Agenda item

Joel Holland, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that the application before the Committee was for the demolition of existing buildings on the application site and the construction of a part 5, part 17 storey building comprising build to rent resident units, community space, and the reprovision of an existing public house on the site. The site was located in Southall West, close to the canal, with prominent frontages onto both Bankside and The Broadway. Officers considered it had the potential to become a gateway building to Southall, given its prominent position on the border with the London Borough of Hillingdon, and its location in an area which played a historically important role in the development of Southall.

Mr Holland described the residential units which would be created as part of this development. They were going to be build to rent units, which were considered to be strategically important in both the London Plan and the Draft Local Plan. Although the site was not allocated for development in the existing Local Plan, it was part of a potential allocation within the Draft Local Plan. It was also noted that there was an existing consent for a hotel scheme of up to 15 storeys on the site, although officers were satisfied that there was sufficient evidence that a hotel scheme was no longer viable on the site, allowing the principle of this residential led development to remain acceptable.

Mr Holland provided an overview of officers’ assessment of the design, scale and height of the proposed development. Officers believed that the scheme did not depart significantly in terms of scale and height from the existing consent for a 15-storey building on the site. Mr Holland also noted some of the key strengths of the design, including an interesting façade design which used ceramic panelling glazed with terracotta. The use of these materials were a reference to the heritage of Southall.

Overall, it was the view of officers that the scheme was well considered. Officers found no reasons that would warrant refusal of the application. Mr Holland therefore recommended that the committee grant the application, subject to conditions, a Section 106 legal agreement, and a Stage II referral to the Greater London Authority.

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 notes and clarifications to the committee report.

There were no speakers on this item. The Committee asked questions and debated the proposal. In response to some of the questions and points raised, officers confirmed that:

·       There was a supportive policy context to the reprovision of the public house on the site. The London Plan sought to support the operation of public houses through planning policy, with public houses understood to be spaces for community gatherings.

·       In order for the applicant to change the use of the ground floor from a public house to another use, for instance a commercial use, the applicant would have to make an application to change the use class. As part of the application, the applicant would have to supply robust evidence that a public house was not viable on the site.

·       The proposals for the unique cladding design were brought to the Council by the applicant rather than the proposals being requested by the Council. Officers were confident that this indicated that the applicant was serious about delivering on the design that was proposed. In any case, there were conditions on the materials the applicant could use for cladding.

·       Given the proximity of the territorial army centre to the development site, officers consulted the Ministry of Defence of the proposals. The Ministry of Defence requested a bird hazard management plan to be produced.

·       There was a community asset separate to the public house.

·       It was a common design of tall buildings to include a roof terrace communal space on the top level of the building. Any such roof terraces were required to comply with building regulations in order to ensure the safety of the areas.

·       There was a contribution of £50,000 towards the canals and river trust. This had been requested to expand the scope of the Southall Wellbeing Way project.

The Committee proceeded to vote on the application.

RESOLVED:

That for the reasons set out in the committee report, planning permission for application REF 223545FUL be GRANTED subject to:

1. Successful resolution of Planning Conditions of Consent;

1. Satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement; and
2. A Stage II referral to the Greater London Authority.