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: Guildhall, Kingston upon Thames. View directions

Contact: James Geach 020 8547 5062  email:  james.geach@kingston.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

27.

Questions, petitions and public participation

·         A 30 minute question and answer session on issues not already listed on the agenda is available at the start of the meeting. Advance notice of questions is encouraged.

 

·         Petitions can also be presented to the Committee at the start of the meeting.

 

·         Contributions during the debate on items is at the discretion of the Chair.

Minutes:

No questions were submitted.

28.

Apologies for absence and attendance of substitute Members

Minutes:

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Andrea Craig and Thay Thayalan. Councillors David Glasspool and Liz Green attended as substitutes.

29.

Minutes

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 13 October 2016.

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 13 October 2016 were confirmed as a correct record.

30.

Declarations of interest

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

Minutes:

No interests were declared.

31.

Neighbourhood Planning pdf icon PDF 76 KB

To allow the Council to respond to its planning duties and opportunities for local communities arising from the Localism Act 2011 and Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012 (and 2015 amendment) in relation to Neighbourhood Planning.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered a series of measures designed to respond to the Council’s duties in relation to neighbourhood planning arising from the Localism Act (2011) and the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations (2012) as amended in 2015. The Committee were asked to approve the amended Neighbourhood Planning Protocol as set out in Annex 1 of the report.

 

The Localism Act (2011) introduced the ability for local communities to produce a range of planning documents that can form part of the decision making process for new developments. It allows communities to apply to be ‘Neighbourhood Areas or Forums’ in order to produce these plans. Alongside other requirements, the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations allows Councils to create additional criteria that local communities will be required to adhere to prior to an application for ‘Neighbourhood Area or Forum’ designation being approved.

 

Neighbourhood Planning documents were previously adopted by the Committee on 26 March 2016. The Neighbourhood Planning Protocol incorporates significant modifications to these including changes to the decision making process for the determination of applications for Neighbourhood Area and Neighbourhood Forum designations.

 

Resolved that:

 

1.    the content and approach set out in the report on Neighbourhood Planning is noted;

 

2.    the Director of Place is given delegated authority to determine an application for the designation of a Neighbourhood Area or Neighbourhood Forum;

 

3.    the amended Neighbourhood Planning Protocol is approved as set out in Annex 1 of the report and the Head of Planning and Regeneration, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and the Opposition Spokesperson for Regeneration, is given delegated authority to make any necessary factual amendments to the document; and

 

4.    the Committee notes the intention of the Strategic Planning Team to redesign the Council’s Neighbourhood Planning webpage in line with its new engagement strategy.

 

Voting: Unanimous.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

32.

Cocks Crescent Supplementary Planning Document pdf icon PDF 83 KB

To adopt the Cocks Crescent Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which sets out a planning framework to guide the redevelopment of Cocks Crescent in New Malden. To note the document responds to the consultation process and provides a clear set of principles and land uses, in order to help shape future development proposals.

 

Please note that Annexes 2, 3 and 4 have been circulated as a separate supplement.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered the adoption of the Cocks Crescent Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (as set out in Annex 1 of the report). The SPD was prepared to guide the redevelopment of Cocks Crescent with the goal of achieving comprehensive regeneration of the site and delivering maximum community benefit. It is in-line with the London Plan and the Council’s existing Development Plan and it will play a key role in shaping future development proposals on the site as the document will carry material weight in the consideration of planning applications as part of the decision making processes within the Council’s Development Management functions.

 

The SPD was published for formal consultation from 1 July 2016 to 29 August 2016 for a period totalling 8 weeks. Prior to this process, two other consultation exercises have also been completed since July 2015. A summary of all this consultation activity was set out in the Consultation Statement which was attached as Annex 2 of the report. A total of 463 responses, detailing over 6,000 individual comments, were received. All of these responses were analysed by the Strategic Planning and Strategic Business teams in order to produce a quantitative analysis. This analysis was attached to the report as Annex 3.

 

Overall, both the vision and overarching principles within the SPD received more support than opposition from those who responded to the consultations. This was also true of the included land use strategy, access and movement strategy and the public realm strategy. Nevertheless there were high levels of concern across other areas including the illustrative masterplan and the height and scale strategy which both received more opposition than support.

 

The consultation results showed that there is very strong support for the Malden Centre which is clearly an essential part of life for the local community and respondents were critical of the of the lack of detail in the SPD about what will be retained. Whilst some favoured the refurbishment of the existing facility, eight out of ten respondents see the delivery of a new leisure centre as very important. All the consultation comments, as well as the Council’s response to each, were set out in full in Annex 3 of the report.

