Reports of Community Forums

Morden Community Forum Item 8 (a) 15 June 2010 Chair’s Report

18 residents attended, as well as 6 other councillors and officers of the council and its partners. Apologies were received from Mr Terrett and Councillor Karin Forbes

1. The Chairman, Councillor Maurice Groves, welcomed everyone to the meeting, and encouraged residents to bring more people to the meetings. He was looking to discuss a wider vision for Morden over the coming year. As examples of possible topics for discussion, he suggested a visit from a member of the Royal Institution for Town Planning, health services, carers, and heritage.

2. Action points from the previous meeting Elspeth Clarke said that it had been Field A at Morden Park that had been badly rutted because of heavy vehicles or early mowing. follow up the suggested bus lane in London Road with Transport for London (TfL).

3. Police update Inspector Matt Boyd said that there were a number of rumours current about possible cuts to Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNT). These were only rumours at present. He suggested that if residents wanted answers to questions on policing matters at future meetings they should channel them through Bartle Sawbridge (community.forums@merton.gov.uk 020 8545 4400). The Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Chris Bourlet was on secondment to another post for six months. His temporary replacement was Superintendent Nick Wolfenden. There had been a crime reduction in four of the wards covered by the forum, but increases of 2.9% in Ravensbury and 4.7% in St Helier. Morden now had 6111 members of CommunitySafe, the largest number in the borough. Bob Whitfield thanked the police for their advice to him about noise in Morden Park. He had not been aware that Environmental Health have powers in this area. Councillor Peter Southgate asked what the police’s public statement about being the fourth best in London for confidence meant. Inspector Boyd replied that the public had been asked ‘Are the police doing a good job?’ The proportion saying that they were had risen from 67% to 77% over the past year. Andrew Wakefield spoke as the Chair of the borough’s Community Police Consultative Committee. He said that their next meeting would be at

29 Morden Baptist Church on 13 July, when Chief Superintendent Wolfenden would respond to pre-submitted questions. There would also be the next quarterly meeting of chairs of all of the London boroughs’ committees at New Scotland Yard on 17 June, when the Commissioner would attend for part of the meeting. The Metropolitan Police faced cuts of £200 million in 2010/11. Councillor Maxi Martin expressed concern at the possibility of cuts to the St Helier SNT, which was a superb team and did an excellent job. The Chairman was similarly concerned about the Lower Morden and Cannon Hill SNTs. Andrew Wakefield said that, contrary to public belief, Police Community Support Officer (PCSO) budgets were only ring-fenced until 2012. This was worrying, as there was consistent support for Police Community Support Officers across the ward panels.

4. Signage and More Morden Paul McGarry, LBM Physical Regeneration Manager has provided the following summary of what he told the meeting: “The Long Term Plan We are just about to commission a masterplan for Morden in July. This will be a joint document between LBM and the Homes and Communities Agency. We’re holding off until the HCA Board meeting in July to determine whether the HCA can invest in Morden with us (from masterplanning through to housing delivery) We’ll be using consultants pre-approved the by HCA to avoid lengthy and expensive EU procurement processes. Once commissioned, the consultants will be undertaking a lot of analysis, based on the visioning and economic profiling work already undertaken. We will then run a series of workshops, focussing on design, planning, business etc - we’ll publicise the workshops once we have commissioned the work. These workshops will influence the preparation of the masterplan. moreMorden masterplan will become a returning item at the Community Forum. Whats been going on behind the scenes? 1. Officers have promoted moreMorden to the London Development Agency and Design for London who are interested in our proposals - it aligns with a recent study ‘7 Town Centres for South London’ LDA (or its new incarnation under the Mayor of London) may invest in Morden as a practical application of the recommendations on that report. 2. HCA are also very keen on Morden as a way of delivering new housing in Merton.

