ details 18 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press 2. the means of escape for all building users: suitably designed stair cores, escape for building users who are disabled or require level access, and associated evacuation strategy approach 3. features which reduce the risk to life: fire alarm systems, passive and active fire safety measures and associated management and maintenance plans 4. access for fire service personnel and equipment: how this will be achieved in an evacuation situation, water supplies, provision and positioning of equipment, firefighting lifts, stairs and lobbies, any fire suppression and smoke ventilation systems proposed, and the ongoing maintenance and monitoring of these 5. how provision will be made within the curtilage of the site to enable fire appliances to gain access to the building 6. ensuring that any potential future modifications to the building will take into account and not compromise the base build fire safety/protection measures. LP HC1: Heritage Conservation and Growth A) Boroughs should, in consultation with Historic England, local communities and other statutory and relevant organisations, develop evidence that demonstrates a clear understanding of London’s historic environment. This evidence should be used for identifying, understanding, conserving, and enhancing the historic environment and heritage assets, and improving access to, and interpretation of, the heritage assets, landscapes and archaeology within their area. B) Development Plans and strategies should demonstrate a clear understanding of the historic environment and the heritage values of sites or areas and their relationship with their surroundings. This knowledge should be used to inform the effective integration of London’s heritage in regenerative change by: 1. setting out a clear vision that recognises and embeds the role of heritage in place- making 2. utilising the heritage significance of a site or area in the planning and design process 3. integrating the conservation and enhancement of heritage assets and their settings with innovative and creative contextual architectural responses that contribute to their significance and sense of place 4. delivering positive benefits that conserve and enhance the historic environment, as well as contributing to the economic viability, accessibility and environmental quality of a place, and to social wellbeing. C) Development proposals affecting heritage assets, and their settings, should conserve their significance, by being sympathetic to the assets’ significance and appreciation within their surroundings. The cumulative impacts of incremental change from development on heritage assets and their settings should also be actively managed. Development proposals should avoid harm and identify enhancement opportunities by integrating heritage considerations early on in the design process. 19 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press D) Development proposals should identify assets of archaeological significance and use this information to avoid harm or minimise it through design and appropriate mitigation. Where applicable, development should make provision for the protection of significant archaeological assets and landscapes. The protection of undesignated heritage assets of archaeological interest equivalent to a scheduled monument should be given equivalent weight to designated heritage assets. E) Where heritage assets have been identified as being At Risk, boroughs should identify specific opportunities for them to contribute to regeneration and place- making, and they should set out strategies for their repair and re-use. LP G7: Trees and Woodlands A) London’s urban forest and woodlands should be protected and maintained, and new trees and woodlands should be planted in appropriate locations in order to increase the extent of London’s urban forest – the area of London under the canopy of trees. B) In their Development Plans, boroughs should: 1. protect ‘veteran’ trees and ancient woodland where these are not already part of a protected site139 2. identify opportunities for tree planting in strategic locations. C) Development proposals should ensure that, wherever possible, existing trees of value are retained.140 If planning permission is granted that necessitates the removal of trees there should be adequate replacement based on the existing value of the benefits of the trees removed, determined by, for example, i-tree or CAVAT or another appropriate valuation system. The planting of additional trees should generally be included in new developments – particularly large-canopied species which provide a wider range of benefits because of the larger surface area of their canopy. LP 1 BE1: Built Environment The Council will require all new development to improve and maintain the quality of the built environment in order to create successful and sustainable neighbourhoods, where people enjoy living and working and that serve the long-term needs of all residents. All new developments should: 1. Achieve a high quality of design in all new buildings, alterations, extensions and the public realm which enhances the local distinctiveness of the area, contributes to community cohesion and a sense of place; 2. Be designed to be appropriate to the identity and context of Hillingdon's buildings, townscapes, landscapes and views, and make a positive contribution to the local 20 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press area in terms of layout, form, scale and materials and seek to protect the amenity of surrounding land and buildings, particularly residential properties; 3. Be designed to include “Lifetime Homes” principles so that they can be readily adapted to meet the needs of those with disabilities and the elderly, 10% of these should be wheelchair accessible or easily adaptable to wheelchair accessibility encouraging places of work and leisure, streets, neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces to be designed to meet the needs of the community at all stages of people’s lives; 4. In the case of 10 dwellings or over, achieve a satisfactory assessment rating in terms of the latest Building for Life standards (as amended or replaced from time to time); 5. Improve areas of poorer environmental quality, including within the areas of relative disadvantage of Hayes, Yiewsley and West Drayton. All regeneration schemes should ensure that they are appropriate to their historic context, make use of heritage assets and reinforce their significance; 6. Incorporate a clear network of routes that are easy to understand, inclusive, safe, secure and connect positively with interchanges, public transport, community facilities and services; 7. Improve the quality of the public realm and