The Planning and Development Control Committee was scheduled to discuss several planning applications, including a significant redevelopment project at Land Between Sandilands Road and Pearscroft Road, and proposals for new housing at Barclay Close and 495-497 Fulham Road. The committee was also set to consider works to the Grade II* listed Gasholder No.2 at Fulham Gas Works, including its dismantling, refurbishment, and re-erection in a new configuration.

Land Between Sandilands Road and Pearscroft Road, Fulham

The committee was scheduled to consider a proposal for the demolition of existing garages and sheds and the redevelopment of the site to erect a part four, part five-storey building providing 38 self-contained residential flats. The plans also included the installation of solar panels, green roofing, and air source heat pumps. The application was for a Full Regulation 3 development, meaning the Local Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham was the developer. The officer recommendation was to grant planning permission, subject to a legal agreement and conditions.

The report pack detailed extensive pre-application consultation with neighbours and local interest groups, which led to design changes. Statutory consultees, including the Environment Agency and Thames Water, raised no objections, subject to conditions. Concerns raised by objectors included the loss of green space, affordability of units, impact on the character of the area, neighbour amenity issues such as noise, loss of light, and privacy, as well as highway and environmental matters.

The officer assessment highlighted that the principle of development on this brownfield site was acceptable, and the proposal would contribute to the borough's housing targets. Policies regarding housing mix and affordable housing were considered, with the scheme proposing 50% affordable units. The quality of residential accommodation, including internal space, outlook, daylight, and sunlight, was assessed against BRE guidelines, with the report concluding acceptable levels. Accessibility and Secure by Design principles were also addressed.

The design and heritage assessment noted the varied character of the surrounding townscape and concluded that the proposed development, with its articulated massing and material choices, would be a high-quality development that respects the locality and would not harm the setting of the Studdridge Street Conservation Area. Residential amenity was assessed in detail, with the report concluding that impacts on daylight, sunlight, outlook, and privacy would be acceptable, with some minor shortfalls considered reasonable in the urban context. Highway and transportation matters, including trip generation, car parking (with a car-free development secured by legal agreement), and cycle parking, were deemed acceptable. Environmental matters, including sustainability, energy efficiency, flood risk, surface water drainage, air quality, and land contamination, were all addressed, with conditions proposed to mitigate potential impacts. The proposal was considered to deliver a biodiversity net gain.

The report also detailed planning obligations, including affordable housing provisions, highway works, construction travel plan monitoring, energy and sustainability contributions, and employment and training initiatives. Mayoral and Local Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) contributions were also outlined. The overall conclusion was that the proposal complied with relevant policies and should be granted planning permission, subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

Barclay Close, London SW6 5QG

The committee was scheduled to consider a proposal for the redevelopment of a site to erect three three-storey single-family dwellinghouses, with associated parking, access, landscaping, and public realm improvements. This was a Full Regulation 3 application, with the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham as the developer. The officer recommendation was to grant permission, subject to a legal agreement and conditions.

The report detailed pre-application consultation and statutory consultations, with no objections raised by the Environment Agency, Transport for London, or Historic England. Public objections focused on highway impacts, including loss of parking and pollution, visual impact, neighbour amenity concerns such as loss of light, outlook, and privacy, and construction issues.

The officer assessment found that the proposal would contribute to the borough's housing targets, with all three units to be delivered as affordable homes (one social rent, two shared ownership). The quality of residential accommodation, including internal space, outlook, and daylight/sunlight, was assessed as good. Accessibility standards were addressed, with units designed to M4(2) standards. The design was considered compatible with the scale and character of the area, respecting the setting of nearby heritage assets. Residential amenity was assessed, with conclusions that the development would not result in unacceptable impacts on outlook, daylight, sunlight, or privacy, with specific conditions proposed for obscure glazing. Highway impacts, including parking (with the development secured as car-free), cycle parking, refuse storage, and construction logistics, were deemed acceptable. Environmental matters, including sustainability, flood risk, air quality, and land contamination, were addressed, with conditions proposed. The report also outlined planning obligations, including affordable housing provisions, car permit-free requirements, and air quality monitoring contributions. The overall conclusion was that the proposal should be granted planning permission, subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