 

A number of changes were made to the draft SPD following its publication for consultation. These changes are the result of both the consultation responses received and some general updates that were required. An annotated version of the original draft SPD showing all the changes made since the consultation version was published was attached as Annex 4 to the report. The key changes were:

 

·         Greater emphasis on the civic, community and leisure aspects of the proposals.

 

·         The introduction of a new section called ‘The Malden Centre’ that sets out the Council’s commitment to delivering a new community sport and wellbeing hub that includes a 25m public swimming pool.

 

·         The removal of the illustrative masterplan and its replacement with text that describes the key relationships required between land uses.

 

·         Greater emphasis on the need to respond  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

33.

Financial Viability in Planning Supplementary Planning Document pdf icon PDF 73 KB

To adopt the Financial Viability in Planning Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames. To note that the SPD responds to the consultation process and provides greater clarity for developers and other stakeholders in regard to the Council’s requirements for robust financial viability assessments.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered the adoption of the Financial Viability in Planning Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) as set out in Annex 1 of the report. The SPD has been prepared in response to development viability becoming an important consideration in the planning process as emphasised by the National Planning Policy Framework. It is a requirement that that major applications are supported by viability appraisals as evidence to the overall viability of proposals.

 

Once adopted the SPD will provide greater clarity for developers and stakeholders on matters pertaining to the role of financial viability assessment in planning. The SPD introduces the Council’s position that, in submitting financial viability appraisals, planning applicants do so in the knowledge that they will be made publicly available. The SPD will become a material consideration as part of decision making in Development Management.

 

The draft SPD was published for consultation for public consultation from 12 August 2016 to 7 October 2016 for a period totalling 8 weeks. A consultation statement that analyses the results of the consultation exercise was attached as Annex 2 to the report and a full breakdown of the all the responses and individual comments received was attached as Annex 3. An annotated version of the SPD, showing the changes made to since the consultation, was attached as Annex 4.

 

During the consideration of the report a Member asked Officers to explore the possibility of setting differential affordable housing targets for both brownfield sites in existing built up areas and for greenfield sites outside existing built up areas during the development of new local plan.

 

Resolved that:

 

1.    the consultation responses and the consequential modifications made to the SPD are noted,

 

2.    the Head of Planning and Regeneration, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration, is given delegated authority to make factual amendments to the SPD.

 

3.    The Financial Viability in Planning Supplementary Planning Document, as set out in Annex 1 of the report, is adopted.

 

Voting: Unanimous.

34.

CIL Governance Principles pdf icon PDF 434 KB

To agree the principles of the CIL Governance arrangements for the Kingston Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) and the arrangements for allocating future CIL expenditure.

Minutes:

The Committee were asked to agree a set of principles that will underpin the Community Infrastructure Levy’s (CIL) governance arrangements and a methodology for the allocation of future CIL expenditure. The report addressed the prioritisation of infrastructure, the decision making process, the distribution of funds, the delineation neighbourhoods, reporting and accounting.

 

Resolved that:

 

1.    the distribution of funds, as set out in paragraphs 14-18 of the report is agreed.

 

2.    the Committee notes that the process for identifying potential CIL expenditure will be managed by Officers.

 

3.    the Committee notes that any CIL expenditure on items that are capital in nature must be allocated through the Capital Programme by the Treasury Committee.

 

Voting:

Those for: Councillors David Cunningham, David Glasspool, Bill Brisbane, Kevin Davis, Sheila Griffin, Raju Pandya, Priyen Patel, Cathy Roberts, Malcolm Self, Ken Smith and Gaj Wallooppillai.

Abstained: Councillors Liz Green and Jon Tolley.

  

35.

S106 and CIL Biannual Monitoring Report pdf icon PDF 108 KB

To provide an update summarising s106 income and agreements entered into

during the period commencing 1st April 2016 to 30th September 2016. The report also provides a summary of affordable housing contributions and completions for this period.

Minutes:

The Committee were updated on the s106 income, and agreements entered into, during the period commencing 1 April 2016 to 30 September 2016. The Committee were also given a summary of the affordable housing contributions and completions for the same period.

 

Councillor Malcolm Self asked for a breakdown of the £37,267.26 of unallocated S106 contributions for Surbiton as cited in Table 4 of the report and it was agreed that this information would be sent to Councillor Self in writing.

