Councillors and committees

Agenda, decisions and minutes

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 key Council meetings here

Venue: Dysart School, 190 Ewell Road, Surbiton

Contact: James Geach tel 020 8547 5062  e-mail:  james.geach@kingston.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

62.

Appointment of Chair and Vice Chair for the 2017/18 Municipal Year.

To appoint a Chair and Vice Chair for the 2017/18 Municipal Year.

Decision:

Councillor Malcolm Self was appointed as Chair and Councillor Sushila Abraham was appointed as Vice Chair for the duration of 2017/18 Municipal Year.

Minutes:

Councillor Malcolm Self was appointed as Chair and Councillor Sushila Abraham was appointed as Vice Chair for the duration of 2017/18 Municipal Year.

 

Voting:

Those for:Councillors Liz Green, Diane White, Sushila Abraham, Malcolm Self and John Ayles.

Abstained: Councillors Ian George, Chris Hayes and Richard Hudson

63.

Question Time

A period of no more than 30 minutes for questions on issues unrelated to items on the agenda.

Minutes:

A number of questions were raised by members of the public. A summary of these is attached but they do not form part of the minutes of the meeting.

64.

Petitions

To receive any petitions.

Minutes:

No petitions were submitted.

65.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mike Head, Andy Johnson-Creek, Yogan Yoganathan and Hilary Gander.

 

Councillor Sushila Abraham was present for items 62-69 but withdrew from the Committee during the consideration of items 70-74.

66.

Minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2017.

Decision:

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2017 were confrimed as a correct record.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2017 were confirmed as a correct record.

67.

Declarations of interest

Members are asked to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests and any other non-pecuniary interests (personal interests) relevant to items on the agenda.

Minutes:

No interests were declared.

68.

Raeburn Avenue - introduction of traffic management measures pdf icon PDF 96 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

The Committee endorsed the traffic management measures proposed, which included minor amendments arising from the Safety Audit, as set out in the revised plan which was circulated as late material, and recommended its adoption to the Residents Committee.

Minutes:

The Committee were consulted on the proposed introduction of new traffic management measures on the Raeburn Avenue and Ewell Road junction. The Committee’s views will be shared with the Residents Committee when it determines the scheme at its meeting on 14 June.

 

The proposed scheme was developed following the receipt of a number of complaints from both residents and Ward Members about both the level and speed of the traffic using Raeburn Avenue. In responses to these concerns a number of site visits and traffic speed surveys were undertaken. Residents were consulted on the proposed scheme in November 2016.

 

The results of this consultation were discussed by the Committee on 19 January 2017. At that meeting the majority of the Committee agreed with the project’s principles and no concerns were raised in relation to the consultation. However, it was the Committee’s view that further refinements were required to the layouts proposed for both junctions with Elgar Avenue and Ewell Road, in order to ensure that the scheme addresses all the known issues at these locations. Subsequently Officers, Ward Members met on site and the final layouts were agreed as shown in Annex 1. Following the publication of the agenda, in order to address concerns raised by a Safety Audit, minor amendments were made to scheme and a revised plan was circulated to the Committee as Late Material.

 

The Committee endorsed the traffic management measures proposed, including the minor amendments arising from the Safety Audit, as set out in the late material, and recommended its adoption to the Residents Committee.

69.

Planning application pdf icon PDF 198 KB

Minutes:

A summary of the reasons for granting planning permission and of any relevant development plan policies is included in the report of the Head of Planning and Regeneration on each application where permission is recommended. Permitted applications are subject to the conditions, legal agreements and informatives set out in the report and late material together with any other details on late response to consultations or comments received since the agenda was printed, revised drawings circulated at the meeting and any recommendations, additional conditions and informative set out below.

 

Resolved that the following application is permitted as indicated.

69a

Land to the rear of 22-24 The Avenue, Surbiton, KT5 8JG (17/16087)

Minutes:

The demolition of the existing 8 No. single garages and the erection of 3 No. dwellings, 8 No. storage lockers, the provision of 7 No. parking spaces with associated works on the land to the rear of 22-24 The Avenue.

 

Speakers on the application

 

Objectors

Applicants

Mr Laurence Broyd

 

Mr Lawrence Green

 

Ms Yasmin Rajeebally

Mr Mark Slater (Agent)

 

In their consideration of the report it was the Committee’s view that given the constraints of the site the units proposed should not have Permitted Development Rights. The Committee were also of the view that the tree protection measures should be verified by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works and that all replacement trees are of a mature age.

 

Permit subject to the following additional and amended conditions.

 

Additional Condition

 

10        Removal of permitted development rights.

 

           

Amended Conditions

 

4          No development shall commence until a landscaping scheme including

the management and maintenance of the living roof shall have been

submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented within the first planting season following completion of the development and the tree planting and landscaping shall thereafter be maintained for five years to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. All newly planted trees should be mature.  Any trees or shrubs which die during this period shall be replaced in the first available planting season, and the area shown to be landscaped shall be permanently retained for that purpose only.

 

Reason: These details are required prior to commencement of

development because the details would affect subsequent design of other elements of the scheme and must be agreed at the outset and in the interests of visual amenity and also that the Local Planning Authority shall be satisfied as to the details of the development in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted April 2012.

5          All works on site shall take place in accordance with the following details which shall have previously been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of work:

 

(a)  Provision for loading/unloading materials.

 

(b)  Temporary site access.

 

(c)  Signing system for works traffic.

 

(d) Measures for the laying of dust, suppression of noise and

abatement of other nuisance arising from development works.

 

(d)  Means of enclosure of the site.

 

(e)  Wheel washing equipment.

 

(f)   The parking of vehicles of the site operatives and visitors.

 

(g)  The erection and maintenance of security hoarding.

 

(h)  Measures for the protection of surrounding trees

 

Reason: These details are required prior to commencement of

development because the relevant works would take place at the

beginning of the construction phase and in order to safeguard the

amenities of the surrounding residential occupiers and to safeguard

highway safety and the free flow of traffic in accordance with Policy DM10 (Design Requirements for New Developments including House

Extensions) of the LDF Core Strategy Adopted  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69a

70.

Enforcement Notice: 108 Ewell Road pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

The Committee agreed that an enforcement notice should be issued. The full decision will be published within the minutes of the meeting. Please note that Enforcement Notices are not subject to the Council’s Community Call in Procedure Rules.

Minutes:

The Committee were informed of various breaches of planning control on the site at 108 Ewell Road which is within in the Oakhill Conservation Area, including the erection of a roof extension not in accordance with approved plans, installation of new windows, door, bargeboards, fascias and soffits, use

of non-matching brickwork, installation of render and a new gate without planning permission. Authority was sought for the issue of an enforcement notice(s) requiring various remedial works with a view to returning the external appearance of the building to as it stood prior to the unauthorised works commencing.

 

Speakers

 

Land/ Property Owner

Supporters of the action proposed

Mr Nicholas Constable

None

 

Resolved that the Head of Planning and Regeneration and the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service) are authorised to:

 

1.    Issue an Enforcement Notice (s) under S. 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), subject to any necessary legal amendments being made for which authority is delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration in consultation with officers from the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service SLLP),

 

2.    withdraw and to vary such notice (s) under S. 173A, and

 

3.    in the event of non-compliance, take action (s) by way of prosecution under S.179, S.187A and/or direct action under S. 178 of the Act.

 

Voting: Unanimously in favour.

71.

Enforcement Notice: 9 Evesham Terrace pdf icon PDF 120 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

The Committee agreed that an enforcement notice should be issued. The full decision will be published within the minutes of the meeting. Please note that Enforcement Notices are not subject to the Council’s Community Call in Procedure Rules.

Minutes:

The Committee were informed of the erection of a roof extension and a single storey rear extension without planning permission and the removal of a garage in breach of a planning condition at 9 Evesham Terrace. Authority was sought for the issue an enforcement notice(s) requiring the demolition of the roof extension and the single storey rear extension. No action was proposed in regard to the removal of the garage.

 

Speakers

 

Land/ property owners

Supporters of the action proposed

Mr Sebastian Riemann

 

Mrs Serena Riemann

None

 

In their consideration of the report and the contributions made by the property owners it was the view of the majority of the Committee that enforcement notices should be issued in order to remedy the breaches of planning control identified in the report.