495-497 Fulham Road, London SW6 1HH

The committee was scheduled to consider a partial retrospective application for the retention of a single-storey rear extension, a reduction in the size of a ground-floor window, replacement of timber gates and fencing with new metal gates, a brick pier, and a 1.8m high brick wall facing Maxwell Road, along with the installation of a louvred aluminium bin store cover. This was a Full Detailed Planning Application. The officer recommendation was to grant planning permission, subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

The report noted that works had been substantially completed and the application was for retrospective permission. Concerns raised by objectors included the retrospective nature of the application, inadequate refuse provision, poor design, inadequate consultation, visual harm to the townscape and heritage assets, security issues, construction disruption, and loss of cycle storage.

The officer assessment found the single-storey extension to be modest in scale and sympathetic to the existing building and neighbouring properties, complying with Local Plan Policy DC4. The impact on the setting of the Moore Park Conservation Area and the Old St James's Vicarage (a non-designated heritage asset) was considered acceptable, with the Council's Design & Conservation officer raising no objections. Residential amenity was assessed, with conclusions that the proposal would not result in unacceptable impacts on outlook, daylight, sunlight, or privacy, with conditions proposed for obscure glazing and fixed shut windows. Highway and transportation matters were considered, with an agreement reached for an off-site cycle hangar and a financial contribution to cover installation, maintenance, and lost parking revenue. Refuse and recycling storage was deemed adequate. Environmental considerations, including flood risk and sustainable drainage, were addressed with conditions proposed. The report also detailed planning obligations, including contributions for highway works, cycle hangar provision, and lost parking revenue. The overall conclusion was that planning permission should be granted, subject to conditions and a legal agreement.

Fulham Gas Works, Imperial Road, London

The committee was scheduled to consider two applications relating to Gasholder No.2: a Full Planning Application (2025/00651/FUL) and a Listed Building Consent application (2025/00568/LBC). These applications sought permission for works to dismantle, refurbish, and where necessary replace elements of the Grade II* listed gasholder, and then re-erect the salvaged components in a new configuration as a centrepiece for the public open space within the King's Road Park development. The proposals also included the permanent removal of certain degraded elements and the infilling of the below-ground void.

The officer recommendation for both applications was to grant permission, subject to conditions and a legal agreement, and subject to no contrary direction from the Secretary of State.

The report detailed the significance of Gasholder No.2 as the world's oldest surviving gasholder and a Grade II* listed structure, highlighting its poor condition and redundancy of original use. It also noted the significance of adjacent listed buildings and the Imperial Square and Gasworks Conservation Area. The assessment concluded that the proposed works would cause substantial harm to the significance of the listed gasholder due to the loss of historic fabric, original function, and form, as well as less than substantial harm to the group value and settings of adjacent listed buildings. However, it was argued that this harm would be outweighed by substantial heritage and public benefits.

These benefits included the conservation of salvageable elements of the gasholder, its reinterpretation within the historic context of the site, its removal from the Heritage at Risk Register, and the creation of a publicly accessible art installation within the new public realm. The proposals were considered to represent the best opportunity to conserve as much of the gasholder's significance as possible, given the lack of viable reuse options that would not cause greater harm. The re-erected structure was considered to be well-designed in relation to the townscape and historic context, and would not harm the Conservation Area or the settings of adjacent listed buildings.

Conditions were proposed to control materials, recording of historic fabric, paint finishes, landscaping, interpretation strategy, and dismantling and construction logistics. A legal agreement was also required to secure details of contracts, salvage and storage, refurbishment and reuse, project timescales, and long-term monitoring and maintenance. The report concluded that the proposals complied with national and local planning policies and legislation, and that the substantial harm to the heritage assets was justified by the substantial public benefits.