Five self-contained flats at 44 Murray Road, Northwood

Summary of planning committee decision

Decided by Hillingdon Planning Committee on 6 Oct 2026.

1787/APP/2025/1849Approved

What was proposed

The application proposed demolishing the existing dwelling and building five self-contained flats with parking, landscaping, cycle storage and refuse storage.

“Proposal: Demolition of existing dwellinghouse, and erection of two storey building containing 5no. self -contained flats with associated landscaping, parking, cycle and bin storage Summary of Recommendation:”

“The application seeks planning permission for the demolition of the existing dwellinghouse and the erection of a two -storey building containing 5no. self- contained flats, with associated landscaping, parking, cycle storage and refuse storage at 44 Murray Road, Northwood.”

Officer report

Earlier application

An earlier application for five flats was withdrawn in May 2023, and the current scheme was revised to address design, neighbour and parking concerns.

“The relevant planning history for the site comprises application ref. 1787/APP/2023/202, which sought planning permission for the demolition of the existing buildings and their replacement with an up to 2.5 -storey building comprising 5no. self -contained flats, with associated parking, cycle and bin storage and landscaping. This application was withdrawn on 16 th May 2023.”

“The current application seeks to respond to concerns raised during the consideration of the previous scheme, including the relationship of the development with neighbouring properties, the overall design and appearance of the building, the treatment of the site frontage, and the arrangement of parking, cycle storage, refuse storage and landscaping. The current proposal has been amended during the course of the application to further address these matters.”

Officer report

What officers recommended

Officers recommended approval because the revised proposal was considered acceptable in design, amenity, highways, landscaping, drainage, ecology and accommodation terms.

“The revised scheme is considered acceptable in respect of design, character and appearance, neighbouring amenity, highways, parking, trees, landscaping, drainage, ecology, biodiversity net gain and the quality of accommodation for future occupiers, subject to the recommended conditions.”

“The revised design is considered acceptable in terms of scale, siting, form and appearance. The building would sit between two -storey residential development and the three -storey flatted development at Lingfield Close,and would be appropriate in scale. The revised frontage treatment, retention of existing planting and architectural approach would ensure the development sits acceptably within…”

Officer report

Objections and consultation

A 50-signature petition and objections from seven households raised concerns about flatted redevelopment, parking, traffic, privacy, overdevelopment, landscaping and construction disturbance.

“Highway, parking and traffic impacts are assessed at paragraphs 7.39 –7.49. The Highway Authority has raised no objection to the proposal.”

“VII. Amenity impacts (Overlooking, privacy, outlook, daylight/sunlight and overbearing) This is discussed at paragraphs 7.19–7.30 of this report . VIII. Disturbance from construction activity, including noise, dust, pollution which impact on nearby residents health and traffic disruption. Disturbance arising from construction works, such as noise, dust, and traffic, is not a material planning consideration in itself as it is temporary in nature.”

Officer report

Highways and parking

The proposal included five parking spaces, active electric charging, cycle storage and a legal restriction preventing future residents from joining nearby parking schemes.

“No objection, subject to conditions. The Highway Officer noted that the site is located within a CPZ operating between 1pm and 2pm Monday to Friday, and that the site has a moderate PTAL rating. A legal agreement is recommended to restrict future residents from joining a Parking Management Scheme. The proposal would provide 5no. on-site parking spaces, including 1no. disabled -compliant space.”

“The comments have been noted, and the relevant legal agreement and conditions have been added.”

Officer report

The decision

“That the application be approved. 7. 6 Woodgate Crescent, Northwood -”

Minutes, 6 Oct 2026

Councillors at the meeting

Apologies James Bourke Conservative

Also attending Jan Sweeting Labour

Source: Plota analysis of the council's record of attendance; parties from the council's list of councillors.

Sources

  • Hillingdon Planning Committee minutes, 6 October 2026
  • Agenda and papers (council website)

Source: Plota analysis of Hillingdon's committee minutes and officer report. Quotations are the council's own words; headings and summaries are Plota's.

Committee decisions and nationwide planning applications, in one API

The Plota API returns planning applications from every council we cover, each with its decision, whether a committee or officers decided it, and the committee date. Build it into your own tools.

See the API →

At the meeting

Council
Hillingdon
Date
Tuesday 6 October 2026
Committee decided
Approved
Councillors
7Conservative 5Labour 2Show councillors
Minutes
The council's minutes
Meeting
Agenda and papers (council website)

This committee's year

60 decisions in the 12 months to this meeting.

Source: Plota analysis of the committee's minutes.

Every decision by this council's committees →