 

The Committee, noting the owners’ circumstances and the complexity of the site’s recent planning history, agreed that the compliance period required by Section 173(9) of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act should be a period of 6 months. In the event of non-compliance the Committee agreed that any action(s) by way of prosecution under S.179, S.178 and/or direction action under S.178 of the Act in in respect of the breach of planning control/or injunctive relief under S.178B should be delayed for a period of at least three months.

 

Resolved that the Head of Planning and Regeneration and the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service) are authorised to:

 

1.    Issue an Enforcement Notice (s) under S. 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), subject to any necessary legal amendments being made for which authority is delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration in consultation with officers from the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service SLLP) The compliance period required by section 173(9) will be a period of 6 months,

 

2.    withdraw and to vary such notice (s) under S. 173A, and

 

3.    in the event of at least three months of non-compliance, take action(s) by way of prosecution under S.179, S.187A and/or direct action under S. 178 of the Act in respect of the breach of planning control/or for injunctive relief under S.187B.

 

Voting:

Those for: Councillors Malcolm Self, Ian George, Chris Hayes and Richard Hudson.

Against: Councillors Liz Green and Diane White.

Abstained: Councillor John Ayles.  

72.

Enforcement Notice: 33 Cheyne Hill pdf icon PDF 107 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

The Committee agreed that an enforcement notice should be issued. The full decision will be published within the minutes of the meeting. Please note that Enforcement Notices are not subject to the Council’s Community Call in Procedure Rules.

Minutes:

The Committee were informed of the erection of connected extensions to a semi-detached dwelling house without planning permission at 33 Cheyne Hill. The unauthorised works take the form of a hip to gable roof extension, a rear dormer extension, and a part two storey, part single storey side and rear extension. Authority was sought for the issue an enforcement notice requiring the demolition of part of the roof extensions, though not the remainder of the unauthorised works.

 

Speakers

 

Land/ property owners

Supporters of the action proposed

Mr Daniel Fox

 

Mrs Kirsten Fox

None

 

Resolved that the Head of Planning and Regeneration and the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service) are authorised to:

 

1.    Issue an Enforcement Notice (s) under S. 172 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), subject to any necessary legal amendments being made for which authority is delegated to the Head of Planning and Regeneration in consultation with officers from the London Borough of Merton (for Shared Legal Service SLLP),

 

2.    withdraw and to vary such notice (s) under S. 173A, and

 

3.    in the event of non-compliance, take action (s) by way of prosecution under S.179, S.187A and/or direct action under S. 178 of the Act in respect of the breach of planning control/or for injunctive relief under S.187B.

 

Voting:

Those for: Councillors Malcolm Self, Ian George, Chris Hayes and Richard Hudson.

Against: Councillor Liz Green.

Abstained: Councillors Diane White and John Ayles.

73.

Exclusion of the Press and Public

The following resolution is included as a standard item which will only be relevant if any exempt matter is to be considered at the meeting for which the Committee wish to resolve to exclude the press and public:

 

To exclude the public from the meeting under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 on the grounds that it is likely that exempt information, as defined in paragraph x of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, would be disclosed and the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

 

Minutes:

This authority was not exercised.

74.

Urgent Items Authorised by the Chair

To consider any urgent items authorised by the Chair.

Minutes:

There were no urgent items.

Public Questions

Dr Alan Flowers asked if Committee members were aware that: 

i) the Dysart School New Classrooms Building Development site works have still not been completed in accord with the March 2015, approved planning application 14/16740/FUL, and the subsequent discharge of the conditions associated with that application (15/16401/COND), - these being works deemed to be urgent for completion by the start of the 2016/7 academic year, and for which all main building construction work commenced in June 2015 and was completed in July 2016. 

 

ii) in February 2017 and also in March 2017 two new planning applications for the site, both since withdrawn, were made for a significant variation of the approved access arrangements, namely from the approved gated footpath access, to a new drop-off/pick-up bay requiring vehicular access using two dropped kerb locations.

 

iii) temporary site vehicular access gates are still in place, from Kingsdowne Road, as at June 2017, despite all major site works having been completed in July 2016.

