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: the theatre in Tolworth Girls School, Tala Close, Surbiton KT6 7EY

Contact: Jean Cousens tel. 020 8547 5023  e-mail: jean.cousens@kingston.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Appointment of Chair and Vice Chair for the Neighbourhood Committee - 2019/20

To appoint a Neighbourhood Committee Chair and Vice Chair for the municipal year 2019/20.

Decision:

Resolved that Councillor Lorraine Dunstone be appointed as Chair and Councillor Andreas Kirsch be appointed as Vice Chair of the Neighbourhood Committee.

Minutes:

Resolved that Councillor Lorraine Dunstone be appointed as Chair and Councillor Andreas Kirsch be appointed as Vice Chair of the Neighbourhood Committee.

2.

Question Time

A period of no more than 30 minutes for questions on issues unrelated to items on the agenda - advance notice of questions is encouraged.

 

[On items on the agenda, public contributions during the debate are at the discretion of the Chair. However, this is with the exception of any planning applications, enforcement or Tree Preservation Order. Please see guidance notes on speaking on these items in the notes on the frontsheets of the agenda pack.]

 

Minutes:

From 7.35pm – 8.05pm the Committee dealt with questions and other matters raised by residents.  A summary of the questions and answers is attached as an Annex but does not form part of the Minutes of the meeting.

 

3.

Petitions

To receive any petitions submitted by councillors or members of  the public.

Minutes:

No petitions were submitted.

4.

Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

There were no apologies for absence.

5.

Declarations of Interest

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

Minutes:

There were no declarations of interest from members of the Committee on any of the agenda items.  Councillors Patricia Bamford and Lorraine Dunstone indicated that, as they were on the Development Control Committee which would determine the application, they would reserve their comments on the Planning Consultation item 19/0091/FUL Manor Building Services, Oakcroft Road, Chessington (refer Minute item 8 below), and consequently neither councillor participated in the deliberations on this item.

6.

Minutes

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 27 March 2019 (to be circulated).  

Minutes:

Resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 27 March 2019 are agreed as a correct record. 

7.

Community Manager's Report

The Community Manager will report on issues arising.

 

Minutes:

The Community Manager, Ellie Walker-Todd, gave a presentation on various issues of interest in the Neighbourhood. The presentation included updates on: 

·         the Community Forum meeting on 26 June 2019 on the Community Plan

·         the successful Chessington Fun Day on 30 May 2019

·         an arts and crafts event ‘First Seen in’ to be held in Tolworth Market on 8 June

·         Wild Kingston event celebrating the biodiversity and wild habitats in Kingston – event held in The Rose Theatre on Sunday 9 June

·         #2 minute litter pick in Hook on Saturday 29 June

·         consultation on Local Health and Care Plan – ref. https://kingstonletstalk.co.uk/health-and-care-plan

·         Neighbourhood Community Grants programme – ref.

www.kingston.gov.uk/info/200169/your_neighbourhood_community_and_safety/152/community_grants_programme

 

8.

Planning Consultation: 19/00991/FUL Manor Building Services, Oakcroft Road, Chessington, KT9 1RH pdf icon PDF 97 KB

To refer comments to the Development Control Committee which will determine this application.

Decision:

Resolved that the Committee’s comments be referred to the Development Control Committee.

Minutes:

The Committee’s comments were sought on a planning application 19/00991/FUL for Manor Building Services, Oakcroft Road, Chessington KT9 1RH which would be determined by the Development Control Committee if the officer recommendation would be for approval. 

 

The development proposal was: Demolition of the existing building of storage and distribution (Class B8) and clearance of the site; and erection of new replacement building (Class B8), with associated vehicle parking, service yard, landscaping and ancillary works, with retention of existing access.

