Agenda item

Jenny Knox, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that the application before the Committee was for the construction of a 4 to 9 storey building comprising 94 co-living units and ground floor commercial space in West Ealing. The site was currently occupied by a Kwik-Fit tyre and exhaust repair shop and comprised a single storey workshop building, which would be demolished if the application was granted consent.

Ms Knox described the co-living product which was being proposed as part of this scheme. The scheme comprised shared working spaces, kitchens, dining areas, lounge, quiet area and games space. Each room would comprise a sleeping area, living area, kitchenette, shower room and built-in storage.

Ms Knox noted that 4 representations had been received in relation to the application. It was the opinion of officers that many of the concerns raised in the representations were mitigated by the conditions proposed. Ms Knox noted that Section 106 legal agreement contributions had been secured. Amongst these contributions, officers had negotiated an offer of £500,000 in place of provision of affordable housing.

Ms Knox also noted the impact of the scheme on the visual amenity of the area and heritage assets. Officers considered that the scheme was not going to have a negative impact on local heritage assets, and that the building’s proposed design could improve the appearance of the Broadway and act as a “gateway” to the Town Centre.

Overall, Ms Knox informed the Committee that it was the opinion of officers that the scheme was going to provide a number of planning and regeneration benefits. On balance, officers considered that the proposal was consistent with the relevant plans and legislation and recommended that the Committee approve it subject to Section 106 and Section 278 legal agreements.

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 description of the scheme in officers’ report, amendments to the recommendation and additional clarifications about references to the London Plan.

The Committee asked questions and debated the proposal. In response to some of the questions and points raised, officers confirmed that:

• The Council had separate flood risk conditions to those which would be set by Thames Water. The applicant was going to have to go through a separate process with Thames Water to satisfy them that the impact of the proposal in terms of flooding was not going to be adverse.
• The visual impact of the proposal was considered acceptable by officers, particularly given its design with a stepped height at the back of the building to ensure lesser impacts on the local parks and housing estates.
• There was going to be a £41,000 contribution by the applicant towards sports recreational facilities. This contribution was going to be ring-fenced to the local area, although the exact area had not yet been defined.
• It was typical for co-living units to include a kitchenette. Officers were satisfied that the kitchenettes, given their size and the facilities in them, did not render the units self-contained.
• There was no proposed amenity space for children, given that the co-living product was for age range 16 – 25 and not for young children.
• The Community Review Panel was not consulted during the application process.
• The applicant had complied with their duties to publicise their development plans, and the Council took steps to ensure that this had been the case.
• If, in the future, an occupier wished to change the use of the commercial units on the ground floor of the development to residential units, an application for a change of use would have to be made.
• The applicant did attempt to negotiate with landowners of the surrounding areas to the development site to propose a development with a wider footprint, although these attempts were unsuccessful.

The Committee proceeded to vote on the application.

RESOLVED:

That for the reasons set out in the committee report, planning permission for application REF 225080FUL be GRANTED subject to:

1.     Successful resolution of Planning Conditions of Consent; and

2.     Satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement