Skip to main content


Meeting Details



Planning Committee
19 May 2021 - 19:00 to 22:00

Webcast / Youtube Link: CLICK HERE


  • Documents
  • Attendance
  • Declarations of Interests
  • Visitors



Standard Items
Public Attendance at the Meeting

This meeting will take place at the Victoria Hall in Ealing Town Hall and webcast live on the Council's YouTube site. We encourage any public intending to attend to watch remotely to reduce the risk of the spread of COVID.

Public Attendance is permitted in person, however, we ask that any members of the public planning to attend in person notifies us in advance by emailing or calling 020 8825 5291. This is to ensure that there is sufficient capacity in the public gallery in the meeting room and that the Council can comply with social distancing requirements.



Cllr Shital Manro (Chair),

 Cllr Shahbaz Ahmed, Cllr Praveen Anand,

 Cllr Jon Ball, Cllr Fabio Conti,

 Cllr Joanna Dabrowska, Cllr Tariq Mahmood,

 Cllr Dee Martin, Cllr Aysha Raza,

 Cllr Miriam Rice, Cllr Ray Wall,

 Cllr Lauren Wall, Cllr Simon Woodroofe

(Membership is subject to change following the Annual Council meeting on Tuesday 18 May 2021)


1 Apologies for Absence and Substitutions

To note any apologies for absence and substitutions.




It was noted that, following on from the Council’s Annual General Meeting on Tuesday 18 May 2021, there had been some changes to the Planning Committee’s membership.


Councillor Young substituted for Councillor Dabrowska.



2 Urgent Matters

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



There were none.



3 Declarations of Interest

To note any declarations of interest made by members.



There were none.



4 Matters to be Considered in Private

To determine whether items contain information that is exempt from disclosure by virtue of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.


There were none.



5 Minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 31 March and 21 April 2021.



The Committee considered the minutes of the meeting held on 31 March 2021 and 21 April 2021.




That the minutes of the previous meetings were agreed as a true and accurate record of proceedings.



6 Site Visit Attendance

To share site visit details and note site visit attendance.



There were none.



Public Items

Tiago Jorge, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that planning permission was sought to agree a reserved matters application for Plot 7.2 of the South Acton Estate Regeneration Masterplan.


It was explained that the reserved matters application had proposed the first residential development within the Clandon Gardens Character Area which was located towards the northern end of the South Acton Estate Regeneration Scheme. The application had proposed 185 residential units which included 44 Active Living Units, comprising 549 habitable rooms. A total of 272 habitable rooms were proposed to be provided as affordable housing, 132 habitable rooms as Affordable Rent plus 88 habitable rooms as Active Living and 52 habitable rooms as Shared Ownership. The proposal equated to a total of 50% Affordable Housing provision which would be split 81% Affordable Rent and 19% Shared Ownership. The development aimed to be tenure blind with no distinguishable difference between the appearances of the various tenures of accommodation. In addition, 36% of the Affordable Rent homes would be 3+ bedrooms.


It was further explained that the proposal for Plot 7.2 had comprised a courtyard style residential development consisting of four blocks ranging in height between 6 and 12 storeys with an internal courtyard amenity space. When read alongside Phase 7.1 which was delivered pursuant to the original 2012 Acton Gardens Masterplan, Plot 7.2 would fill in the central northern section of the frontage along the primary artery of Avenue Road.


The proposal was considered to provide a high-quality residential development that would positively contribute to the wider-regeneration aspirations for South Acton and continue the Council’s Estate Regeneration Programme. An Environmental Impact Assessment Statement of Compliance was submitted to accompany the submission. The reserved matters application was in accordance with the 2018 Masterplan Permission and parameter plans. It was therefore recommended by Officers that reserved matters approval be granted subject to successful resolution of Planning Conditions of Consent and Informatives.


A briefing note in respect of the application had been produced by Planning Officers, circulated to the Committee and published on the Council’s website prior to the meeting. It had provided details of additional notes.


The Committee debated the proposal and in response to some of the questions and points raised, Officers confirmed that:

  • Existing residents would be entitled to a parking permit. New residents would only be entitled to a parking permit should one be acquired privately.
  • The solar panels would be used to operate the air source heat pumps in order to make them even more efficient.
  • There would be a small shortfall in the play space provided, however, opportunities for play space would be maximised nearby.
  • As part of the Master Plan, a significant contribution towards education had been secured. The contribution would help provide the number of school places that would be commensurate with the population increase within the area.
  • All tenures would benefit equally from access to private balconies, private terraces or gardens.


The Committee then proceeded to vote on the Application.