 

The Committee expressed concerns about:

·         whether the planting of trees would reduce the fire break distance from adjacent properties fire safety issues

·         insufficient parking spaces being provided and the potential for increased traffic in adjacent roads

·         the overall height of the proposed development – that it would have an overbearing scale and mass which would be out of place with adjacent properties

·         potential loss of daylight/sunlight and overshadowing in adjacent properties

·         the maintenance regime for the trees to be planted along the boundary of the site  and potential encroachment on adjacent gardens

·         potential night time operations - restrictions should be imposed

·         whether hazardous substances were to be stored on the site

·         loss of habitat for bats living on the current site arising from the demolition of the existing building

·         the deterioration of outlook for some of the adjoining properties, contrary to what was indicated in the Design and Access Statement

 

Resolved that the Committee’s comments be referred for consideration when the application is determined by the Development Control Committee (or by officers under delegated authority).

 

Voting – unanimous

 

[Councillors Patricia Bamford and Lorraine Dunstone, as members of the Development Control Committee which would determine this application, indicated that they would reserve their comments on this item for that meeting and consequently neither councillor participated in the deliberations on this item.  The Vice Chair, Councillor Andreas Kirsch, chaired the item.]

9.

Early Engagement on the Local Plan pdf icon PDF 98 KB

To engage with the Neighbourhood Committee and seek comments from Members on the Local Plan Early Engagement as part of the public consultation.

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved that comments made by the Committee are reported to the Strategic Housing and Planning Committee when it considers the Local Plan Early Engagement document and individuals and organisations are encouraged to submit their own responses.

 

Minutes:

The Council is preparing a new Local Plan which will replace the current Core Strategy (2012) and Kingston Town Centre Area Action Plan (2008).  Planning applications must be determined in accordance with the local plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.  For the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, this will be the new Local Plan and the London Plan, and therefore the new Local Plan is critical in shaping the future of the borough.

 

This is the first public stage of development of a new local plan for the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames.  The consultation period runs from 1 May to 31 July 2019.

 

There are very limited legal requirements for this stage, which only requires the notification of the Council’s intent to develop a new local plan, and must ask the public what that local plan should contain. However, this stage is used to undertake a significant public engagement exercise to seek the views of Kingston’s varied communities and stakeholders about the future of the borough from 2019 to 2041.  It is the most open and crucial stage of engagement as a local plan must be shaped by early, proportionate and effective engagement with a wide range of groups.

 

Neighbourhood Committee Members are invited to provide comments on the Local Plan Early Engagement (at this link: at this link: Local Plan Early Engagement (Regulation 18)

May 2019 “Kingston: Looking Forward Together) and Site Assessments documents (at this link: Local Plan Site Assessments (May 2019)  (This can also be viewed as an attachment within the electronic agenda for this meeting.)

 

Responses to this engagement and statutory consultation will inform the development of the vision, objectives and planning policies that will be contained in a future local plan. The feedback will be developed into a range of options, each of which will then be assessed using the sustainability appraisal process, to understand their economic, social and environmental impacts.  This will help ensure the final local plan is an appropriate strategy for the borough, taking into account all reasonable alternatives.

 

The Committee’s comments were as follows:

·         We need to make sure that there is better step-by-step guidance on the website to explain to the public how to submit responses and more hard copy information should be sent out, for example in public libraries  – a maildrop or flyers were suggested to raise awareness and to encourage residents to contribute views.  The Call for Sites document was considered to be quite difficult to access and comment on.

·         It is difficult for residents to respond to all the different consultations currently underway

·         Transport and Parking infrastructure are key issues if there is to be growth in the borough – if there is not likely to be progress on Crossrail 2, this needs to be taken into account.  There is a need to be realistic about the amount of new carparking spaces which need to be provided in new developments to prevent obstructive parking on residential streets.

·         The impact of neighbouring  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

10.

Elmcroft Drive - Local Area of Special Character (LASC) designation pdf icon PDF 88 KB

To identify and protect Elmcroft Drive through local heritage designation, as a Local Area of Special Character. To note Green Lane does not meet local list requirements

Additional documents:

Decision:

Resolved that –

 

1.    Elmcroft Drive and Elmcroft Close (area delineated on page C10 of the report) be designated as a Local Area of Special Character and as such, be included on the Local List for the reasons set out in paragraph 4 of this report; and

2.    Green Lane does not meet the Local Area of Special Character (for the reasons set out in paragraph 3 of the report) and as such will not be added to the local list.

Minutes:

The Committee considered a report assessing whether Elmcroft Drive should be identified through local heritage designation, as a Local Area of Special Character.  The report also advised that Green Lane does not meet local list requirements.

 

An independent heritage specialist carried out an initial assessment of Elmcroft Drive and Green Lane to consider their eligibility for Local Area of Special Character (LASC) designation.  The preliminary report noted that Green Lane did not meet the criteria and that Elmcroft Drive merited further investigation.  A full assessment has been carried out for Elmcroft Drive which concluded that the area meets the Council's criteria for designation as a LASC.  Once designated, the local heritage asset will be a material consideration in the planning process.

 

A detailed question in relation to Green Lane which was submitted in writing by the Chessington District Residents Association would be referred to the relevant officer to send a written reply.

 

Resolved that –

 

1.    Elmcroft Drive and Elmcroft Close (area delineated on page C10 of the report) be designated as a Local Area of Special Character and as such, be included on the Local List for the reasons set out in paragraph 4 of this report; and

2.    Green Lane does not meet the Local Area of Special Character (for the reasons set out in paragraph 3 of the report) and as such will not be added to the local list.

 

Voting - unanimous

11.

Appointment of Chair and Vice Chair and other arrangements for the Planning Sub-Committee pdf icon PDF 70 KB

The Committee is requested to appoint a Chair and Vice Chair for the Planning Sub-Committee and to confirm other arrangements for the Planning Sub-Committee.

Decision:

Resolved that the arrangements set out in the report for the chairing, membership and meetings of Planning Sub-Committees are approved, subject to the amendment that the Neighbourhood Committee Chair (Councillor Lorraine Dunstone) will chair all the Planning Sub-Committee meetings (the rota to be amended accordingly).  [A Vice Chair will be appointed for any meetings which the Neighbourhood Committee Vice Chair, Councillor Andreas Kirsch is not on the rota to attend.]

Minutes:

Arising from a Constitutional Review reported to Council on 11 December 2018, a number of changes were made to the roles and functions of the Neighbourhood Committees as part of a wider package of governance improvements. This included a reduction in the threshold required to trigger consideration of a planning application at a Neighbourhood Committee meeting from 10 to 5 valid objections.  It was recognised that the impact of this in practical terms would be an increase in the number of planning applications which would be brought to Neighbourhoods.  A report to all Neighbourhood Committees in March 2019 suggested that Neighbourhoods may wish to establish Planning Sub-Committees, with meetings to be scheduled each year in addition to those scheduled for the Neighbourhood Committees, to absorb this additional workload 

At its meeting on 27 March, South of the Borough Neighbourhood Committee agreed that a Planning Sub-Committee would be established for 2019/20 to consider planning and related issues within its remit, with a rota for 5 members at each meeting (and a quorum of 3 members) to include at least one Member from each Ward.  Dates scheduled for Planning Sub-Committee meetings had been included in the Council’s municipal calendar as follows:

·         Thursday 18 July 2019

·         Wednesday 25 September 2019

·         Thursday 5 December 2019

·         Tuesday 25 February 2020

·         Tuesday 28 April 2020

 

However, a Planning Sub-Committee meeting will only take place if there is known to be a planning application* which needs to be considered then (ie that the planning application cannot wait until the next Neighbourhood Committee meeting) or if to include it in a Neighbourhood Committee agenda would cause the Neighbourhood Committee meeting to run on too late.  Otherwise, a Planning Sub-Committee meeting will not be convened on the scheduled date - Members will be notified 4 weeks beforehand and the venue cancelled.  The headteacher at Chessington School has offered to make a venue available on this basis.  [*For clarification, it will usually only be Planning applications (or Planning enforcement items or Tree Preservation Orders) which are for determination which will be submitted to a Planning Sub-Committee meeting.  Planning consultation items - on which Neighbourhood Members are being consulted so that their comments can be referred to the Development Control Committee to determine the application - will continue to be submitted to the full Neighbourhood Committee.]

