PLANNING SUB-COMMITTEE - 10 SEPTEMBER 1998 REPORT OF THE HEAD (UXBRIDGE) OF PLANNING SERVICES
CONTACT OFFICER: RICHARD HUMPHREYS EXTENSION: 3499
Application No. Location Proposal
1. 52933/98/982 28 MOORFIELD ROAD ERECTION OF A COWLEY TWO STOREY SIDE AND REAR EXTENSION Drawing No. BM D3 received 18.5.98 (Date of receipt : 18.5.98)
Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two storey side and rear extension to this semi-detached dwellinghouse. There are objections from the public on grounds of loss of light to the adjoining property, the implications for on street parking and disturbance during construction works. Whilst the scheme presents difficulties, a refusal on such grounds is not considered justified. However, due to its size and prominence it is considered the addition would be detrimental to the appearance of the dwellinghouse itself, to the pair of houses 28/30 Moorfield Road and the general street scene.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - REFUSAL, for the following reason:-
The development would be contrary to policies BE10 and BE12 of the Modified Draft Hillingdon Unitary Development Plan and Policies UL1 and UL3 of the Central Hillingdon Local Plan in that due to size and prominence it would be detrimental to the appearance of the dwellinghouse, to Nos. 28/30 Moorfield Road as a pair and the general street scene.
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.06 Hectares 0.15 Acres
CAR PARKING: Lost: 1 Provided: 1 Required: 1
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 73.4 sq.m
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 1 CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted : 4 No. of replies : 1
Petition of objection - 22 signatures.
(4) REPORT
The Site
The application site is a two storey semi-detached dwellinghouse lying on the east side of Moorfield Road. It is provided with an original single storey rear extension. The main flank wall contains an entrance door and two windows. There is a further flank window at first floor level. A driveway at the side provides two car parking spaces, achieved by end on end parking.
The house is angled on its plot and is separated from No. 26A by a minimum of 6 metres. No. 26A is a single storey bungalow. It has a window in its northern flank wall serving a very small living room.
The Proposal
Permission is sought for a two storey extension to the rear and side of the house. It would provide a new dining room, bedroom and w.c. facilities.
Planning History
None.
Planning Policies and Standards
The modified Draft UDP is close to adoption and carries significant weight. The following policies are relevant to the application:
BE10 Requires extension to harmonise with the scale form and architectural composition of the original building.
BE12 Requires new development to improve or compliment the character of the area.
BE13 Requires that new development ensures adequate sunlight and daylight can penetrate between buildings.
BE14 Planning permission will not be granted for new development that results in a loss of residential amenity by reason of siting bulk and proximity.
BE14A Requires two storey side extensions to be set 1m from the side boundary.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 2 BE15 Requires the provision of adequate amenity space.
BE16 Requires new development to ensure adequate levels of privacy to neighbours.
AM13A Requires new development to accord with the Council’s standards on car parking.
The Adopted Development Plan is the Central Hillingdon Local Plan the relevant policies are:-
UL1 New development required to make positive contribution to improving the character of an area.
UL2 Layout and appearance to harmonise with the existing features of an area which are desirable to retain/enhance.
UL3 Extensions should harmonise with the scale from architectural composition and proportions of the original building.
UL8 Requires residential extensions to accord with the Council’s design guidance.
Main Planning Issues
The determining issues are considered to be the impact of the scheme on the original house, car parking, the effect on No. 26A and the street scene.
The extension would be set off the boundary by 2.4 metres at the front and 3.8 metres at the rear. This exceeds the 1 metre minimum separation provided by the UDP’s Supplementary Planning Guidance.
The addition, however, would be large. Whilst it would be subservient to the original dwelling, it would destroy the appearance of Nos. 28/30 as a matching pair, when viewed from both the street and the rear. Adequate amenity space would remain.
The UDP’s applicable parking standard is two spaces per dwelling. The scheme would result in the loss of one space, although this has limited utility. An additional space could however be provided on the front garden area. Whilst this would be undesirable , it is not considered a refusal of permission could be sustained on parking grounds.
As mentioned, No. 26A adjoining has a flank window on its northern wall facing No. 28. At present, the window receiver no sunlight due to its orientation. The amount of daylight is already restricted by the existing house at No. 28. The development would result in the loss of a very small sky component. Whilst this would exacerbate the existing situation, it is not considered the effect would be so severe to justify refusal on daylight grounds. The addition would extend beyond the rear of No. 26A by 0.5 metre. This would not result in any adverse effect due to the distance off the boundary and the existence of a lean to extension to No. 26A.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 3 The proposed extension would be provided into a number of flank windows facing the adjoining property. Whilst this is bad practice, only one window on the ground floor would serve a habitable room. Again, at 3.3 metres from the plot boundary, it would be unlikely to affect the development potential of the adjoining site.
Public Consultation
One letter has been received from an adjoining resident who has also written to his Member of Parliament. Objection is raised on grounds of loss of light, duct and dirt from construction works and additional on street parking should the property be relet.
A petition signed by twenty two local residents objects on the ground of additional parking on a busy road that is already heavily parked.
Conclusion
For the reasons set out above the development is considered detrimental to the appearance of the dwellinghouse, to Nos. 28/30 Moorfield Road as pair and to the street scene.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
5
In addition, the following documents were also used:-
(a) Two letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report).
(b) A petition.
(c) The Draft UDP as Proposed to be Modified.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 4 CONTACT OFFICER: JIM READ EXTENSION: 2397
Application No. Location Proposal
2. 52874/98/805 LAND BETWEEN LEA ERECTION OF ONE COURT AND 15 BUTLER 3-BEDROOM HOUSE AND STREET HILLINGDON ONE 1-BEDROOM HOUSE (BOTH SEMI-DETACHED) (Date of receipt: 28.4.98) Drawing Nos. BS01A, 02A, 03A, 04, 05A, 06 and 08A received 13.7.98, 07A received 31.7.98 and letter dated 13.7.98.
Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
Permission is sought to build two semi-detached dwellings, one a 3-bedroom house and the other a 1-bedroom house in a small residential road which originally had a combination of small ‘cottage-type’ houses and commercial development along it. There has been a significant amount of redevelopment in Butler Street within the last 10 years or so and this site is considered acceptable in principle for the kind of development envisaged. The proposal has been carefully designed to take account of existing site constraints, no objections have been received, and conditional approval is therefore recommended.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (5 years) 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B16) Details/samples to be 2. (B16) Standard submitted. 3. (D1) Additional Fenestration 3. (D1) Standard (‘facing any direction’). 4. (D2) Obscured Glazing (all first 4. (D2) Standard floor windows facing Pole Hill Road and Lea Court) 5. (B10) Maintenance of facilities 5. (B10) Standard parking 6. (B5) New Planting. 6. (B5) Standard 7. (B6) New Planting (Time Limit) 7. (B6) Standard 8. (B14A) Screen Fencing Pole Hill 8. (B14A) Standard Road properties. 9. (E5) No additional bedrooms 9. (E5) Standard (delete ‘any of the dwelling units’ and replace with ‘Plot 2’)
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 5 Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 6 INFORMATIVES
1. (3) Property Rights/Rights of Light. 2. (14) Compliance with legislation administered by Public Protection Services. 3. (22) Mogden Drainage Group - Sewerage. 4. (24) Crossings.
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.026 Hectare: 0.064 Acre
DENSITY: Proposed : 192 h.r.p.ha. 77 h.r.p.a.
CAR PARKING: Lost: Provided: 4 Required: 4
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 170m² (approx.)
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted 17 No. of replies: 6 (see below)
Comments:
3 letters of support for original plans
3 letters of support for amended plans
OTHER CONSULTATIONS: COMMENTS:
Hillingdon Federation of Residents No reply received. and Tenants Associations
Area Engineer No objection
(4) REPORT
The Site
A cleared area of land which formed the rear half of back gardens of Nos. 18-22A Pole Hill Road. It is approximately 16m wide and varying in depth between 15m and 20m, lying on the north side of Butler Street, a short narrow road running between Alpha Road and Uxbridge Road, Hillingdon. Butler Street originally contained a mixture of late 19th Century ‘cottage-style’ houses and commercial development. One of the latter, ‘Alpha Works’, was a timber yard granted planning permission for residential redevelopment, since implemented and constructed in the early 1990s. Part of that redevelopment fronts onto Butler Street and in fact a pair of semi-detached houses directly faces the application site.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 7 Immediately adjacent to the site on one side is a three storey block of flats under a pitched roof (built within the last 10 years) known as Lea Court. On the other side is a pair of semi-detached late 19th Century “cottage-style” houses which mark the northern end of Butler Street. To the rear of the site lie the back gardens of terraced 19th century houses in Pole Hill Road. Towards the southern end of Butler Street on the same side as the application site there is a variety of new residential redevelopment (mostly built within the last 10 years or so).
The Proposal
Permission is sought to construct two semi-detached dwellings on the site. One would be a three-bedroom house, the other a one-bedroom house. Both would be two-storey buildings faced in brickwork under a pitched, tiled roof. Parking space sufficient for two cars would be provided under each of the dwellings, with back gardens of 59m² and 42m² respectively located behind. In view of the possible overlooking problems towards the rear, the layout at first floor level has been designed so as to minimise the number of habitable rooms facing the rear, and in any case all the rooms concerned would have high level, obscurely-glazed windows. A 2 metre close-boarded fence would be erected on the rear boundary.
Relevant Planning History
Permission was refused on two previous occasions for land behind 22 and 22A Pole Hill Road (which forms the northern half of the current site). The first (Ref: 52061/97/986), for the erection of a three-bedroom detached house and the installation of a vehicular crossover, was refused on 21.8.97. The second (Ref:52061A/97/1977) for the erection of a detached two-bedroom dwelling was refused on 13.2.98. In both cases taken together, the reasons for refusal concerned the cramped nature of the development, provision of insufficient amenity space, and overlooking problems towards properties in Pole Hill Road.
It should be noted that most of the residential redevelopment of the southern half of Butler Street has taken place within the last 10 years or so and reflects the relatively high densities which tend to characterise a road of this kind and is of similar density to what is currently before the Sub-Committee.
Planning Standards and Policies
Policies UL1, UL2, UL9 - Central Hillingdon Local Plan (CHLP) Policies H4, BE9, BE12, BE13, BE14, BE15 and BE16 - Unitary Development Plan (UDP) as proposed to be adopted.
These policies seek to ensure that new residential development, particularly where density is at the high end of the range, are well-designed and of a quality which produces good environmental conditions within the development and harmonises with the surroundings.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 8 Main Planning Issues
In this case the main issues concerns whether or not the current proposal overcomes the reasons for refusal cited in the previous applications. The issues are therefore:
(i) The impact on the streetscene; (ii) Provision of sufficient amenity space; (iii) Overlooking problems
(i) Impact on the Streetscene
The actual design of the dwellings proposed is considered acceptable and broadly mirrors the housing directly opposite, constructed as part of the ‘Alpha Works’ site redevelopment scheme. There will be a one metre set-in from both of the side boundaries. Each dwelling will have a porch-like structure housing a bin store/meters and a lobby built hard up to the back edge of the pavement. In this locality such a practice is acceptable, as many of the 19th century houses are built hard up to the pavement across their entire width.
(ii) Provision of Sufficient Amenity Space
The two previous schemes both refused permission, suffered from the fact that the amount of built development proposed in relation to the total space available was much greater than is the case in this proposal. In one of the previous schemes, only 21m² of garden space was proposed, in a plot only 3 metres deep and therefore not really useable. In the current scheme the amenity space for each dwelling is shown of a size and shape that is both useable and in conformity with the Council’s minimum standards for amenity space.
(iii) Overlooking Problems
In this proposal the minimum back-to-back separation between Plot 1 (the 3-bedroom house) and the houses at 18/20 Pole Hill road is about 20 metres. The minimum distance between Plot 2 (the 1-bedroom house) and 22/22A Pole Hill Road is 18 metres. At ground floor level, overlooking can be overcome by the erection of a two metre high close-boarded fence, and this will be achieved through the imposition of Condition 8. At first floor level, the potential for overlooking has been minimised by locating the non-habitable rooms (W.C.s and bathrooms) at the rear and by specifying high level, obscurely-glazed windows in the rear elevation. It was unavoidable that one of the bedrooms in the 3-bedroom house faced towards the rear, but this will be lit by high level obscurely-glazed windows on the rear and side elevations.
Although the Council’s guideline minimum distance between facing habitable rooms is normally 24 metres, it is considered that in this instance, given the higher densities in the area, the minimisation of overlooking through high-level obscure-glazed windows and design of the internal layout to move habitable rooms from the rear elevation, the proposal is considered acceptable.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 9 In summary, this proposal has been able to overcome the problems which caused the refusal of the previous applications due to a doubling of the site area which has enabled a more satisfactory layout and design to be achieved.
Public Consultation
Six letters were received as a result of consultations, three in support of the proposal as originally submitted and three more supporting the amended plans.
Conclusion
The proposal is considered to be a significant improvement compared with previous schemes submitted for the same site. Although the density is at the higher end of the range it is similar to that of recent schemes granted permission in the same road. I therefore recommend conditional approval.
Background Documents
Documents Used : 5, UDP 6 letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 10 CONTACT OFFICER: DANIEL MURKIN EXTENSION: 3606
3. Application No. Location Proposal
52644A/98/1260 72 WEST DRAYTON ERECTION OF A ROAD HILLINGDON DETACHED GARAGE Drawing No. un-numbered - Site plan and elevations (Date of receipt : 15.6.98) received 15.6.98
Unitary Development Plan - Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
Full planning permission is sought for a 6 metre long and 4 metre wide garage to the side of this bungalow which is situated at the junction of Green Lane and West Drayton Road.
A previous proposal for a garage was refused in May ( Ref: 52644/98/0439) because the position was considered intrusive in the street scene and thus contrary to UDP Policies.
The current proposal has been revised to reduce the width of the garage, add a pitched roof and re-position further into the site and in these respects the development is now considered acceptable.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard 2. The garage hereby permitted shall 2. To safeguard the residential only be used for the amenity of the adjoining and accommodation of private motor nearby properties. vehicles or for other purposes incidental to the dwellinghouse as a residence. 3. (B15) External surfaces to match. 3. (B15) Standard 4. Amended drawings. This 4. To avoid ambiguity and to development shall only be carried accord with the application as out in accordance with drawing amended. numbers ...... received by the Local Planning Authority on ......
5. The existing portacabin on the site 5. To protect the visual shall be removed in its entirely amenities of the adjoining prior to the garage hereby residential area. permitted being occupied.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 11 (3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: (approx.) 0.065 Hectares
CAR PARKING: Lost: 0 Provided: 1 Required: 2
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 24m²
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted : 5 No. of replies : 3
Comments:-
1. Very busy road/dangerous; 2. Pavement not wide enough; 3. Visibility of oncoming traffic blocked.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS: COMMENTS:
Area Engineer No objection
4. REPORT
The Site
The bungalow occupies a position between Green Lane and West Drayton Road. A close boarded fence and tree screen run along the Green Lane boundary and there is a pre-fabricated building next to the fence in the approximate position of the proposed garage.
Relevant Planning History
An application for a detached garage adjoining the Green Lane boundary of the site was refused in May 1998 (Ref: 52644/98/0439) because the projection forward of the building line on this prominent corner site was considered intrusive and detrimental to the street scene contrary to Policies BE9 and BE12 of the UDP.
The Proposal
This revised application proposes a detached garage 6 metres long and 4 metres wide with a pitched roof (Max. 3.6m high) in materials to match the house - pebble dash over concrete block and pantiles for the roof.
It will be sited 2 metres inside the fence line and is intended to be used for storage of classic motorcycles.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 12 Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 13 Relevant Planning Standards/Policies
UDP Policies BE9 and BE12 apply. Development which fails to harmonise with the existing street scene in terms of layout and appearance is not permitted by Policy BE9 whilst Policy BE12 requires that new development within residential areas complements or improves the amenity and character of the area.
Main Planning Issues
The appearance of the proposed garage is the principal issue again here though other highways related aspects of the development need to be addressed as these gave rise to the objections received from nearby occupiers.
Following the earlier refusal the proposals have been amended by reducing the width of the garage from 4.8 metres to 4 metres, incorporating a pitched roof and setting the garage further inside the boundary fence line along Green Lane.
The re-positioning will still put the garage forward of the building line established by the bungalows along Green Lane though it is not practicable to position it any closer to the house which has side windows and the existing structure which is next to the fence is certainly more visually intrusive in the street scene.
The existing portacabin will be removed and the applicant has agreed to hip the garage roof on the end facing the houses along Green Lane, the direction from which the building will have greatest visual impact when viewed from the public highway and nearest properties. This will match the house roof better. From the garden side the garage will be completely hidden by trees and by virtue of being sited two metres inside the fence will not be especially noticeable when going/looking north along Green Lane until or unless you are virtually opposite the house.
In terms of visual effect on the street scene this is now considered acceptable and it would be unreasonable to resist a form of development which has taken these factors into account as far as practicable.
The garage will be used for storage of motor cycles and jet-ski and therefore no vehicular crossover is required onto Green Lane as part of this proposal - there is an existing entrance for vehicles on the opposite West Drayton Road frontage.
Public Consultation
The concerns raised by nearby local residents are covered in the report above. Planning permission would not in any case be required for construction of a crossover onto a non-classified road and the Area Engineer has indicated that visibility and distance from the junction are adequate.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 14 Conclusion
The amendments made to this proposal compared to the previous refusal have now achieved an acceptable form of development which should not detract from the overall street scene. Approval is therefore recommended subject to appropriate conditions.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda.
Draft Unitary Development Plan as proposed to be modified.
In addition the following documents were also used:
Three letters making representations.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 15 HOUSEHOLDER TEAM CONTACT OFFICER: BHUPINDER MANZ EXTENSION: 7079
Application No. Location Proposal
4. 40279/C/98/850 1 THE RISE ERECTION OF A TWO- HILLINGDON STOREY SIDE EXTENSION (Date of receipt: 1/5/98) Drawing No. 326/01/A (Date of amended plan: 1/6/98) received on 1/7/98 and letter dated 29/6/98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan: Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
The application relates to a semi-detached property, with the rear garden of properties in Vine Lane adjoining the side of the site.
Planning permission is sought for a two-storey side extension set 1m from the side boundary.
The proposed extension is set approximately 23m from the rear wall of properties in Vine Lane. Subject to the conditions detailed below it is not considered that the development will adversely affect the amenity of adjoining occupiers or the character and appearance of the streetscene.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B15) External surfaces to match 2. (B15) Standard 3. (B8) Parking arrangements 3. (B8) Standard 4. (D1) No additional windows 4. (D1) Standard facing Nos. 17 & 19 Vine Lane 5. (D2) Obscure glazing. The 5. (D2) Standard 1st Floor bedroom window facing Nos. 17 and 19 Vine Lane 6. (B14A) Screen fencing boundary 6. (B14A) Standard with No. 17 and 19 Vine Lane.
INFORMATIVES
1. (3) Property Rights of Light 2. (25) Legislation administered by building Control.
(3) INFORMATION
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 16 SITE AREA: 0.380 Hectares
CAR PARKING: Lost: 0 Provided: 2 Required: 2
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 6 No. of replies: 3
Comments:
Three letters of objection were received making the following points:-
(i) Loss of privacy from proposed side window. (ii) Overbearing effect of the proposed extension. (iii) Loss of sunlight effecting growth of trees.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS:
Area Engineer No comments
(4) REPORT
The Site
The application house is semi-detached and has an existing single-storey side and rear extension. The side boundary of the site meets the rear boundaries of 13-19 Vine Lane.
The Proposal
Planning permission is sought for a two-storey side extension with a pitched roof. Set 1m away from the rear boundaries of Nos 17 and 19 Vine Lane, Hillingdon. The extension has a depth of 8,075m and is 2.85m wide. It is intended to be used as a dining area and an extension to the existing kitchen at ground floor, with two bedrooms at first floor.
Relevant Planning History
The property has an existing single storey side and rear extension. The single-storey side extension is to be demolished.
Planning Policies and Standards
The Deposit Draft of the Borough’s Unitary Development Plan, (as proposed to be adopted), has reached an advanced stage in its process towards adoption. As such its policies should be given considerable weight when determining the current proposal. The following policies from the plan are considered relevant to the application:
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 17 BE10 Requires extension to harmonise with the scale form and architectural composition of the origin building.