That for the reasons set out in the committee report, planning permission for the application REF 211783REM be GRANTED subject to:


1. Successful resolution of Planning Conditions of Consent and Informatives as set out in the committee report.




John Robertson, Planning Officer, introduced the report and explained that the application sought permission for residential redevelopment of a narrow back-land site which was overgrown and contained derelict buildings formerly in education use. It was bounded by the rear gardens of two storey residential dwellings on Hanson Gardens, Beaconsfield Road and Lewis Road. Access was via two, narrow gated entrances adjoining dwellings along Hanson Gardens.


It was explained that the site had no designations but laid within the Southall Opportunity Area and an area of park deficiency. The application proposed demolition of existing buildings on the site and development of three single-storey detached houses, four two-storey detached houses and a two-storey building containing two flats. Only three car parking spaces were proposed, including one disabled parking space.


It was recommended by Officers that full planning permission be granted with conditions and subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement and a Community Infrastructure Levy payment to the Greater London Authority (GLA).


A briefing note in respect of the application had been produced by Planning Officers, circulated to the Committee and published on the Council’s website prior to the meeting. It had provided details of further written representations that had been received.


Chasham Mitraan objector to the development, made a representation to the Committee which included the following key points:


  • The proposed development would not meet the minimum access requirements of 3.25 metres.
  • Four out of the nine proposed units would not meet Policy 7D requirements for amenity space.
  • Further parking difficulties would be caused for the existing residents.
  • The proposed development would be in flagrant contradiction of the Inspector’s clear conclusion that harm would arise without a needs-assessment of the change of use.


Kate Matthews, on behalf of the applicant, spoke in favour of the application. The representation made the following key points: 

  • The derelict site had been vacant for over 25 years and the existing buildings had fallen into disrepair. The site presented a great opportunity for regeneration and was ideally suited for residential development. The optimization of brownfield sites such as this were supported in the London Plan and Local Plan.
  • The layout had been designed to ensure that there would be no overlooking into neighbouring properties and the scheme would provide a high standard of accommodation.
  • The proposed car parking provision was considered acceptable.
  • It had been demonstrated within the applicant’s submission that the existing site use had been abandoned and this was supported by case law.


Councillor Jaskiran Chohan, a local Ward Councillor, made a representation to the Committee which included the following key points:

  • A very engaged group of local residents had spent a lot of time and effort in scrutinising the application in order to engage with the planning process and they had picked out a crucial flaw in the plan which was the incorrect measurement of the only access to the back-land site.
  • The proposed refuse collection arrangements were not considered to be appropriate and would potentially block access for cars and emergency vehicles.
  • The proposed development had insufficient mitigation measures in place against increased parking pressures in the area.
  • The amenity space provision would be Insufficient.


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

  • The width of the access to the site had been measured by the Council’s Transport Officer who had concluded that it was acceptable, however, it was not clear if he had measured it from the plan or if he attended the site.
  • The applicant had submitted a swept path analysis for a range of emergency and refuse vehicles which had been assessed and was considered to be acceptable.
  • There would be a turning head within the site.
  • There was no legal requirement to apply the London Plan Policy with respect to loss of social infrastructure premises for a site that had been abandoned.
  • An air quality assessment had been carried out and was acceptable.
  • There would be three car parking spaces within the site.
  • A Section 106 agreement would restrict residents parking permits which should limit parking pressures.
  • The applicant had submitted evidence that the site had been vacant for 25 years. There was a structural report confirming that the buildings were derelict, unusable and unsafe.
  • It was not for the Committee to adjudicate on whether or not the use of the site had been abandoned.


It was moved by Councillor Ball and UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that consideration of Planning Application REF 205302FUL be DEFERRED in order to:


1. arrange a site visit for the Committee (virtual site visit if restricted due to COVID). 

2. confirm the exact measurement of the width of the access to the site.

3. provide the Committee with information on the alternative uses considered for the site.

4. provide the Committee with the Inspector’s decision on the recent unsuccessful appeal.



9 Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 16 June 2021.



It was noted that the next scheduled meeting would be held on Wednesday 16 June 2021.


The newly appointed Chair, Councillor Ray Wall, expressed his thanks to the former Chair, Councillor Manro and the former Vice-Chair, Councillor Donnelly. He confirmed that the newly appointed Vice-Chair was Councillor Mahmood.


The meeting of the Committee concluded at 8:34pm



Declarations of Interests

Member NameItem Ref.DetailsNature of DeclarationAction
No declarations of interest have been entered for this meeting.


Visitor Information is not yet available for this meeting