Agenda, decisions and minutes

Online meeting, Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee
Tuesday 3 November 2020 7:30 pm

You can view the individual reports for this meeting by selecting the headings from the numbered list of items at the bottom of this page. Alternatively you can view the entire agenda by selecting 'Agenda Reports Pack' below.

Watch Council meetings here

Venue: Virtual meeting

Contact: Kevin Jones 020 8547 6622  email:  kevin.jones@kingston.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

10.

Public Questions

A period of no more than 30 minutes for questions on issues unrelated to items on the agenda (please refer to the More Meeting Information sheet).

Minutes:

A question had been received as required by the rules, in writing by one full working before the meeting from Ms Helen Hinton.

The question was:

“Kingston is an area of deficiency in access to protected open spaces. How is the cumulative impact of development being assessed, how are future publicly accessible open space needs being planned for and how are our green spaces ( such as Kingsmeadow and Fairfield)  being protected? “

 

Ms Hinton advised that she was unable to attend the meeting to ask her question. The rules for asking questions require that a resident ask the question in person. The Chair decided to allow the question, which he read out to the meeting. The answer received from Strategic Planning was as follows:

"The New Local Plan will include policies for the protection (and enhancement) of existing open spaces, and promote the creation of new open spaces, especially within identified areas of deficiency.  Existing open spaces are also protected under related policies in the Mayor's London Plan and the government's National Planning Policy Framework. The Council has worked with Greenspace Information for Greater London (GiGL) to provide up-to-date modelling data on Areas of Deficiency. The information will help inform proposals for new open spaces or to improve public access from new development proposals.

 

With regards to the cumulative impact of development, from a planning perspective, we are concerned about the accessibility and the quality of open spaces more than the quantity of spaces. The new Local Plan will however seek to encourage developments to provide open spaces and better access to existing spaces".

11.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Councillor Jon Tolley.

12.

Declarations of Interest

Members are invited to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests and any other personal interests relevant to items on this agenda.

Minutes:

Declarations of interest were received from the following members of the committee

Councillor K Lidbetter – Declared that she received regular updates from Friends of Latchmere Rec. and attends their events. She was not on the board or in any way involved with their decision making.

Councillor R Moll - declared she was a member of the Development Control committee and would not participate in the discussions on the 2 planning consultations

Councillor O Wehring – Declared he was in contact with Khalsa Karate in his capacity as a Councillor.

Councillor M Netley - Declared that she too received regular updates from Friends of Latchmere Rec. and attends their events. She was not on the board or in any way involved with their decision making.

Councillor D Cunningham - Declared that he also received regular updates from Friends of Latchmere Rec. and attends their events. He was not on the board or in any way involved with their decision making. He further advised the committee that he was a member of the Development Control committee and would not participate in the discussions on the 2 planning consultations.

Councillor D Ryder-Mills – Declared he was a member of the Development Control committee and would not participate in the discussions on the 2 planning consultations. He would nonetheless continue to chair the meeting during the discussions and would summarise points which were made and which would be taken to the Development control committee. He further declared he was a friend of the director and of the manager of Christians Against Poverty and attended the church which ran the programme. He would vacate the chair to the vice Chair for the discussion on the Christians Against Poverty grant application, and would not participate in the discussion or the vote.

 

 

13.

Minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 16 September 2020.

Minutes:

Resolved, that the minutes of the meeting held on 16 September 2020 be confirmed and signed as a correct record.

14.

Petitions

To receive petitions submitted by Councillors or members of the public who live work or study in the Borough. The petition must contain at least 20 signatures*, and notice of the intention to submit the petition must be given in writing to democratic.services@kingston.gov.uk by 10am on the last working day prior to the meeting.

 

*The Chair may waive the 20 signature threshold where the petition relates to a community or geographical area with a limited number of residents.  

Minutes:

No petitions were received.

15.

Neighbourhood Manager's Report

The Neighbourhood Manager will report on current Kingston Town Neighbourhood issues and topics. 

Minutes:

The Neighbourhood Manager reported that the new COVID-19 restrictions were starting on Thursday 5 November. There had been a sharp increase in the number of infections in Kingston and the team was waiting for instructions as to how the new restrictions were to be implemented. They would then be able to assess the impact on the services they deliver and understand what action they needed to take. Their experiences of the first wave would inform what they needed to put in place this time.

 

She reported that the Ranger teams had been very busy during the last 8 months and had been at the centre of the response to the pandemic and the work of the Kingston Stronger Together hub. They had been collecting and delivering PPE and food donations, supporting vulnerable residents with shopping, prescriptions, and the delivery of well being boxes.

2 Members had been deployed to help support bereavement services. Although PPE, shopping tasks and prescription deliveries had fallen off to a large extent, they were still involved in supporting the work of the Kingston Stronger Together hub.