BE12 Requires new development to improve or compliment the character of the area.
BE13 Requires that new development ensures adequate sunlight and daylight can penetrate between buildings.
BE14 Planning permission will not be granted for new development that results in a loss of residential amenity by reason of siting bulk and proximity.
BE14A Requires two storey side extensions to be set 1m from the side boundary (1.5m in the Copsewood and Gatehill Farm - Areas of Special Character).
BE15 Requires the provision of adequate amenity space.
BE16 Requires new development to ensure adequate levels of privacy to neighbours.
AM13A Requires new development to accord with the Council’s standards on car parking.
The Adopted development plan is the Central Hillingdon Local Plan the relevant policies are:-
UL1 New development required to make positive contribution to improving the character of an area.
UL2 Layout and appearance to harmonise with the existing features of an area which are desirable to retain/enhance.
UL3 Extensions should harmonise with the scale from architectural composition and proportions of the original building.
UL8 Requires residential extensions to accord with the Council’s design guidance.
Main Planning Issues
The determining planning issues are considered to be:-
(i) The impact of the proposed extension on the residential amenity of the neighbouring properties and
(ii) The visual impact of the proposed development.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 18 (i) At its closest the proposed side wall of the extension will be 23m from the rear wall of properties in Vine Lane. This is sufficient distance (Council’s minimum standard 15m) to ensure that the development will not appear over bearing.
In the sidewall of the extension is proposed a secondary window to a bedroom, single casement and of obscure glass. Having regard to the size and nature of the window and the distance involved, it is not considered that the presence of the window will cause a material loss of privacy to the neighbouring properties in Vine Lane.
(ii) In terms of the visual impact of the proposed development the scheme has been amended to ensure that the front wall of the extension is set back creating a subordinate appearance with a lower ridge level. The development maintaining a 1m gap to the side boundary now accord with the Council’s design guidance as set out in the ‘Residential Extensions’ Design Guide.
Public Consultation
The points in relation to overlooking and over bearing appearance of the development have been dealt with in the above report. The issue of loss of light to adjacent trees is not considered capable of forming a reason for refusal.
Conclusion
The layout and dimensions of the site are considered to be sufficient to accommodate the proposal without resulting in a detrimental impact on the character of the area, design of the original house or the amenities of the neighbouring properties.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are:-
UDP as Proposed to be Modified 3 Letters of Objection
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 19 CONTACT OFFICER: DANIEL MURKIN EXTENSION: 3606
Application No. Location Proposal
5. 7109N/98/1241 SWAKELEYS SELF-SERVE VARIATION OF LONG LANE CONDITION 8 (TO EXTEND ICKENHAM HOURS OF OPENING TO BETWEEN 0600 TO 2400 HOURS) OF PP REF. 7109A/78/0848 (Date of receipt: 10/9/98) Unnumbered drawing received 12/6/98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan: Developed Area Ickenham Local Plan: Local Shopping Area
(1) SUMMARY
The extension of hours of operation of this petrol service station in Ickenham Village centre is considered to be a reasonable request given the location. Adjoining residential properties should not be unduly affected.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following condition:-
1. No work or business shall be 1. To ensure that the carried on at any time other than development does not between the hours of 06.00 to 24.00 prejudice the enjoyment by hours (Mondays to Saturdays) and neighbouring occupiers of 07.00 to 22.00 hours (Sundays). their properties.
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.1 Hectares
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: Originally consulted: 17 No. of replies: 5 Re-consulted: 17 No. of replies: 1
*THE PROPOSAL HAS ALSO BEEN ADVERTISED AS:
*(a) being within or affecting a conservation area
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 20 Comments:
5 replies received following initial consultation which mistakenly referred to 24-hour operation.
Revised Consultation:
One reply received to date objecting to noise/fumes/inappropriate development in a Conservation Area.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS:
Ickenham Village Conservation Feelings of local residents should be taken Panel seriously
Ickenham Residents Association None received
PPS Comments requested
(4) REPORT
The Site
The petrol station and shop with adjoining pump forecourt and canopy was approved in 1978 and is therefore a feature of the village centre though mostly hidden by trees on the wide highway verge.
It is within Ickenham Village Conservation Area and Local Centre with its mix of shops, community uses, businesses and busy road junction (High Road/Swakeleys Road). To the immediate south of the site are predominantly residential roads with high quality and spacious housing development.
The Proposal
At the time of granting permission for the redevelopment of the site Ref. 7109A/78/0848 the various conditions imposed to control the use of the site included a restriction on the operating hours to between 07.00 and 22.00 hours (all days).
This application seeks to vary that condition and extend the petrol station hours to between 06.00 mornings and 24.00 midnight.
Relevant Planning History
Permission has been granted for extensions to the original building and fascia/sign changes plus replacement boundary fence between 1980 and 1996. Two years ago, an application to install a car jet wash with portico and vacuum unit floodlight was refused.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 21 Planning Standards and Policies
There are no directly related policies. The UDP contains policies covering aspects such as noise pollution which relate to new buildings/uses though these have limited (if any) retrospective application to long established activities.
Main Planning Issues
The sole issue arising from this proposal to extend opening hours is that of residential amenities, that is to ensure that the development does not prejudice enjoyment of properties by neighbouring occupiers. All other aspects of the site operation are controlled by conditions imposed when redevelopment of the site was granted and it can be taken that there are no problems in this regard - there have been no enforcement investigations necessary in recent years.
It is a matter of subjective opinion as to whether the ingress/egress of vehicles, closing of car doors, radios, operation of the pumps and behaviour of customers on the forecourt during the additional hours sought will have a detrimental affect on the amenities of nearby residential occupiers.
The detached houses in Almond Avenue which adjoin the site (Nos. 1 to 5) are between 15 and 19 metres (approx.) from their rear boundary and the petrol station forecourt is beyond a 1.8m. close-boarded fence. In between there is a tall outbuilding at the end of No. 1’s garden and a substantial planting screen to Nos. 3 and 5. These features no doubt provide a visual buffer to the petrol forecourt if only partial sound reduction by virtue of the separation distance.
There are flats above the shopping parade on Swakeleys Road but these are separated from the petrol forecourt by a rear yard/parking area and access road. The petrol station shop building and canopy would obscure much of the forecourt activity from most of their windows.
If it is accepted that the additional number of customers would be very few between 6 and 7 am and less than the average between 10 and 12 p.m., because it is not on a major through road, then the potential noise disturbances at these times would not normally exceed the background level noise of other traffic.
With the ingress of vehicles at the southern access there would be no more disturbance from vehicle headlights shining towards the nearby houses whilst the canopy downlights and shop lights are for safety and security purposes primarily rather than display and therefore would not splay light outside the site sufficient to constitute a nuisance before midnight or 7 am in the darker months.
A variation of the existing hours is considered acceptable though a respite on Sundays is recommended as a control.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 22 Public Consultation
Initial responses to this application from residents and the Ickenham Conservation Panel related to the 24-hours operation mistakenly referred to in the consultation.
The comments made relating to noise during sleeping hours and the intrusion into the Conservation Area such an operation would represent will not be especially applicable to the actual hours being sought though any further comments made will no doubt be on a similar theme.
Conclusion
The change of hours sought by the application would not represent a significant intrusion into the living conditions of residents or visual amenities of the Conservation Area sufficient to warrant refusal.
In particular the relatively low-key level of operation at this site and peripheral location are not likely to attract additional customers beyond a level which can be absorbed by surrounding features (trees/buildings etc.) and ambience (e.g. traffic noise).
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
Adopted Ickenham Local Plan and UDP 5 letters making representations to initial consultation.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 23 CONTACT OFFICER: STEVE GAINES EXTENSION: 3402
Application No. Location Proposal
6. 52433/97/1827 LAND AT 241 PARK ROAD ERECTION OF SEVEN AND REAR OF 190/192 DETACHED HOUSES AND 196 HAREFIELD (INVOLVING THE DEMOLITION ROAD UXBRIDGE OF 194 HAREFIELD ROAD) (Date of receipt: 5.11.97) Drawing(s) No. 211/D/A/012E; (Last amended plans received: 6.7.98 and 211/D/A/100; 211/D/A/001/A; 30.7.98) 211/D/E/014B and 015A; 211/D/A/002A; 211/D/E/016B and 017A; 211/D/A/004A and 005A; 211/D/E/020B and 021B; 211/D/A/028A; 211/D/E/029A and 030A; 211/D/E/022B and 023B; 211/D/A/006A and 007A; 211/D/A/008A and 009A; 211/D/A/024B and 025B; 211/D/E/TP and additional letters of 27.7.98, 30.7.98, 31.7.98 and 4.8.98 “Arboricultural Report and Tree Protection Strategy (Schedule 1), “Summary Tree Protection Method Statement 2, Details of Road Construction and Specification (11.6.98), Existing House Demolition Method Statement (2.7.98) received on 6.7.98 and 12.6.98 and letter dated 3.7.98
The decision on this application was deferred at the meeting of the Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee on 4 August 1998 to enable members to visit the site.
Central Hillingdon Local Plan: Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
This proposal relates to the erection of 7 detached 4 and 5 bedroom houses within a site created from part of existing residential properties. It is considered that the proposal would complement the existing character of the area, and provide a good standard of layout which would not harm the amenities of adjoining occupiers. Existing protected trees on the site would be retained, as would other trees of merit and adequate scope exists for further planting (including on the boundaries with adjacent houses). The highway proposals are also considered to be acceptable. The developer
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 24 has agreed to enter a S.106 legal agreement to contribute towards the provision of additional school places at Whitehall Schools.
(2) RECOMMENDATION
1. That the Council enter into an agreement under S.106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) and other appropriate powers to secure, at no cost to the Council, a financial contribution of £32,000 for the provision of additional school places at Whitehall Schools.
2. That the planning application be deferred for determination by the Head of Planning Services.
3. That the following conditions be imposed should planning permission be granted:
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B2) Trees Retained 2. (B2) Standard 3. (B3) Fencing 3. (B3) Standard 4. (B4) Maintenance of Landscaped 4. (B4) Standard Areas 5. (B5) New Planting 5. (B5) Standard (Amend as follows: ‘Landscaping scheme, including planting plans, plant schedules and landscaping specification, shall be submitted...... such a landscaping scheme should incorporate details of the advance planting of semi-mature trees on plots 2, 3 and 4.’) 6. (B6) New Planting 6. (B6) Standard (Amend as follows: ‘...... whichever is the earlier. The advance planting of trees on plots 2, 3 and 4 shall be carried out in the first planting season after the date of this permission i.e. October - December 1998.’) 7. (B7) Screen Planting Hedges (1.5m) 7. (B7) To protect the visual amenities of the area 8. (A2) Existing Trees 8. (A2) Standard
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 25 9. Prior to the commencement of any 9. To ensure the works, details of the surface treatment protection of trees to of the access driveway (geoweb be retained as part of construction) shall be submitted to and the scheme hereby approved in writing by the approved Local Planning Authority 10. (A38) Surface Water/Sewage Disposal 10. (A38) Standard 11. (B8) Parking Arrangements 11. (B8) Standard 12. (B9) Parking/Sight Lines 12. (B9) Standard 13. (B16) Details/Samples to be submitted 13. (B16) Standard 14. (D5) Extensions/Erection of Garages 14. To prevent overdevelopment of the site 15. (D9) Enlargement to houses 15. To safeguard the consisting of roof additions/alterations amenities of adjoining occupiers from the possibility of overlooking 16. (E4) Loss of Integral Garages to 16. (E4) Standard Living Accommodation 17. (B14A) Screen Fencing 17. (B14A) Standard (add “... shall be maintained on all site boundaries ...” and delete “for the full depth of the development”) 18. (D1) No additional windows or doors 18. (D1) Standard 19. (A17) Levels 19. (A17) Standard 20. Details of binstores shall be submitted 20. To ensure adequate to and approved in writing by the Local refuse facilities are Planning Authority prior to the provided commencement of work 21. Notwithstanding Condition 3 above, 21. To safeguard the details of the treatment of the boundary privacy of adjoining of the site with 2, 3 and 4 Hillman Close occupiers. shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work.
INFORMATIVES:
1. (3) Property Rights/Rights of Light. 2. (4) Non-Enforcement of Fencing Condition. 3. (11) Notification to Building Contractors. 4. (14) Compliance with Legislation Administered by Public Protection Services 5. (22) Mogden Drainage Group - Sewerage
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 26 6. (23) Engineering Consultancy Unit 7. (25) Legislation Administered by Building Control 8. (26) Notification of Demolition to Building Control
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.37 Hectares
CAR PARKING: Lost: 2 Provided: 26 Required: 26
TREES: T.P.O. 3 TO BE RETAINED: Yes
CONSULTATIONS: NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 23 No. of replies: 17 (including 2 in support and a petition of objection of 13 signatories)
*THE PROPOSAL HAS ALSO BEEN ADVERTISED AS: A major development
Comments:
Objections to the proposed development have been received on the following grounds:
1. Loss of trees (including prior to determination of application). 2. Cramped form of development out of keeping. 3. Loss of privacy due to overlooking. 4. Unattractive design. 5. High density. 6. Road safety problems - due to proximity of access to Harefield Road/ Park Road traffic light junction. 7. Narrow access. 8. Poor sight lines. 9. Excessive noise would be generated from cars. 10. Overshadowing/Loss of outlook. 11. Insufficient car parking. 12. Question whether there is a demand for such large houses. 13. Would encourage parking on Harefield Road. 14. Inadequate sewer system in area.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS:
Area Engineer No objections.
North Uxbridge Residents Association i. Access is prejudicial to road safety. ii. Protected trees would be threatened. iii. Excessive building mass. iv. Out of character.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 27 (4) REPORT
The Site
This application relates to a site of 0.37 ha comprising parts of back gardens of existing residential properties and accessed off Harefield Road, 35m to the west of the junction with Park Road. The site is bounded to the north by Harefield Road and to the south, east and west by residential properties in the form of 2 storey detached houses. The site is covered by a Tree Protection Order relating to 3 beech trees located at the front of 194 Harefield Road.
The land slopes gently from Park Road to the east down towards Hillside Close to the west.
Proposal
Originally the application sought permission for the erection of 8, 4 and 5 bedroom 2 storey detached houses. It involved the demolition of the existing house at 194 Harefield Road and its replacement with a new house to be built slightly further back into the site.
The revised proposal has deleted the replacement house in order to secure the retention of the protected trees at the point of access into the site. Therefore the application now seeks permission for 7 houses.
The estate would be accessed via a road approximately 65m long to a cul-de-sac around which the seven houses would be located.
Relevant Planning History
None in relation to this site. However, there is a long history of in-fill residential developments in this part of Uxbridge, e.g. Hillman Close, Salt Hill Close, Water Tower Close.
Planning Standards and Policies
Adopted Central Hillingdon Local Plan (CHLP) policies;
H3 (presumption in favour of residential development); T12 (off street parking); UL1 (new development must reflect the character of the area); UL2 (criteria for housing developments); UL4 (landscaping features); UL7 (amenity space).
Draft Unitary Development Plan (as proposed to be modified) (UDP) policies; BE9 (layout and appearance of new development); BE12 (development must reflect character of the area); BE13 (penetration of daylight and sunlight); BE16 (privacy); BE30 (landscaping); AM15A (car parking), Pt.1.35 and R15 (planning obligations).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 28 Main Planning Issues
(i) The acceptability of the principle of the use.
There is no objection in principle to the use of the site for residential purposes given that the land is already in such use.
(ii) The impact of the sub-division of existing residential properties.
The existing houses on this side of Harefield Road have large rear gardens about 70m long by about 16m wide. As a result of the proposal, the gardens of the affected properties would be as follows:
No. 190 No. 192 No. 196
Length 30m 30m 50m Width 15m 18m 18m Area 450m2 540m2 900m2
The existing house at 241 Park Road has a rear garden 65m long by 15m wide. As a result of the proposal the garden of the affected property would be as follows:
No. 241
Length 40m Width 15m 600m2
Taking account of these changes to the gardens of the existing properties comprising the application site, all the houses would retain garden areas above the Council’s adopted standards (20m² per habitable room).
In addition, these properties would not be compromised in terms of vehicular access or in any other respects (see below) and as such would remain viable residential units.
(iii) The impact of the proposal on the amenities of adjoining houses.
In terms of the Council’s adopted standards, those existing properties being sub-divided would not have their amenities unduly affected as a result of the proposal. This is due to the distances involved and juxtaposition of the proposed and existing houses.
The access would fall within the plot of No. 194 Harefield Road. The revised proposal deletes the replacement house that in effect provides space for the road so that it would not be immediately adjacent to either Nos. 192 or 196
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 29 thereby preventing disturbance to those houses from vehicle movements. The retention of the protected beech trees and provision of new landscaping would also act as a buffer between the road and adjacent houses.
The existing houses at Nos. 243-247 Park Road have rear gardens 10m long. The existing houses at Nos. 2, 3 and 4 Hillman close have rear gardens 10m, 7m and 17m long respectively.
Nos. 243-247 Park Road and Nos. 2, 3 and 4 Hillman Close are the properties most affected by the proposed development because at present the occupiers have an outlook across large expanses of rear gardens which fall within the application site. Nevertheless, none of these houses would be compromised in terms of overlooking, loss of outlook, overshadowing or overdominance in relation to the Council’s adopted standards. The back to back distances would be between 23- 27m. The adopted standard requires 21m (plus 3m relating to an ‘outdoor living area’ behind each house) where houses are directly back to back.
Nos. 2, 3 and 4 Hillman Close would also be affected to an extent by the high drop in land levels from east to west across the site. The difference in levels has been addressed in the proposal so that House 4 would be only 1m higher than Nos. 3 and 4 Hillman Close. However, it is considered that the provision of 2m high close boarded fencing, tree retention and new tree planting on these boundaries should safeguard against any serious overlooking/loss of privacy.
At the site boundary with Nos. 243-245 Park Road similar landscaping and fencing are proposed.
(iv) Quality of the Layout
The cul-de-sac arrangement of the houses would present an attractive appearance and complement the character of the area, particularly bearing in mind other infill developments in the vicinity. The properties would relate satisfactorily to each other and the proposal would meet adopted standards in relation to outlook, privacy, overdominance and light penetration between buildings.
The proposed garden sizes would be above the adopted standard and offer good useable spaces with adequate sunlight.
Ample opportunities would exist within the estate for new planting to improve the visual amenities of the area.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 30 (v) Access/Parking and Road Layout
The Area Engineer is satisfied with the proposed traffic arrangements and does not consider that the access would be too close to the Harefield Road, Park Road junction to cause problems.
(vi) Tree Protection
The protected beech trees on 194 Harefield Road make a significant contribution to the amenity of area and are shown to be retained as part of the scheme.
The original scheme included a replacement house for No. 194 which would be demolished. However, the replacement property would have prevented the retention of the protected trees and as a result the replacement house was deleted from the scheme.
The roots of the protected trees are to be safeguarded by the erection of a membrane, above which the new access road would be laid. The membrane which has been agreed by the Trees and Landscape Officer forms part of the application and its implementation is conditioned.
(vii) Provision of Educational Places
The Director of Education has stated that the development is in an area experiencing pressure on primary school places. As a result of this 4 and 5 bedroom scheme, it would therefore be possible that any children of primary school age living within the estate would not be able to go to a local school. The two schools in the area are Hermitage Primary which is full in all year groups and oversubscribed and Whitehall Schools which are being expanded to meet a local need for places.
In the absence of Council resources the Director of Education has stated that in this situation the applicants should be required to make a contribution to the cost of improving Whitehall School. Following negotiations the applicants have offered a sum of money for this purpose which has been agreed by the Director of Education. The contribution is to assist in the provision of classrooms and other facilities in the Whitehall Schools. Planning policies in the emerging Unitary Development Plan (Pt 1.35 and Policy R15) support the provision of Community facilities, including schools, through planning obligations. It has been demonstrated that the proposed obligation is relevant to the application and can be justified by development plan policies. Significant weight can therefore be attached to the proposed Section 106 agreement in considering the merits of the application.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 31 Public Consultation
16 letters have been received in respect of the original proposal including a petition of 13 signatures. 2 letters are in support of the proposal but the remaining 14 are objecting. All the substantial issues raised have been summarised above and dealt with in the main body of the report. The one letter received in respect of the revised proposals has raised no new issues.