30 3. Deliverability is key, and despite the recession, Morden is well placed to attract investment from developers because the key land owners are LBM/TFL - making it attractive for a joint venture between the public and private sector. (something the industry is looking at more often) 4. We have sought advice from developers and national housebuilders who also agree that Morden is a suitable place to invest in, and deliver housing geared towards the 'first and second rungs of the housing ladder'. The Willows scheme in St Hellier is selling well, as this type of housing (1-2 bed flats, small 2-3 bed family properties) are in demand, and under provided for in the wider Morden area. Transport for London: Officers have met with senior officers at TFL (Tube, Road, Busses, Planning, Property) to discuss our aspirations for Morden. 1. TFL have commissioned a feasibility study to look at the provision of a bus station in Morden. TFL accept that the existing situation is not ideal, either for passengers, pedestrians or drivers. It may not be a 'bus station' like Vauxhall, but we are exploring spreading the bus stops along London Road towards Sainburys. This also spreads footfall around the centre to help businesses. 2. We have proposed an option that unravels the Civic Centre gyratory and narrows London Road to provide more space for wider footways and spreading out the bus stops. TFL are examining our ideas at the moment. 3. TFL are looking to roll out iBus - the replacement for Countdown in 2011, TFL website is already updated with the Bus GPS system. 4. TFL are also looking at splitting the Northern Line and increasing the frequency of trains running to Morden (via Bank) - As part of our proposals for developing at the rear of Morden Station, TFL are considering if there is a need for additional platform space, and if so, could be accommodated through a redevelopment of the site. This is just at a conceptual stage. 5. TFL are also doing work with the Council’s design team to explore improve/renew the shopfronts on Morden Station. Small changes: TFL have removed 300m of guardrails from London Road which has made the place look less cluttered already. TFL have also re-planted the roadside planters at Civic Centre and will be looking at the remainder soon. The offices above Morden Station have been refurbished and the exterior repaired and painted - not a dramatic change, but certainly tidier and welcomed.

31 Merton have now installed the pedestrian wayfinding maps and finger posts - pointing out key destinations in and around Morden.

Whats next? Community engagement on the masterplan (interactive workshops rather than formal public meetings) - late summer. Still detailed work underway identifying land ownership details, leasehold information - related to the council’s land ownerships, assessment of delivering regeneration. LBM Regeneration strategy - all the boroughs regeneration activity, recommending that Morden is the borough’s flagship regeneration project. Website update - coming this summer. (hopefully a bit more interactive and linked to Facebook.”

Councillor John Sargeant asked what the short, medium and longterm goals were, say up to 15 years. Paul replied that the short term aim was to make Morden more attractive and help businesses through the recession, carry out tidy-up repairs and deal with some of the traffic problems. In the medium term there would be more major transport changes. The longterm objective was to bring in major developments, for example building housing that would allow people to climb the ‘first rung of the housing ladder’, and other smaller homes for medium to high earners and those with disposable incomes. The present housing stock was predominantly larger family homes. Fulham Broadway might provide a good model for the new development.

In answer to a question from Andrew Wakefield about Red Routes, Paul said that London Underground had produced a very full report. He would ask Nick Greenwood, from Transport Planning, if the report was still available.

Councillor Dennis Pearce asked how funding for development would be identified. Paul said that delivery on roads rested with TfL. Other development could be funded through Tfl asset development and the HCA. Councillor Pearce wanted to see small improvements made now, rather than waiting for the big picture together. Councillor Maxi Martin said that the long term aims would not be achieved unless everyone was tenacious.

5. Section 106 Bartle Sawbridge put this item in context by referring the forum to a discussion on community forum involvement in the section 106 process, at

32 the last meeting. All 5 forums had discussed the issues, and would do so again in the current round of forums, and a meeting had been held on 7 June of representatives of the forums, to consider possible ways forward.

Simon Cranmer, from the National Trust at Morden Hall Park, had volunteered to report back for the borough wide meeting. He said that the aim of section 106 was require developers to ‘mitigate the effects’ of their development. Many residents thought that this did not happen, with money not being spent where the development had taken place. He cited the experience of Longthornton ward, where only 4.65% of section 106 money generated in the ward over the past 5 years, had been spent in it.

He said that new Community Infrastructure Levy regulations brought in at the end of the last government, would reduce the money available. It was not yet clear what effect the new government’s localisation plans would have on planning contributions. In his view, Community Forums were central to the process, and the borough wide group should continue to meet.

Bob Whitfield asked whether the council budgeted for section 106 contributions. It does not, as it does not know what developments will take place and what contributions will be generated from year to year.

A resident asked whether section 106 could be used to improve drainage at Morden Park and to create a green gym. The latter has already been provided, and Paul McGarry offered to speak to Leisure Services about the drainage issue.

Councillor John Sargeant said that the present process was opaque. A clearer process would to lead to better decisions on section 106 spend.

Councillor Debbie Shears replied that the Cabinet sees more information. Councillor Philip Jones added that detailed information is provided to the Cabinet each quarter, but the money does not get spent.

Councillor Peter Southgate said that it should be possible to identify contributions that were not encumbered with specific spending requirements, and that these could be decided on by Community Forums rather than officers.

Paul McGarry said that a lot of local authorities receive project lists from the community, and suggested that the More Morden masterplan should be looked at in this context.

