Apologies for absence were received on behalf of Councillors Stephen Alambritis, Billy Christie and Simon McGrath. Councillors Ben Butler and Dennis Pearce were in attendance as their respective substitute. 

Members were informed that Councillor Eloise Bailey was substituting for Councillor Simon McGrath, however, due to Covid related reasons sent her apologies.

Councillor David Dean declared an interest in respect of item number 6 – Dundonald Recreation Centre, Wimbledon, in that he was acting Vice-Chair of The Friends of Dundonald Park.  He did not take part in the debate or vote on the proposal.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 15^th July 2021, were agreed as an accurate record.

The Chair will announce the order of Items at the beginning of the Meeting.

A Supplementary Agenda with any modifications will be published on the day of the meeting.

Note: there is no written report for this item

The Committee noted the amendments and modifications to the officers’ report (see item no. 18). This applied to items number 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10.

Furthermore, the Chair advised that the order of the agenda was charged and would be considered in the order as follows: 10, 9, 6, 7, 5, 8 and 11. For the purpose of the minutes, items were minuted in the order they appeared in the published agenda.

Application no. 20/P2235

Ward: Village

Recommendation: GRANT Planning Permission Subject to Conditions and no objection received from Thames Water

RESOLVED that the application number 20/P2235 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions and no objection received from Thames Water.

Proposal: Demolition of dwelling house and erection of three new dwelling houses.

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (North). The Committee also noted the modifications sheet contained in the supplementary agenda.

In response to issues raised by a Member, the Development Control Team Leader (North) confirmed that surface water drainage and flood risk had been considered by the Council’s Officers and no concerns had been expressed, although there were still concerns of flooding to the basements and the potential risks to the occupiers of the dwellings.

The Chair moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation and it was

RESOLVED that the application number 20/P2235 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions and no objection received from Thames Water.

Application no. 19/P4183

Ward: Dundonald

Recommendation: REFUSE planning permission

RESOLVED that the application number 19/P4183 be REFUSED.

Proposal: Erection of a temporary building to provide community space, tennis club and café and erection of separate temporary toilet facilities.

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (North).

Two representatives had registered to speak in support of the proposed scheme, and at the request of the Chair, advised the Committee of the following points:

·         the proposed scheme would benefit the community, in terms of their health and wellbeing;

·        it would provide usable space and much needed toilets, with an attractive addition to the park surrounded by extra planting which would improve the appearance to the garden.

Councillor Anthony Fairclough had registered to speak and at the request of the Chair stressed that Donald Recreation Ground was managed and maintained for the benefit of all residents and users of ‘The friends of Dundonald Park’ and welcomed any reasonable and sympathetic improvements.

In the ensuring debate, although some members supported the proposal, some members raised a number of concerns and stressed that the open space should be retained and not to be diminished

The Chair moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation and it was

RESOLVED that the application number 19/P4183 be REFUSED.

(Councillor David Dean declared an interest in respect of this application, in that he was acting Vice-Chair of The Friends of Dundonald Park.  He did not take part in the debate or vote on the proposal).

(The meeting was adjourned at 20:50 and resumed at 20:56 for a short break)

Application no. 21/P0855

Ward; Dundonald

Recommendation: GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

RESOLVED that the application number 21/P0855 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions.

Proposal: Temporary installation of 2 x 2 kiosks and an archway with planters for up to 5 years from 26^th March 2021 until 25^th March 2026.

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (North). The Committee also noted the modifications sheet contained in the supplementary agenda.

An objector had registered to speak in relation to the proposed scheme, including Councillor Edward Gretton on behalf of his Ward, and at the request of the Chair, had raised a number of points, including:

·         poor design and materials;

·         the proposed development raised ecological concerns;

·         the archway design with tall planters at the entrance to Hartfield wall was too narrow and needs to be much wider.

The applicant had registered to speak, and at the request of the Chair, informed the Committee that this application was approved by Council’s offices in September 2020 to develop the walkway into a dynamic public realm space in the heart of Wimbledon Town Centre. The scheme would

improve the town through place making increasing planting improving air

quality and providing an interesting space in an environmentally conscious

way with eco messaging and additional bio diversity.

In response to Members’ questions, the Development Control Team Leader (North) draw Members’ attention to page 111 paragraph 7.7.1 of the report, it stated that a number of concerns had been raised with regards to the impact of benches on the existing trees within Hartfield Walk. The benches installed do not require planning permission and were not part of the current application. The kiosks and archway themselves do not require foundations and were set away from the trees.