 

Resolved that:

 

1.    the information and analysis provided on new s106 financial contributions agreed, financial contributions received, expenditure, MCIL and CIL income received and the affordable housing agreed for the period commencing 1 April 2016 to 30 September 2016 is noted.

 

2.    the committed s106, as set out in table 3 of the report, are noted.

 

3.    the unallocated funds secured over this period, as set out in table 4 of the report, are noted.

 

4.    the amount of Mayoral and Kingston CIL collected is noted.

 

5.    the number of affordable housing agreements signed and the number of affordable units delivered are noted.

 

Voting: Unanimous.

36.

Children’s Home for Looked After Children pdf icon PDF 121 KB

To note the Adults & Children’s Committee decision to support the opening of a children’s home and to begin the process of identifying a suitable site for the home.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee were asked to note the Adults & Children’s Committee decision to support the opening of a children’s home and to begin the process of identifying a suitable site for the home.

 

Members agreed that in information detailed in Annex 1 of the report should be exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. In order to allow the Committee to discuss this annex members of the press and public were briefly excluded from the meeting in accordance with Standing Order No 31.

 

Resolved that, following the agreement of the Adults and Children’s Committee at its meeting on 16 November 2016, to open a children’s home either within the borough or its close vicinity,

 

1.    authority is delegated to the Head of Property and the Joint Director of Children’s Services, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Social Care & Health, to identify a suitable building for this purpose; and

 

2.    once a suitable site has been identified a further report will be submitted to the Committee.

 

Voting: Unanimous.

37.

Former Barnfield Youth Centre pdf icon PDF 69 KB

To consider bids received for the site known as the Barnfield Youth Centre,

Parkfields Road, Kingston, with a view to approving the leasehold disposal of the site.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

This item was withdrawn and not considered by the Committee.

38.

Disposal of Long Lease of St Mary's Centre pdf icon PDF 87 KB

To approve the disposal of the site known as the St Mary's Centre, Chessington, to the YMCA by way of a long lease, subject to the YMCA obtaining any necessary planning consents and resolving any relevant land issues.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Committee considered the disposal of the site known as the St Mary’s Centre, Chessington, to the YMCA by way of a long lease, subject to the YMCA obtaining any necessary planning consents and resolving any relevant land issues. The Council owns the freehold of the site as shown in Annex 2 of the report, the site has been leased to St Mary’s Church since 2008.

 

The YMCA has made a proposal to acquire the leasehold of the site for a period of 150 years in order to facilitate a mixed use development consisting of a community hall facility and 31 one bedroom residential units. The YMCA has proposed to pay an annual rental for the use of the site, to grant the Council nomination rights for 50% of the residential units it intends to develop on the site, and to enter into a profit sharing arrangement with the Council for any additional revenue it is able to generate from the community facility.

 

Councillors Patricia Bamford and Rachel Reid addressed the Committee on this item from the public gallery and asked a number of questions about the legality of the disposal process proposed, the recreational use covenant that in in place on the site and the length of lease proposed. In response the Committee received confirmation from officers that the proposed disposal is lawful and that any land issues relating to covenants are for the YMCA to resolve. The anticipated lifespan of the type of units proposed is in the region of 50 – 60 years and the proposed 150 year lease has been designed to accommodate three lifecycles of these units.

 

In their consideration of the report it was the view of some Members that there is currently insufficient evidence that this lease represents best value for the Council. Some members also expressed concern about whether the recreational covenant in place on the site will allow for the residential use proposed. Given these concerns some Members called for this item to be deferred to a later meeting in order for a more detailed report to be presented to the Committee. However it was the view of the majority of the Committee that the disposal is lawful, represents good value for money and that it will help to realise a scheme that will deliver a significant amount of much needed affordable housing. It was noted that any future planning application will be subject to the Council’s development management processes.

 

It was moved to defer consideration of the issue to a future meeting and the motion fell.

Voting:

Those for: Councillors Sheila Griffin, Malcolm Self, Bill Brisbane, Jon Tolley and Liz Green.

Those against: Councillors David Cunningham, David Glasspool, Kevin Davis, Ken Smith, Priyen Patel, Gaj Wallooppillai, Cathy Roberts and Raju Pandya.

 

Members noted, but during the course of the meeting did not directly refer to, the financial details within the report’s annex which was agreed should be exempt from publication by virtue of paragraph 3 of Part 1  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

39.

Urgent items authorised 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.