33 6. Action in Merton (AIM) Bartle Sawbridge reminded the meeting that the AIM event in around Green Lane, St Helier, would take place on 17 & 18 June. Officers, Councillors and partners had carried out a walkabout in the area to identify actions that residents wanted, and there would be a wide range of activity on the two days.

7. Olympics 2012 update A resident had asked at the last meeting for an update. There are two public meetings on progress each year. This summer’s event in Merton is a fun day taking place in Cottenham Park on 10 July.

8. Soapbox Bob Whitfield raised concerns about the possible impact of a recent out- of-court settlement on Merton and all other local authorities’ pension funds. The case had related to equal pay issues.

Elspeth Clarke raised three matters. She was pleased at the way in which the grass in Morden Park was being cut; in one large swathe, leaving some uncut as meadow. She pointed out, however, that cutting on the playing fields had taken place one day, or in one case two hours, after the white lines for the pitches had been marked. This seemed odd. Action: Raise with Leisure Services. She also welcomed the new two-part refuse bins, but had noticed that the recycling side of one in London Road was not being emptied regularly. Action: Raise with Waste Services.

Adrian asked whether the Civic Centre car park could be left open when there are public meetings. The Chairman said that it had been closed because other people had been used it who were not on council business. Councillor Debbie Shears said that the Leader of the Council had stated that it was no longer a public car park.

Ray Leyden had seen an advertisement in the local Guardian for Civil Enforcement Officers. This seemed to be an indication of a growing parking regime. Ingrid Lackajis pointed out that other residents find parking on roads a problem and want more enforcement.

David Smith addressed the meeting on the planning application to convert the Morden Tavern into housing. He said that the tavern was a key community facility, not only as a meeting place, but as somewhere where information and advice was provided. He mentioned an occasion when a

34 resident had received help completing a housing benefit application. The Planning Applications Committee would not consider some the issues that were nevertheless very important, because less articulate members of the community would be unable to make their point. Management of the pub had been hugely improved, and it was a community asset. In addition the building of 16 flats and 11 houses on the site would add to the already severe parking problems in the area. More than 100 people had objected to the plan, and he urged other residents to do so.

Councillor Maxi Martin said that she would be meeting the Planning Officer at 5pm on 17 June, and would invite him down to the pub to hear the residents’ views.

There was a request from residents for dog bins in A & B fields of Morden Park, and at Garth Road.

9. Ward Councillors’ updates Councillor Dennis Pearce told the meeting that the AGM of the Morden Park Playing Fields Committee, of which he was joint Chair, was to take place at Morden Baptist Church on 29 June. The late summer fair at Morden Park, previously known as the ‘Lions Fair’, is on 31 August. He said that a few people had given a great deal of their time to organising the fair, and he now wanted a lot of people to give a little time on the day of the event.

Councillor John Sargeant reported on a dilemma faced by Rutlish School. It owns land near John Innes Park, where a public footpath passes straight through the school, which now wants to close it during school hours for reasons of security. There will be consultation on the issue over the respective interests of public access and children’s security.

Councillor Philip Jones said that a local request for a doctor’s surgery may be progressed soon.

Councillor Maxi Martin referred to the 28 May atrocity in Lahore when members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association were murdered. She had attended a service of commemoration the previous week, and asked that the Community Forum send a letter to the mosque. This was agreed. Action: The Chairman to write to the Mosque expressing the Community Forum’s concern. Councillor Martin added that a Steering Group for Ladies had been set up at the Mosque, meeting on Saturday mornings. Many of them are disenfranchised, with English being their third language. A Guides Troop is being set up as well.

35 Next meeting: Wednesday 8 September, in the Council Chamber, Merton Civic Centre

36 Item 8 (b)

Colliers Wood and North East Mitcham Community Forum 16 June 2010 Chair’s Report

The meeting was chaired by Councillor Gregory Udeh

9 residents attended, as well as three other councillors and officers from the council and its partners.

Apologies had been received from Councillors Linda Kirby, Mark Allison and Mark Betteridge

1. The Chair introduced himself and welcomed everyone to the meeting. He said that he would like the meetings to be interactive and informal, and thanked the outgoing Chair, Sheila Knight, both for her contribution as Chair and her great dedication as a councillor and with MIND.

2. Action points from the previous meeting Traffic issues around Christchurch Road: ‘The Chief Executive, the Director for Environment and Regeneration together with senior officers regularly meet with TfL senior officers to discuss issues of both the TfL and Borough roads network. These meetings tend to focus on strategic issues, business planning, public realm and also often include operational issues such as this one. This matter will be included on the agenda for discussion at the next meeting.’ The Neighbourhood Governance Officer is seeking further detail on these meetings, with a view to having a broader discussion on the relative functions of the council and TfL at the next meeting.