 

Resolved that the arrangements set out in the report for the chairing, membership and meetings of Planning Sub-Committees are approved, subject to the amendment that the Neighbourhood Committee Chair (Councillor Lorraine Dunstone) will chair all the Planning Sub-Committee meetings (the rota to be amended accordingly).  [A Vice Chair will be appointed for any meetings which the Neighbourhood Committee Vice Chair, Councillor Andreas Kirsch is not on the rota to attend.]#

 

Voting - unanimous

12.

Urgent Items authorised by the Chair

To consider any items which, in the view of the Chair, should be dealt with as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances in accordance with S100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

 

Minutes:

There were no urgent items authorised by the Chair.

13.

Information Items

 

 

1.         Dates & venues of the remaining Neighbourhood Committee meetings in the 2018/19 municipal year and potential forthcoming business

 

Thursday 5 September 2019 - venue: (TBC) Tolworth Girls School theatre, Tala Close, Surbiton KT6 7E

  • Green Lane - report back on the review of the experimental traffic order

 

Tuesday 5 November 2019 - venue: Chessington Methodist Church, Church Lane/ Moor Lane, Chessington, KT9 2DJ

 

Thursday 16 January 2020 - venue: Hook Centre, Hook Road, Chessington, KT9 1EJ

 

Tuesday 10 March 2020 - Chessington Methodist Church, Church Lane/ Moor Lane, Chessington, KT9 2DJ

 

 

2.         RBK Traffic Schemes Update – to follow

 

 

Minutes:

Resolved that the following items be noted:

 

·         Traffic Schemes update

·         Potential Forthcoming Business

 

Annex 1 - Public Questions

Annex 1

Public Questions

 

1.            Mayor of London’s Plan

Mr Rob Robb asked the following questions on behalf of Chessington District Residents Association:

 

The most worrying and contentious issue that is causing real concern amongst our community in the South of the Borough is the potential destruction of our Homes and Back Gardens by the London Mayor’s Plan. As the South of the Borough is the only real opportunity we have to see all  our Local Council Representatives, people we voted in to look after our interests, together  we need to know where they stand on an individual basis, including the Chair, asking them to comment on the following questions.

 

The Chair of the Committee advised that she had collated comments from Committee members in order to save time in responding to the five questions:

 

1.       Can our councillors tell us on an individual basis where they stand on Back Garden Development and the effects it will have on the existing wildlife and trees etc.?

Response:  We can’t give a definitive answer to this. Committee members are united in wishing to deliver their manifesto commitments in the interests of all the residents of the Neighbourhood and have an interest themselves in protecting the Neighbourhood as they are themselves all residents in the Neighbourhood.  However, the Local Plan will be the key determinant of how the Council responds to the Mayor of London’s targets and therefore residents should engage with the Local Plan process – there will be an item later on in the agenda for the meeting to explain about early engagement with the Local Plan. With reference to the question about back garden development, each application must be considered on its own merits – local authorities are not able to agree blanket policies against all back garden development and must consider specific factors such as the size of the development, the distance from neighbouring properties and the impact on other neighbouring properties.  Wildlife and trees should be protected wherever possible.  All these con

 

2.       How do our Local Councillors feel about the recent decision made by the Appeals court to hold up the High court decision to allow registration of Playing Fields if they are identified in the Local Plan as areas for potential  development; i.e. should we keep all existing recreation grounds out of the Local Plan as potential development sites. 

Response: Generally playing fields should be kept out of development sites; however, it would be unwise to rule this out completely as there is a chance, however slim, that a development may provide an opportunity for the playing field to be developed into better recreational facilities for local people.

 

3.       What plans do our councillors have to improve the infrastructure of the South of the Borough i.e. School places, expansion of GP surgeries, improvement in Public transport?  Do they envisage they will be proactive and put these plans in place before they encourage the London Mayor’s Plans of densification for our part of the Borough; especially within his circles he has drawn around stations?

