The Hillingdon Planning Committee convened on Thursday, 4 June 2026, approving eight planning applications. The committee granted permission for developments including new homes, an artificial grass pitch, and enabling works for a data centre campus, while refusing one application for a change of use.

Land at Rushmoor Close - Approved

Permission was granted for the erection of two two-storey detached dwellinghouses with associated parking, landscaping, and ancillary works at Land at Rushmoor Close¹. The application was called to committee due to a petition of objection, with concerns raised about the impact on the Eastcote Village Conservation Area, traffic congestion, overdevelopment, and neighbour amenity. Officers noted that revised plans addressed concerns regarding encroachment into the root protection area of a prominent tree, and that the design was contextually appropriate and of high quality. The council's inability to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply was also a material consideration, engaging the 'tilted balance' in favour of sustainable development.

74 St Georges Drive - Approved

Permission was granted for the erection of a single-storey rear extension, alterations to the existing garage roof, conversion of the main roof to habitable accommodation with dormers and a hip-to-gable extension, demolition of an existing chimney, and expansion of a raised patio area at 74 St Georges Drive². The application was called to committee due to three petitions of objection with a total of 181 signatures, raising concerns about neighbour amenity, character of the area, overdevelopment, flood risk, and the retrospective nature of some works. Officers highlighted that materially similar extensions had previously been granted under Permitted Development rights, and that the current proposal's deviations were assessed against this fallback position. Conditions were recommended to address unlawful works and ensure necessary alterations within a specified timeframe.

Land adjacent to 7 Wepham Close - Approved

Permission was granted for the erection of five new-build residential dwellings, with private amenity space, parking, refuge storage, and cycle parking at land adjacent to 7 Wepham Close³. The application was called to committee due to a petition of objection with 91 signatures, raising concerns about design, character, landscaping, highways, neighbour amenity, flood risk, and the retrospective nature of works. Officers noted that the proposal was considered an acceptable form of backland development, integrating satisfactorily within its context and contributing to housing supply. A Section 106 agreement was required to secure off-site biodiversity units to achieve the statutory 10% Biodiversity Net Gain.

Technology House - Refused

Permission was refused for a change of use from mixed Class B8 (Storage and Distribution) and Class E (Commercial Business and Services) uses to mixed Class B8, Class E, and Class F.1 (Learning and Non-Residential Institutions) at Technology House⁴. The refusal was based on three main reasons: inadequate pedestrian and vehicular access and parking provision, prejudicing highway and pedestrian safety; failure to satisfactorily address flood risk; and the lack of a secured planning obligation for air quality mitigation. Officers noted that while community use was supported, the location was deemed inappropriate due to accessibility and safety concerns, and the Flood Risk Assessment was insufficiently detailed.

Hayes Bridge Retail Park - Approved

Permission was granted for proposed enabling works, including site clearance and ground preparation, at Hayes Bridge Retail Park⁵. These works are in advance of the main redevelopment for a data centre campus, which had recently received planning permission. The enabling works are considered temporary and reversible, with no enduring impact on the street scene. The application was supported by comprehensive technical documentation, and subject to recommended conditions, was deemed acceptable.

Hayes Park West - Approved

Permission was granted for the partial demolition and redevelopment of the existing multi-storey car park to provide 52 new homes, landscaping, car and cycle parking, and associated works at Hayes Park West⁶. The proposal involves a mix of one and three-bedroom flats, with 19% affordable housing. The development is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt but is considered appropriate development on previously developed land that would not cause substantial harm to its openness. Public benefits, including housing delivery, affordable housing provision, and contributions to health infrastructure and active travel, were considered to outweigh the identified low level of harm to the setting of nearby Grade II* listed buildings. A Section 106 legal agreement was required to secure various provisions, including affordable housing, health contributions, and the delivery of the Hayes Park Central and South development.

Land at Austin Road (Hayes Town Centre) - Approved

Permission was granted for the submission of Reserved Matters for Access, Appearance, Landscaping, Layout, and Scale for Phases 2 and 3 of the development at Land at Austin Road⁷. This application relates to a larger redevelopment project that includes demolition, new buildings, a community centre, and residential units. The Reserved Matters application details the specific design elements for these phases, including the number of homes, building heights, and landscaping. The proposal was considered to align with the approved parameters, maintain appropriate design standards, and provide suitable accommodation and amenity space. The development contributes significantly to housing supply, including affordable housing, and includes enhancements to public realm and community facilities.

Haydon School - Approved

Permission was granted for the construction of an Artificial Grass Pitch (AGP) with perimeter fencing, hardstanding areas, a storage container, floodlights, and an access footpath at Haydon School⁸. The proposal aims to enhance all-weather sports provision for the school and the wider community. While acknowledging concerns from local residents regarding noise, light pollution, traffic, and visual impact, the committee considered that the revised scheme, with increased separation distances from residential properties and operational controls, overcame previous reasons for refusal. Sport England supported the development, considering its sporting and community benefits to outweigh the limited loss of grass playing field.