Flytipping in Heathfield Drive: ‘It is an ongoing problem around the estate. An attempt to solve the problem is being made by redesigning the bin store area in conjunction with the managing agents.There is hoped to be some improvement by early June.’ Nobody at the meeting was able to comment on whether the position had improved. Need for warning sign near Streatham Road/Links Road junction: ‘The blind spot will be investigated and the appropriate action will be considered.’ Seek assurance that Colliers Wood Rec will be maintained to its 'Green Flag' status: 'Yes, that it is the intention. The park won the award in the absence of a full time member of staff. A dedicated staff member is not a prerequisite for a Green Flag park.’

3. Police update

1 37 Sergeant Tony Richardson from Colliers Wood Safer Neighbourhoods Team (SNT) provided an update. There had been three stabbings (four people were in custody) and a shooting (probably gang-related) in Mitcham. There had also been a rise in violent crime in Figges Marsh, mostly around midnight to 1 a.m. This was alcohol related. High visibility patrols were being used in the area. There had been a sexual assault in Morden Hall Park (there were several there in summer 2009). Other crimes included two residential burglaries within the past two weeks. There had also been a run of flytipping (the police had caught someone with 6 bags). John Barrett referred to recent thefts from empty houses, probably of copper. Sgt Richardson said that the SNT were on night shifts at present. Air fresheners were being given out as part of the Drive Out Vehicle Crime initiative this month. In answer to a question about drinkers on Figges March he said that the police could not do anything unless the people were committing an offence. Pat deJesus, Community Waster Partnerships Manager, said that a team had been up there recently and removed 15 bags of beer and wine bottles. There would be more sessions over the summer. Neil Malcolm said that the council had been good at clearing up. Was it possible to provide temporary bins over the summer? The bins on Figges Marsh and Wandle Park are tiny.

Councillor Edith Macauley asked for the police updates to include all three wards: Colliers Wood, Lavender Fields and Graveney in future.

4. Conversion of family houses to flats Sam Amoako-Adofo, Planning Enforcement Team Leader, told the meeting that conversions normally need planning permission, but it is not a criminal offence to convert without permission. Merton Council had wanted to set a 120 square metre minimum, but the Planning Inspectorate would not accept it. The council’s refusal to grant planning permission is sometimes overturned at appeal. A conversion without permission becomes lawful if it is not challenged within four years. Sam mentioned several properties where the council had taken successful enforcement action, including one in Boundary Road. Councillor Edith Macauley referred to properties at 56 Ashley Avenue, and 10 and 14 Hawthorne Road, that needed to be investigated. She gave a letter to Bartle Sawbridge with details of the cases. Councillor John Dehaney said that there should not be a right of appeal against conversion without consent. In answer to a question from Councillor Nick Draper, Sam said that he did not know whether Eric Pickles, the new Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, would change the law.

2 38 Neil Malcolm was unhappy about the encouragement of developers to proceed without planning consent. The council does not have enough officers to keep up. He referred to 14 Eveline Road, where an outbuilding had been repeatedly re-occupied despite enforcement action. Also, how could we know whether unlawful conversions conform with building regulations and are safe? Sam replied that a developer could use their own structural surveyor and not use the council’s Building Control.

Councillor John Dehaney said that the council should have the right to inspect regularly, but officers said that they could not resource this. Sam agreed that they had to work reactively.

There was a discussion of the planning applications for the Prince of Wales site. Neil Malcolm said that there were three applications, and Jonathan Lewis was going to inspect the site on Friday. The applications contained a tissue of lies.

Councillor Nick Draper told the meeting that Sam was a very approachable officer. The Development section needed to work more closely with him, although he knew that they had a difficult task. He added that the banners were still on the Brown and Root tower. Sam replied that the developers maintained that the person responsible was in hospital. The Chair said that the Planning Applications Committee encountered this sort of problem regularly. A legal framework was needed to challenge these issues. Appeals were sometimes allowed.

5. Action in Merton (AIM) Kris Witherington, Consultation and Community Engagement Manager, explained the purpose of AIM: AIM is an initiative to make Merton a safer, cleaner and healthier place for all. It is partnership approach looking to make a real difference to local communities in a short period of time. Local residents and the Safer Merton partnership work together to identify key issues affecting their area, and bring in services to address them. AIM is a series of activity days to address local concerns including: Environmental issues Crime and anti-social behaviour issues Preventative health Fire and other safety issues

It had been decided that the areas for this year’s programme of AIM events should be chosen by the Community Forums. Safer Merton had used a variety of sources of information – about environmental problems, flytipping, graffiti, deprivation, etc – to come up with a short list for each Community Forum area. To make the events manageable

3 39 they were working to Super Output Areas (SOAs), small areas used by the census, with populations of about 1,500 each.

