Planning Atlas
Planning AtlasKingston Upon ThamesSt Mark's & Seething Wells ward22/02880/CPU
Planning application · Kingston Upon Thames

22/02880/CPU.

10 Victoria Road Surbiton KT6 4JU

Lawful Development Certificate at 10 Victoria Road Surbiton KT6 4JU, received 7 Sep 2022 — approved on 8 Nov 2022 (delegated, James Garside).

ApprovedRefusedOther
At a glance · this applicationKingston Upon Thames profile →
Approved
Outcome
8 Nov 2022
9 wks
Decision time
1 wks over the 8-week target
Conditions
not captured
0
Documents
on the council file
0
Objections
0 in support
No
Appeal
none recorded
Record from the Kingston Upon Thames planning register as captured; documents link to the council's own files. Nearby applications are context, not part of this application.
Application

What is it?

Full refurbishment of the main pitched roof

Reference
22/02880/CPU
Type
Cert of Lawful Use/Operation - Proposed
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
KT6 4JU
Received
7 Sep 2022
Validated
13 Sep 2022
Target date
8 Nov 2022
Decision date
8 Nov 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Granted
Reference
22/02880/CPU
Type
Cert of Lawful Use/Operation - Proposed
Show all 16 rows
Agent / consultant
Case officer
Postcode
KT6 4JU
Received
7 Sep 2022
Validated
13 Sep 2022
Target date
8 Nov 2022
Decision date
8 Nov 2022
Decision route
Delegated (officer)
Status
Granted
Documents

What was filed?

No documents are recorded for this application.

Documents open on the Kingston Upon Thames portal (the portal needs its documents tab opened first — the link handles that). View the application page ↗

Decision

What happened?

Approved on 8 Nov 2022, delegated decision by James Garside — 9 weeks from submission (1 over the 8-week target).

Timeline

Date
Event
7 Sep 2022
Application received
13 Sep 2022
Application validated
8 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
8 Nov 2022
Delegated decision: Approved · James Garside
7 Sep 2022
Application received
13 Sep 2022
Application validated
8 Nov 2022
Statutory target date
Show all 4 rows
8 Nov 2022
Delegated decision: Approved · James Garside

Public response

Measure
Count
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
Objections
0
In support
0
Total comments
0
People

Who is involved?

Name
Role
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Applicant — the party who applied, not necessarily the owner
Agent · consultant profile
Case officer — delegated decision
Place

What affects it?

Context around the site — not part of this application. Designations over the site: use the map's designations filter (conservation areas, listed buildings, Article 4, flood risk …). Decisions within 250 metres of the site are listed below — context, not this application.

Other applications within 250 metres (context — nearby, not this application)

No other geocoded decision is recorded within 250 metres.