 

Response: The Council does not itself have funding to build infrastructure.  However, the Council would be proactive in seeking S106 and CIL funding for infrastructure and would aim for this to be in place before the development was completed.  Once we understand the likely growth patterns following consultation, the Council will commission an infrastructure study and primarily, within any Opportunity Area, appropriate mechanisms beyond the Community Infrastructure Levy, to secure the funding for the infrastructure. The Administration is challenging the Mayor of London’s housing targets for the borough.

 

4.       How do they feel about the Mayor’s pressure to reduce the number of parking places that go with new developments?  Do they believe this way forward is realistic or do they agree that the reality is that most families in the South of the Borough have at least one vehicle, possibly an SUV, and that a growing part of the local economy is people working for themselves or for an organisation where they need a vehicle parked at home for work. Surely they are clearly aware, the fact that parking  issues are regularly  raised by Residents at Local Neighbourhood Committees, shows the London Mayor is burying his head in the sand and is in denial when it comes to allocation of parking spaces on new developments and is causing stressful situations in Communities for the future.

 

Response: This is a difficult issue. There is no easy answer. We all want carparking spaces but also know there are too many cars on our roads for the size of our roads, and there is too much air pollution caused by cars.  More space for carparking reduces the size of the development.  Better public transport facilities and car charging facilities are needed. We all need to be thinking about the types of cars we drive and could think about using car clubs and Zip cars.

 

5.       Do our councillors recognise the A243 is one of the most congested roads in the Borough and they should seriously think about restricting further development along its length where this congestion occurs, on a daily basis, until the congestion problem is resolved? Surely adding developments along its length before a resolution is found will, just add to the existing traffic volumes and by our planning department allowing developers to bring the building lines forward to virtually up to the public footpath will put households, including young children, in contact with high levels of pollution. In addition the loss of trees etc in front and back gardens due to the overdevelopment that at the moment help tackle the pollution taking up ozone and nitrogen oxides will be lost and make matters even worse.

 

Response: Any development along the A243 is going to cause difficulties but the Council can’t stop someone submitting a planning application.  This is an example of the kind of issue about which residents should submit views for the Local Plan giving their reasons. The Council can’t refuse an application unless it provides reasons in accordance with their local planning policies.  This is a strictly regulated process nationally.

 

 

 

 

2.            Filby Road – dangerous cycling

Mr Ian Hogben asked the following question:

Now that pavement work is currently already underway in Filby Road, is some action at last being taken to discourage dangerous pavement cycling before another accident happens?  There are elderly residents who have nearly been knocked down by cyclists.

As this is a safety issue I have raised this matter at a number of previous Neighbourhood meetings, as well as in emails to various councillors and officers, and have even provided cctv footage as evidence of the problems of high-speed cyclists using the southern pavement on the approach to the entrance of the Castle Hill open space.

I have already submitted a suggestion/diagram to how this situation might be tackled and have recently spoken several times to Gert van Wyk, but each time I have been told the matter is with Ian Price. I am attaching a photo of a similar measure Epsom and Ewell BC have had to take on one of their (Chessington Road) pavements.

A written response from the Traffic Engineering team was read out at the meeting as follows:

 

“The photo attached to the email is a different set of circumstances to Filby Road, and the railing put in place are at the end of cul de sac, where there is a possibility that cyclists may join the footway and it is in place to protect pedestrians who may be waiting to cross at the pedestrian crossing, as well as making sure the cyclists go round the back of the pedestrian waiting area.  Albeit the photos along this section of road are possibly out of date, the footway on this side of Chessington Road is hilly like Filby Road and the SCC chose to make it a shared facility without any physical measures on those hilly sections.

 

I have discussed this with Gert van Wyk and rather than put in railings, there is an option to introduce a stagger to the path by moving the grass verge section to the rear of the footway over a short section, but his view is that it will not slow cyclists adequately. 

 

I do not think we should be introducing railings across the footway, in residential areas as that can present other issues.  I have previously discussed this with Chris, our Design Team Leader, and included him on the circulation so that Chris can offer any comments to Gert to reply to you.”

 

Councillor Bamford commented that she would like further consideration of this matter, having already met several traffic engineers on site to discuss the problem.

The Committee agreed to receive a brief report on this matter at its next meeting.