The three short listed areas in the Colliers Wood forum area were based on Steers Mead Merantun Way Singleton Close

Several residents and councillors thought that the SOAs were not very helpful, in that areas just outside them were in as much need of the AIM approach as those within them. Kris explained that the approach was flexible, and somewhere close by with an obvious need would not be overlooked.

After some more discussion it was agreed to move to a show of hands on the three short listed areas. The votes were: Steers Mead 2 Merantun Way 2 Singleton Close 8

The walkabout to identify residents’ priorities in the Singleton Close area will take place on 4 October, and the AIM event on 22 and 23 October.

6. Section 106 Bartle Sawbridge put this item in context by referring the forum to a discussion on community forum involvement in the section 106 process, at the last meeting. All 5 forums had discussed the issues, and would do so again in the current round of forums, and a meeting had been held on 7 June of representatives of all the forums, to consider possible ways forward. Neil Malcolm had volunteered to feed back from the borough wide meeting to this forum.

Neil said that he had been the only Colliers Wood and North East Mitcham person at the meeting. This was unfortunate,as there had been large protests about the use of s106 in the area quite recently, and he had thought that more people would be interested. The meeting had been impressed by the research that members of the Longthornton Redevelopment Working Group had carried out into the destination of s106 funds generated in their ward. Over the past five years only 4% had been spent on Longthornton projects. It was not right to be rigid about s106 being spent locally, but it was reasonable to expect more than 4% to be. Residents across the borough should have access to this information.

4 40 There was an opacity about the s106 process, and it was difficult for residents to become involved at an early, pre- application stage. Suggestions at the meeting had included dedicating one of each forum’s meetings each year to s106, or holding an extra meeting, or setting up a sub committee on the subject with a couple of people from each ward.

Councillor Nick Draper said that a big fuss had been made about s106 four years ago, but it had not got any answers. But now the geographical balance of the use of s106 funds might be redressed. Councillor Edith Macauley agreed with him.

Keith Allen commented that Colliers Wood Rec had benefited substantially from s106 in 2008/09.

The Chair added that the restrictive nature of how individual s106 contributions are targeted really constrains the implementation process. He favoured diversification.

Neil suggested that the forum should a representative from each of the wards that it covers to the borough wide meeting. He would represent Lavender Fields, and Sheila Knight agreed to represent Graveney. Colliers Wood Residents Association would find a representative at their July meeting.

7. Soapbox A resident complained that, despite the blue cycle track line in Colliers Wood High Street, people were still cycling on the pavements, and that shops put boards and other things on the pavements that cluttered them up. Councillor Nick Draper replied that the problem was that the council did not own the pavements; they were half owned by the shops and half by TfL, and so shops could put things outside on them. He wondered whether the blue lines were safe in wet conditions; TfL had been very reticent about this.

Auriel Glanville spoke about the need for recycling at Merton Abbey Mills. There was an ongoing problem of waste, especially during festivals – there is a 7 week festival in the summer. The waste goes straight to landfill, and the council has said that nothing can be done about this. There is only one green bin, and the oildrums from landfill waste are very prominent. Councillor Andrew Judge had said that there was no money to enable recycling there, but that Sustainable Merton might do it voluntarily. Auriel thought that every public event ought to have a recycling policy.

Keith Spears suggested that s106 money could be used for this it was a grassroots project and would cost little money.

5 41 Neil Malcolm raised the issue of a grey cylinder that he had seen in Victoria Road, which turned out to contain or have contained CFCs, which could cause freeze burns. He had reported it to Environmental Health and the Police. He said that Environmental Health would not investigate. Councillor Nick Draper said that, with an address, the council could and does prosecute.

Next meeting: 7.15, Tuesday 7 September Venue to be confirmed

6 42 Mitcham Community Forum Item 8 (c) 22 June 2010 Chair’s Report

The meeting was held at Vestry Hall, and chaired by Councillor Ian Munn. 27 residents attended, as well as 7 other Councillors, and officers of the council and its partners. Apologies had been received from John Strover, Councillor Brenda Fraser, Roy Tranckle, Chris Lee, Ron Broom

1. The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Action points from the previous meeting Enforcement action on 84 Rowan Road: ownership details are being checked with the Land Registry before enforcement action is started. Police solved crimes figures: Inspector Phillips has not provided these yet, and will be asked to before the next meeting. Rowan School site issues: Cormac Stokes will meet with the Longthornton Redevelopment Working Group to discuss a range of issues, including: provision of a community facility and scout meeting place; site security; state of negotiations between the council and the developer.

