Apologies for absence were received from: Councillor David Dean

The Chair advised that the meeting would be filmed but due to technical problems, it wouldn’t be broadcast live today, though it should be available to view tomorrow (via the Council’s web-site).

None made at the start of this meeting.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 August 2013 be agreed as a correct record.

The published agenda and the modifications list tabled at committee form part of the Minutes.

(a) Modifications: A list of modifications for items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, & 13, and additional letters/representations and drawings received since agenda publication, were tabled at the meeting. 

(b) Oral representations: The Committee received oral representations at the meeting made by third parties and applicants/agents in respect of items 2, 7, 10 (objectors and a supporter only) & 12.  In each case where objectors spoke, the Chair also offered the applicants/agents the opportunity to speak; and the Chair also indicated that applicants/agents would be given the same amount of time to speak as objectors for each item.

The Committee received no oral representations at the meeting from Councillors who were not members of the Committee for this meeting.

(c) Order of the Agenda: Following consultation with other Members at various times during the meeting, the Chair amended the order of items to the following –

10, 12, 2, 7, 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, 13 & then 8.

RESOLVED: That the following decisions are made:

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

Decision: GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

External Materials – Some Members expressed concern about the design of the proposed development, especially its bland appearance.  Officers advised that the proposed external materials would need to be submitted to and approved by the Council further to proposed Condition (6), and suggested that, if appropriate, details of such materials could be submitted to the Committee for approval (instead of being dealt with by officers).  As indicated below, the Committee subsequently agreed to this suggestion.

Decision: Item 2 - ref. 13/P1383 (Building at 21 Eastfields Road & Garages between 21-27 Eastfields Road, Mitcham, CR4 2LS)

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet, and subject to the following –

(a) External Materials – The external materials to be submitted to and approved by the Council further to Condition (6), shall be submitted to the Committee for approval.

Officer Recommendations:

(1) Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

(2) Grant Conservation Area Consent

Decision: Item 3(1)  - ref. 13/P1588

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report.

Decision: Item 3(2)  - ref. 13/P1669

GRANT CONSERVATION CONSENT subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to conditions

1. Design Review Panel – Some Members expressed concern about the design of the proposed development and that this application for Merton Abbey Primary School and the application for Poplar Primary School (See Minute on Item 9 below) were not submitted to the Design Review Panel (DRP) as part of the consultation process.  As indicated below, the Committee subsequently agreed to express its concern on the matter of the applications not being submitted to the DRP.

2. Approval – The Committee agreed to grant permission as shown below (Councillor Maurice Groves dissenting).

Decision: Item 4 - ref. 13/P1516 (Merton Abbey Primary  School, High Path, South Wimbledon, SW19 2JY)

(A) GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

(B) Design Review Panel - The Committee EXPRESSES CONCERN that this application for Merton Abbey Primary  School and the application for Poplar Primary School (See Minute on Item 9 below) were not submitted to the Design Review Panel as part of the consultation process,

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to conditions

Extra Informatives- Construction Works – Some Members expressed concern about the effect on neighbours of the noise and vibration resulting from the proposed development, especially construction works for additional accommodation at basement level, and that neighbours should be made aware of when such construction works were due to be undertaken and their likely duration.  As indicated below, the Committee subsequently agreed that two appropriate extra Informatives be imposed

Decision: Item 5 - ref. 13/P2043 (58 Kings Road, Wimbledon, SW19 8QW)

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet, and subject to the following extra Informatives regarding any construction works –

(a) Extra Informative (1) – The Council would expect the developer to ensure that the immediate neighbours were made fully aware in advance of the various stages of construction work and their likely impact.

(b) Extra Informative (2) – The developer is encouraged to abide by the principles and guidance contained in the Considerate Constructor Guidance documents.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

Decision: GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

1. Access to 17-19 Merton High Street – The Committee heard oral representations from an objector including that the proposals would result in the loss of rear access to the carpet shop at 17-19 Merton High Street and result in delivery vehicles parking on the main road.  Reference was also made toassociated issues such as rights of access, covenants and site ownership.  It was noted that issues such issues were outside the remit of the Committee.

2. It was also noted that the shopping parade containing 17-19 Merton High Street hadn’t been designated as a protected shopping parade under the Council’s Unitary Development Plan and so wouldn’t be designated as a protected shopping parade under the Council’s latest policies (under the LDF – Local Development Framework).

Decision: Item 7 - ref. 13/P3140 (Land to rear of Nelson Arms PH, 15 Merton High Street (fronting Abbey Road), Colliers Wood, SW19 1DF)

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

Officer Recommendations:

(1) Grant Permission subject to conditions

(2) Grant Conservation Area Consent

Decision: Item 8(1) - ref. 13/P1206

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

Decision: Item 8(2) - ref. 13/P1213

GRANT CONSERVATION CONSENT subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to conditions

Decision: GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet.