The Chair moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation and it was

RESOLVED that the application number 21/P0855 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions.

Application no. 21/P1442

Ward: Raynes Park

Recommendation: GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

RESOLVED that the application number 21/P1442 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions.

Proposal: Redevelopment of the site involving demolition of the commercial buildings and 2 x residential units, and the erection of row of three single storey dwellings, together with landscaping, cycle storage and refuse storage.

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (South). The Committee also noted the modifications sheet contained in the supplementary agenda.

The Chair moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation and it was

RESOLVED that the application number 21/P1442 be GRANTED planning permission subject to conditions.

Application no. 21/P1988

Ward: Colliers Wood

Recommendation: GRANT planning permission subject to conditions, and the completion of a unilateral agreement to secure 4 of the 5 flats to be parking permit free

RESOLVED that the application number 21/P1988 be REFUSED planning permission. The reasons for refusal will be set out in the minutes.

Proposal: Conversion of existing dwelling house into 5 x self-contained flats, including ground and first floor extensions, a rear roof extension, excavation and extension to basement level, associated landscaping (including demolition of exiting garden structures) cycle and refuse storage.

The Committee noted the report and the plans presented by the Development Control Team Leader (South). The Committee also noted the modifications sheet contained in the supplementary agenda.

Two objectors had registered to speak in relation to the proposed scheme, and at the request of the Chair, had raised a number of points, including:

·         the risk of vibrations to the neighbouring property from the railway;

·         the proposed basement was ‘medium risk, of surface water flooding;

·         the proposed scheme was overdevelopment;

·         concerns around the impact the proposed works could have on the stability of the neighbouring property;

·         the proposed plan stated that there was likely to be damage to the adjacent properties at 36 and 40 Lyveden Road;

·         strain on an overcrowded road and locality

The applicant had registered to speak, and at the request of the Chair, addressed the Committee with the following points:

·         the development of the site was logical and considered acceptable in principle and would deliver 5 units, including two family sized units, to enable the Council to meet its housing need. The proposed design was of a high standard and considered appropriate within the site's context;

·          the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties, the local highways network, flooding and drainage, sustainability, trees and ecology;

·         as considered by the Council’s Officers, the revised application overcomes the previous reasons for refusal, by reducing the height and the depth of the first floor extension to the rear, which results in the proposed first floor extension being set in and not built on either boundary, reducing the height of the ground floor extension, setting in and reducing the extent of the rear dormer from both sides, removing the rear balcony and repositioning and redesigning the rear external openings;

·         the site also does not have any heritage sensitivities;

·         the proposed basement would not exceed the size criteria.

·         the site was located within close proximity to a number of public parks, which would provide external amenity space for the three other flats;

·         In terms of highways and transport, the site was located in an accessible location that was close to public transport. In addition Cycle parking would be provided in line with the London Plan standards.

·         In terms of flood risk and drainage, a Flood Risk and Surface Water Assessment had been submitted with the application, which details the strategies that could be adopted to mitigate flood and drainage risks.

Councillor Laxmi Attawar had registered to speak, and the request of the Chair, addressed the Committee the site was an overdevelopment, and that no other properties in the area had been developed to this extent. There were a number of parking issues arising from the narrow road, this development would only add to the existing problems.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Application no. 21/P1546

Ward: Ravensbury

Recommendation: GRANT planning permission, subject to conditions

That the consideration of application number 21/P1546 be deferred to the next meeting of the Planning Applications Committee.

The Chair advised the Committee that the consideration of application number 21/P1546 be deferred to the next meeting of the Planning Applications Committee.

Ward: West Barns

Recommendation: That the Merton (No.766) Tree Preservation Order 2021 be confirmed without modification

RESOLVED that the Merton (No.766) Tree Preservation Order 2021 be confirmed without modification.

Proposal: Tree Preservation Order (No.766) at Land at 35 Meadow Close, Raynes Park, SW20.

The Committee noted the report presented by the Development Control Team Leader (South).

The Chair moved to the vote on the officer’s recommendation and it was

RESOLVED that the Merton (No.766) Tree Preservation Order 2021 be confirmed without modification.

Recommendation: That Members note the contents of the report.

The Planning Appeal Decisions report to be submitted at the next meeting of the Committee.

Recommendation: That Members note the contents of the report.

Members noted the Planning Enforcement report.

The Committee noted the modifications sheet.