3. Police update Sergeant Juliet Sowter, from the Figges Marsh Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) spoke about the police ‘confidence map’. People were asked how good a job they thought the police were doing, and results were plotted on a map. Across the borough police had received an excellent or good rating. The Mitcham Dispersal zone has been confirmed for another 6 months from 9 June. The SNT visited Figges Marsh with Safer Merton recently, because of all the drinking and littering that went on there. They talked to people, chipped some dogs, and are planning to go back on a couple of evenings in July. They also carried out an under age buying exercise, working with police cadets. None of the shopkeepers approached would sell alcohol or tobacco to them. The House of God had been served with a number of different orders. It appears that the man who was running it has left.

A resident said that there had been a bad accident on Rowan Road caused by parking, within two days of the issue being raised at the previous forum meeting. Action: Seek response from Traffic & Highways

4. Action in Merton (AIM) Kelly Marshall, Strategic Partnerships Officer for Safer Merton, introduced this item.

43 AIM is an initiative to make Merton a safer, cleaner and healthier place for all. It is partnership approach looking to make a real difference to local communities in a short period of time. Local residents and the Safer Merton partnership work together to identify key issues affecting their area, and bring in services to address them. AIM is a series of activity days to address local concerns including: Environmental issues Crime and anti-social behaviour issues Preventative health Fire and other safety issues

The four areas shortlisted for Mitcham were: Cricket Green/London Road Sadler Close/Armfield Crescent Clay Avenue Glebe Court

It was pointed out that Glebe Court and Cricket Green/London Road effectively overlapped. Kelly said that the boundaries of the area chosen could be flexible.

After discussion about whether a decision should be deferred to allow time for ward councillors to consult their constituents, it was agreed to move to a show of hands. Cricket Green/London Road was chosen, with 12 out of the 19 votes.

There will be a walkabout of council officers and partners to find out what residents’ priorities are, in the week commencing 30 August. The AIM event will take place on 17 and 18 September.

Slides from Kelly Marshall’s presentation can be seen by following the link at www.merton.gov.uk/communityforums/mitchamcommunityforum

5. Section 106 Bartle Sawbridge put this item in context by referring the forum to a discussion on community forum involvement in the section 106 process, at the last meeting. All 5 forums had discussed the issues, and would do so again in the current round of forums, and a meeting had been held on 7 June of representatives of all the forums, to consider possible ways forward. Trudy Baillie had volunteered to feed back from the borough wide meeting to this forum.

44 Trudy told the meeting that there had been a wide range of knowledge and experience among the people who attended the 7 June meeting. She had managed to get figures for the Longthornton ward over the past five years, that showed that £730,000 of s106 contributions had been generated from developments in the ward, but only £31,000 spent there. Other points made at the meeting had included: Residents could put forward their own projects for consideration by departmental s106 implementation officers. There was a need for residents to know about proposed developments at an early stage, not just at the Planning Applications Committee (PAC). Alternative suggestions had been made; either for residents to be involved before a development was approved; or, for a general pot to be established, out of which funds could be identified for particular projects identified by the forums. She gave an example of the difficulty of submitting projects at the PAC stage, when she had suggested, at a PAC meeting, the use of s106 to provide yellow lines to mitigate the effects of a development of 8 houses. She thought that the committee had been confused, and unable to respond to this. Other suggestions had been: Many decisions could be made after the planning application stage; The expenditure of small, identified sums, could be made by Community Forums; Some s106 agreements were so specific that decisions would have to be made elsewhere; Residents could use the council’s Project Bank if it was opened up to them; Community Forums could set aside one meeting each year for s106, or hold an extra meeting.

In discussion Councillor Martin Whelton suggested that a proportion of each s106 contribution could be dedicated to projects within the ward in which it was generated. He also pointed out that the east of the borough was intended to be regenerated. The Chair commented that it was rare to get s106 money for ‘general community benefit’; it was normally more closely circumscribed. A s106 contribution must also be reasonable and relevant to the development. An important question was how far officers decided the nature of a s106 contribution, and which project(s) it went to.

Trudy suggested that figures like Longthornton’s should be obtained for the other 19 wards, and that would help to move the discussion on. She welcomed a suggestion from Colliers Wood and North East Mitcham forum that a representative from each ward attend the borough wide meetings. Action: Neighbourhood Governance Officer to write to residents seeking reps from each Mitcham forum ward: Pollards Hill, Longthornton, Cricket Green, Figges Marsh.