provide for public and private spaces that are attractive, safe, functional, diverse, sustainable, accessible to all, respect the local character and landscape, integrate with the development, enhance and protect biodiversity through the inclusion of living walls, roofs and areas for wildlife, encourage physical activity and where appropriate introduce public art; 8. Create safe and secure environments that reduce crime and fear of crime, anti- social behaviour and risks from fire and arson having regard to Secure by Design standards and address resilience to terrorism in major development proposals; 9. Not result in the inappropriate development of gardens and green spaces that erode the character and biodiversity of suburban areas and increase the risk of flooding through the loss of permeable areas; 10. Maximise the opportunities for all new homes to contribute to tackling and adapting to climate change and reducing emissions of local air quality pollutants. The Council will require all new development to achieve reductions in carbon dioxide emission in line with the London Plan targets through energy efficient design and effective use of low and zero carbon technologies. Where the required reduction from on-site renewable energy is not feasible within major developments, contributions off-site will be sought. The Council will seek to merge a suite of sustainable design goals, such as the use of SUDS, water efficiency, lifetime homes, and energy efficiency into a requirement measured against the Code for Sustainable 21 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press Homes and BREEAM. These will be set out within the Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2- Development Management Policies Local Development Document (LDD). All developments should be designed to make the most efficient use of natural resources whilst safeguarding historic assets, their settings and local amenity and include sustainable design and construction techniques to increase the re-use and recycling of construction, demolition and excavation waste and reduce the amount disposed to landfill; 11. In the case of tall buildings, not adversely affect their surroundings including the local character, cause harm to the significance of heritage assets or impact on important views. Appropriate locations for tall buildings will be defined on a Character Study and may include parts of Uxbridge and Hayes subject to considering the Obstacle Limitation Surfaces for Heathrow Airport. Outside of Uxbridge and Hayes town centres, tall buildings will not be supported. The height of all buildings should be based upon an understanding of the local character and be appropriate to the positive qualities of the surrounding townscape. Support will be given for proposals that are consistent with local strategies, guidelines, supplementary planning documents and Hillingdon Local Plan: Part 2- Development Management Policies. LP2 DMHB 1: Heritage Assets A) The Council will expect development proposals to avoid harm to the historic environment. Development that has an effect on heritage assets will only be supported where: i) it sustains and enhances the significance of the heritage asset and puts them into viable uses consistent with their conservation; ii) it will not lead to a loss of significance or harm to an asset, unless it can be demonstrated that it will provide public benefit that would outweigh the harm or loss, in accordance with the NPPF; iii) it makes a positive contribution to the local character and distinctiveness of the area; iv) any extensions or alterations are designed in sympathy, without detracting from or competing with the heritage asset; v) the proposal would relate appropriately in terms of siting, style, scale, massing, height, design and materials; vi) buildings and structures within the curtilage of a heritage asset, or in close proximity to it, do not compromise its setting; and vii) opportunities are taken to conserve or enhance the setting, so that the significance of the asset can be appreciated more readily. B) Development proposals affecting designated heritage assets need to take account of the effects of climate change and renewable energy without impacting negatively on the heritage asset. The Council may require an alternative solution which will protect the asset yet meet the sustainability objectives of the Local Plan. 22 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press C) The Council will seek to secure the repair and reuse of Listed Buildings and monuments and improvements to Conservation Areas on the Heritage at Risk Register, through negotiations with owners, the provision of advice and guidance, the use of appropriate legal action, and through bids for external funding for improvement works. LP2 DMHB 2: Listed Buildings A) Applications for Listed Building Consent and planning permission to alter, extend, or change the use of a statutorily Listed Building will only be permitted if they are considered to retain its significance and value and are appropriate in terms of the fabric, historic integrity, spatial quality and layout of the building. Any additions or alterations to a Listed Building should be sympathetic in terms of scale, proportion, detailed design, materials and workmanship. B) Applications should include a Heritage Statement that demonstrates a clear understanding of the importance of the building and the impact of the proposals on its significance. C) The substantial harm to or total loss of significance of a statutory Listed Building will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances when the nature of the heritage asset prevents all reasonable use of the building, no viable use can be found through marketing, grant-funding or charitable or public ownership and the loss is outweighed by bringing the site back into use. In such circumstances, full archaeological recording of the building will be required. D) Planning permission will not be granted for proposals which are considered detrimental to the setting of a Listed Building. LP2 DMHB 3: Locally Listed Buildings A) There is a general presumption in favour of the retention of buildings, structures and features included in the Local List. The Council will take into account the effect of a proposal on the building's significance and the scale of any harm of loss when considering planning applications, including those for major alterations and extensions. Proposals will be permitted where they retain the significance, appearance, character or setting of a Locally Listed Building. B) Applications should include a Heritage Statement that demonstrates a clear understanding of the importance of the structure and the impact of the proposals on the significance of the Locally Listed Building. C) Replacement will only be considered if it can be demonstrated that the community benefits of such a proposal significantly outweigh those of retaining the Locally Listed Building. 