Hounslow planning officers accused of misleading councillors in Judicial Review of 1 Burlington Lane decision

Royal Courts of Justice, The Strand

Planning Committee members ‘misled’ by council planning officers

Councillors on Hounslow’s Planning Committee decided to approve the high rise tower block planned for the site at 1 Burlington Lane beside Hogarth Roundabout because council planning officers misled them, the High Court heard today.

The Old Chiswick Protection Society (OCPS) has taken LB Hounslow’s decision to approve the scheme to Judicial Review. The development is too tall and will ruin the appearance of an historic area, they say.

READ ALSO: Residents of Old Chiswick seek legal opinion to challenge high-rise development beside Hogarth Roundabout

Their barrister Andrew Parkinson told the court councillors on the Planning Committee were informed the current proposal was better than a previous proposal turned down by the Council because the previous scheme was of “poor quality design” and would have offered “poor quality accommodation”.

Initially the previous scheme, which would have been seven storeys high, was refused planning permission, but the developer appealed the decision and won, so it was subsequently given permission, but the development did not go ahead and plans for the new, higher scheme were submitted by another developer.

There were objections to it from local residents, so it was considered by councillors on the Planning Committee, who were asked to compare the two schemes.

READ ALSO: Hogarth roundabout development gets go ahead

What planning officers failed to tell them was that the planning inspector who heard the appeal considered the previous scheme to be of “high quality design” and would have offered “acceptable accommodation”, the court heard.

It would have kept the existing structure, a five-storey concrete and glass office block which has been standing empty for some time, and extended it front and back, adding two new storeys on top to provide 104 flats.

Visualisation of scheme viewed from Hogarth Roundabout; CGI Simpson Haugh Architects

Planning officers asked councillors to compare two schemes without giving them the full facts, court told

In the report Hounslow’s planning department prepared for councillors and in their power point presentation to the Planning Committee where it was discussed, what officers told councillors was the exact opposite of the inspector’s findings with regard to the quality of the design and the acceptability of the accommodation, the court heard.

“No summary was given of the findings of the inspector, or any on the reasoning behind it”, said the barrister representing the residents’ association.

While an inspector’s report is not binding on a council, he told Judge Kelly that if councillors were being asked to make their decision on the basis of a comparison, then legally they should have presented the comparison fairly by including the inspector’s comments. Not to do that had been “materially misleading”.

The councillors had gone ahead and approved the current proposal without being in full possession of the facts, he said.

“The basis of the comparison is that the fallback scheme is considered poor, when actually it has been found to be more than adequate”.

The residents of Old Chiswick object to the current proposal on the grounds of its height and mass, which they say will ruin the appearance of a very special historic neighbourhood.

The plan is for a complex partly six storeys high and party ten, providing 132 flats, including 13 ‘affordable’ homes, with commercial space on the ground floor and a terrace of three storey townhouses at the rear.

It involves the demolition of the existing five storey office block, which is much less sustainable than building on top of it, the residents’ counsel argued.

Existing office building, behind the Chiswick flyover at Hogarth Roundabout

Previous proposal would have ‘enhanced’ the look of the area

The crucial difference from residents’ point of view is that the planning inspector concluded the previous proposal would have “enhanced” the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, while the current proposal is acknowledged by all sides, including the Council’s planning department, to harm it.

While LB Hounslow argues the public benefits outweigh the heritage harm, the residents disagree.

Barrister Andrew Parkinson told the court Chiswick House lay to the southwest, Hogarth’s House to the west, and Old Chiswick, with St Nicholas Church at the heart of it, to the south, which would all be harmed if the development went ahead.

Planning officers made the case that the harm to the area’s historic heritage was ‘less than substantial’.

Photograph of the day by Bridget Osborne

Church Street, in the Old Chiswick Conservation Area

Most recent proposal ‘superior’ to previous scheme

Defending the Council, Rebecca Clutten told the court the new scheme was superior, offering 13 affordable homes as opposed to none, 28 more units overall, an improved mix of housing with more three-bedroom flats suitable for families, and better design.

The councillors on the committee already had substantial knowledge about local planning matters did not need to know the details of the appeal regarding the previous scheme.

They knew it had been successful, so it was obvious the inspector had considered the scheme good enough to receive planning permission, but the new scheme was better, she said.

Had councillors received a fair briefing from officers, the overall comparison would have been very different, the OCPS counsel concluded.

The case continues with the summing up tomorrow. OCPS expect to receive the judge’s finding in about three weeks’ time.