The consultation is to be readvertised with a revised company name 'Latchmere Community Pavilion' with an advert in the Surrey Comet on the 5th & 12th Aug or the 12th and 19th August and the consultation period extended for 6 weeks after the first of these revised advert dates.
Leaflet distributed to local residents before Public Meeting Held on Thursday 13th May 10 at Tudor Hall see photo above
Latchmere Recreation Ground is within Tudor Ward and is used on Saturdays by the ‘Little League’ football league, and generally as an informal playing area, and dog walking area. It also has a children’s playground and a toilet block.
It used to have a pavilion used by the Little League and a daily children’s nursery.
It was poorly maintained and about three years ago it was condemned as being structurally unsound and demolished. In the meantime metal containers were located on the old base for use and storage by the Little League.
The Council did not have enough money to build a new pavilion (except for a £60K sum which was ringfenced by the Kingston Town Neighbourhood Committee)
The Council’s Leisure Services Department was tasked with trying to find a partner or sponsor for a new pavilion and contacted all local sports organisations to sound out their interest. The only organisation that showed any interest was Mr Sehra who ran a martial arts club at the Hawker Centre.
With the encouragement of the Leisure Services Department Mr Sekra proposed to build a pavilion and obtain sports council funding.
The Tudor Ward Councillors spoke to Mr Sehra prior to the application and advised him to hold a public meeting to outline his proposals and obtain public feedback before lodging a planning application and he organised and held a meeting at Tudor Hall in Dec. We issued a leaflet at the meeting explaining that we would be at the meeting to hear the views of resident but not to speak and prejudice our position. (http://www.tudorconservatives.com/#/latchmere-rec-pavilion-page-2/4537621893)
Prior to the meeting Mr Sehra has a leaflet delivered very wildly as an insert to the local paper Though the Dec meeting was uncomfortably close to Christmas it was well attended and generally welcomed.
The planning application was lodged earlier in 2010. (To download a pdf file click button at top of this page)
The new pavilion, to replace the old demolished building, received planning consent at the Council’s Development & Control Committee on 21 April 2010. Further details of operation are being negotiated by the Planning Officers and they will be incorporated in a Section 106 Legal Agreement.(See definition below)
We have since received complaints and concerns from you, the residents that you were not adequately consulted and were not informed about the meeting on the 21 April.
We checked with the officers and consultations as specified in the planning requirements were carried out; but that does not mitigate the fact that many of you feel that you should have been consulted more thoroughly and more timely.
We therefore arranged for another public meeting with the applicant, and other key players, (see our leaflet above) which was held on the 13th May 10. At this meeting we promised to arrange another meeting when there was more information and therefore we have arranged a meeting on Monday 1st Aug 11 at Dinton Pavilion. (This was the best locally available location as Tudor hall had prebooked regular meetings and Latchmere School was not available due to construction works)
As a lease of more that 2 years constitutes a disposal under section 123 of the Local Government act 1972 (Known as the Open Spaces Act) it has to be advertised and adverts were placed in the Surrey Comet on the 16th & 23rd July. To assist residents we have included a copy above and also on the flyer (also above) which we distributed to residents to advertise the 1st Aug meeting at Dinton pavilion.
See details of section 123 Public Open Space requirements below.
The meeting was held on Monday 1st Aug 11 and the notes on the meeting can be downloaded by clicking on the item at the top of this page. (see also the press report - link also at top of page )
106 agreement. (See definition a) below) Usually 106’s, which have not been agreed in advance of the planning committee, are left to the Council officers to agree and do not come back to the committee for ratification. However at the Development Committee on the 21st April Cllr Cunningham proposed, and the committee agreed, that the draft 106 should come back to Council Members (i.e. Chair, party spokespersons, and ward cllrs) before it was agreed.
Lease.
The other mechanism, and in its way more powerful, is the lease that the Council would need to grant to the applicant to construct and operate the building. We have been in discussion with the Borough Valuer’s Department on the issue and will be having a further meeting with them to ensure that the sort of issues raised at the public meeting are addressed and the long term community benefits are realised. It is also likely that the lease details would have to be ratified by the Council’s Executive
a)"Section 106 Agreements" and b)"Unilateral Undertakings" are types of Planning Obligation authorised by Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Planning and Compensation Act 1991 Section 12. A planning obligation is a legal agreement between the planning authority and the applicant/developer (and any others that may have an interest in the land.) An obligation either requires the developer to do something or restricts what can be done with land following the granting of planning permission.
a) A bilateral agreement (Section 106 Agreement) is an agreement between the applicant and the Council, (and occasionally others.)
b) A unilateral undertaking is an obligation offered by the applicant to the planning authority either in support of a planning application or more usually, a planning appeal. The terms of the agreement are identified by the applicant. This is produced by the applicant's solicitor in its entirety with no Council involvement.
You are viewing the text version of this site.
To view the full version please install the Adobe Flash Player and ensure your web browser has JavaScript enabled.
Need help? check the requirements page.