23 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMHB 4: Conservation Areas New development, including alterations and extensions to existing buildings, within a Conservation Area or on its fringes, will be expected to preserve or enhance the character or appearance of the area. It should sustain and enhance its significance and make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. In order to achieve this, the Council will: A) Require proposals for new development, including any signage or advertisement, to be of a high quality contextual design. Proposals should exploit opportunities to restore any lost features and/or introduce new ones that would enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. B) Resist the loss of buildings, historic street patterns, important views, landscape and open spaces or other features that make a positive contribution to the character or appearance of the Conservation Area; any such loss will need to be supported with a robust justification. C) Proposals will be required to support the implementation of improvement actions set out in relevant Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans. LP2 DMHB 5: Areas of Special Local Character A) Within Areas of Special Local Character, new development should reflect the character of the area and its original layout. Alterations should respect the established scale, building lines, height, design and materials of the area. B) Extensions to dwellings should be subservient to, and respect the architectural style of the original buildings and allow sufficient space for appropriate landscaping, particularly between, and in front of, buildings. C) The replacement of buildings which positively contribute to the character and local importance of Areas of Special Local Character will normally be resisted. LP2 DMHB 11: Design of New Development A) All development, including extensions, alterations and new buildings will be required to be designed to the highest standards and, incorporate principles of good design including: i) harmonising with the local context by taking into account the surrounding: - scale of development, considering the height, mass and bulk of adjacent structures; - building plot sizes and widths, plot coverage and established street patterns; - building lines and setbacks, rooflines, streetscape rhythm, for example, gaps between structures and other streetscape elements, such as degree of enclosure; - architectural composition and quality of detailing; - local topography, views both from and to the site; and 24 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press - impact on neighbouring open spaces and their environment. ii) ensuring the use of high quality building materials and finishes; iii) ensuring that the internal design and layout of development maximises sustainability and is adaptable to different activities; iv) protecting features of positive value within and adjacent to the site, including the safeguarding of heritage assets, designated and un-designated, and their settings; and v) landscaping and tree planting to protect and enhance amenity, biodiversity and green infrastructure. B) Development proposals should not adversely impact on the amenity, daylight and sunlight of adjacent properties and open space. C) Development will be required to ensure that the design safeguards the satisfactory re-development of any adjoining sites which have development potential. In the case of proposals for major development5 sites, the Council will expect developers to prepare master plans and design codes and to agree these with the Council before developing detailed designs. D) Development proposals should make sufficient provision for well designed internal and external storage space for general, recycling and organic waste, with suitable access for collection. External bins should be located and screened to avoid nuisance and adverse visual impacts to occupiers and neighbours. LP2 DMHB 12: Streets and Public Realm A) Development should be well integrated with the surrounding area and accessible. It should: i) improve legibility and promote routes and wayfinding between the development and local amenities; ii) ensure public realm design takes account of the established townscape character and quality of the surrounding area; iii) include landscaping treatment that is suitable for the location, serves a purpose, contributes to local green infrastructure, the appearance of the area and ease of movement through the space; iv) provide safe and direct pedestrian and cycle movement through the space; v) incorporate appropriate and robust hard landscaping, using good quality materials, undertaken to a high standard; vi) where appropriate, include the installation of public art; and vii) deliver proposals which incorporate the principles of inclusive design. Proposals for gated developments will be resisted. B) Public realm improvements will be sought from developments located close to transport interchanges and community facilities to ensure easy access between different transport modes and into local community facilities. 25 Planning Committee Part 1: Members, Public & Press LP2 DMHB 14: Trees and Landscaping A) All developments will be expected to retain or enhance existing landscaping, trees, biodiversity or other natural features of merit. B) 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 biodiversity and amenity particularly in areas deficient in green infrastructure. C) Where space for ground level planting is limited, such as high rise buildings, the inclusion of living walls and roofs will be expected where feasible. D) Planning applications for proposals that would affect existing trees will be required to provide an accurate tree survey showing the location, height, spread and species of trees. Where the tree survey identifies trees of merit, tree root protection areas and an arboricultural method statement will be required to show how the trees will be protected. Where trees are to be removed, proposals for replanting of new trees on- site must be provided or include contributions to offsite provision. LP2 DMHB 15: Planning for Safer Places The Council will require all new development to ensure safe and attractive public and private spaces by referring to the Council's latest guidance on Secured by Design principles. Where relevant, these should be included in the Design and Access Statement. Development will be required to comprise good design and create inclusive environments whilst improving safety and security by incorporating the following specific measures: i)