Conclusion
The proposal is considered to be acceptable for the reasons given. The applicants have also agreed to make a contribution to additional school places or the local Whitehall Schools which is to be welcomed. I recommend accordingly.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Unitary Development Plan
In addition the following documents were also used. a) 17 letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 32 CONTACT OFFICER: JIM READ EXTENSION: 2397
Application No. Location Proposal
7. 52521/97/2106 LAND AT ‘ODDICOMBE’ CHANGE OF USE OF LAND TROUT ROAD FROM RESIDENTIAL TO YIEWSLEY CAR PARK TO PROVIDE PARKING FOR ADJACENT (Date of receipt : 5.12.97) LIGHT INDUSTRIAL PREMISES (INVOLVING (Last amended plans received: 24.6.98) DEMOLITION OF BUNGALOW AND OUT- BUILDINGS) Drawing No. 1108B received 24.6.98 and letter dated 23.6.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Industrial and Business Area
(1) SUMMARY
Permission is sought to create a car park adjacent to an existing light industrial premises which currently suffers from a shortage of parking facilities. Although the proposal involves the demolition of a house and its outbuildings it is considered on balance to be acceptable because Trout Road is relatively narrow, heavily parked, and the site is close to a dangerous bend. Furthermore, the site is surrounded by industrial or warehouse buildings and therefore not suited for continued use as a dwelling, whilst use of the land for parking would, in effect, support the local economy.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B16) Details/samples to be 2. (B16) Standard submitted - parking area. 3. The parking spaces shall be 3. To ensure that parking takes marked out as indicated before the place in an orderly fashion so area is used for parking vehicles. as to preserve the amenity of the area. 4. (B6) New Planting. 4. (B6) Standard
INFORMATIVES
1. (3) Property Rights/Rights of Light. 2. (25) Compliance with Legislation Administered by Building Control. 3. (14) Compliance with legislation administered by Public Protection Services.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 33 4. You are reminded that should ownership of the southern boundary wall be established as yours, the panel closest to the road should be reduced by a height of at least one metre.
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.075 Hectare: 0.79 Acre
CAR PARKING: Provided: 12 Required: max. of 14
TREES: EXISTING: TO BE RETAINED: Pleached limes at front to be retained. New planting at rear
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted 21 No. of replies: 0
OTHER CONSULTATIONS: COMMENTS:
West Drayton Residents’ Association No reply received.
Area Engineer Supports recommendation, subject to conditions.
No objection
(4) REPORT
The Site
The site lies on the east side of Trout Road, between High Street, Yiewsley and the Grand Union Canal. Immediately adjacent is a printing works in the same ownership as the applicant. The site contains a Victorian bungalow , ‘Oddicombe’ which has been unoccupied for about one year since the tenant passed away and which has been boarded up recently. The house has been broken into as many occasions and the interior has been vandalised.
The site is surrounded on all sides by industrial or warehouse buildings, and is in an Industrial and Business Area as defined in the Central Hillingdon Local Plan and falls within the Hayes-West Drayton Corridor in the Draft Unitary Development Plan.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 34 The Proposal
Permission is sought to use the site as a car park to serve the adjacent printing works. This would involve the demolition of the house and its outbuildings. Access will be from the existing opening that serves the adjacent printing works. Twelve spaces are shown, including two for orange badge holders closest to the entrance of the printing works. The line of pleached lime trees at the front of the site will remain, and the area through which runs a possible road widening line, will remain open and grassed. (The widening scheme has been identified by the Council but is not in any specific programme and therefore unlikely to be implemented for the foreseeable future).
The car park will also be landscaped with 3 new trees plus hedging and ground cover.
Relevant Planning History
There have been no previous applications on this site but a series of applications for the adjacent site in connection with it operation as a printing works.
Planning Standards and Policies
Policies H1, H3, H4 of the Central Hillingdon Local Plan (CHLP): Policies H1 and H2 - Unitary Development Plan (UDP): Presumption in favour of the retention of residential property where possible.
Policy E1 - CHLP, Policy LE3-UDP : Presumption in favour of industrial use in industrial employment areas.
Policy UL16 - CHLP, Policy BE17 - UDP : Landscaping of buildings and external spaces in industrial employment areas.
Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 13 : Transport (1994) Planning Policy Guidance Note (PPG) 4 : Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms (1992)
Main Planning Issues
The main issue in this case is whether the loss of a residential unit is acceptable. Although the house, ‘Oddicombe’, is theoretically capable of residential use, it has become something of an anachronism as the site is completely surrounded by industrial or warehousing development, this position being confirmed by the allocation of the site as an Industrial and Business Area in the adopted local plan. Even if the house were to be restored so that it was capable of residential use, it is unlikely that anyone would wish to live there, in view of its surroundings.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 35 The demolition of the house and use of the site as a car park will not only provide some much-needed parking space for the adjacent printing works but will also help to reduce the amount of off-street parking in a road which is relatively narrow, yet heavily used by HGV’s and other large vehicles due to the neighbouring industrial estate and other commercial premises further along Trout Road. In addition, the existence of a blind bend and the narrowing of the road on the approach to it means that vehicles parked at the kerbside become potential obstructions and road safety hazards.
The printing works, G.W. Chapman and Sons has long been located in the area and therefore is an established part of the local economy providing 32 full-time jobs. The applicant states that some 7-8 employees currently park their cars on Trout Road, so the creation of the car park is likely to remove at least this many vehicles from the road.
The number of spaces has been reduced from the 26 originally shown in the submitted drawing as a way of reflecting the general tenor of Central Government Guidance Note PPG13 (which seeks to reduce the dependency upon car borne travel) : the proposal will therefore ameliorate the existing parking situation without attracting additional traffic to the area. It will also comply with advice contained in PPG4 which encourages local authorities to support the local economy unless the proposal would cause demonstrable harm to interests of acknowledged importance.
In view of the UDP policies which both oppose the loss of residential accommodation and encourage environmental improvements to industrial areas, the applicant has been requested to make a voluntary financial contribution towards the cost of improvement and regeneration works scheduled by the Council for the Industrial and Business Area in which the site is located. The outcome of this request will be reported to Committee Members at the meeting.
The proposal is, therefore, on balance, considered to assist in the strengthening of the local economy to the extent that the resultant loss of one dwelling, in this particular case, is acceptable.
Consultation
No comments were received from neighbouring occupiers. The Area Engineer supports the recommendation as it improves highway safety in the vicinity of the site and the amount of parking provided would be in accordance with the Council’s adopted standards.
Conclusion
The proposal is recommended for conditional approval as it would, in effect, support the local economy in the area as well as improve highway safety on a relatively narrow road that carries such heavy goods vehicle traffic and is close to a dangerous bend. These benefits are considered to outweigh the loss of a dwelling which has become a less attractive place in which to live because it is now surrounded by industrial or warehouse development.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 36 Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:
5, UDP (as proposed to be modified) PPG13 : Transport (1994) PPG 4 : Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms (1992)
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 37 CONTACT OFFICER: RICHARD PHILLIPS EXTENSION: 3836
Application No. Location Proposal
8.(A)28252H/98/613 CEDARGREEN HOUSE DETAILS OF MATERIALS IN BENTINCK ROAD COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 8 WEST DRAYTON OF PLANNING PERMISSION REF. 28252E/97/603 DATED 11.12.97; (Date of receipt: 26.3.98) OFFICE EXTENSIONS, (Last amended plans: received: 15.6.98) EXTERNAL ALTERATIONS INCLUDING ACCESS TO HIGHWAY (RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION) Drawing Nos. 9741/01 Rev E, 9741/02 Rev. E and manufacturer’s brochures received on 26.3.98 & 12.6.98 and letters dated 19.3.98 & 12.6.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan/UDP - Developed Area (Yiewsley/West Drayton Town Centre)
Application No. Location Proposal
(B) 28252J/98/1293 CEDARGREEN HOUSE AMENDMENT (TO PERMIT BENTINCK ROAD REPLACEMENT OF GLAZED WEST DRAYTON CURTAIN WALLING TO FRONT EXTENSION WITH BRICKWORK) (Date of receipt: 19.6.98) TO PLANNING PERMISSION REF: 28252E/97/603 DATED 11.12.97; ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE AT THIRD FLOOR IN FORM OF A MANSARD ROOF, ERECTION OF A LIFT TOWER, ALTERATIONS TO EXTERNAL ELEVATIONS AND ALTERATIONS TO EXISTING ACCESS TO HIGHWAY (RETROSPECTIVE APPLICATION) Drawing Nos. 9741/01 Rev. E. 9741/02 Rev F & I.N./98/01 Rev A received on 19.6.98.
Central Hillingdon Local Plan - Unitary Development Plan - Developed Area
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 38 (1) SUMMARY (Applications A & B)
These applications seek to discharge a materials condition and approval for an amendment to the front elevational treatment of a scheme for office extensions and alterations that was previously granted on 11.12.97. It is considered that the materials are acceptable and the replacement of glazed curtain walling by matching brickwork is acceptable in visual and residential amenity terms.
(2) RECOMMENDATION (A) - APPROVAL OF MATERIALS
1. Himley Dark Brown Rustics 2. Chelwood Brick Honey blend 3. Aluminium window frames in metallic grey (RAL number 9007) 4. Dobel pre-painted grey steel sheet roof covering.
INFORMATIVE:
You are advised that details relating to Conditions 3 (Tree Protection Works), 4 (Landscape Maintenance) and 5 (Landscaping Scheme) have yet to be submitted, despite works having commenced on site.
(2) RECOMMENDATION (B) - APPROVAL, subject to the following condition:-
1. (B15) External Surfaces to Match. 1. (B15) Standard
(3) INFORMATION (A & B)
SITE AREA: 0.3 Hectares 0.74 Acres
CONSULTATIONS: (Application B only)
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted : 18 No. of replies : 2
Comments:
1. Additional storey will reduce light to small back garden. This building is already invasive. 2. Car parking at moment is dire, additional staff and deliveries can only make situation worse. This is a residential area with young children, most unsuited for deliveries by HGVs. Should be seeking to reduce traffic in such a locality. 3. Car parking details not complete. Numbers of staff and number of car parking spaces leaves big discrepancy. 4. Articulated lorries, due to their size, take up large part of car park. When offices are occupied, car park will be full, forcing lorries to unload on right of way to premises behind. Problems already experienced here with staff and customers having to wait until unloading completed in order to enter premises. This is totally unacceptable.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 39 5. Bentinck Road is a one way system. Due to a lack of manoeuvrability associated with their size, lorries are driving up the wrong way on this road.
(4) REPORT (Applications A & B)
The Site
This is a three storey office building with a single storey warehouse to the rear, although building works are presently in hand to install the front extension, alterations and a fourth storey in the form of a mansard roof. The site extends to some 0.3h.a. On the south eastern boundary is a vehicular access beyond which are offices whilst immediately to the north and west are residential properties. The property is set back 12 metres from the road frontage in which space car parking and landscaping is provided.
This site forms part of the Yiewsley/West Drayton Town Centre.
The Proposals
Application A
This application seeks permission to discharge Condition 8 (materials) attached to planning permission ref. 28252E/97/603 by employing the following materials:-
1. Feature soldier courses - Himley Dark Brown Rustics (to match existing face brickwork) 2. Face brickwork in new panels - Chelwood Brick Honey blend 3. Aluminium window frames in metallic grey (RAL number 9007) 4. Dobel pre-painted grey steel sheet roof covering
Application B
This application seeks an amendment to the previous planning approval for additional office space at third floor in the form of a mansard roof, erection of a lift tower, alterations to external elevations and alterations to existing access to highway, granted on 11 December 1997 (Ref: 28252E/97/603) by replacing the glazed curtain walling to the front lift tower extension with brickwork.
Relevant Planning History
Planning permission was originally granted in 1973 and 1974 to erect two industrial units and one warehouse unit. The latter does not form part of this application. Subsequently permission was granted in 1979 to change the use of the three storied Unit 1 (CedarGreen House) from industrial to offices (Ref: 3024M/79/265). Permission was also granted in this year to change the industrial use of Unit 2 (premises to rear, also in use by applicant) to warehousing (Ref: 3024Q/79/1367). Following a Members site visit, the scheme to extend CedarGreen House was granted permission on 11 December 1997 (Ref: 28252E/97/603).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 40 Planning Standards and Policies
Central Hillingdon Local Plan, Policies UL1 and UL3; Draft Unitary Development Plan as proposed to be modified, Policies BE9, BE10 and BE18.
Main Planning Issues
The proposed materials are considered acceptable, presenting a satisfactory appearance within the street scene.
As the proposed amendment purely relates to design, this scheme only has implications for the visual appearance of the building within the street scene and for the residential amenity of adjoining occupiers.
In terms of the first issue, the replacement of a glazed curtain with brickwork to the front extension which will house the lift will increase the visual prominence of this extension. However, as this structure would be set back from the highway frontage and it would be largely viewed against the bulk of the existing building, this increase in the visual prominence is considered acceptable. Brickwork is now proposed of materials which will match the rest of the building which has been controlled by condition.
As regards the second issue, due to the juxtaposition of this building with neighbouring properties, there would be no increase in the visual dominance of the extensions. Furthermore, the proposed use of brick will restrict any potential for overlooking.
Public Consultation
The five points raised are not relevant to the consideration of these applications.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, these applications are recommended for approval.
The background document used in the preparation of this report is that numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:- 5
Background Documents
In addition the following documents were also used:- a) Two letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report) b) Draft UDP as proposed to be modified.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 41 CONTACT OFFICER: RICHARD PHILLIPS EXTENSION: 3836
Application No. Location Proposal
9.(A) 28720H/98/920 7 THE GREEN INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL WEST DRAYTON ALTERATIONS AND EXTENSIONS TO BUILDING (APPLICATION FOR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT) (Date of receipt: 11.5.98) Drawing Nos. 4570/01, 4570/02, (Last amended plans received: 24.8.98) 4570/03, 4570/04 REV A, 4570/05 REV A and 4570/06 REV A received on 22.5.98 and 24.8.98 and letters dated 1.5.98 and 21.8.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan/UDP: Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY (A, B & C)
These three applications seek planning permission and listed building consent to change the use and physically convert which includes the minor extension of a listed building fronting The Green from a shop (Class A1) to offices for a computer software company (Class B1). The unit forms part of a designated retail parade, but the loss of this retail unit is considered acceptable. The works are considered acceptable in terms of the character of the listed building, West Drayton Green Conservation Area and streetscene. There would be no adverse impact upon the residential amenity of adjoining occupiers subject to suitable conditions and the implications for highway safety are considered acceptable.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:
1. (G1) Time Limit (LB) 1. (G1) Standard 2. (G13) Material Samples 2. (G13) Standard 3. Samples of the surfacing material for 3. In order to ensure that the courtyard shall be submitted to and the setting of the approved by the Local Planning listed building is not Authority prior to it being installed on adversely affected site. and in the interests of the visual amenities of the area.
INFORMATIVE:
1. (25) Compliance with legislation administered by Building Control.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 42 Application No. Location Proposal
(B) 28720J/98/921 7 THE GREEN CHANGE OF USE FROM CLASS A1 WEST DRAYTON (RETAIL) TO CLASS B1 (OFFICES) WITH ANCILLARY SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT, RETAIL AND TRAINING FACILITIES (Date of receipt: 11.5.98) Drawing Nos. 4570/01, 4570/02, (Last amended plans received: 24.8.98) 4570/03, 4570/04 REV A, 4570/05 REV A and 4570/06 REV A received on 22.5.98 & 24/8/98 and letters dated 1/5/98 & 21/8/98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan/UDP: Developed Area
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:
1. (B1) Time Limit 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B19) Personal Permissions 2. To ensure that the Local Planning insert “Caliach Limited” Authority retains control over any subsequent use of the building in order to protect the amenities of adjoining residential occupiers. 3. No more than 7 persons shall be 3. In order to comply with the employed at the premises nor applicant’s letter of 1 May 1998 shall the ancillary training facility and in order to protect the be used for more than 2 days a residential amenities of adjoining week. occupiers. 4. The building operations hereby 4. In order to ensure the satisfactory permitted shall be carried out in conversion of the building and in strict accordance with the agent’s the interests of the amenity of letter of 21 August 1998. adjoining occupiers. 5. The courtyard shown on the 5. In order to ensure that adequate approved plans shall be re- facilities are provided. surfaced prior to the occupation of the building and thereafter permanently retained for the parking of vehicles. 6. (D1) No Additional Windows or 6. (D1) Standard Doors (delete ‘facing’) 7. (D2) Obscure Glazing 7. (D2) Standard (insert ‘ground and first floor windows’ and ‘9 & 11 The Green’) 8. (B34) Shop Window Display 8. (B34) Standard
INFORMATIVE:
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 43 You are advised to contact the Local Planning Authority as to whether advertisement and/or listed building consent would be required for any replacement signage.
Application No. Location Proposal
(C) 28720G/98/1032 7 THE GREEN ERECTION OF FIRST FLOOR WEST DRAYTON EXTENSION, INVOLVING RAISING OF THE HEIGHT OF EXISTING GROUND FLOOR AND FRONT PORCH (Date of receipt: 11.5.98) Drawing Nos. 4570/01, 4570/02, (Last amended plans received: 24.8.98) 4570/03, 4570/04 REV A, 4570/05 REV A and 4570/06 REV A received on 22.5.98 and 24.8.98 and letters dated 1.5.98 and 21.8.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan/UDP: Developed Area
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:
1. (B1) Time Limit 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B15) Materials to Match 2. (B15) Standard
INFORMATIVES:
1. (3) Property Rights/Rights of Light 2. (25) Compliance with legislation administered by Building Control.
(3) INFORMATION (A, B & C)
SITE AREA: 0.02 Hectare 0.06 Acre
CAR PARKING: Lost: 0 Provided: Paved courtyard Required: 2 spaces capable of providing plus 1 disabled space 3 spaces plus loading/unloading space
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 171.5m²
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 0 + Site Notice (A) No. of replies: 3 19 + Site Notice (B) 12 + Site Notice (C)
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 44 *THE PROPOSAL HAS ALSO BEEN ADVERTISED AS:
(a) Being within or affecting a Conservation Area (b) Being a listed building or affecting its setting.
Comments:
1) First floor windows overlooking the paved parking area would also overlook rear bedrooms of the maisonettes.
2) Any parking provision on the paved area should not encroach upon the areas set aside for use and access by occupiers of maisonettes as stipulated on leasehold documents.
3) Consultation letters being sent to 9 and 11 Church Road instead of 9 and 11 The Green.
4) The north elevation of the rear building has no guttering so rainwater drops on our property as does debris from tree/shrubs growing in this wall which is damaging to our property.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS: (Applications A, B & C)
English Heritage Views to be reported to Members
West Drayton Green Conservation Area No objections Advisory Panel
West Drayton Green Residents No reply Association
Public Protection Services No reply
Area Engineer No objection subject to 3 parking spaces being provided
(4) REPORT (A, B & C)
The Site
The application site forms part of a two storey retail parade and part of an enclosed rear courtyard to the north of The Green. The courtyard is accessed from The Green by means of an archway between Nos. 7 and 9. Presently, No. 7 forms the ground floor retail unit with storage space behind on the western side and ancillary workshops and externally accessed offices above on the northern side of the courtyard. There is a first floor residential flat above the shop (7B The Green) which is accessed via an external staircase from the courtyard and 2 maisonettes (9 and 11 The Green) form the frontage
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 45 to the courtyard. The retail unit sells car alarms and stereos which are fitted and repaired in the workshop and courtyard at the rear. The courtyard is also used by the maisonettes as a clothes drying area.
The buildings to the front of the site are listed as is the brick wall which forms the eastern boundary of the site. The site also forms part of the West Drayton Green Conservation Area.
The Proposals
Application A
Listed Building Consent is sought to affect a change of use of these premises by installing and removing internal walls and openings, levelling the floors, installing new window frames to include the replacement of a garage door, remove an external staircase, fix closed existing shop door, repair and generally make good external fabric and erect a first floor extension to house a new staircase to first floor and front porch.
Application B
This seeks planning permission to change the use of these premises from retail (Class A1) to Offices (Class B1) with ancillary software development, retail and training facilities. By way of supporting information, in their letter of 1 May 1998, the applicant states that they are a computer software company, supplying management software to manufacturing companies. They are looking to employ a maximum number of 7 staff, within software development (3), sales (2), customer training and support (1) and general administration (1). It is envisaged that the ground floor of the rear building would be used for the seminar/training room, initially for less than one day a week, increasing to two days a week maximum. The numbers of attendees involved would be 3.4 on average, with a maximum of 8.