 

iv) tree protection has ceased, and some trees listed for protection during site works, under the approved planning application and for which protection was indeed given during site works have now subsequently been felled from locations along the boundary with my property, No. 11 Kingsdowne Road, and along the Kingsdowne Road site boundary, including a well-established large Yew tree, described in the October 2014 Arboricultural Impact Assessment as "good vitality, no apparent structural defects recorded".

 

v) trees which were planted on the site in 2016, as replacements to felled trees, have died and have not yet been replaced in accord with the conditions to maintain the agreed landscaping

 

vi) the green wall proposed for the South-east elevation of the new building "for visual upgrade for No, 11 Kingsdowne Road",  and stated in the letter associated with the conditions discharge "We are proposing a green wall on the South East wall of the building", has not been installed?

 

The following response was later provided to Dr Flowers in writing.

 

Following discussions with the Council's Assets team it is understood that Dysart school decided not to open the new school building until they had built the vehicular access. The proposed vehicular access point has been subject to discussions with Council Officers, and the application hopes to have a revised application submitted to the Council before the Autumn. This decision was outside of RBK's control given that Dysart is an academy School (Orchard Hill).

These planning applications were not submitted by RBK but instead were submitted by the Dysart directly. Both applications were withdrawn by the applicant. The applicant has been in discussions with the Council's Planning and Highway Departments so as to inform a revised application which is proposed to be submitted before Autumn. Any revised application will be advertised in accordance with the national requirements i.e. neighbouring properties will be written to and a site notice erected near to the site.

 

Whilst the school are exploring the submission of an application to create a vehicular access point to Kingsdowne Road, it makes sense to retain the existing access arrangement. Notwithstanding, in the event that a vehicular access point is not approved, Condition No 6 of Planning Permission 14/16740, requires a pedestrian gate to be installed before the development is completed. 

 

Trees were protected during the construction works.  The works were then completed. The Yew Tree was removed as the School considered the tree to pose a danger to pupils given that is can be poisonous. A Planning Condition on the planning permission requires that replacement planting is planted along the boundary with No 11 in accordance with a scheme which has been approved by the Council. I shall request that the Council's Enforcement team investigate the progress of this planting and report back to you.

The Council is not aware of this. The contractor was charged with planting disease resistance elms.  A member of the Council's Assets team with visit the site on the 30th June and will inspect the trees in question. The trees are guaranteed them for 12 months so if they are dead we can get them replaced.

Due to proximity of the new build to the boundary it was not possible to plant these trees/green wall plants.  

 

Dr Flowers also asked what information does the Committee have on the status of the Dysart School development and the extent to which there has been either a breach of, or failure to enact in a timely manner, the original approved plan (14/16740/FUL) and the associated conditions (15/16401/COND)? 

 

The following response was later provided to Dr Flowers in writing.

 

Planning Application 15/16401 is fully discharged.  Planning permission reference 14/16740 was commenced within 3 years and as such remains extant. Officers, at this point in time, are not in a position to require the completion of the development, however, if the uncompleted development starts to cause significant nuisence we can explore all options. 


Dr Flowers also asked if any members of the Surbiton Neighbourhood Committee follow-up the above matters with the appropriate borough officersinvestigate the progress of these works, and pursue any breached conditions to enforcement, or for a timescale to be agreed with planning officers in respect of enacting the approved application 14/16740/FUL, and complying with all conditions of the planning application as describe in 15/16401/COND? These issues are currently being considered by the Council’s enforcement team.

 

Mr John Tellick asked for an update about the timetable for the carriageway and footway resurfacing work for the triangle at Ellerton Road and Ditton Road and also reported to the Committee the continuing problems that residents are experiencing due to drivers ignoring the area’s one-way system such as shoppers using the new supermarket who continue to turn right out of the store. Mr Tellick asked for an update on the proposed new scheme for Ellerton Road.

 

Mr Younes Hamade, Senior Professional Engineer for the Kingston and Surbiton Neighbourhoods, replied that the resurfacing work for both the footway and the carriageway is scheduled to take place in July. Officers are looking to secure funding for a new scheme next year and a report will come to a future Committee meeting. There is currently a no right turn sign at the exit of the supermarket car park but as this has not proved to be effective Officers will look to see how this can signage can be improved.