45 6. Planning update Councillor Martin Whelton pointed out that senior planning officers never came to the Mitcham forum meetings. Could someone be invited next time? The Chair thought that should be arranged if specific issues were identified. People should let him, Cormac Stokes or Bartle Sawbridge know in advance, and either an answer would be provided or an officer invited to the meeting.

Trudy Baillie raised concerns over the Brenley site, where consultation would end on the coming Saturday. It was Greenfield site which had been bequeathed to the people of Mitcham. Merton Council proposed to build 169 homes there. Another resident commented that national covenants would be placed on playing fields from 2012. Councillor Richard Williams said that the covenant on the Brenley site only extended to the frontages. He added that there were separate processes covering planning and restrictive covenants, the latter being dealt with through the courts.

SEGAS: there was a request that s106 form the development should be used to do up the local roads.

SITA: the Chair said that a planning application Committee was expected between 19 and 21 July. NB. This meeting is deferred until early October.

7. Soapbox A resident asked what was happening about Bond Road. The Chair said that the car park had reopened. A resident said that lorries were still parking in Portland Road and wrecking trees. A local businessman said that none of the businesses had been consulted, despite what the council had said. Cormac Stokes replied that he had personally signed the letters of invitation to a consultation meeting. No one had turned up to the meeting. He thought that the council was now moving into the statutory consultation phase. He would check on the details and respond to the forum.

A resident said that the crossroads with Beddington Lane and Croydon Road was dangerous because of the difficulties lorries faced turning the corner. A white line should be set far back so that lorries could have a wide sweep round.

A resident said that Longthornton was terrible for refuse and street cleaning. Another resident said that the streets were being cleaned before the refuse was collected. Also, flytipping was as bad as it had been.

46 Cormac Stokes replied that there had been considerable improvement since 2008/09 the streets were cleaned after the refuse collection, but that there was an additional full street clean each week, not necessarily on the refuse collection day. He asked residents to let him know of specific problems.

The poor distribution of the local Guardian was criticised. Residents suggested that the council should stop advertising in it unless better distribution was guaranteed. The Chair commented that the council was obliged to put Public Notices in local newspapers, but Merton was not well served by them. Cormac Stokes added that the council spends a lot on advertising in the Guardian, whose owners are now challenging the rights of councils to produce their own local free newspapers or magazines. Councillor Maurice Groves said that the Guardian had difficulty recruiting people to deliver the paper, and so the council had persuaded them to leave piles of papers in the libraries. Councillor Russell Makin asked for pressure to be put on the Guardian. He added that Piles of papers were left untouched at Wimbledon Library, but there were hardly any left at Mitcham after a short time. Someone else pointed out that the Guardian was also published on the internet. Trudy Baillie said that she had persuaded the Intergenerational Centre and a local newsagent to have stands for the newspaper, but the Guardian had wanted to charge the newsagent and the Intergenerational Centre had not heard from them.

A resident came back to the relationship between road humps and pollution that had been raised at previous meetings. Apparently the impact depended on how close together the humps are placed. Cormac Stokes replied that the main purpose of the humps is to displace and reduce traffic.

Next meeting: Wednesday 6 October Bartle Sawbridge suggested – an idea of Councillor Geraldine Stanford’s – that the next forum meeting could be held jointly with young people at the Intergenerational Centre, as part of Local Democracy Week. The week aims to engage young people with different aspects of local democracy. The meeting welcomed this idea. Bartle said that he would contact members of the forum with more detailed suggestions for the meeting.

47 Item 8 (d)

Raynes Park Community Forum 30 June 2010 Chair’s Report

The meeting was held in Raynes Park Library, and chaired by Councillor Linda Scott. 24 residents attended, as well as 6 other Merton Councillors, and officers from the council and its partners.

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

1. Actions points from the previous meeting A local businessman had questioned aspects of the proposed traffic measures in West Barnes Lane that would affect his business. Councillor William Brierly, then the Cabinet member responsible, had met with him and the matter had been resolved. A request for yellow hatching at the junction of Cambridge Road and Pepys Road had been investigated and appropriate action would be considered. Action: Bartle Sawbridge to seek an update from the Traffic and Highways service.

2. Police update Inspector Jim Cook described some changes to the Merton police hierarchy. The Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Chris Bourlet had left temporarily on secondment , and been replaced by Chief Superintendent Dick Wolfenden. Chief Sup. Wolfenden would try to get to as many public meetings as he was able. Chief Inspector Mark Lawrence was now running the Partnerships and Safer Neighbourhoods Teams(SNT) side. In response to a question from Councillor Gilli Lewis-Lavender, Insp. Cook said that the West Barnes SNT was still depleted, but it was intended to make a temporary appointment while waiting for the post to be filled permanently.