(NB. See also Minute above on Item 4 (Merton Abbey Primary School) where the Committee expresses concern that this application for Poplar Primary School was not submitted to the Design Review Panel as part of the consultation process.)

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to conditions

1. Application Site – It was noted that the application site related to the existing informal gravel parking area (adjacent to the main entrance of the Revelstoke Road car parking area) and its use as a seasonal overflow car park (April to September).

2. Declaration of Interest – Upon speaking, Councillor Ian Munn declared a
non-pecuniary interest in this item by reason that he had used the Revelstoke Road car parking area (including the application site), when his Bowls Club had visited the Wimbledon Park Bowls Club.

3. Access for TfL – Officers confirmed that TfL had rights of access to the application site for the purpose of carrying works to the nearby railway line.

4. Outstanding Issues – During considerable debate, Members indicated that further information was needed on various matters including the following –

(a) the need for data on the use of the Revelstoke Road car parking area and the application site (the overflow car park) by genuine users of Wimbledon Park and other non-users of Wimbledon Park (such as commuters) and possible ways of controlling the latter;

(b) justification for the proposed size of the overflow car park (including having regard to the Council’s policies on sustainable transport);

(c) the possibility of planting around the application site (and possibly other car parking areas for Wimbledon Park) so as to screen parked cars;

(d) the effect of the application on Wimbledon Park as a Grade II* Listed site and on the North Wimbledon Conservation Area, and in particular views into and out of the Park and Conservation Area, and the visual amenity of both;

(e) comment on the impact on visual amenity of the already existing Hercules Running Track (located within Wimbledon Park); and

(f) the possible adverse effect on nearby trees of oil leaking from vehicles parked on the application site.

5. Deferral – It was moved and seconded that consideration of the application be deferred as detailed below.  The motion was carried by 8 votes to one.

Decision: Item 10 - ref. 12/P1181 (Wimbledon Park Open Space , Revelstoke Road, SW19 8EJ)

Consideration of the application be DEFERRED in order that further information can be submitted on the outstanding issues outlined above.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

Decision: GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report.

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to conditions

Flat Roof – Amendment of Condition (5) There was considerable discussion regarding possible measures to protect the privacy of the occupiers of the adjacent property at 3 Spencer Hill.  It was noted that there were already three conditions proposed protecting trees.  Officers confirmed that it would be possible to –

(a) impose an additional condition regarding landscaping; and/or

(b) amend proposed condition (5) (which would restrict access to the flat roof of the proposed two storey rear extension) so as to require that any balustrade restricting access over the flat roofed area (shown on P.325 of the officer report) shall be aligned with the rearmost part of the new extension, thus preventing occupiers of the application site looking back from the flat roofed area towards 1 Spencer Hill.

As indicated below, the Committee subsequently agreed to suggestion (b) rather than suggestion (a) above.

Decision: Item 12 - ref. 13/P0585 (1 Spencer Hill, Wimbledon, SW19 4NZ)

GRANT PERMISSION subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report and the tabled modifications sheet, and subject to the following –

(a) Flat Roof – Amendment of Condition (5) (C.8 – No Balcony) – Condition (5) be amended by the addition of the following sentence – “Any balustrade restricting access over the flat roofed area shall be aligned with the rearmost part of the new extension.”

Officer Recommendation:

Grant Permission subject to S.106 Obligations

Decision: GRANT PERMISSION subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement and subject to the conditions set out in the officer case report.

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report

4 Ridley Road, Wimbledon, SW19 (Ref. 12/P2585) (para. 1.3, page 354) – It was noted that the report should be amended to show that the refusal was a Committee decision (not a delegated decision by officers).

RECEIVED

Officer Recommendation:

That Members note the contents of the report

(a) Burn Bullock PH, London Road, Mitcham (para’s 2.08 & 3.4, pages 359/360) – Councillor Ian Munn expressed concern that whilst some rubbish had been removed from the site by the Council, not all the rubbish had been removed and the amount of rubbish was now building up again.

(b) Cricketers PH, London Road, Mitcham (paragraph 2.02, page 358) – Councillor Ian Munn thanked officers for issuing an Enforcement Notice on this site.

RECEIVED

Development Control officers made a short oral report on this application, which had been refused by the Committee at its previous meeting in August, thus overturning an officer recommendation for permission, but for which no formal decision notice had been issued yet.  Officers outlined the case (especially following a recent appeal decision on another site) for an additional ground for refusal to be added as follows –

“The proposed development would fail to contribute to meeting affordable housing targets and in the absence of a legal undertaking securing a financial contribution towards delivery of affordable housing off-site would be contrary to Policy CS.8 of the Merton LDF Core Planning Strategy (2011).”

After some debate, it was noted that, if appropriate, a formal report on the matter would be submitted to the next meeting of the Committee in October.

-------------