Agenda and minutes

To note any apologies for absence and substitutions.

Apologies were received from Councillor Stafford, with Councillor Gallant substituting.

Apologies were also received from Councillors Martin and Mohamed.

To consider any urgent matters that the Chair has agreed should be considered at the meeting.

There were none.

To note any declarations of interest made by members.

There were none.

To determine whether items contain information that is exempt from disclosure by virtue of Part1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no matters to be considered in private.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday, 21 September 2022.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting on Wednesday, 21 September 2022 were agreed as a true and correct record.

To share site visit details and note site visit attendance.

Site visits had taken place prior to the Committee meeting, and these had been attended by Councillors Busuttil, Mahmood, Padda, Gallant, Wall, Hamidi, Iqbal, Kelly, Khan and Kohli.

Chris Maltby, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that the application before the Committee was for the phased demolition of all existing buildings/structures on the Friary Park Estate, Acton, followed by a mixed-use re-development on the site comprising 8 blocks of varying heights, with the tallest building at 24 stories. The development was going to be comprised of up to 1228 residential units and up to 1825sqm of non-residential floorspace. The non-residential space was going to be available for a range of uses, with up to 782 sqm of this floorspace dedicated to community uses. The development was going to include associated landscaping works, replacement of trees and public realm improvements.

The site was located within Acton Central ward, approximately 800m north of Acton Town Centre. The site was bounded to the east, north and west by Friary Road, whilst the southern boundary was to the rear of the properties fronting Emmanuel Avenue. Acton Mainline station was located opposite the western most part of the application site.

The proposal followed a previous application to develop the site (193424HYBRID) which was granted in November 2020. In part due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, a review of the granted scheme took place and opportunities were identified to enhance the development by increasing its provision of affordable housing and giving additional planning benefits. The nature of the changes precluded them from being considered as an amendment to the 2020 application, and therefore the new proposal had been brought to the Committee as a new application for the full development. 

Mr Maltby outlined some of the improvements on the previous application, which included delivering 238 additional homes (of which 50% of the additional habitable rooms were to be delivered in affordable housing tenures), changes to the size and shape of some of the blocks, additional amenity and community facilities, and a new community square at the centre of the scheme. The Section 106 Legal Agreement contributions had also increased in comparison to those agreed for the previous application.

Mr Maltby informed the Committee that it was the opinion of Planning Officers that the proposals for the comprehensive redevelopment of the site will improve the standard of accommodation for existing residents, provide a range of affordable homes and generate over £6.1 million in Section 106 Legal Agreement Contributions (excluding carbon offsetting contributions). Planning officers therefore recommended that the Committee grant the application, subject to conditions, satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement, and Stage II referral to the Mayor of London.

A briefing note in respect of the application had been produced by Planning Officers, circulated to the Committee, and published on the Council’s website prior to the meeting. It had provided information corrections/clarifications to the Committee report, additional representations received (both in support and in objection), amendments to proposed conditions, and proposed additional conditions.

Sean Fletcher, an objector to the development, made a representation to the Committee which included the following key points:

·       During the application process, a large section  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

James Young, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that there were two related applications before the Committee on this item, the first for listed building consent (222378LBC) and the second for full planning permission (222341FUL), for the redevelopment of the Twyford Abbey and its 5.4 hectares of surrounding grounds. The development included the restoration of the existing abbey (which was grade II listed and deemed by Heritage England to be at risk of immediate deterioration) and its walled garden, as well as extensive landscaping works in the grounds. The proposal also included the construction of 326 residential units (primarily within the Abbey itself), seven new residential blocks in the grounds, a pair of “gate house” dwellings at the entrance of the site and a terrace of 8 dwelling along the western boundary.

The application site was bounded to the north by the North Circular Road, to the south by Twyford Abbey Road and to the south east by West Twyford Primary School. To the west of the site is another Grade II listed building, St Mary’s West Twyford Church.

The grounds of site were designated Metropolitan Open Land. The Committee noted that, to establish the acceptability of the principle of the development, there needed to be “very special circumstances” to outweigh the harm the proposed development would cause to the open land. Mr Young noted that the proposal included transferring the ownership of the South Lawn (the open space between The Abbey and Twyford Abbey Road) to the London Borough of Ealing, and for access to the lawn to be secured for the public by Section 106 Legal Agreement. Community access to the principal rooms of The Abbey was going to be secured 3 days per week and Pedestrian and cycle access for the public was also going to be provided through the site. In addition to works on The Abbey and its grounds, the development was also going to provide housing provision of 36% affordable units by habitable room.

Mr Young informed the Committee that it considered that these public benefits of the proposal were sufficient to be the “very special circumstances” necessary to outweigh the harm the development was going to cause to the Metropolitan Open Land. Whilst Mr Young noted the objections which had been received relating to the proposed development, he informed the Committee that officers recommended that it grant, (1) the listed building consent, and (2) planning permission for the development, subject to conditions, Stage II referral to the Mayor of London and the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

A briefing note in respect of the application had been produced by Planning Officers, circulated to the Committee and published on the Council’s website prior to the meeting. It had provided information on amendments to the recommendation made in the committee report, additional representations received, corrections/clarifications to the report and additional information on the application.

Jean-Paul Beaini, an objector to the development, made a representation to the Committee which included the following  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Marile van Eeden, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that the application before the Committee was for the construction of 3 buildings, ranging from 4 to 20 storeys, to provide 188 mixed tenure residential units and ground floor community space, with associated infrastructure works. 85.6% of the proposed 188 residential units were going to be affordable. The 3 buildings were Blocks A, B and C. Block A was going to provide 111 homes of a mix of 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom units. Block B was going to provide 71 1-bedroom units for older persons. Block C was going to be 3 storeys and located to the north of the site, providing 6 3-bedroom market sale units.

The 1.42ha application site was located to the north of Acton town centre, on the corner of Steyne and Lexden Roads. It currently contained two tower blocks, the Rufford and Moreton Towers. Ms van Eeden informed the Committee that the site was well served for transport links, given that Steyne Road and Uxbridge Road to the south of the site linked it to the Acton Main Line station to the north, Acton Town station to the south, Ealing Broadway station to the west and Acton Central station to the east.

Ms van Eeden informed the Committee that it was Planning Officers’ opinion that the proposal represented a high-quality development, with high levels of affordable housing in a highly accessible location. Overall, Planning Officers recommended that the application be approved, subject to conditions and satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement.

A briefing note in respect of the application had been produced by Planning Officers, circulated to the Committee and published on the Council’s website prior to the meeting. It had provided information on amendments to the committee report, an amendment to one of the proposed conditions, and an additional proposed condition.

Richard Stonor, an objector to the development, made a representation to the Committee which included the following key points:

·       Given the height and shape of the buildings, residents of local roads were likely to be badly impacted by the proposal, with a loss of light to their houses.

·       The proposed towers were deemed too close together, and there was concern that if there was a fire in one, it could spread to the other easily.

·       The buildings were intrusive in the local area and lacked aesthetic appeal.

Adam Towle, on behalf of the applicant, made a representation to the Committee which included the following key points:

·       This application had been formed with a view to tackling the housing crisis by contributing to the supply of high quality, affordable accommodation in the Borough.

·       Given that the London Borough of Ealing had an increasingly aging population, the proposal included a large quantity of affordable provision specifically for older people (aged over 55).

·       The proposals included new community space, additional cycle storage and carefully considered building and estate design to make the area a safe place to live.

The Committee asked questions and debated  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 23 November 2022.

The next meeting was scheduled for Wednesday, 23 November 2022.