Councillors and committees

Agenda 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: Coombe Girls School, Clarence Ave, New Malden KT3 3TU

Contact: Samuel Nicholls tel 020 8547 5533  e-mail:

No. Item


Apologies for Absence


There were no apologies.


Declarations of Interest

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



Councillors Simon Edwards, Lesley Heap, Roy Arora and Kim Bailey as Members of the Development Control declared that they would not take part in the discussion or make any comments in relation the Planning Consultation item 19/01228/FUL - 229-255 Kingston Road, New Malden, KT3 3SW.

However it was clarified that they were permitted under 5.1 of the Planning Protocol to ask factual questions of the applicant and officer.


Resolved that Councillor Tim Cobbett be appointed Chair for the duration of the Planning Consultation item: 19/01228/FUL - 229-255 Kingston Road, New Malden, KT3 3SW.





Planning Consultation: 19/01228/FUL 229-255 Kingston Road New Malden KT3 3SW pdf icon PDF 350 KB

This planning application has been brought to the Kingston Town and Maldens and Coombe Neighbourhood Committees for comment. The application for the above mentioned development will be determined at the Development Control Committee (if Officer recommendation is for approval) in accordance with the Council’s Scheme of Delegation.


Members considered a consultation item on application 19/01228/FUL – 229-255 Kingston Road, New Malden, KT3 3SW which was due to be considered at a future meeting of the Development Control Committee. It was noted that a consultation on this application was also taking place at the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Planning Sub-Committee as the application was within Norbiton Ward. The application was for the redevelopment of the site to provide 297 residential units in buildings ranging from 4 to 7 storeys, with 216 sq m commercial space (A1, A2, A3, A4, B1 and D1) at ground floor, 124 car parking spaces (including car club and accessible provision); communal landscaped amenity areas, secure cycle parking and other associated development.


Mr Mark Jackson from Fairview Estates (Housing) Ltd, addressed the Committee to give an overview of the application as the developer of the site. It was explained that the application site comprised the Homebase store and garden centre, the Prince of Wales Public house and Avenue Terrace which is a small cul de sac, located between the two sites. The proposed development was located to the north east of Kingston Road between Dickerage Lane and St. Johns Road. The surrounding area was mixed in character. The north of the site is bounded by Lawsons Timber Yard and two pairs of semi detached dwellings. Large Retail units (Aldi and Matalan) were located to the east which were accessed via St. Johns Road. To the west of the site was a shop at the junction of Kingston Road and Dickerage Lane beyond which along Kingston Road and Dickerage Lane are further two storey houses. Further north on Dickerage Lane is King’s Oak Primary School. To the south of the site is St. Johns Church and two storey houses and a Local centre comprising storey buildings in retail and cafe uses. The site has a PTAL score of 2 (poor). Most of the application site falls within Flood Zone 1 and part within Flood Zone 2.


A number of residents addressed the Committee to raise concerns about the application including:

·         The proposed four storey element overlooking existing two storey properties on Dickerage Lane

·         Traffic management planning as there were significant traffic issue currently experienced by residents, such as on Dickerage Lane and the St. John Road junction which could be exacerbated by the development. There was a suggestion that there could be an alternating junction to improve access.

·         The impact that the development may have on the Lawsons Timber Yard business.


A number of Councillors made comments in relation to the application including the:

·         affect limited car parking spaces on site would have on neighbouring roads;

·         need for secure cycle parking on site;

·         concern over the mixed use of the site with both commercial units and residential units and the type of businesses that would occupy that space;

·         concern over the limited number of car parking spaces and the reliability of alternative schemes such as ZIP Car

·         35% level of affordable house being low compared to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.


Enforcement: 240 Malden Road New Malden KT3 6AR pdf icon PDF 1 MB


Members considered a report concerning the unauthorised erection of:

·                     A means of enclosure comprising a brick wall along the front (western) boundary, interspersed with metal fencing and two sets of gates.

·                     A side wall on the shared boundary with no.238 (northern boundary) measuring between 2.15m and 2.3m high.

·                     A side boundary wall adjacent to Wilton Grove (south) largely measuring between 2m and 2.17m high.

·                     A front extension.

·                     A canopy to the rear.


Members noted that no further action was recommended regarding the front extension and canopy to the rear, however, enforcement action was recommended in relation to the front wall, railings and gates and partial demolition of the boundary wall on the shared boundary with No. 238, to create the requisite visibility splays.


Resolved that the Director of Growth 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.





Confirmation of Tree Preservation Order (105a Blenheim Gardens) pdf icon PDF 11 MB

A Tree Preservation Order (TPO No.2 of 2019) has been served to protect two trees within the site of 105a Blenheim Gardens, Kingston. The making of this new TPO having been objected to, the Order is now brought before the

committee for a decision on confirmation. Committee may decide to confirm

without modification, confirm with modification, or choose not to confirm.

Additional documents:


Members considered a report following an objection to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO No.2 of 2019) which had been served to protect two trees within the site of 105a Blenheim Gardens, Kingston.


The Committee considered the objections to the order including the belief that the trees were “unremarkable trees in a publicly visible area of relatively low footfall and not overlooked by many properties” as such they held the position that the trees were not of high amenity value.


It was considered that whilst neither tree had yet reached their full potential, they were both well-formed specimens and of a good size, offering amenity both within Blenheim Gardens and outside where they can be seen as part of the backdrop of trees viewed from Galsworthy Road. They were also ideally situated in order to replace the lost contribution of the two previous TPO trees that were in this location.


Resolved that the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames TPO

No.2 of 2019 be confirmed without modifications thereby granting full protection to the two trees in question.


Reason For Recommendation:

None of the points of objection raised give adequate reason as to prevent the confirmation. The trees in question should be protected in the interests of public amenity and continuation of long term mature tree cover in the area.





Urgent Items Authorised by the Chair


There were no urgent items.