Application C
Planning permission is sought to erect a pitched roof first floor side extension to the rear building, measuring 3.6 metres wide and 2 metres deep with a maximum height of 5.1 metres which involves raising the height of the existing single storey from 2.9 to 3.6 metres and a brick and glazed front porch to the rear building, 3.1 metres wide by 2.0 metres deep and would have a ridge height of 4 metres.
Relevant Planning History
Planning permission was granted for a new shopfront to these premises on 10 June 1982 (Ref. 28720A/82/608). Advertisement and Listed Building consent were granted for a non-illuminated hand painted fascia sign on 10 April 1991 and 15 April 1991 respectively (Refs. 28720E/90/3631 and 28720F/90/2040). An application for the change of use of 1 The Green from butchers shop (Class A1) to Insurance Brokers (Class A2) was granted at the Uxbridge and Harefield Planning Sub-Committee meeting of 23 January 1995 (Ref. 48631A/94/1533).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 46 Planning Policies and Standards
Central Hillingdon Local Plan, Policies E5, S4, S9, T2, T12, UL1, UL3, UL11, UL13, UL14, UL21 and DIS2. Draft Unitary Development Plan as proposed to be modified, Policies BE4, BE6, BE8, BE10, BE12, BE13, BE14, BE16, OE1, S8, S9, LE8, AM6 and AM13A.
Main Planning Issues
(i) Principle of the Change of Use
The main consideration relating to this proposal involves the acceptability of the change of use. Given the CHLP and UDP designation of these premises as forming part of a local parade, the main thrust of retail policy seeks to retain sufficient essential shop uses to maintain retail choice appropriate to the size of the parade.
This unit is the only one in the parade which has remained in retail use, the other three units (1, 3 and 5 The Green) are in use as an Insurance Brokers, although the Class A2 use of 3 and 5 is unauthorised which application No. 52691/98/1196 seeks to redress. However, this proposal would not result in the loss of essential shop uses due to the current use of these premises as a car audio and alarm shop and there are essential shop uses in the immediate vicinity, notably on Swan Road. Given this scenario, it is considered that the relevant criteria of Policies S9 of the CHLP and UDP which deal with the loss of retail would be satisfied. Indeed, it was recognised in the report that considered the application to change the retail use of 1 The Green (48631A/94/1533 refers) that this parade did not function as a conventional retail parade. The proposed use would not provide a local service but given the employment benefits and the physical benefits that would accrue from allowing this proposal in terms of the refurbishment of a listed building and the likely improvement to the residential amenity of the area (see (ii) and (iii) below), on balance the use is considered acceptable.
(ii) Impact of the alterations on the listed building, conservation area and street scene
It is that part of the building that fronts The Green that is listed and the more important historically whereas it is the more modern building at the rear that is in a relatively poor state of repair. The internal alterations to the building are relatively minor, involving the installation/removal of internal walls and openings and the levelling of floors and would not adversely harm the character of the building. The external alterations that are being proposed are mainly to the building at the rear which is not in itself listed. These include replacing a garage door with a matching window and rendering and painting of brickwork. It is considered that these works would greatly improve the appearance of the building, providing the courtyard with greater visual cohesion. The courtyard
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 47 would further benefit from the proposed re-surfacing, the suitability of the paving materials have been controlled by condition.
As regards the proposed extensions, the first floor extension would barely be visible within the street scene and is of a design which would complement the original building. The porch, being of a glazed and brick wall construction would provide an attractive contrasting design to the main building.
(iii) Impact upon the amenity of adjoining residential occupiers
In terms of the proposed use of these premises, the existing use of the rear building and courtyard is quasi-industrial, with the fitting and repair of car audio systems and alarms. It is considered that the use of the ground floor as offices with an ancillary training facility at the rear would be less disruptive to local residents, particularly as the training facility would only be used for 1 to 2 days a week. Furthermore, in order to protect the privacy of adjoining residents, particularly those of the two maisonettes to the front of the courtyard, all windows facing onto these properties are to be obscure glazed, controlled by condition.
Due to the relatively small scale of the proposed extension and porch and juxtaposition with adjoining properties, they would not unduly affect their amenities.
(iv) Implications for Highway Safety
In terms of the Council’s car parking standards, the B1 office use would require two car parking spaces plus 1 disabled and unloading/loading space. The courtyard is capable of provided this provision although it would involve end to end parking and is therefore not ideal. This site is on a bus route and within a reasonable walking distance of West Drayton Town Centre and its station. In view of these circumstances although at risk of less provision being provided on site and in order to protect the setting of the listed building, it is considered that these parking arrangements should not be formalised by having the spaces marked out.
Public Consultation
As regards the first point, by conditioning that obscure glazing is to be installed within the ground and first floor windows facing 9 and 11 The Green, the potential for overlooking would be mitigated. In terms of the second issue, although land ownership issues are not strictly a planning matter, amended plans have been received which do not formalise the parking arrangements in the courtyard by having spaces marked out. All neighbours have now been correctly consulted, and their responses considered within this report (point 3). As regards the fourth point, the building will be put into a good state of repair which has been confirmed by the agent in their letter of 21 August 1998 and controlled by condition.
Conclusion
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 48 For the reasons stated above, this scheme is recommended accordingly.
Background Documents
The background document used in the preparation of this report is that numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
5
In addition the following documents were also used:-
(a) Two letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report)
(b) Draft UDP as proposed to be modified.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 49 CONTACT OFFICER BHUPINDER MANZ EXTENSION: 7079
Application No. Location Proposal
10. 47883D/98/105 26 BELLCLOSE ROAD ERECTION OF A SINGLE WEST DRAYTON STOREY REAR EXTENSION (Date of receipt: 22.1.98) (Last amended plans received: 26.5.98) Drawing No. 2-01A received on 26.5.98 and letter from Henry Jackson (Estate Agent) received 23.2.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan
At the meeting of the Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee on the 4/8/98 Members of the Sub-Committee deferred the application in order that further negotiations could take place facilitating a reduction in the development’s height/width.
The applicant has declined to amend their scheme requesting that the Sub-Committee determine the application as submitted.
(1) SUMMARY
The proposal relates to a semi detached property. Planning permission is sought for a single storey rear extension 5.9m deep x 3.8m wide by 3m high. Planning permission has been granted and constructed for a similar extension at No. 28 Bellclose Road. Having regard to the size of the extension and relationship to the neighbouring properties the proposal is not considered to result in a material loss of residential amenity.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard 2. (B15) External Surfaces to Match 2. (B15) Standard 3. (D2) No Additional Windows or 3. (D2) Standard Doors (‘facing No. 24 Bellclose Road’) 4. (D3) Obscure Glazing (‘facing 4. (D3) Standard No. 24 Bellclose Road’) 5. (D4) Prevention of Balconies 5. (D4) Standard 6. (B14A) Screen Fence 6. (B14A) Standard (‘facing No. 24 Bellclose Road)
INFORMATIVES:
1. (3) Property Rights/Rights of Light
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 50 2. (25) Legislation Administered by Building Control
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 51 (3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.01 Hectares
CAR PARKING: Not affected
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 2 No. of replies: 1
Comments - One letter of objection has been received which makes the following points:-
1) over-intensification of development; 2) bulk of development to the rear of 26 & 28 Bellclose Road would cause a loss of light to ground floor habitable rooms; 3) unacceptable height.
OTHER CONSULTATIONS: COMMENTS:
Area Engineer No comments
(4) REPORT
The Site
The application relates to a semi-detached property on Bellclose Road, the site is rectangular in shape, with a small change in level at the rear.
There is an existing outbuilding at the end of the applicant's garden.
The neighbouring property at 28 Bellclose Road has constructed a single storey rear extension, which extends along the side boundary of the application site.
The Proposal
Planning permission is sought for a single storey rear extension with flat roof - 5.9m long by 3.8m wide by 3m high.
The extension is set 1.8m from the boundary with 24 Bellclose Road and extends up to the boundary and joins onto the extension at number 28 Bellclose Road.
The proposal provides for a 'playroom'.
The extension has a high level window and side door facing number 24 - both are shown to be of obscure glass. A recent site inspection revealed that the applicant has constructed the proposed extension up to damp course level. Construction works have stopped.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 52 Relevant Planning History
There is no planning history relevant to the consideration of this application.
The neighbour at No. 28 has had planning approval for a similar extension to that proposed, this has been constructed - planning reference 97/1154.
Planning Policies and Standards
The Draft Unitary Development Plan as proposed to be modified (UDP) has reached an advanced stage in its process towards adoption, as such its policies should be given considerable weight when determining the current proposal. The following policies from the plan are considered relevant to the application.
BE10 Requires extension to harmonise with the scale form and architectural composition of the origin building.
BE12 Requires new development to improve or compliment the character of the area.
BE13 Requires that new development ensures adequate sunlight and daylight can penetrate between buildings.
BE14 Planning permission will not be granted for new development that results in a loss of residential amenity by reason of siting bulk and proximity.
BE15 Requires the provision of adequate amenity space.
BE16 Requires new development to ensure adequate levels of privacy to neighbours.
The Adopted development plan is the Central Hillingdon Local Plan, the relevant policies are:-
UL3 Extensions should harmonise with the scale form architectural composition and proportions of the original building.
UL8 Requires residential extensions to accord with the Councils design guidance.
Main Planning Issues
The determining planning issue is considered to be the impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 53 (i) Impact on the amenity of number 28 Bellclose Road
No. 28 Bellclose Road has constructed a rear extension under ref: 643656/L/97/1154 to the same depth and height as presently proposed. The presence of this extension ensures that the current proposal will not cause a material loss of amenity to No. 28.
(ii) Impact on No. 24 Bellclose Road
The occupiers of this property have written in and objected to the current proposal - the comments are set out at the beginning of this report.
The proposed development is set 1.8m from the neighbours boundary, projecting 5.9m deep with a roof height of 3m. The orientation is such that the neighbours property is west of the application site.
Having regard to the distance from the boundary, height and size of the extension the proposal is not considered to either overdominate or unacceptably overshadow or reduce light to the neighbouring property. This view is arrived at taking account of the fact a similar extension was approved and constructed at No. 28 and having regard to original ground level.
Amended plans have been submitted showing a high level window in the side elevation. Subject to the maintenance of a 1.8m close boarded fence (see conditions) on the boundary there is not considered to be any material overlooking. Both the side window and door are to have obscure glass.
The proposal is considered acceptable in all other respects.
Public consultation
The main points raised by the objector are dealt with in the above report. Having regard to the overall size of the site, an objection on grounds of overdevelopment/overintensification cannot be sustained.
Conclusion
Having regard to the size and siting of the proposed extension, the development is not considered to result in a material loss of amenity to the neighbouring occupiers.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:- The Draft UDP as proposed to be modified
In addition the following documents were also used:-
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 54 One letter of objection (the contents of which are summarised in the report) CONTACT OFFICER: DANIEL MURKIN EXTENSION: 3606
Application No. Location Proposal
11. 52664A/98/1156 140 HIGH STREET CHANGE OF USE FROM YIEWSLEY CLASS A1 (SHOP) TO CLASS A2 (FINANCIAL AND PROFESSIONAL SERVICES) (Date of receipt: 5/6/98) Drawing No. 98/1935/2 received on 5.6.98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan: Yiewsley Town Centre - Secondary Shopping Area Unitary Development Plan: Yiewsley Town Centre
(1) SUMMARY
This application for a change of use to a financial/professional office is within a Secondary Shopping Area. The unit, currently vacant, is in a parade of eight of which four others are in retail use and is adjoined by an electrical shop and a solicitors office. An appeal has recently been lodged against the decision to refuse an application for a take-away/restaurant at the same address in April. It is considered that the location and the proposed use, which is appropriate to such peripheral shopping areas and in accordance with Development Plan policies would be unlikely to be detrimental to the vitality or viability of this part of Yiewsley town centre.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following condition:-
1. (B1) Time Limit (Full) 1. (B1) Standard
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.0065 Hectares
CAR PARKING: Lost: 0 Provided: 0 Required:
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 110m2
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 12 No. of replies: 2
Comments:
1. Financial and professional services do not encourage passing trade that retailers rely on.
2. Would not wish to see another solicitors’ office established.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 55 OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS:
PPS To be reported.
PEP Objection - loss of an A1 unit.
(4) REPORT
The Site
The application relates to a vacant Class A1 retail unit, formerly a hairdressers situated in the middle of a parade which is part of a transitional shopping location beyond the designated boundary of the primary frontage of Yiewsley town centre.
Of the eight units between Nos. 136 to 150, four are currently in retail A1 use, two are in Class A3 use and one Class A2. No. 140 has been marketed for nine months without any interest.
The Proposal
The application seeks permission for a change of use from the existing retail use to a financial/professional office use (Class A2). This would occupy both floors, 65 square metres of floorspace at ground level and ancillary office/WC accommodation (45 sq.m) on the first floor which is accessed through the ground floor via an internal staircase.
Relevant Planning History
A previous application which proposed to change the use of the premises to a Class A3 (takeaway/restaurant) use was refused in April 1998 (Ref. 98/0306). An appeal was lodged in June against that decision the reasons given being the loss of a retail use in a Secondary Shopping Area detrimental to the overall vitality and viability of the shopping area and thus falling contrary to Policies S8 of the Central Hillingdon Local Plan and S14 of the draft Unitary Development Plan as Proposed to be Modified.
Planning Standards and Policies
Policies S7 and S9 of the Central Hillingdon Local Plan are applicable.
S7 states the acceptable uses at ground floor level in Secondary Shopping Areas including Class A2.
S8 outlines the criteria by which such accepted uses are permitted. These must accord with the character and function of the shopping centre; must not result in dead frontage sufficient to erode the attractiveness of that centre (part or whole); must not be detrimental to visual amenities; and must be compatible with neighbouring uses.
Policies S7, S9 and S14 of the draft Unitary Development Plan are especially relevant.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 56 S7 permits changes from Class A1 retail where such uses would not be separated (or non-retail uses concentrated) such as to erode the attractiveness of the centre/parade.
S9 as modified allows changes of use from Class A1 provided that sufficient essential shop uses are retained.
S14 of the UDP lists acceptable uses in Secondary Shopping Areas including Class A2 financial and professional services. Separation of Class A1 units by non-retail uses which would result in more than 12 metres lost frontage or in less than 50% of the frontage in Class A1 uses are sought to be prevented.
Main Planning Issues
Again, as with the appeal proposal, the main issue is whether the proposed use would be detrimental to the vitality of the shopping area in this part of Yiewsley. The possibility of it remaining vacant or being periodically unoccupied in future, which certainly would not contribute to the locality, is another consideration.
The site is in the middle of a parade and was formerly a hairdressers. It has been marketed for at least nine months without interest to date. This is a transitional shopping location outside of the main centre and consequently has a relatively run-down appearance that nonetheless needs to be afforded protection for its role which is common to all such peripheral areas in Hillingdon and elsewhere.
At present there are four retail units in this set back parade between Nos. 136-150, there are two Class A3 uses and a solicitors office Class A2 in addition to the vacant unit, No. 140, subject of this application. The retail uses currently provided in the row are a dry cleaners, beds/bedding, a radio/TV and a carpet shop, none of which are listed as essential shop uses important at a local level referred to in the UDP Policies.
The retention of any retail unit which could be occupied in due course by an essential shop use (e.g. chemist, newsagent, grocer, bakery or butcher) is therefore arguably even more critical in this particular situation where there are none at present.
Recent appeals have been allowed for changes of use from retail to Class A3 uses at Nos. 126 and 131 High Street on the same side and opposite the application site respectively though both are within the Primary Shopping Area frontage. Figures for Secondary Shopping Area frontage from the 1997 survey indicate that there were below 50% of units in Class A1 use in the Yiewsley centre.
However there are three distinct Secondary Shopping Areas - High Street, Yiewsley, Fairfield Road and High Street, West Drayton adjoining the Primary Shopping Area of Yiewsley and it would thus be difficult to demonstrate how a fall in the attractiveness/vitality or viability of the centre as a whole could be attributed to a lack of essential Class A1 shops in just one particular part.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 57 Neither would the proposal result in a proliferation of non-retail Class A2 uses in this area however, which would have been the case with A3 uses hence the refusal of the recent application at this address.
There is no amenity issue involved with this type of use as normal office hours and activities would apply.
Public Consultation
1. Majority of shoppers would be drawn to the centre by retail/essential shops in Primary Area adjoining the parade.
2. Competition is not a planning matter for consideration of such proposals.
Conclusion
The proposed use accords with the terms of Development Plan policies which seek to retain the attractiveness of the centre. The lost retail frontage would not exceed the limits set out in the UDP (Policy S14) and neither would any existing essential shop uses be lost - there are none to be retained in this specific location at present and in any event the provision of such are controlled by market forces (i.e. if more were needed in a particular area then the retailers would take up more peripheral locations).
It is recommended that this application be approved.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
5 and Draft UDP as Proposed to be Modified.
In addition the following documents were also used:-
Two letters making representations (the contents of which are summarised in the report).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 58 CONTACT OFFICER: DANIEL MURKIN EXTENSION: 3606
Application No. Location Proposal
12. 28488D/98/1188 35 KEATS WAY RENEWAL OF PLANNING WEST DRAYTON PERMISSION REF. 28488B/90/1498 TO ALLOW CONTINUED USE OF GARAGE FOR AN EMBROIDERY BUSINESS (Date of receipt: 8/6/98) Unnumbered Drawing received on 8/6/98
Central Hillingdon Local Plan: Developed Area
(1) SUMMARY
This is a renewal application seeking to continue the use of a domestic garage for the applicants’ embroidery business which has been operated from this address since 1991. During this time there have been no complaints received about any aspect of the use. The location of the garage sited in a rear garden accessed via a shared driveway means that a permanent use would be inappropriate.
In the particular circumstances personal to the applicant a further two year temporary permission is considered reasonable.
(2) RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The use hereby permitted shall be 1. The operation of a commercial discontinued within 2 years of the activity on a permanent basis is date of this permission. not considered appropriate given that this is a residential area. 2. The use hereby permitted shall be 2. This is a residential area and the carried on only by Mr Normal Petty. Local Planning Authority would not like to see this use become established. 3. Provision shall be retained at all 3. To ensure that adequate parking times within the curtilage of the site facilities are provided. for the parking of at least 1 vehicle. 4. As measured at any site boundary 4. To ensure that the use does not operational noise levels shall not detract from the amenities of exceed 10dB(A) below the local residents. background level (as measured during the quietest period of expected operation).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 59 5. The premises shall not be used 5. To safeguard the residential between 1700 hours and 0900 amenity of the occupiers of hours on Mondays to Fridays and nearby properties. at no time whatsoever on Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays. 6. No deliveries or collections shall 6. To ensure that the amenity of the take place between 1700 hours and occupiers of nearby properties 0900 hours on Mondays to Fridays are not adversely affected by and at no time whatsoever on traffic noise. Saturdays, Sundays or Bank Holidays. 7. The premises shall have no retail 7. The premises located within a element and be solely used for residential area are lacking in embroidery business and for no on-site customer parking other purpose. facilities. Accordingly the Local Planning Authority wishes to retain control in the event of any change in the use of the site.
INFORMATIVE
The applicant is advised that the Local Planning Authority would be reluctant to further extend permission to operate a full-time commercial use from these premises unless he can demonstrate that the business would still be continued at a scale not warranting relocation to suitable alternative premises in the locality.
(3) INFORMATION
SITE AREA: 0.026 Hectares 0.065 Acres
CAR PARKING: Lost: 1 Provided: 0 Required: 2
TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF DEVELOPMENT: 22.7m2
CONSULTATIONS:
NEIGHBOURS: No. consulted: 4 No. of replies: 0
OTHER CONSULTATIONS COMMENTS:
PPS No objection to continued use/no complaints received about use (noise or other aspects).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 60 (4) REPORT
The Site
This is a semi-detached property with a detached garage sited towards the back of the rear garden. A shared drive gives access to this and the adjoining garage.
The Proposal
Permission is sought to renew application 28488B/90/1498 which was previously granted as an initial temporary consent for 5 years in 1991 and extended for a further two years in 1996 (Ref. 28488C/96/138). All aspects of the use have remained unchanged since it commenced at this address and conditions controlling parking, noise, hours of operation, deliveries/collections and retailing have been in place since. The use involves a domestic garage which has been converted by installation of an automated sewing machine for the applicants’ embroidery business.