 

 More recently they had been supporting the Resilience Planning team with opening and closing of the mobile testing units at the Cattle market and the PPE pop up shop in Clarence Street. They were also supporting the Kingston and Sutton shared environment service with the NHS Covid 19 QR Code Business Engagement work. The team had returned to many of their business as usual activities in the last couple of months and had been working very hard to catch up following the impact the first wave had on their service.

 

Graffiti in the Borough had been on the increase particularly in the Kingston Town Neighbourhood which had been experiencing a higher than normal volume of graffiti and littering and the Neighbourhood now had 2 rangers allocated to it.

 

The committee recorded it’s thanks to the Neighbourhood Manager and to the rangers for the work they had been doing and would be doing during the second wave of the pandemic.

16.

Neighbourhood Community Grants pdf icon PDF 112 KB

To consider applications for Neighbourhood Community Grant (NCG) funding.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Resolved to award the following Kingston Town Community Grants:                                            

 

Kingston Vineyard and Growbaby

£2718.00

 

Khalsa Karate

£3000.00

 

Friends of Kingston Road Recreation Ground

 

£  928.95

Friends of Latchmere Rec. (FoLaR)

£2,952.00

 

 

It was further agreed that the following grant be agreed in principle pending receipt of information on the budget breakdown and minimum standards being met. The final decision on proceeding with payment was delegated to the Executive Director, Corporate and Communities, in consultation with the Chair and vice Chair of the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee.

 

Recovery Initiative Social Enterprise (RISE) CIC-

 

£2,950.00

 

And, that the following grant be agreed in principle pending receipt of a budget showing how the money would be spent.. The final decision on proceeding with payment was delegated to the Executive Director, Corporate and Communities, in consultation with the vice Chair of the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee.

 

Christians Against Poverty (CAP) –

 

£2500.00

 

17.

Result of local consultation on the extension of PPA on north Kingston pdf icon PDF 126 KB

This report outlines the results of a public consultation on the review of the Permit Parking Area (PPA) in the following roads - Latchmere Road between Richmond Road and Latchmere Lane, Durlston Road, Studland Road, Earle Gardens and St Albans Road and the impact of this scheme on the surrounding roads following the implementation of the PPA, and seeks agreement on a way forward.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A report by the Senior Professional Engineer was received which outlined the results of a public consultation on the review of the Permit Parking Area (PPA) in Latchmere Road between Richmond Road and Latchmere Lane, Durlston Road, Studland Road, Earle Gardens and St Albans Road and reflected the impact of this scheme on the surrounding roads following the implementation of the PPA. The report noted that following the introduction of a Permit Parking Area (PPA) in the roads east of Richmond Road, a petition had been received from some residents from Latchmere Lane, which asked that the council develop a parking scheme in their road. At the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee meeting on 22 January 2019, the committee considered the petition, and resolved that a local consultation be carried out in order to establish whether residents thoughts on the matter and report the outcome to a future Committee for consideration.

The report asked the members of the committee to approve the introduction of a parking scheme which would make it easier for residents to park in their own roads. The report noted there was the likelihood of parking displacement, and as such the situation would need to be monitored and reviewed as appropriate. The consultation had also reviewed the recently installed PPA in the roads east of Richmond Road.

 

It was resolved that –

1. Given the consultation results (paragraphs 5-6), no changes are made to the PPA in the roads east of Richmond Road at this time;

2. Given the consultation results (paragraphs 8 & 9), approval is given to progress with PPA Extensions in Latchmere Lane, between Latchmere Road and Tudor Drive (Monday - Friday 11am - 2pm); and also in Lancaster Gardens, Lancaster Close, and Fernhill Gardens (Monday to Saturday 11am - 2pm) as shown on Annex 1 and to implement these extensions, subject to the necessary statutory processes;

3. There be no extension of the PPA scheme at this time, in Aragon Road, Wolsey Drive, Cardinal Avenue, Hollybush Road, part of Latchmere Road (east of Latchmere Lane), Aldersbrook Drive, Cranleigh Gardens and St Agatha’s Drive

4. Officers inform residents of the Committee’s decision and review the PPA extension scheme after 6-9 months of implementation.

 

The committee agreed to add an informative to 2 above. To ensure there was an informative to properties in Lancaster Gardens and Lancaster Close noting that the statutory consultation would be carried out and that residents would have the opportunity to make representations to the committee to set it aside.

 

 

18.

Result of local consultation on the introduction of School Streets trial in Latchmere Road (between Park Road and Latchmere Lane) pdf icon PDF 128 KB

This report outlines the results of a public consultation on proposals to introduce a trial of a school street in Latchmere Road, between Park Road and Latchmere Lane, and recommends the way forward.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

A report by the Senior Professional Engineer was received which outlined the results of a public consultation on proposals to introduce a trial of a school street in Latchmere Road, between Park Road and Latchmere Lane. At the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee meeting on 9 January 2020  the committee had considered a report outlining the outcomes of a Healthy Streets study undertaken by consultants, on behalf of Kingston Council, to identify local connectivity improvements for the North Kingston area. The establishment of a school street would create a safer environment for children going to and from school and would encourage the use of sustainable modes of travel. The report also considered more localised issues of through traffic in the King’s Road area and noted that residents in Dinton Road had expressed interest in being part of the school street trial.

