Council services by letter

Agenda and minutes


Venue: Committee Rooms 1 & 2, Harrow Civic Centre, Station Road, Harrow, HA1 2XY. View directions

Contact: Miriam Wearing, Senior Democratic Services Officer  Tel: 020 8424 1542 E-mail:

No. Item


Attendance by Reserve Members

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.


Reserve Members may attend meetings:-


(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             the meeting notes at the start of the meeting at the item ‘Reserves’ that the Reserve Member is or will be attending as a reserve;

(iv)              if a Reserve Member whose intention to attend has been noted arrives after the commencement of the meeting, then that Reserve Member can only act as a Member from the start of the next item of business on the agenda after his/her arrival.


RESOLVED:  To note that no Reserve Members had been nominated to attend the meeting.


Declarations of Interest

To receive declarations of disclosable pecuniary or non pecuniary interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from:


(a)               all Members of the Panel;

(b)               all other Members present.


RESOLVED:  To note that there were no declarations of interests made by Members.



To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Executive Procedure Rule 48 (Part 4D of the Constitution).


RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at the meeting.



Presentation by the Developers on the remainder of the Harrow View East (Kodak) Site


The Panel received a presentation from Martin Scholar, Head of Planning at Barratt London, and architects and consultants working with the company, on the emerging proposals for parts of the development site at Harrow View East (former Kodak site).  Mr Scholar outlined the context of the significant increase in housing targets for the Borough and explained that, compared with the 800 units proposed in the 2015 planning permission, the new proposal envisaged some 1,350 homes.  The presentation focused on the layout and design of the development, including the height of buildings, routes and views through the site, measures to promote a greater community “feel” and arrangements for landscaping and green spaces.


A Member asked about the extent of employment uses on the site.  It was explained that part of the site to the east was explicitly designated for commercial uses; there were as yet no definitive proposals, but the expectation would be that these would be smaller-scale, “maker”-style enterprises.  In addition, there would be some smaller-scale retail units offering local employment opportunities.  In response to the Member’s further query about community uses, reference was made to meetings with Council officers and representatives of the local voluntary sector about community benefits arising from a Section 106 agreement; discussions were continuing to establish the most effective use of these resources.  It was also mentioned that a community medical facility had been proposed for Block A3, the L&Q Housing Association site. 


In response to a Member’s question about the pedestrian tunnel through to the station, it was confirmed that Section 106 funding to look at options for securing improvements had been secured through the original Masterplan. The Member also asked about the provision of smaller food shopping units for residents of the development; while there would be “doorstep shopping” opportunities, there would be a limit on this due to the possible adverse impact on the town centre.  It was explained that Block A1 included a local store. 


A Member asked about the heights on the buildings in the new plan as they appeared to have increased substantially since previous proposals.  It was reported that the taller buildings would be in the centre of the site and on the “knuckle” of the park as had been proposed in the outline planning permission. 


The Member also asked about the likely overflow of parking demand into local streets without controls and the suggestion in the presentation that some parking provision in similar developments elsewhere had not been taken up.  Mr Scholar advised that housing schemes in inner London were typically car-free developments while there was understandably some flexibility on outer London sites; nevertheless, there was evidence that parking capacity was not fully used in schemes where provision was made, particularly where there was a significant proportion of one and two-bedroomed properties involved.  It was suggested that the risk of overflow parking would be low; the developers would contribute both to the monitoring of parking demand and the implementation of schemes to control parking by non-residents.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.