Relevant Site History
None, apart from temporary permissions for business use referred to above.
Planning Standards and Policies
Central Hillingdon Local Plan Policies E5, E7, E9 and UL21 Unitary Development Plan Policies LE8, OE1.
Main Planning Issues
The main issues relating to this proposal are the principal of a commercial activity taking place in a residential area together with its possible impact on nearby residents.
Having granted temporary permissions for this use in the past the Council are in the position whereby granting a permanent permission would still be inappropriate and could set a precedent whereas a further temporary permission for more than one or two years could imply that it was acceptable. There is certainly no need to assess the use further for its impact on residents as this has been already done over a 7 years period.
The applicant has indicated that the use is now very low key, down to 2 days a week at times and there have been no complaints about noise (or any other aspects) since it started nor objections or any other comments made at the time of this current renewal being sought. The high rentals of other premises and lack of orders due to competition are cited by the applicant as reasons for not having re-located the business.
If the use were to continue on a personal basis, with no other employees this would effectively prevent establishment of a permanent business premises at the address transferring to the next owner of the property in the future.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 61 Given the apparent scaling down of orders being taken by the applicant a slight reduction in the permitted hours to between 0900 to 1700 hours Mondays to Fridays is considered appropriate at this time to prevent intensification in what is still predominantly a residential location.
There is no direct conflict with national policy guidance (PPG4 - Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms 1992) or Development Plan Policies which seek to prevent commercial activities from being located where these would cause detriment to the character or amenities of the adjoining properties or area generally but do not rule out residential areas completely.
Policy LE8 of the UDP regards small scale activities as acceptable in principal whilst Policies UL21 (Central Hillingdon LP) and OE1 (UDP) indicate the criteria by which non-residential uses are assessed. In terms of storage of goods, traffic generation and noise, which with the garage door closed is barely audible within the garden of No. 35, the existing use is quite acceptable at present and it would be difficult to reason why it could not be continued with the controls on operation in place.
Public Consultation
No comments have been received relating to this latest renewal application.
Conclusion
It is considered that permission should be granted for a further two years with hours reduced to (max.) 40 per week (from 47½) and the applicant being informed that any continuation beyond that date would need to be justified in terms of scale and hours of operation.
Background Documents
The background documents used in the preparation of this report are those numbered below from the comprehensive list included at the end of the agenda:-
5, and draft UDP as proposed to be modified.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 62 CONTACT OFFICER: JON FINNEY EXTENSION: 3536
13. CONSERVATION AREA REVIEWS
(1) SUMMARY
Under Section 69 of the Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act, local authorities have a duty to periodically review Conservation Areas and their boundaries. This report seeks member’s support for consultation over the Uxbridge, Greenway, Cowley Church, Cowley Lock and Hillingdon Conservation Area reviews. Consultation over Conservation Areas situated in the North of the borough has already been authorised and is underway.
(2) RECOMMENDATION
That a public consultation exercise over the Uxbridge, Cowley Church, Cowley Lock, Greenway and Hillingdon Conservation Areas be authorised and a report then be submitted to the main Environment Committee in relation to any alterations considered appropriate.
(3) BACKGROUND
Over the past year, each of the Borough’s 25 Conservation Areas has been analysed in order to further clarify their ‘special architectural and historic interest’ and highlight key problems and issues to be resolved. Appendices A and B are extracts taken from the agreed minutes of the Conservation Councils which outline the findings of each individual review. The results of these reviews have been discussed in detail and agreed by both English Heritage and the Conservation Council.
The next stage of the review process is to assess local support for any changes. This is in line with Planning Policy Guidance Note 15, which states:
“The greater public support that can be enlisted, the more likely it is that policies for the area will be implemented voluntarily and without the need for additional statutory controls.”
The public consultation process would involve the production of information leaflets explaining the purpose of the review and seeking comments from local residents and business people. Maps and background information will also be placed in a convenient location for public viewing. The initial consultation will be produced in-house and costs covered by our existing publications budget.
If members accept the recommendation, the results of consultation would be reported back to environment committee where changes will then be discussed and adopted if agreed.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 63 There will be another on-cost when full guidance notes are produced -following the report back to committee- and financial assistance will be sought from English Heritage to meet these publication costs. Details would be given to members with the report on public consultation.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 64 APPENDIX A
Exttractt ffrom tthe Miinuttes of the Conservation Council Meeting held on the 3rd September 1997 on "Spirit of Stockley"
5. Principal Architect/Planner's Report on the Canal Locks CAs
(1) Cowlley Lock
HISTORY CHARACTER
Jon Finney dealt with the history of the Canal under the next heading. With regard to the character of the Cowley Lock Conservation Area, he said that the designated area was centred around the Canal Lock with the road Bridge and group of Listed Buildings. The River Frays flows under the canal just north of the Lock which is therefore, at 11'1" one of the deepest. To the south, is the Recreation Ground; re-landscaped a few years ago.
Old Mill Lane forms an additional north-south axis for the area; from Iver Lane, passing a group of houses and then through more open land with the Old Mill House and Farm creating a pinch point.
To the south, the road has the Frays River on the left and is joined by an arc of the Colne on the right. The feeling is one of driving on a dyke across open water.
Huntsmoor Weir is a house on a spit of land, and the road soon has water on both sides again; this time the Frays to the left and Little Britain Lake to the right. The Lake is a Country Park and its natural attractiveness is the major contributor to the rural character of the area down to Packet Boat Lane.
On the eastern side of Old Mill Lane there are a series of buildings including "Quackers" (the night club), and round the corner into Packet Boat Lane are a series of low key buildings leading up to the Canal Bridge by the Turning Point with its attractive canal-side scene and setting.
The overall area is largely open space - much of it water - and the only good, concentrated group of buildings is around the lock itself although individual buildings do make a contribution.
BOUNDARY
The main consideration was to re-examine the southern extension taking in the Little Britain Park, and bounded by Packet Boat Lane. This extension was created in 1988 and the recent survey of the area confirmed that the designation was proper and reasonable.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 65 No change in the boundary was therefore recommended although the southern area around the Turning Point was examined in detail to see whether small extensions would be appropriate.
(A handout was distributed giving information about the Planning Brief for the BWB land that stretches down to the Slough Branch.)
BUILDINGS
In Packet Boat Lane, the Bridge carrying the road over the canal and the bridge carrying the towpath over the former dock opposite the Turning Point both contribute. The Turning Point is also important although the area to the north with a scattering of buildings is detrimental. Along the tow path is a mile-stone "10 miles to London".
The cottages/bungalows along Packet Boat Lane have a scale and reticence that contributes although buildings in the backland are detrimental. The bridge carrying the road over the River Frays is also unattractive but the end of the road with the lakeside and former crossing point of the Colne has a pleasant rural character.
Running northwards, Old Mill Lane is mainly described above. Just off the Packet Boat Lane junction, on the right, are a series of buildings including Lakeside, White Acres and buildings to the rear, and "Quackers", all of which are detrimental to the character.
Further along the road on the left beyond Little Britain Lake is Huntsmoor Weir, an attractive house contributing to the character of the Conservation Area. Beyond again is Old Mill Farm, New Gables and 4 Acres whose extensive buildings are unremarkable apart from a very good Barn on the road-side.
The Barn is opposite the Old Mill House which the DoE Listed Grade ll many years ago (1973) when it was in a "dilapidated condition,"
Its condition now is more dilapidated, even ruinous, but it is still a major contributor to the character of the area. The group of structures consists of the main house - this is a roofless shell although the front elevation retains an historic dignity: Between the house and the road is the Mill spanning the River Frays: On the west is a row of stables, much altered, and, from there, a driveway leads to a bridge over the canal to Benbow Way. Towards the junction with Iver Lane are, on the left, the Villa Magueritte which makes little contribution. Beyond it though is Clisby Lodge which is good and does contribute as does Riverdale opposite. On the corner, Ponderoso and its various outbuildings are detrimental.
Turning back up Iver Lane leads again to the moorings. Here there is a superb group around the Bridge (No. 188) and Lock (No. 89) structures; with Listed Buildings including the Shovel PH and Lockside Cottages. Some good new housing along the Frays River completes the scene.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 66 TREES AND LANDSCAPE
Given that most of the area was a Country park, it was not seen as appropriate to do a landscape analysis for the Conservation Area. The only point that was noted therefore was that trees were generally of importance and that several had been lost in the area of the Recreation Ground.
VIEWS AND PROPOSALS
Views generally are along the canal and are important in determining the character of each of the areas. This was the reason for the site visits by boat. The only views identified therefore are exceptional views usually away from the actual canal.
The Cowley Lock Conservation Area has important view- point from the bridge looking toward the Turning Point; along Packet Boat Lane, at the junction with Old Mill Road and at the south-western corner of the area. Along Old Mill Lane, there are viewpoints at the northern edge of Little Britain lake and just to the south of the Old Mill House. There is a good view from Iver Lane of the River Frays, and the view at the Lock is exceptional.
Policy initiatives involve the refurbishment of the Old Mill House and the development within its grounds and on the BWB land to the south of Packet Boat Lane.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 67 APPENDIX B
Extract from the minutes of Conservation Council Tuesday 14th October 1997.
(1) UXBRIIDGE CONSERVATIION AREA
History/Designation
Attention to the existing "Old Uxbridge Conservation Area Study". It was not proposed that this document be reprinted. The current review would produce a report/analysis of each Conservation Area explaining the designation, amending boundaries where necessary and noting features contributing to the character. Each area should end up with a specific leaflet such as the one produced for The Greenway. In the case of Uxbridge, the analysis may be in the form of an addendum sheet to the existing Study.
The History itself is set out at some length in the Study but needed some amendment in line with what is seen as a three stage development as follows:
1. It is possible that the original settlement at Uxbridge was by the River, on the County boundary between Denham and Hillingdon. It is of interest that those two were the Parish centres, remaining so until Victorian times. Uxbridge may thus be best represented by the Mills at Willowbank outside the Borough.
2. The town (already existing) got its market Charter as long ago as 1180; Gilbert Bassett being the Lord of the Manor. It is likely that the original or early market was in Windsor Street which has the traditional form of a road winding up the hill to the Church at the top. The pattern becomes more clear if one remembers that the Guild Chapel was a later, albeit overwhelming addition to the mediaeval church and that the buildings by the former Metropolitan PH. are later infills.
3. The High Street might have been developed later, on the open field with its narrow strips. The pattern of development suggests this, and supports the theory of a "Mediaeval Milton Keynes" built because of the success of the market and because of the strategic location of the town on the coaching route from London to Oxford. Two important points about the High Street are that it depends upon the importance of Oxford and the road to it which may not have been as great in 1180 as it would be at the beginning of the next century. The second point is that the new route killed off Denham as a Market Town; the route by-passing the village.
Uxbridge was designated in 1973, extended in 1976 to include the Station and north end of High Street; in 1982 to include some of the south end of the High Street and in 1990 to include Vine Street and the other side of the south end of the High Street.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 68 Character/Appearance
To that broad outline of a history must be added the development of the town leading to its present character. The town developed very strongly as a Market Town but then stood still unchanged by the railways which passed to the north and south of the town. Although branch lines were provided, and the underground link meant that the town had 3 stations, it was not until the growth of suburbia that the Uxbridge again began to expand.
The major alterations to Uxbridge have occurred in this century with many office blocks built in the "Strategic Centre" (GLDP). Many people consider that the town was ruined during this period and certainly from the outside it is peculiarly unattractive. From the "inside" however; walking down the High Street or Windsor Street a very different picture emerges.
Windsor Street particularly retains an historic character and interest which is quite remarkably complete. High Street is also a road of pleasant scale and character (see Buildings below) except where the Block 1 (Pavilions) Blocks crash up against the back of the footpath. Since then, lessons have been learnt later development, extensive as it has been, has been behind existing frontages, retaining the street-scene.
The Central Area by the Station has the only major space in an otherwise linear place. The disparate but excellent buildings are described below but the recent re-paving and landscaping works have created improvements to match the earlier alterations to the Market House which recessed the shop units restoring its historic character.
The High Street (south) has an unfortunate and soon to be replaced pedestrianisation scheme but is generally of good quality as far as Vine Street. Beyond, there are many gaps in the streetscape and the whole of the east side will be affected by the Block 6/7 developments (see below).
The High Street (north) is very under-rated and, again on the east side, has a superb row of buildings. The sort of thing expected more in places such as Evesham or Pershore. Uxbridge lacks that sort of ambience and the individual buildings tend to be overlooked (literally and metaphorically).
Recent road schemes with bus bays have not helped.
Boundary
Generally the boundary has evolved and is acceptable in terms of the town today. There are some changes being suggested and these are dealt with under the survey of Buildings as set out below:
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 69 Buildings
As stated the buildings were generally described and this Minute contains a more detailed analysis following the same order. From the north (on the left) at the corner of Harefield Road:
118 Mid 18th C. brick front. 17th C. structure. 2 storey with basement and attic. 5 windows on a grand scale. Brown brick, red brick dressings. Good 18th C. Door and Doorcase. Garden wall to rear, also listed though now much rebuilt. 119 Mid 18th C. red brick front with parapet concealing older timber frame building. 2 storeys; high tiled roof, inside beams and a small inglenook. 120 Early 19th C. building of 3 storeys. 4 windows. Painted brick. Low slate roof. Reproduction oriel bay shopfront windows. 122 beyond alleyway, 18th C. front, may be older structure behind. Two storeys and attic, 4 bays, tiled mansard roof. One blocked window. 123 18th C. again possibly concealing earlier structure. 2 storeys and attic. 3 windows. High pitched tiled roof with later hipped dormer. (118-120 ARE NOTED FOR GROUP VALUE AS ARE 122-123) 124-5 MacDonalds - a comparatively modest modern building with curtain wall front. Marked as detrimental because it breaks such an superb street frontage. By the side of MacDonalds is Beasleys Yard leading to Watttts Hallll; Original Chapel of 1716; schoolroom added in 1828. major alterations 1883 when Entrance Tower was added. Brick with slated roof. Much brickwork rendered. Building now 4 bays. Old brickwork and windows to north walls. Tower square with pyramidal roof. Plaque: ”OLD MEETING CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH BUILT 1716 REBUILT 1883". - recently restored after fire. 126//126a back on the High Street. Early-mid 19th C. 3 storey building. 3 windows. Hipped slate roof partly concealed behind parapet of stuccoed facade. Good central door with 19th C. shop fronts now with reproduction Georgian bow shop windows. 127 One of a c1700 pair of buildings. 2 storeys and attic. 5 windows in all. High pitched tiled roofs with two dormers. Moulded and dentilled eaves cornice. Brown brick front with red brick dressings. 3 windows, 2 of normal width one very narrow, all with flat brick gauged arches. 128 the other of the c1700 pair of buildings. 2 storeys and attic. 5 windows in all. Painted brick front with diagonal brick cornice. Modern replacement windows. 129 has early 19th C. front of 3 storeys. 2 windows. Yellow stock brick with stone coping to parapet. 130-131 Late 18th C. front of 3 storeys. 5 windows (including the left hand bay of 132). Pinkish brick, stone coping to parapet. High pitched roof behind. 132-133 The two right hand bays share with 133 a 2 storey 18th C. front of pinkish brick with red brick gauged arches. Old tiled roof hipped at the left. Crosses over Johnsons Yard with wallll adjjoiiniing 134 c1700; tall and in red brick.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 70 134-135 Imposing early-mid 18th C. house of 2 storeys. 5 windows. Double span high pitched tiled roof with end stacks. Early 19th C. central canted bay through 2 storeys with wood cornice to match the brick one exactly 136 The Crown and Sceptre PH. - much altered but historic pub. Has timber frame (a range at right angles to the street) with some external timbering visible on the south gable. 137-138 This single storey building is a non-contributor but has not been marked as detrimental because it does no positive harm. This is a finely balanced argument and may need to be reconsidered with adjoining buildings. 139/140 Detracts because it is such a gap building, single storey and of no architectural merit where some quality is required. It is therefore marked as detrimental. Bennetttts Yard and Wallll are part of the old historic layout of the town and parts of the wall are historic in their own right (17th C. or earlier.) The detrimental building at the back but should be included. 141/142 The Old Bank is a contributor particularly because it is on the corner of Belmont Road but the newer extensions detract and the "building" is in fact a facade only. The White Horse is good and contributes to the character as does the outbuilding which abuts the Bennetts Yard Wall. On the other side of the High Street are 66 The Cedars, and 64 - Old Bank House both are Listed major contributors to the street-scene The Cedars is 18th C.red brick, 3 storeys. 5 windows, good central doorway with fanlight. Old tiled roof, Dutch gables to end elevations. Recently converted to residential, building has odd plan form with re-entrant corner on the northern corner. Old Bank House is 18th C., a substantial and impressive building. It is also carefully designed with red brick quoins; rusticated stucco to the ground floor and good central door. Of 3 storeys it has 5 windows with similar 2 storey w.wing of 2 windows. Slate roof behind parapet. 65 Sandwiched between 66 and 64 is 65 which is of poor design and, because it detracts from the setting of the important Listed Buildings, is considered detrimental to the character of the C.A. 63 is a more sensitive building and, while not making a major contribution does not detract CP Alongside is the massive slab of the Cedars car park. It is suggested that the Conservation Area boundary be extended up to the face of this building so that the trees, landscaping and paved area in front will fall within the designated area. The boundary would step back at the entrance to Chequers Square and return along the centre line of Belmont Road. At the centre of the town is a "focal group" of Listed Buildings; all very different Uxbriidge Underground Sttattiion The LUL Underground Station 1937 was designed by Charles Holden of Adams Holden and Pearson with L H Bucknell. Inside there is a magnificent concrete structure with "nave" and "side aisles" giving clerestorey light to the centre, roof lights to the side. There is a stained glass window by Erwin Bossanyi at the Ticket Hall end. All very reminiscent of and inspired by the work of Behrens and Dudok in Holland.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 71 The frontage is a wide crescent of brickwork with continuous bands of windows at 1st floor level and shopfronts below. A dramatic break over the entrance has symbolic sculptures by Joseph Armitage in the form of reversed carriage springs to emphasise the axis which is cleverly twisted from the High Street line to the Platform alignment. There is a good freestanding totem sign. The Markett House opposite the Station, dates from 1788 and is by Thomas Niell. Described in Pevsner as "a stately composition. 11 bays, the centre taller, with a pediment and clock turret behind; three arched windows to the brick upper floor. The ground floor now has shops which since a restoration of 1986 have been tactfully recessed behind the original wooden Tuscan columns." The upper floors were originally used as a grain store and charity school; the ground floor being completely open. The back wall is cranked as the building squeezes past the Church. Stt.. Margarett''s Church is tucked behind the Market house, at the top of Windsor Street. Mainly 15th C. (Nave and north aisle), though the tower may be older. Guild Chapel 1443. North Chancel, early 16th C. Crown post roofs over nave and chancel. Hammerbeam over south "aisle". Much altered in the re-ordering of 1985-8 which introduced an ingenious lantern over the nave. Though not a parish church till the Victorian era, St.Margaret's is one of the more important late Mediaeval buildings in the Borough. 3x K6 Tellephone Kiiosks should also be mentioned. They have been moved from one side of the forecourt to the other to enable the development of the Block 6/7 scheme. The re-paving works, with new street furniture and tree planting have considerably enhanced this important space. Many years have passed since Ian Nairn wrote his book about London in 1966. We now design pedestrianised areas in a way that reflects their traditional function as streets. Nevertheless we have gone a long way towards Nairn's realisation that: "if the through traffic were taken out, the High Street could be closed and paved across to the Underground terminus: a centre of some power would (then) be created." Windsor Street, going down the road has on the left: The dramatic entrance to Charter Place. A glimpse view of a good modern building and a difference of scale that creates a sort of frisson. A positive Urban Design feature benefiting both modern and historic buildings. 