← More from Ruislip Residents' Association
Following serious concerns regarding outdated evidence and procedural flaws in the planning assessment for 73 High Street, we have escalated the matter to Hillingdon Council’s Planning Department. Below is our formal request for a Management Review, sent on 25th February:
Request for Management Review – Officer Report Accuracy and Procedural Conduct
Ref: 14252/APP/2025/2753, 73 High Street, Ruislip
Dear Julia Johnson & Noel Kelly,
I wish to request a Management Review of the delegated officer report for application 14252/APP/2025/2753 (73 High Street, Ruislip).
The report contains material factual inaccuracies, omissions, and procedural deficiencies that undermine the integrity of the assessment and risk prejudicing any subsequent appeal.
Incorrect evidence used in the assessment The report states that “Tokyo Fizz operates until approximately midnight”. Tokyo Fizz at 109 High Street had closed by January 2022. (Minutes of the January 2022 RRA committee meeting state that Tokyo Fizz had closed). The current restaurant, Sushi Futomaki, opened in 2022 and closes at 22:00. This information is verifiable via Streetview (Sept 2024). The use of four‑year‑old information is a material factual error.Failure to consider submitted evidence (Appendix 1) The Ruislip Residents’ Association submitted Appendix 1, providing accurate closing times (at the time of publication) for all evening venues. It is referenced on page 9 of the officer report under title “2. Impact on Residential Amenity”. However, page 15 of the report suggests Appendix 1 was not considered, as it introduced a non‑existent late‑night venue. This represents a failure to consider relevant evidence.Inadequate Conservation Area assessment The report limits its Conservation Area analysis to shopfront alterations. Policy DMHB 4 and London Plan HC1 require assessment of use, activity, hours of operation, character, and impact on significance. These matters were raised by the RRA, the Local History Society, and ward councillors, yet were not addressed.Procedural fairness and risk to appeal The inaccuracies and omissions outlined above weaken the Council’s position should the applicant appeal. A planning decision must be based on accurate, up‑to‑date information and proper consideration of representations.I request that the Council review the report, correct the factual errors, and issue an addendum addressing the omitted evidence and policy considerations.
Yours sincerely,
Homepage