 

It was resolved that –

1.    The school street in Latchmere Road (between Latchmere Lane and Park Road) is approved on a trial basis, with an experimental Traffic Management Order to cover the 6 month period, operating during hours  to be agreed to in consultation with the schools, Chair, vice Chair and ward members, Monday to Friday only’ during school term times, and will be enforced using ANPR cameras, based on the consultation results set out in paragraph 5, and for the reasons explained in paragraph 6, (See Annex 1 for more details.)

2.    The school street in Dinton Road (the cul-de-sac end from Bockhampton Road) is approved on a trial basis, with an experimental Traffic Management Order to cover the 6 month period, operating during hours to be agreed to in consultation with the schools, Chair, vice Chair and ward members, Monday to Friday only’ during school term times, and will be enforced using ANPR cameras,

3.    A Monitoring plan is developed, setting out an assessment process to measure the impact of the trial on the surrounding roads, in consultation with the chair and vice chair of this committee and ward councillors.

 

 

19.

Consultation Items pdf icon PDF 302 KB

Consultation Item - 20/02213/FUL- Roupell House                  Pages A3 – A6

Partial demolition of the existing Roupell House building and erection of a part 3-storey, part 4-storey building comprising 23 residential units with associated landscaping, refuse and cycle storage, public pathway improvements to the eastern boundary and landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space to the rear of 37-40 York Road (Dale Court).

 

 

Consultation Item - 20/02216/FUL - Land To Rear Of 204-210C Cambridge Road                                                                                                            Pages A7 – A10

Erection of 5 storey building comprising of 18 self-contained residential units (8 x one-bedroom, 9 x two-bedroom and 1 x three-bedroom) with associated landscaping, car parking (8 x car parking spaces), refuse and cycle storage

 

Minutes:

Planning Consultation Item:

20/02213/FUL- Roupell House                                                    Pages A3 – A6

Partial demolition of the existing Roupell House building and erection of a part 3-storey, part 4-storey building comprising 23 residential units with associated landscaping, refuse and cycle storage, public pathway improvements to the eastern boundary and landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space to the rear of 37-40 York Road (Dale Court).

 

This planning application had been brought to the Neighbourhood Committee for comment by Members and residents. The application for the development would be determined by the Development Control Committee in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.

 

The Chair invited the developers to make their presentation first, following which he allowed the Committee to ask questions of the developers and the Planning Department. He then asked for comments from the floor after which he put the matter to the Committee for debate and then summed up the points made.

 

Esterina Bartilomo, Bob McCurry, John Haxworth, Paul Joslin of Barton Willmore and Malcolm Wood of Countryside Properties UK presented their proposal for the partial demolition of the existing Roupell House building and erection of a part 3-storey, part 4-storey building, comprising 23 residential units with associated landscaping, refuse and cycle storage, public pathway improvements to the eastern boundary and landscaping improvements to the existing communal amenity space to the rear of 37-40 York Road (Dale Court).

 

The Members of the Committee and public were asked to comment and ask

questions. The following points were made by Councillors and members of the public against the development:

 

Worries about the size mix of the units proposed, Only 1 3 bed unit

Worries about the flat roof and longevity of the building

Green roofs,

Pitched roofs,

Maintenance and repair of properties

Overmassed and overscaled

Overbearing and oversight

Conflict of interests within the Council

Consultation with residents

Height and design (particularly roof) 4 storey’s

Change to 3 storey with a pitched roof

Not Victorian Character

Architectural and urban disaster

Does not respect the building line

Site boundaries extended

Misinformation in the drawings

226 letters sent out 116 responses No support

Consultation result was ignored

Visual difference between Roupell House and Dale Court

Balcony overlooking no 13

Planting of trees and carbon emmissions

 

 

Planning Consultation Item

20/02216/FUL - Land To Rear Of 204-210C Cambridge Road                                                                                                                                Pages A7 – A10

Erection of 5 storey building comprising of 18 self-contained residential units (8 x one-bedroom, 9 x two-bedroom and 1 x three-bedroom) with associated landscaping, car parking (8 x car parking spaces), refuse and cycle storage

 

This planning application had been brought to the Neighbourhood Committee for comment by Members and residents. The application for the development would be determined by the Development Control Committee in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.

 

The Chair invited the developers to make their presentation first, following which he allowed the Committee to ask questions of the developers and the Planning Department. He then asked for comments from the floor after which he put the matter to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

20.

Urgent items authorised by the Chair

Minutes:

There were no urgent items authorised by the Chair.