4 Although this is part of the infill group, this is the start of the street proper. 19th C. 3 storey building. 3 windows and rounded angle to one further window. Painted brick with low parapet. Modern shop fronts. Site of earlier Inn. 4 Around the corner, the other part of this composite building is a 2 storey, 3 bay irregular composition; probably timber framed and of 17th C. origin but altered. High pitched roof.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 72 5/5A/5B Probably 17th C. timber framed buildings, re-fronted in the early 19th C.2 storeys, 3 bays. Slated roof, brick front, modern shopfronts. 6/7 Late 17th-early 18th C. appearance. 2 storey and attic. Slated mansard roof with 3 dormers. 20th C. shopfronts. Nos. 4-7 are Locally Listed and form a Group. 8 A Victorian building which, while not Listed, is a contributor to the streetscene. 2 storey, brick built, it has an important splayed corner facing southwards down the street. This is the last of the infill group. 10 is now part of the Metropolitan PH (Scruffy Murphy's). It is 2 storey with 3 windows. Listed as late 17th or early 18th C. but probably earlier timber frame building with Lobby entry plan; the entry leading off a yard spanned over at 1st Floor level. The building is refronted with mock timbering and gabled windows. 11//12 2 storeys, 3 windows with tiled roof. 17th C. or early 18th C. date. Tiled roof with yellow brick front and altered shopfront. 13//14 17th C. or earlier timber frame building. Front now plastered and roof renewed. Modern bow shop front at ground floor. 15 Early - mid 19th C. building of yellow brick. 3 storeys, 2 windows. Hipped slate roof with wide eaves and painted brackets. Sash windows with side lights. 19th C. shop front. 16//16A Probably 17th C. Timber frame building but altered, and 2 storey and attic. 3 window. Old gabled rear extension. 17//17A Modernised but retaining internal/external interest. 18 17th C. or earlier timber frame building. 2 storeys and 19 attic. Very grand, 7 bay elevation with 3-bay centre and projection under pediment. Painted brick front. 20 Dentil cornices at eave and pediment. 21//21A Probably 17th C. timber frame house of 2 storeys, 4 windows. High pitched roof renewed with modern pantiles. 19th C. sash windows. Infilled yard at left with a carriageway at right leading back past new extensions to service road at rear. 22/23 18th C. with alterations. 2 storey and attic, 4 windows. painted brick. 2 canted oriels at left had side. Timber framed and clad outbuilding to right fronting onto Cross Street. A contributor to the street scene Opposite is the former PO and 36/37/38 The original corner piece now restored is described by Pevsner as Edwardian baroque. it is in what is known as the "Wrenaissance" style. The Sorting Office in a sort of starkly debased Georgian style has been demolished and replaced by Offices with elevations in keeping with the retained section. The Windsor Street part has been similarly treated and the two K6 Tellephone kiiosks have been retained. The whole (rebuilt and restored) is a major contributor to the character of the area at this important corner site. 39//40 represent a dramatic change of scale. Probably 16th C. timber framed, of 2 storeys, 3 windows. Very high pitched tiled roof. Painted brick front only just reaching 1st floor cill level on the PO building. 41//42 Early 17th C. house of 2 storeys and attic with tiled gambrel roof renewed with 3 dormers. Wood dentil course. 3 windows. 1st Floor roughcast with mock half- timbering. 43//44//45 Row of 18th C. cottages with 19th C. brick fronts
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 73 according to list description. More probably timber framed and a century earlier judging from the roof construction. 2 storey and attic. 7 windows in total. Mansard roof with modern dormers. 49 Old Police Station. 1871. A stately Victorian palazzo design with arched windows and pronounced key stones. Of yellow stock brick and grey slate roof, the building has been renovated with Conservatory extensions to form the "Old Bill PH". A major contributor to the street. 50 Beyond the yard, an early 19th C. building of 3 storeys with 2 windows. Yellow stock brick with stone cornice and blocking course. Gauged flat brick arches to 2nd floor windows (renewed) and console bracketed cornices to 1st floor. 51 17th C. or earlier timber framed range of buildings each 52//52A 2 storeys, 1 window. High pitched roof. Shop fronts and mainly 19th C. 1st floor windows all normal sash except 53 which has horizontal sliding sash. 54 "The Queens Head PH".. Listed as early - mid 19th C. building but, almost certainly earlier. 5 bays, left hand side being old carriageway. Tiled roof. Re-fronted with strangely over-sized Georgian sash windows. The building faces onto the tower of St.Margaret's Church. Bank The Nat West Bank that, because of its poor design in such an important environment is detrimental. At the moment the boundary cuts arbitrarily through the Bank and across to Bakers Yard. In recognition of the importance of the High Street and the historic group of buildings at the centre of the town, it is proposed that the boundary be adjusted to take in the Bank - detrimental though it may be - and then run along the face of the building - taking in (and bringing under control) the main entrance to the pavilions - before crossing to the frontages (157/158) on the other side. This would allow for the landscaped area from which there are important views to be included within the designated area. The southern stretch of the High Street, moving away from the central group has on the left, next to the Station, Nash's Yard and 175/176 spanning across the Alleyway onto the Flank Wall of the Station Forecourt includes the re-faced (and largely rebuilt) 19th C. building formerly the "Eagle and Child" Coaching Inn originating in the 17th/18th C. These structures are to be demolished to form the access to the Block 6/7 Shopping Centre development. They are respectively a Listed Wall and Locally Listed Building but have been omitted from this Survey because of the decision to demolish. 178 is an early 19th C. building. 3 storeys. Yellow stock brick. Pitched roof with slates behind the parapet wall. Several extensions to the rear all of which will be lost in the Block 6/7 development. 19th C. section of the building immediately behind frontage block will also be lost. 179 again early 19th C. but with gate and ceiling timbers to the passage to Attwell's Yard dating from early 18th C.; using 15th C. timbers. The building is of 3 bays with the yard to the left. Granite settes running back from the High Street.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 74 180/181 A 1960s addition to the street scene, and one of very particular clumsiness. A former "super-market", the horizontality of the building and the obtrusive canopy are totally alien to the character of the area. The building is especially detrimental as the rest of the street scene is of a high standard. 182 Early 19th C. building of yellow stock bricks. 3 bays. Gabled roof to main range, mansard to rear. Good internal fittings now mostly lost. 183 Early 19th C. building of yellow stock brick with rendered quoins. Venetian windows to 1st floor. Back range may have earlier origins. Again good internal fittings now mostly lost. 184/185 Reconstructed pair of buildings with simple frontage and central passage way. Sash windows in arched openings. Not a major contributor but not detrimental. 186 Mid 19th C. yellow stock brick building. Hipped roof behind parapet. The corner with George Street is rendered, and marks the eastern boundary of Old Uxbridge. Nos.. 175,, 178 and 179.. 182 and 183,, and 186 are Localllly Liistted Buiilldiings and conttriibutte tto tthe charactter off tthe Conservattiion Area.. 187/191 Beyond George Street, is another recent building that consists of the former Sainsbury's Store and the George Street multi-storey Car Park to the rear. Although of a different scale the building is of traditional materials and the upper floor is within a mansard. It is not therefore considered detrimental although it will be demolished as part of the Block 6/7 development 192 19th C. - 2 story plus attic. Red brick with tiled mansard. 3 windows with an ornate central panel at 1st floor level. Modern shopfront. 193/194 19th C. - 2 storey plus attic. Red brick with tiled mansard. Recently refurbished. 3 windows. 2 shop units at Ground Floor level. These ttwo buiilldiings are llocalllly Liistted and conttriibutte.. 195-7 are 20th c. buildings of no merit and, in terms of the street scene are detrimental. 198 Although this building, which was formerly a Bank is less featureless, it still does not contribute and, at this important position, is considered detrimental. 199-201 This run of buildings are featureless and without merit. They complete a detrimental run of buildings (195-201). 202-205 The former Perrings Store. 2 storey with recessed shop fronts creating a colonnade. Left hand side brought forward with pyramidal roof to create feature. A contributor to the street scene and currently the last building in the Conservation Area. 206-211 Flat roofed, two storey run of modern buildings; without merit and detrimental. 213 Grade ll Listed Building set back from the High Street. Recently demolished. 214-215 Former Garage; not contributing to the street scene and considered detrimental. Allll tthe buiilldiings ffrom 195 tto 215 are tto be demolliished as partt off tthe Bllock 6//7 devellopmentt.. 219-221 Two storey building with tiled roof and dormers to attic. 4 bays with 2 doors and bracketed canopies. Vertical sliding sash windows in gauged brick arch openings. There is little to give the game away, but this is mainly an historical reconstruction of a Listed Building. Large extension to the rear.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 75 222 Set back from the High Street, a three storey 5 bay brick house built in 1832-3. Slate roofs behind parapet. The building has a dignity and presence despite its current surroundings. Alongside, Chippendale Alley runs from the High Street up to the back line of the Burgage Plots. The alley also marks the limit of the new Shopping Centre development. The Conservation Area boundary will have to be adjusted to take account of this major re-construction and it is suggested that the boundary should cross Nash's Yard and follow the line of the new development round to George Street; returning to the rotunda feature; including Store 3; and then running along the back of the Service Area r/o and the proposed new retail/residential block, possibly cutting across the Department Store before returning round the edge of the Store/Cinema Building and Car Park coming back down Chippendale Alley - thus including the Listed Buildings, the re- erected Burge and Gall Timbers and the open Courtyard Space opposite the Civic Centre. It is also suggested that the modern Office Blocks adjoining the Civic Centre be included within the designated area as they mark, reasonably successfully, the start of the street beyond the open space of the forecourt. 273 Next to the Offices but separated by a carriageway, is a Locally Listed Building. Early 19th C. of two storeys and attic. Slate roof. Stock brick. The ground floor is rendered with a modern shopfront which explains why the building is not Listed though it does contribute. 274 adjoining, is Listed. It is an 18th C. house of 3 storeys. 3 windows. Pitched tiled roof. Stuccoed front with parapet. 275 is again 3 storeys, of stock brick and, while not listed as a contributor, does not detract. 276-7 The New Arcade is of interest but not architectural merit. It does not though detract from the street scene. 278 is an 18th C. building of 3 storeys. 2 windows. Stuccoed front with incised lines and stone coped parapet. There is a passageway on the right. An important buildings; it is Locally Listed. 279-280 are an early-mid 18th C, house of two storeys and attic. 2 windows. Hipped slated gambrel roof with central chimney and 2 dormers. Canted bay windows to 1st floor Again an important building and Locally Listed. 281 continue the scale of 2 storey, stock brick buildings 282/3 with slated roofs - up to the junction with Vine Street. This group of buildings contribute to the character. At the corner, No. 1 Vine Street cuts into the smaller traditional buildings. The building is a large rather plain composition of 3 storeys - in the neo-Georgian style, it is a not unsuccessful attempt to create an impressive facade. Alongside is 3-5 Vine Street, a less impressive but equally recent building spanning over a carriageway to a yard at the rear. Not a contributor though it does not detract. In contrast, Randalls Store is a tour de force of Art Deco. Designed in 1937-8 by W L Eves, it features, in Pevsner's words "streamlined cream faience with a vertical feature with flagstaff and elegant original lettering." It is a major contributor to the street scene and character of the Conservation Area. The corner section of Randalls, by Cricketfield Road is later and not of the same quality though, round the corner, are the triple gables of the old fire station of stock brickwork and slated roof.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 76 Back on the High Street opposite No. 1 Vine Street is the Royal Bank of Scotland. 1987, it is described by Pevsner as a "clumsy post-modern pastiche: triple gables and porthole windows." The building is certainly too large for this traditional High Street corner and the way it is detailed does little to break down the scale in a sensitive manner. Nevertheless the use of traditional materials just saves the building from condemnation in terms of the character of the Conservation Area. 5-6 Next door to the Royal Bank of Scotland, is a 3 storey stock brick building known as "Nottingham House". It has red brick dressings and a curious blank parapet feature with red brick decorative balustrade. A building of interest contributing to the street- scene 7/8/9 A tall, 4 storey building, again in stock bricks with red brick dressings. Ground floor shop fronts above which oriel windows are carried up through 1st and 2nd floor. The top floor is in the attic lit by high dormers with semi-circular heads and shell decoration. A building of some grandeur contributing to the character. 10-11 c1800, a building of 3 storeys, 3 windows. Stock brick with stone-coped parapet concealing low pitched slate roof. Sash windows, gauge brick arches. Carriageway and 19th C. shopfronts. 12-15 1985-7, by Frederick Gibberd, Coombes and Partners. Described by Pevsner as: "a deceptively unassuming gabled frontage of dark brick, distinguished from the neighbouring shops by oddly shaped windows." The building is a positive contributor being a well designed modern building in traditional materials; the mass broken down by the clever use of gables. To the rear, and part of the same development all built as part of the Charter Place complex is the main bulk of the Library building - around an atrium - alongside the Entertainment Building. These structures front the service road and Vine Street, the latter building facing Randalls Store (see above). The buildings are again of red brick, with corbelled gables giving a dramatic castle-like appearance. As with the Library, the buildings are considered to be of good modern design contributing to the character of the Conservation Area. The line of the Conservation Area boundary follows the sweep of the Charter Place service road, crossing into Cricketfield Road to take in Randalls and outbuildings to the rear. This line may need some amendment to take account of the scheme "as built" but is otherwise fairly logical and no major changes are suggested unlike the changes proposed on the other side of the High Street.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 77 Charter Place itself is a well designed 4 storey modern Office Block, by the same Architects as the Library and Entertainment Building. With a dramatic white frame, dark windows and spandrels together with a varied roof scape (barrel vaults to the atrium like entrances and pyramidal plant room enclosures), it contributes to the character of the town generally but is not seen as part of the Conservation Area which is based on the linear street scenes of the High Street and Windsor Street. There is a good view from Windsor Street along the service road terminated by the dramatic bulk of the Library and Entertainment Building. The description of the High Street frontage buildings is continued on the next page. 16-17 A plain but dignified Georgian building of 3 storeys. Stock brick, sash windows and slated roof. The building Contributes positively to the street-scene. 18 Early 19th C. of 3 storeys, 3 windows. Yellow stock brick with stone coped parapet. Sash windows and gauged brick arches. A major contributor to the character. 19 2 storey, 3 windows. 18th C. cottage to the rear of No. 18. Pinkish brick with dentil course. Largely rebuilt with coarse architectural details. Contributes in terms of street- scene despite loss of historic interest. 20 Timber framed building, probably 16th C, altered in the 17th C. and again in modern times. 2 storey, 3 windows. Old hipped tiled roof extending at left, at a lower level above carriageway. 3 gables continuously jettied over 1st floor oriel bay windows. Modern, well designed shop fronts. Plenty of exposed timber inside. An important historic building contributing positively. 24 The Three Tuns PH is probably a 16th C., timber framed building with 17th C. part to the rear. Front wall rendered with mock half-timbering to 1st floor. At right a carriageway has stout old timbers including a hollow chamfered beam. Again, an historically important building making a major contribution. 25-27 An imposing mid 19th C. building of 4 storeys, 6 windows. Yellow brick with stucco dressings including 3rd floor cill band and entablature with blocking course. Pediment over slightly projecting 2 bay centre. Sash windows with margin lights; those on the 1st floor having console bracketed cornices and the two central ones having pediments. A very grand building of major importance to the character of the Conservation Area. 28 Mid 19th C. building of 3 storeys, 2 windows. Rusticated quoins and banded rusticated stucco ground floor with set back centre divided by attached paired Doric columns. Ornamental surround to door at left may be later.
The building is on the corner of Windsor Street and brings us back to the central group around the Market House and Church.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 78 Trees/Landscape
Mainly hard landscape but street trees are important and other areas are mentioned above. The good landscaping to the Civic Centre should set the standard for other Town Centre development
Views/ Policy
Basically the views are along the roads and down alleyways - the mediaeval yards of the burgage plot layout shown on Trumpers Map
Particular views of the Church and other buildings at the centre were identified. It was noted that the curve of the High Street gives important views all the way along the road.
These viewpoints were shown on the map displayed at the meeting. In terms of Policy, the Conservation Area Study sets out a list of Policies and Proposals which will have to be updated. It is suggested that an addendum sheet be prepared for the Study :
Proposal 1: Alterations to the boundary. Implemented as shown in the Study. Further changes now suggested. Policy 1: Demolitions. re-word sub-para (iii) in line with UDP Policy 2: New buildings. Delete ref to traditional materials Policy 3: Alterations/Extensions. Add "normally" to Line 1 Policy 4: Windsor St. Restrict on new building. Retain as is. Policy 5: Central Space. Development. Delete last sentence; include street furniture Policy 6: High Street. New development. Retain as is. Policy 7: r/o Windsor St/High St. Proposals must enhance. Retain as is Policy 8: General improvements to elevations. Retain as is. Proposal 2: Pedestrianise Windsor Street - retain as is Proposal 3: Design Strategy High St/Windsor St Pedestrianisation This needs to be done urgently in the light of proposals for Piccadilly Centre. See SAL scheme. Need also to resolve problems with Engineers. Policy 9: Rear access must be maintained. Retain as is. Policy 10: Provision of rear access. Retain as is. Policy 11: Preserve and Enhance Yards. Retain as is. PRIORITY Proposal 4: Advertisements. Retain as is. Special Character? Policy 12: Replacement Shopfronts - not if good - retain as is Policy 13: Features of Policy 14: New Shopfronts: Policy 15: New Advertisements Policy 16: Windsor Street - traditional signs - Policy 17: No internally illuminated signs. Retain as is. Proposal 5: Enforcement. Retain as is
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 79 Policy 18: c of u in Windsor Street. Retain as is Site specific policy/proposals Policy 19: Old Post Office, Windsor Street. Delete because: Policy 20: Development completed in accordance with Policy Policy 21: ditto Proposal 6: 45-48 Windsor Street. Delete if paving can be Policy 22: secured. Taxi firm. Otherwise issue Planning Brief. Policy 23: Old Police Station, Windsor St. Delete, work done. Policy 24: 137-140 High Street - Retain as Planning Brief. Proposal 7: Delete - include in Planning Brief (above) Policy 25: 132-133 High Street and Johnsons Yard. Re-phrase and re-issue as a Planning Brief. Policy 26: The Cedars, High St. Delete but leave landscaping Policy 27: 178/179 High Street. Delete. Part of Block 6/7. Revise Schedule accordingly. Appendix A/B/C/D/E/F/G can be omitted. New List will cover E, F should refer to the UDP and G should be a new Planning Brief. New Leaflets on Conservation Area and possible separate ones on Advertisements and Shopfronts in Uxbridge
(2) HIILLIINGDON VIILLAGE CONSERVATIION AREA
History/Designation
Hillingdon is the fortified place on the hill and has the earth works to prove it. Its exact origin is however more complex. It could well have been a pre-historic encampment overlooking the swampy ground of the Pinn and Colne to the west and the Crane and Yeading Brook to the east. An argument has been made out for a Romano-British settlement on the basis of names connected to Kings or Chieftains. Certainly in Saxon times the hill top location would have been of importance controlling the crossing of the Colne, an important tribal boundary.
There is evidence of battles in the area as the Saxon Kings fought each other for territory and defended their own land against foreign invasion. By Norman times we know from the Doomsday Book that there is a Manor, Church and Village - with another Manor (Colham) also lying within the Parish. It is at this stage that the settlement pattern emerges with the Church at the north-west corner of the encampment and the cottages clustered around the Village Green.
The problem with all of this pre-history is that it depends on speculative evidence. It is entirely possibly that Coney Green and its earth-works relate to a mediaeval warren. Rabbits were kept and bred in vast "parks" in the middle ages to provide a ready source of fur and food, and the earth-works at Hillingdon are not unlike other, known Coney Greens attached to a major Manor House.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 80 The Manor at Hillingdon has been linked to the Bishops of Worcester from very early times. One of the first Lords of the Manor, Milo Crispin, held land in Oxfordshire and had dealings with the Abbots of Evesham.
The Bishops of Worcester continued to be responsible for the appointment of the Rector at Hillingdon throughout the middle ages when the Manor was held by the Charleton family. Throughout this time there was a Manor House, Rectory House (at one time identical) and a substantial House for the use of the Bishop of Worcester. This has been re-built but is still named Bishopshalt.
The Hillingdon Village Conservation Area was designated in 1972 and a major review took place in 1995 when large areas to the north-east were omitted having been developed for housing and, at the same time, a large area to the south was included taking in the grounds of Bishopshalt and the area known as the Grove.
These areas were described fully at the time of the review and only the briefest of comments is therefore made below about the boundary of the Conservation Area which will not change.
Character/Appearance
The village is grouped around a small triangular Village Green. Individual buildings are noted below but the group is somewhat spoilt by the dual carriageway; Uxbridge Road. Comparison between the present situation and old photographs of the village before the widening of the main road, dramatically illustrates its impact.
The road is a physical and visual barrier and separates out various buildings on the north from the village centre; the most important building being the Cedars. To the south and east of the Church - away from the Green - are, firstly the open space known as Coney Green with prominent earth works along the line of the road. Southwards in this area, is Bishopshalt with its grounds.
Again this is a building and open space of importance to the character of the area. Finally there is the Grove, a landscaped garden open to the public. These are the major elements of the tight-knit village around its Green.
Boundary
As stated above, the boundary was reviewed as recently as 19KK and there are therefore no proposals for further amendments.
Buildings
The main building in the Conservation Area and its focal point is the Pariish Church off Stt John tthe Bapttiistt. Nave and aisles 14th C. and, despite the restoration by Scott in the 19th C., "all of a piece". The Tower was re-built in 1629, and Scott added
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 81 Transepts and enlarged the Chancel. Chancel arch though is 13th C. Very good brasses (16th C.) and monuments (17th/18th C.) (See Illustrations in hand out from last meeting.)
Facing Church, across the Village Green on which stands a Listed K6 Tellephone Kiiosk is a good group of buildings including: The Red Liion PH.. on the corner with the main road. An historic building of considerable importance with a 16th C. core. White painted and extensive, a good corner building with bay windows. Charles 1 stopped here during his flight in April 1646.
Adjoining Cottttages are similar and Listed for group Value. Again probably early 16th C. building with 18th/19th C. "Tudor" front. 2 storeys, 3 windows - left bays with slightly projecting gables and Victorian gables. Exposed timbers inside.
The Cottttage Hottell, an obvious 16th C. lobby-entry type despite blocked entrance, and the addition of one bay to the left hand side. Now has four gables with a huge multi- stack chimney in the correct historic position. Timber frame visible inside.
All these buildings are important to the character of the Village and all contribute to the Conservation Area.
Elm Tree Cottage stops the view southwards. It also forms an important group with St Johns Church Hall and both buildings contribute positively to the character. They are Victorian, of brick with stone dressings and slate roofs, and contrast vividly with the traditional buildings around the Village Green. Between these buildings are two houses which are unexceptional but have an older wall to the road frontage and this is an important feature. The views northwards are noteworthy but the view down The Chantry is detrimental. Opposite is the entrance to Biishopshalltt lying south of the Church. Built in 1858, it is a many gabled building with red brick front relieved by stone strapwork. The interiors are very good; particularly the ceilings which were a speciality of the builder John Jackson. There is a beautiful Conservatory to the garden front. The building, its grounds and front gates all make a major contribution to the character of the area.
There were additions to the main building in 1957-61 and from the later 1970s onwards in connection with its use as a School. Some of the later buildings are in brick with traditional roofs, others are more utilitarian. While the earlier extensions are reasonably sympathetic and contribute, the later parts are reticent enough not to detract from the character of the area. Facing across Royal Lane onto the front lawn of Bishopshalt are two houses next to the Church Hall. Neither Glebe House or the Vicarage are particularly distinguished but neither really detract from the character. Beyond is the footpath leading south-west along the boundary of Tudor Cottage. From the footpath, there are important long views out to the south and west at the edge of the Conservation Area.
Tudor Cottage itself is a pleasant building but does not really contribute to the character because it is hidden from public view. The extensive grounds are important however simply because the open, undeveloped space is a major feature. At the bend in the
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 82 road is a driveway leading to The Grove, opposite which is a building compound edged by the tennis courts of Bishopshalt. This has a detrimental impact on the character.
On the corner of the driveway itself is a small white rendered Lodge that contributes. Further down is a house called Greensleaves that appears to have been extended to a point where it can be described as bland although the right hand wing has some interesting Gothic arched openings. The Grove itself was demolished some years ago and has been replaced by a modern block of flats. Well designed and of traditional materials, it does not intrude.
This is of particular importance because the area to the south is now a publicly accessible nature reserve. This was formerly the Victorian gardens of The Grove with ornamental ponds and good trees. The gardens contribute positively to the character of the Conservation Area and, additionally, have an historic interest; it being considered that the 19th C. layout was based on ancient fishponds possibly connected with Bishopshalt.
North of the dual carriageway on the corner of The Crossway is a quite reasonable block (Nos. 81-89) with half timbering. A new Office Building has been built behind and this is detrimental.
The next block is residential and is a very simple brickwork building with tiled roof. Two projecting entrances (Nos. 91-95 and Nos. 97-101) add to the simple dignity of the building which contributes to the character of the Conservation Area.
The next block (Nos. 103-107) is a good half-timbered inter-war building facing directly onto The Green. It too contributes to the character. There are shops with flats above, built in a quasi-Wealdon Hall style. The adjoining run of buildings (Nos. 109-119) is of a lesser quality but does not detract and The Vine PH on the corner of Vine Lane, is a positive contributor. A good inter-war design with prominent gabled dormers giving the right emphasis for this important corner site while the layout allows for views of the Cedar House.
This house, on the other corner of Vine lane, facing onto the Churchyard, is one of the most important historic buildings in the Conservation Area. Cedar House is a 16th C. Mansion Listed Grade ll*, c1580, of red brick, two storeys and attic. Sash windows under gauged brick arches . Central 2 storey projection. 3 gables with brick coping. Interiors have some good Jacobean panelling and beams.
Later rooms were attached to the south-west with mock timber to the elevations. To the rear, along Vine Lane, there is a modern office extension tactfully designed - a Civic Trust Award winner - beyond which is the converted Stable Block. To the east are two bungalows which are hardly noticeable as indeed is the well designed modern estate around Cedars and Buckingham Drive. On the line of the ancient trackway - Charville lane - though are a series of buildings which are important contributors to the Conservation Area despite the fact that they set back from the present road line.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 83 Gllentthorne is somewhat spoilt by the new development in its grounds. The house though is an 18th C. villa of 2 storey, 3 bays. Tiled roof with end chimneys. Brick now pebbledashed but dentil cornice shows. External louvered shutters to some windows.
Although altered, the building contributes to the character. Perryffiielld and Grenedehar form one building. Late 17th C. or earlier now divided into 2 houses. Main elevations altered in 18th and 19th C. Roughcast painted, with corner quoins. Two storey with scattered suggesting a complex building history.
The Fiirs and Acaciia House. An early 19th C. pair somewhat altered. Each is 2 storeys, 2 windows. Stucco with parapet fronts partly concealing hipped slated roofs.
Hiighffiielld Cottttage. Early 18th C. house possibly over earlier structure. Two storeys and loft. painted brick (rendered to the left ranges). Tiled roof. Magnolliia House,, tthe Laurells,, tthe Chesttnutts and Beech Cottttage. Formerly known as Highfield House, the property is now divided into four units. Brick in Flemish bond with gauged brick arches. Stucco scored to imitate ashlaring. Hipped roofs of slate. Main block of 3 storeys between Magnolia and Chestnut Houses.
Finally on the southern side of Uxbridge Road, the Pub on the corner of Harlington Road is The Prince of Wales PH. c1922 by Nowell Parr a noted Architect of the period. Not one of his more distinguished works but it holds the corner satisfactorily and, while not a contributor, it is a reasonable termination.
On the other corner is a group of modern, white rendered mono-pitch roofed houses. Somewhat out of character with their surroundings, they nevertheless have a character of their own which does not detract from the overall area.
Green Cottttage and Greensiide is 18th C. A 2 storey, 2 window central block is of stock brick with later parapet and hipped tiled roof. Greenside is the older block plus the right wing and the Cottage is the set back left wing. Slated roofs to wings. The group contributes to the character of the Conservation Area.
Green Cottage faces onto Coney Green which brings us full circle except to mention the prominent earthworks and the Pavilion and Lodge; undistinguished but reticent enough not to detract.
Trees/Landscape
Trees are important throughout the area particularly in relation to the open spaces, but also around the Church and Bishopshalt. The Cedar at Cedar House is of individual and special interest
The major spaces are of fundamental importance to the character of the Conservation Area. They include Coney Green, the Church- yard, the grounds of Bishopshalt and the gardens at The Grove.
Finally, there is The Village Green at the heart of the area.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 84 It is of importance both spatially and as a focal point.
Views/ Policy
Important views were marked on the maps and have been mentioned above. They are mainly of the Church and across the open spaces.
Views are identified along the Uxbridge Road, across Coney Green and within the Grove Nature Reserve. There are also important views of Bishopshalt and of the Cedar House.
Policies need to be directed at the maintenance and enhancement of landscaping of these open areas. Traffic management and landscaping is also needed to reduce the impact of the main road.
(3) THE GREENWAY CONSERVATIION AREA
There is already a leaflet for The Greenway published in c1993 and setting a pattern that I would like to repeat with regard to getting information to local residents (along with the general Conservation Areas leaflet). The fuller report/analysis would be available for a small charge. Straight from the leaflet: we can take in quotes:
History/Designation
"The character and buildings of the area have been influenced by its history.
"A map of 1754 shows the area to have been at that time part of a large stretch of land between Uxbridge and Cowley known as Cowley Field intersected by two lanes now called The Greenway and Cleveland Road.
"By the end of the eighteenth century brick making was taking place to the north of The Greenway and the public house known as the Cowley Brick was in existence.
"In 1853, the Royal Elthorne Light Infantry Militia was formed and a barracks built on the open land to the South of The Green- way. Married quarters for the militia men, known as Enfield Place, were also built off Villiers Street. (The first commanding officer of the Unit was Colonel the Hon F W Villiers). "A guidebook of 1860 refers to the 'new and beautiful suburb of Chiltern View' and the Ordnance survey map shows 13 houses in Chiltern View Road, 19 in The Greenway, 8 in Cleveland Road, 15 in Villiers Street and one in Elthorne Road. Norton Road was laid about this time.
"Building continued throughout the rest of the century. By 1900 there were 187 houses and The Greenway was a tree lined avenue and a respectable suburb of Uxbridge.
"At the start of the century orchard land was developed and laid out as King and Queens Road. Building work continued before and after the First World War, Norton Road being lengthened in 1933. This section of the road remains undeveloped.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 85 "During the Blitz in World War ll a bomb fell on the north west side of Chiltern View Road. This site is now occupied by the Rabbs Mill House development. The old militia barracks has been demolished and redeveloped as Enfield Close.
"The post war period has brought major changes to the area with the arrival of Brunel university and the increase of traffic both through The Greenway and adjacent to the area."
"The Greenway was designated a Conservation Area in 1975 ......
Character/Appearance
"The Greenway was designated a Conservation Area in 1975 because it has a distinctive character which is considered worthy of preservation. It is characterised by middle to late Victorian housing with a predominately rectangular grid street pattern. The use of yellow stock brickwork is almost universal and the similarity of window and roof treatments gives the area a feeling of architectural consistency. Many of the buildings are of historic merit and their original features should be retained.
"As well as ensuring that the area is preserved the designation also means that positive steps should be undertaken to improve and enhance the character of the area. This includes the restoration and face-lifting of buildings, removal of advertisements and unsightly clutter and planting of trees."
Boundary
The area takes in the grid of development very precisely. There has been discussion about the inclusion of an area of open space in the south-west corner, but the street- scene of the terraces and other buildings is encapsulated within the existing boundary.
Areas to the north, around Walford Road, were considered but are isolated and not appropriate for inclusion. No changes therefore are proposed to the boundary and the area would remain the same as that originally designated in 1975.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 86 Buildings
BUILDINGS ARE NOT INDIVIDUALLY DESCRIBED IN DETAIL SAVE WHERE THEY ARE OF EXCEPTIONAL CHARACTER. ALL BUILDINGS FALL INTO THE MID-LATE 19thC. TERRACE OR SEMI-DETACHED TYPE UNLESS OTHERWISE INDICATED.
All the buildings are described as part of the street-scene as this is what determines the character of the Conservation Area.
The description is lengthy, and is taken in the following order:
Chiltern View Road (east to west) Alexandra Road (north to south) The Greenway (east to west) Kings Road (north to south) Queens Road (east to west) Cowley Road (south to north) then Elthorne Road (north to south) Villier Street (west/east/west) (Enfield Close) (not applicable) Norton Road (west/east/west) Cleveland Road (south to north)
Chiillttern Viiew Road runs from east to west. Starting in the north-east corner: The Cowley Brick PH and Cottage. White rendered buildings, yellow stock brick still visible at rear, with slate roofs and prominent gables with mock timbering. An important corner building contributing to the character of the Conservation Area. The house to the rear faces onto Whitehall Road (No. 82). Yellow stock bricks; it has rendered side and rear elevations and a front plinth. Slate roofs. It contributes to the character.
In Chiltern View Road, the next 5 houses (beyond the vacant plot) are 2 sets of semi- detached and one detached house. Of unexceptional appearance, they do not detract. Built at a later date in brick with tiled roofs; the detached house having a large gable with mock timbering.
Beyond them Nos. 45/46 and Nos. 47/48 all contribute. Yellow stock brick, slate roofs and bay windows to the ground floor.
Opposite are Nos. 52/53 and Nos. 54/55, again contributing to the character. Of yellow stock brick with red brick dressings and gothic arches to front porches. Slate roofs (No. 55 re-roofed.)
Then there are Nos. 56/57, Nos. 58/59 and Nos.60/61 all very good. Yellow stock bricks, slate roofs. White painted stone quoins to windows and corners. (Nos. 60-61 re- roofed).
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 87 Nos. 62/63 also contribute. Again yellow stock brick, red brick dressings, square bays to ground floor with curved brick arches to paired windows. Slate roofs.
Nos. 64/65 is a larger pair of houses with rendered gables and square bay windows. Yellow stock brick, red brick dressings, tiled roofs.
Nos. 66/67 are the same as Nos.62/63 although No.67 has been re-roofed. All these buildings are important contributors, and this row of buildings leads up to the junction with Alexandra Road. On the right hand side of Chiltern View Road is another superb group.
Burr Hall and its extension. Originally a Chapel, Burr hall is built of the local burr or seconds (reject) bricks. They give an appearance of flints with stock brick dressings needed at door and window openings. The conversion to Offices involved a modern but reasonably well-designed and reticent extension. The whole complex is important and contributes to its character.
Nos. 33-44 is a two storey terrace built on lower ground; probably the site of a former brickyard. Yellow stock brick and slate roofs, they are, despite alterations, buildings of interest and character, and contribute.
Then No. 31/32/33 is a tall, gaunt house (4 storeys in total) of burr bricks, under a steep ornamentally tiled roof. It balances the converted Hall and forms a very good group of important buildings in the context of the Conservation Area.
Nos. 29/30 is a new building of bricks and tiled roof. It attempts, but fails to be sympathetic to the adjoining house. It has been noted as detrimental because of its impact on the next house and because it terminates the view up Alexandra Road.
27/28. Pair of houses with projecting porches and crenellation. Double gable with central Dutch gable type feature. Brick, painted and rendered.
25/26. Stock brick, red brick dressings and quoins projecting at corners. New tiled roof.
23/24 as above except that 24 has been rendered and altered. These three pairs of houses all contribute to the character of the Conservation Area and, on the left hand side:
68-75 is a good terrace with Victorian out-buildings. Yellow stock brick, red brick dressings with arches to windows. Slate roofs, some altered but all contributing to the character.
Grundy House, a modern block of flats does not really fit in, but the building does not really detract from the street scene either. 3 storey with an attempt at stock brick with red brick dressings.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 88 2/3 and 4/5 on the other hand are Victorian semi-detached houses which do contribute. The former, modest in scale, now painted and rendered but 4/5 still in stock bricks with crisp white arches and bay windows. These are still slate roofed though the main roof is red tiled.
On the left hand side of Chiltern View Road, Nos. 76/77/78/79/ 80/81/82/83/84/85 are of a later date and although they do not detract make no very positive contribution. Apart from the bungalow at 78, they are of 2 storeys, red flettons and render predominating.
Allexandra Road consists of two terraces leading from Chiltern View Road down to The Greenway.
On the left, Nos. 13-22 are in yellow stock brick, red brick dressings, slate roofs. Some have been repainted. Arches to all windows. The terrace in its entirety contributes.
Opposite are 2-12, again in stock brick but with little red brickwork apart from keystones. These two terraces determine the character of the road.
It is very unfortunate therefore that 23/24, a modern bland building in red flettons, should have been allowed to intrude into this street-scene. It is detrimental.
Opposite, the last house of the terrace (No. 1) has had stone cladding applied. This again detracts and is detrimental.
The Greenway is the main axis of the Conservation Area and again is described working from east to west:
On the corner with Whitehall Road is a superb house (No. 87) known as tower house. Somewhat Italianate, almost Tuscan, in design, it is a two and three storey stuccoed building, with slender glazing bars to the high elegant windows. The roof has wide overhanging eaves. The building is Locally Listed and is a major contributor at this important corner location.
To the north, in Whitehall Road, is an unfortunate and detrimental bungalow (No. 86) with red flettons and concrete lintols to the windows.
The house (No. 84), in its back garden is rendered and, being tucked away, is less harmful to the character of the area.
Back in The Greenway, on the right hand side are:
No. 75, a larger detached house of redbrick, rendered above. Elegant frilled window head details relieve the elevation.
Nos. 77/79. Pair of house with projecting porches and crenellation. Double gable with central Dutch gable type feature. Stock brick though No. 77 has been painted.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 89 Nos. 81/83 and Nos. 85/87 are similar; the latter being rendered. These three pairs of houses all contribute to the character.
On the left hand side:
Nos. 64, 66 and 68 are Locally Listed. They are three bay villas with pedimented porches and elegant windows. Rendered with classical details particularly pilasters to the corners. These buildings obviously contribute.
No. 62 also contributes. A later building; rendered with tiled roof. Twin gables with mock timbering and red brick quoins.
Opposite, Nos. 1-73 are superb. They are Locally Listed, of 3 storeys, rendered (and rusticated) ground floor with arched windows. Stock brick above with 6 windows. Slate roofs. The terrace contributes to the character of the Conservation Area.
It follows that the new building (Nos. 67-69) adjacent, detracts and is detrimental to the character, lacking as it does any of the elegance of proportion or any of the architectural merit or manners of its neighbour.
The Flats opposite (and those around Enfield Close) are not particularly special architecturally either but they fit in much better as noted again in Villier Street. They are simple, three storey yellow brick blocks arranged around a central space.
Further on the left hand side are:
Nos. 56/58, Nos. 52/54, Nos. 48/50 and Nos. 44/46. All have ornate and prominent 2 storey gables with bay windows having intricate glazing bars and 1st floor balconies. Yellow stock brick with red brick dressings and painted stone details. Tiled roofs.
All contribute to the character and lead to the corner of Elthorne Road.
On the right hand side of The Greenway are:
Nos. 43/45, Nos. 47/49/51, Nos. 53/55/57; smaller scale, 2 storey terraces of stock brick with slate roofs. Red brick dressings including zig-zag banding. Some houses now rendered.
Nos. 59/61 and Nos. 63/65 are pairs of semi-detached houses of red brick with projecting square bays having Dutch gables. Painted stone around porches and openings. Slate roofs. This whole group - from No. 43 to No. 65 - contribute.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 90 Beyond the junction with Elthorne Road are:
Nos. 32/34, Nos. 36/38 and Nos. 40/42. They are of yellow stock brick with red brick dressings in bands. Bay windows to ground floor. The last two pairs have white painted stone to openings. These three pairs again all contribute to the character.
Beyond, St Peter's Church - although well set back - is a contributor both architecturally and as a social focus for the Conservation Area.
No. 32a, the 2 storey house built of flettons on the road frontage is not however in keeping and is detrimental.
On the RHS, beyond Alexandra Road, Nos. 15/17, Nos. 19/21, Nos. 23/25 and Nos. 27/29 are 2 storey, yellow stock brick with some red brick dressings. Bay windows to the ground floor. Odd dogtooth brick decoration over doorways to central pairs. They contribute.
Nos. 31/33, Nos. 35/37 and Nos. 39/41 are 3 storey, of yellow stock with two storey bay windows and ornate metal work at 1st floor level. All contribute and are as a group very significant. Beyond this run of buildings, from No. 15 to No. 41 are:
No. 23a, a modern building of yellow/grey bricks with red brick dressings and very prominent garages; Nos. 19a/21a, of red brick with render above. Ground floor square bay; Nos. 11a/11b of red brick with render above but a bay window; No. 13, an "L"- shaped building in red brick; Nos. 9a/9b of brick and render with projecting flat roofed garages, and Nos. 7/9 of red brick with projecting square bays. All of these buildings are unexceptional and make no particular contribution but do not detract.
No. 5 however, is considered detrimental mainly because of the stark garage extension that is viewed across the adjacent Electricity Substation, detracting from the street- scene. It is a characterless 2 storey house of red brick.
Finally, Nos. 1/3 are of yellow stock bricks with slate roof. Red brick arches to bay windows. Contributors to the character.
On the other (LHS) side of The Greenway beyond the junction with Kings Road is another very good group all of which contribute.
Nos. 2/4 of yellow stock brick with red brick arches to porches and bay windows. Nos. 6/8 are rendered and painted. Projecting bays and porch under slate roof. Nos. 10/12 in yellow stock and red brick. Flat roofed square bays. Slate roofs. Nos. 14/16 have slate roofs hipped back over projecting bays. White stone. Then,
Nos. 18/20 are of stock brick with rendered "M"-shaped gables. Nos. 22/24 are of red brick with tile hanging, as are the next pair of houses, Nos .28/30 which have Art Nouveau porch designs.
No. 26 is later but does not detract and the same is true of:
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 91 Nos. 2a/2b/2c/2d at the western end which are ordinary suburban brick and render semi-detached houses. Returning to Kiings Road, this leads off to the south and is one of the least satisfactory of the grid of roads within the area. On the LHS, the corner plot:
Nos. 1/3 are ordinary post-war red fletton brick buildings on an important corner plot. They detract from the street-scene of both The Greenway and Kings Road and are detrimental.
Nos. 5/7 and Nos. 9/11 are the same and again detrimental leaving this part of the street singularly unattractive. Beyond this, however, is a better group:
Nos. 13/15/17, Nos. 19/21 and Nos. 23/25/27 are tall two storey houses. Bay windows with gables. Stock brick with red brick dressings. White painted stone. A good group, all contributing.
Nos. 29/31 is though more ordinary. A later building in red brick and flettons with curved bays under square tiled roofs.
On the other side, there is only one house (No. 2) and that is a modern bungalow which is out of place with the street-scene. It detracts and is detrimental.
Facing down Queens Road is No. 33 which is a wider detached house of yellow stock brick. Red brick banding and arch over central door. Two bays. Sliding sash windows. It contributes.
Beyond is an unexceptional bungalow so small that only its tiled roof is visible and then
No. 37 which again contributes although white rendered, it retains its 2 storey bay window with intricate glazing bars.
No. 39 is unremarkable but Nos. 41/43 contribute and
Nos. 45/47 with the new houses opposite bring the road to an abrupt and rather ordinary end. From the end of Kings Road, Queens Road leads off to the west.
Queens Road is altogether different. On the left hand side
No. 13 is good and contributes. Yellow stock brick, red brick dressings with terracotta mouldings. Big square bay to ground floor. Stained glass to fanlights. Gable facing onto road.
Bungalow, poorly designed but small enough not to detract.
No. 14 over-restored, yellow stock brick, red brick dressings. Central doorway with arch. Ground floor bay to the left. With
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 92 Nos. 15/16, Nos. 17/18, Nos. 19/20 and Nos. 20/22, this is a good group contributing to the character. The four pairs of 19th C. yellow stock brick houses have red brick dressings and white painted stone to arched porches and around bay windows which run up two storeys under gabled roofs with decorative brickwork Intricate glazing bars to windows.
Unfortunately a Block of Flats have been inserted at the end of this run. The ground floor is open for parking with a central rendered entrance running up 3 storeys. Elaborate cantilevered balconies at 2nd floor level. Coarse detailing and badly proportioned windows. The building obviously detracts from the street-scene and is detrimental to the character of the area.
On the right hand side, Nos. 11/12 on the corner with Kings Road, are good and contribute. An Arts and crafts type pair with brick ground floor, render above carried on timber framing where it projects on either side of bay windows and over porches. Leaded light windows. Tiled roof carried on corner brackets with exposed rafter ends.
Nos. 9/10 also contribute. Of yellow stock brick but with very prominent square gabled projecting bays, decoratively plastered. Sliding sash windows.
No. 5 and Nos. 6/7 are unremarkable, later buildings of brick and pebbledash. 2 storey bay windows; tiled roofs.
Nos. 1/2 and Nos. 3/4 again are good. Plainer and of red brick with slate roofs. Slightly projecting square bays through two storeys. White painted stone to window openings. A good group making a positive contribution to the street-scene and the Area.
The western edge of the Conservation Area is bounded by Cowlley Hiigh Road along which the following buildings are included.
South of the Queens Road junction:
Nos. 258/260. Smaller scale pair. Yellow stock brick, red brick dressings. Ground floor bays under continuous roof taking in porches. No. 258 painted and altered to make corner shop.
Nos. 262/264. 2 storeys, painted or coloured brick; originally yellow stocks. 2 storey bays under square gables. Intricate glazing bars. White painted stone to windows and porches.
No. 266, stock brick, slate roof. Grand house with recessed central portion having 1st floor balcony and good metal balustrade. Square projections with bay windows either side of central arched doorway (now blocked).
All these buildings contribute to the character.
To the north along Cowley High Road, between The Greenway and Queens Road is a superb group including:
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 93 Nos. 224/226 and Nos. 228/230 are two pairs of later semi-detached houses. Rendered with big arched porches. 2 storey bays under gables with mock timbering.
Nos. 234/236, Nos. 238/240, Nos. 242/244, Nos. 246/248, Nos. 250/252 and Nos. 254/256 are all two storey. Stock brick with red brick dressings. Some since rendered. Tiled roofs. 2 storey bay windows under square gables with prominent barge boards. Column heads and key stones picked out in white painted stone.
Again, all these buildings contribute to the character.
The only flaw is No. 232 which is awful; with fletton bricks and crude detailing. It has not been noted as detracting because it retains the building line. There is also a superb tree on the road frontage.
North of The Greenway, the scene is more mixed:
Nos. 210/212, Nos. 214/216 are two storey semi-detached houses of no real distinction. Red brick and render. Bay windows under square gables.
No. 218 is unexceptional; a bungalow, pebbledashed and with a large gable mock timbered.
No. 194 and the Garage are however detrimental. The garage with its pretentious railings and lighting not concealing the gap in the street-scene, open up a view of corrugated metal sheds and cars on the forecourt of the garage. No. 194 is a pebbledashed bungalow with prominent gable and mock timbers. Unlike No. 218, this clashes with the older properties and, together with the adjoining Garage, detracts from the character of the Conservation Area.
On the corner of Chiltern View Road, Nos. 190/192 contribute. Of yellow stock brick with red brick banding. Simple but very much a part of the Conservation Area. Adjoining ids the traditional corner shop still with the remains of the old metal stamp vending machine on its timber board. It contributes as does the Chiltern View PH on the other corner. This is a good building of stock bricks with sash windows to the 1st floor. Later red brick extensions at ground floor level with bay to left hand side having parapet wall with decorative terracotta panels. Projecting stone quoins to corners of original building.
Beyond, the houses in Median Close are of red brick with tiled roofs. Plain and not contributing to the character. They are unsympathetic and detrimental.
South of The Greenway, back at the heart of the Conservation Area is Elltthorne Road - one of the better roads. On the left-hand side, Nos. 1-7 and Nos. 9-17 are of yellow stock brick. Slate roofs, some renewed. Red brick banding; ground floor bay windows with white painted stone to windows and porches. Both rows of terraces contribute to the character.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 94 Facing them, on the right hand side, Nos. 2/4 are unremarkable, rendered above stock bricks. Ground floor with square bays in red brick. No. 6 is an individual house. Rendered 1st floor over painted stone windows and porch, set back. Roof almost pyramidal in form giving a somewhat Regency feel.
Nos. 8/10, Nos. 12/14, Nos. 16/18 and Nos. 20/22 are all very good and contribute. Of yellow stock brick and red brick banding. Slate roofs. Bay windows to ground floor. The first pair have a continuous roof taking in porches and square bays.
Round the corner, along Viilllliiers Sttreett, the same quality continues. On the corner with Elthorne Road is No. 23, one of a run of 8 properties (Nos. 23-30) making a major contribution. Of yellow stock brick, red brick arches to 1st floor, ground floor bays under projecting lean-to. Slate roofs. Some properties altered. No. 23 is the corner shop with shop front set forward.
The Flats at Enfield Close have already been mentioned. They do not detract from the street-scene and, being built on the site of the old barracks, sections of vast wall are to be found behind The Greenway properties.
The Load of Hay PH. (No. 33) is of yellow stock brick, slated roofs and 2 gables fronting the road. It also is a contributor and an old wall lines a driveway down to three new houses with parts of older walls again in evidence.
Facing the Pub is the Depot with a good barn-type building at the back although parts of the frontage are detrimental. The main frontage building (No. 1) does not detract though. It is a long two storey building, rendered with two bay windows and shallow gables with shaped timbers to the soffit. The porch creates an interesting, 3 gabled composition.
From there back to Elthorne Road is a superb piece of continuous streetscape. Nos. 2/3 and Nos. 4/5 are of yellow stock brick; red brick bands and arches to the windows. Bay windows to ground floor. White painted stone. Nos. 6/7/8/9/10 is a plainer terrace in yellow stock brick. No decoration; simple arches to window and door openings. Slate roofs; several altered.
Nos. 11/12 smaller pair of houses. Yellow stock brick with plain corner pilasters (No. 13 demolished). Nos. 14/15/16 are as above although No. 14 has an altered 1st floor window. Nos. 17/18/19/20 >are again the same as are Nos. 22 and the Militia Canteen PH on the corner of Elthorne Road. All these buildings contribute making this one of the best continuous street scenes in the Conservation Area.
The southern limb of Elltthorne Road, is more mixed. On the right hand side, the flats are not very well designed but do not detract. They are in pale bricks with large windows and flimsy canopies. The ends project slightly under shallow gables. There appears to be an older wall at the rear running all the way along the back gardens back up to The Greenway.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 95 South of the flats are No. 48 an ordinary, later house; rendered above red brick. Ground floor square bays, it does not detract.
No. 50 is rendered with projecting quoins to corners. Intricate glazing bars, good porch bracketed forward over central door. Bay to left under gable with mock timbering; small, false gable to right. Slate roof.
Nos. 52-54 are of yellow stock brick with gault brick dressings and slate roofs. An elegant pair with two storey bays under hipped roofs. These last three contribute to the character of the Conservation Area.
Around the corner, in the unmade section of Nortton Road are 5 sets of semi-detached houses of unremarkable character. They are mainly pebbledashed above brickwork with two storey bays which alternate square and curved; tile hung with mock timbering to the gables.
On the other corner are two blocks of flats which totally fail to create a positive feature at the corner and therefore detract from the street-scene and the character of the Conservation Area. They are detrimental despite being partly hidden by the trees along Elthorne Road. Of yellow bricks, the buildings are of two and three storeys with flat roofed projecting porches and standard windows. Sited to give re-entrant corner.
The main part of Nortton Road is the south-east corner of the Conservation Area is another road with some superb houses. From Elthorne Road; on the left hand side, are the flats referred to above, but then:
Nos. 12/14 is a good pair of simple 19th C. houses. Yellow stock and red brick banding, ground floor bays all under slate roofs.
Nos. 8/10 are again of yellow stock brick with red brick banding Gothic arched porches, ground floor bays; (No. 10 being marred by dreadful dormer extensions to rear). No. 6, yellow stock bricks, red brick dressings. White key stones and 2 storey bay at left.
Nos. 2/4 are later, pebbledashed, with dramatic gable sweeping down to corner porches. 2 storey rounded bays "applied" to elevation. All these buildings contribute to the character.
No. 6a is a later insert in red fletton brick, concrete tiled roof and standard windows. The house detracts from the very good row, and is therefore detrimental to the character.
This detrimental impact is made worse because, on the opposite side of the road, is another very good row of buildings which are described overleaf.
Nos. 25/27 of yellow stock brick, blue/grey brick dressings. 2 storey bays under hipped slate roofs. Nos. 21/23 are again of yellow stock brick but with red brick dressings, 4 windows; the two middle ones narrower over doors. Slate roofs. No. 19 again faces up Elthorne Road and is a good, later, building. Render to upper storey over red brick.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 96 Bay to the right. Original entrance door and timber work to porch with dramatic oriel bay suspended above. All of these buildings contribute to the character.
Nos. 15/17 are not of the same quality; rendered 1st floor with red brick below, square bays to the ground floor. Sliding sash windows. Not in any way detracting from the character.
Nos. 9/11 are good, yellow stock brick with red brick banding, and arches in alternating colours. Bay window to No. 9. Nos. 5/7 and Nos. 1/3 are of yellow stock brick; red brick bays through two storeys. Painted key stones. Cut brick aprons to 1st floor windows. Slate roofs. Nos. 1/3, a pebbledashed wide fronted pair of houses with two storey square bays slightly projecting at each end. Elegant timber balcony at 1st floor level over central part with entrance doors. All these buildings contribute positively.
At the end of the road, No. 1a has been built on the back garden of the Cleveland Road properties. It is an unfortunate addition but does not detract. Second hand stocks are used clumsily with red brick bands but there is an attempt to fit in and the house at least respects the building line and is not intrusive.
Finally, Cllevelland Road forms the eastern boundary of the Conservation Area and, from the south, there are No. 20 and Nos. 18/19 which are an unfortunately unremarkable group at the beginning of the designated Area. They are in red flettons with two storey bays, tile hung. They do not however detract.
Nos. 16 and 17 however are very good and contribute. They are 2 storey white painted villas with central porches; arches with keystones. Rustication continued round the ground floor with projecting quoins at the corners. Windows unfortunately replaced and artificial slate on roof. Still a very grand pair of villas.
North of Norton Road, No. 15 detracts as do the garages at the back. It is poorly designed 2 storey pair of houses (actually Nos. 15/15a/15b) in badly chosen materials (a mix of different flettons), standard modern windows and projecting flat roofed porches. On this important site the effect is detrimental.
Nos. 13/14 contribute; pebbledashed with gault brick dressings and blue brick bands. Sash windows. Slightly projecting square bays at ground floor level. Round arches to porches.
Neither No. 11 nor No. 12 make any contribution but do not detract. The former is a bungalow with 2 bays and recessed central doorway. Mixed bricks with tiled roof and shingles to the dormer and gables over the bays. No. 12 is a recent 2 storey house; projecting gable at right. Mixed brick. Standard windows and projecting porch.
Nos. 9/10 contributes as does No. 8. The pair of houses are smooth rendered with plain projecting corner pilasters. Elegant windows with decorative surrounds. The two storey extension to No. 10 is unfortunate. No. 8 is of stock brick with plain projecting corner pilasters. Slate roof. French windows to ground floor; shutters to 1st floor (replacement) windows.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 97 No. 7 contributes but has extensions that detract and are detrimental. The building therefore has to be identified by its parts. The main house is of stock brick. Central doorway. White painted stone. 2 projecting bays to the ground floor. Elegant glazing bars. Red brick arch to 1st floor central window.
No. 6 and No. 4 contribute. Of the same design as No. 7 but, No. 6 is marred by alteration to porch and windows. No red brick arch.
No. 4 is pebbledashed with shutters added to the upper floor.
Nos. 2/3 and 3a are ordinary but do not detract. Of two storeys, Nos. 2 and 3 have rendered bays at ground floor level. 3a is in yellow brick with a gabled front.
No. 1, turns the corner into The Greenway (No. 70). Pink rendered with metal windows. Extended and somewhat featureless, it has bay windows to the ground floor - two square ones to Cleveland Avenue and one curved on The Greenway. It is a building that has been so changed that it no longer contributes bit it is not felt to detract. Opposite is the Tower House described above.
Trees/Landscape
Trees are important throughout the area both lining the streets and in the often extensive garden areas. The Monkey Puzzle tree outside the terrace of houses in Chiltern View Road (No. 42) can be singled out as an individual and important specimen but there are many good trees and it is impossible here to single out examples.
Views/ Policy
There are good views at the entry points into the designated area. At the Chiltern View Road/Alexandra Road junction, views east and south are good but to the west, detrimental. The view at lower level east to Burr Hall is also good. At the Alexandra Road/ Greenway junction, there are good views east and west but the view north is detrimental. At junction between Kings Road and The Greenway, views east and west are good but to the south, detrimental. There are similarly detrimental view north from the end of Kings Road. At the Queens Road/Kings Road junction there is a good view to the west. At junction between The Greenway and Elthorne Road there are good views in all directions, as there are at the Elthorne Road/Villiers Street junction, and at the Elthorne Road/Norton Road junction.
In terms of policy, it is necessary that parking problems are resolved. Ways of achieving a reduction in the amount and speed of vehicles using The Greenway should also be investigated.
Article 4 Directions will need careful consideration especially as so many properties have had minor alterations but, they may be appropriate in selected areas within the Conservation Area.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 98 (4) COWLEY CHURCH CONSERVATIION AREA
History/Designation
The history of the Cowley Church area is a puzzle. The Church is situated a considerable distance from the High Road with its few remaining timber framed and other historic buildings.
Pevsner states that "the church, no doubt representing an older settlement, is some distance to the east." There are also ideas that there might have been a north-south route in Roman times from Staines up to St Albans. Park Road, Uxbridge is supposedly part of the route, and the Roman Villa site at Moor Park would be near the alignment.
A further historic conundrum is the location of the Manor of Colham (unconnected with the present Colham Green area) and unidentified apart from being located somewhere to the north of Yiewsley. The presence of Manor Farm to the south of the Church is of interest and is considered below. The present Conservation Area was designated in 1988.
Character/Appearance
The area is one of the smallest in the Borough. The buildings are described briefly below, but are grouped around the Church of St Lawrence and its Graveyard. The road junction to the south-west has the two Lodges on either side of the trackway leading out of the designated area down to Manor Farm. This trackway is slightly raised above the meadows forming the flood plane of the River Pinn. To the north-east is the area known as Pield Heath Nurseries. Both these areas bordering the River Pinn are, additionally, in the Green Belt.
Boundary
This was drawn tightly around the Church and Vicarage including only a small group of houses. It is proposed that the meadow to the south be included with Manor Farm thus giving an historic logic in terms of landscape development and acknowledging that there may be other historic connections that have not been fully researched at this time.
The question of the siting of the Parish Church away from the linear settlement along Cowley Road is perhaps the most obvious unexplained question in terms of historic development.
Buildings
St. Lawrence Church, the focal point of the Conservation Area. Unenlarged, early mediaeval church. 12th C. building with 13th C. chancel, timber bellcote re-built in 1780. Crown post roof. Ian Nairn said of it:
"incredibly pretty. The little weatherboarded belfry, painted cream sits up inimitably on its hipped gable. When the sun is out the vermilion roof tiles glow so brightly that the
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 99 colour is unlike anything else in Britain. The rest of Cowley is new Middlesex and worth a curse or two."
In Church Road; No. 27 - The Rectory - 1807-1811, north wing added. Cupola-type bell tower feature. An elegant house that contributes to the character of the Conservation Area. The contemporary Coach House, although altered to create a separate dwelling, also contributes.
The new Vicarage and adjoining houses are unexceptional but not really intrusive and do not detract. To the south, two Lodges, possibly late Victorian date, are an ornate and decorative addition to the street scene at the cross roads, opposite the Church. They are important features and contribute to the character. The Lodges frame the drive (and public footpath) leading down to Manor Farm, an interesting conglomerate building with elements of late mediaeval timber framing. There is little known about the detailed history of the building either in terms of its built fabric or in terms of its name; suggesting as it does an important historic site.
Trees/Landscape
The open fields are important to the Pinn Valley and, around the Church, trees make a significant contribution to the character of the Conservation Area.
Views/ Policy
There are open views across the meadow land and shorter views around the Church.
There are important views from the west as the land rises toward the Church Tower. There are also important views of the Village Green from across the road (outside Nos. 61/63) and from the foot path north of the Church Tower. This view-point also looks east to Cedar House.
The view from the south by Elm Tree Cottage is important and there is a good view of the Church Tower from the junction with The Chantry although the view down that road is, as already mentioned, detrimental.
There are good views by the foot path, across to the lawns of Bishopshalt and, at the bottom of the foot path, the views have already been noted. There are of course many view-points within The Grove Nature Reserve.
Policies will need to continue to reinforce Green Belt Policy in this area, and the impact of traffic at the road junction will need to be assessed in order that the effect of the carriageway can be reduced and the area visually enhanced.
Uxbridge Planning Sub-Committee - 10 September 1998 Page 100