Inspector Cook then introduced Sergeant Dan Wheatley, from the Raynes Park SNT, who said that PC Floodgate would be joining the SNT in August. This would be the first time that the SNT had a full team. He was pleased to tell the meeting that Rui Azevedo was back at work after his bad motorcycling accident. Sgt Wheatley gave some statistics for recent crime in the ward, and drew attention to thefts from vehicles that had taken place at sports grounds. Someone suspected of being involved in these had been arrested. The Ward Panel in April had taken theft of pedal cycles off their top three priorities, but the SNT were still keeping an eye open, and a PCSO had managed to get one cycle back by pursuing the thief on foot.

1 48 A resident mentioned that Sgt Wheatley had talked about the role of PCSOs being ‘non-confrontational’. What powers, then, did PCSOs have? Sgt Wheatley said that they did the intelligence work. They should not get. involved in violent situations, but telephone for help.

A resident spoke about the confusing traffic arrangements at the West Barnes level crossing, and asked for something to be done. Sgt Wheatley said that he would speak to the West Barnes SNT Sergeant, Graham Chapman, and Insp Cook suggested that residents speak to the council, which is responsible for traffic control. Councillor Mary-Jane Jeanes said that extra signage was on order.

Andrew Wakefield spoke as Chair of the Merton Community Policing Partnership. The next public meeting would take place on 13 July at Morden Baptist Church. Chief Superintendent Wolfenden would be there to present the Borough Commander’s report. Andrew had attended training on Intervention by the Armed Response Unit. At the last quarterly meeting of all London Community Policing Partnership chairs, there had been a robust discussion with the Met. Commander about SNTs. He was committed to local policing, but not necessarily to current numbers.

3. Raynes Park Enhancement Plan The Chairman introduced the item by saying that the Mary Portas TV Programme, ‘Mary Queen of Shops’, had provided very positive visual coverage for Raynes Park. She was also pleased at the removal of the advertising hoardings.

Paul McGarry, said that the council was undertaking a review of all capital expenditure in the light of the Budget. Part of the budget for Raynes Park Town Centre was being reviewed, but the majority was safe: £75,000 that would cover the Bellmouth and the trees at the Skew Bridge. There might be £30, 000 of s106 available from the Waitrose development.

On the hoardings, Paul said that he would be meeting Prime Site in the following week to see how far their fund would stretch in terms of providing fencing and other improvements. The council would also be serving a section 215 enforcement notice on Network Rail. The timing of the notice would depend on the negotiations. Linked to this were Councillor Mary-Jane Jeanes’ concerns about Network Rail and Southwestern trains failure to clear litter from between the tracks and down the embankment.

There was discussion of the Waitrose site. Points made included: The council think that Waitrose’s plan to move the front entrance is reasonable. There is no danger of trolleys running away as they have automatic brakes that come on after a set (adjustable) time; The developers want to clad the 10” Thames Water box to match the development;

2 49 The balconies are being painted in reds, oranges and yellows, in translucent glass.

Councillor Margaret Brierly asked whether anything was happening about the Pine Shop. There was still broken glass there. Action: Neil Milligan will chase action on this.

A resident was concerned about cyclists on pavements. The station island was shared by cycles and pedestrians. Paul said that this was the case as far as Starbucks. He was monitoring the area for accidents, but there had been none yet.

Some Countdown bus stops have been removed. A resident referred to one in Wimbledon. Paul thought that they would probably be replaced with iBus, a newer technology which provided information on where buses actually are rather than where they are meant to be.

Cyclists still ride through the cattle arch, maybe because the ‘Dismount’ signs are too high up.

4. Planning update Neil Milligan said that there had been two applications for the Hollymount School extension, and both had been approved by the Planning Applications Committee. He had been approached by the owners of the Rainbow Industrial Site for a meeting. He did not know why they wanted the meeting. 1, Durham Road: an informal appeal hearing is to be arranged. The hard standing for the Old Wimbledonians Sports Ground had been approved. Go ahead on the Lambton Medical Centre was expected soon.

Councillor Gilli Lewis Lavender said that the Conservative Group on the council will fight tooth and nail against the use of the Rainbow site as a waste treatment plant. The owners had claimed that their lorries were odourless, but they stink. Neil said that he did not know what uses the owners intended for the site.

The Manuplastics appeal had been dismissed.

Councillor Rod Scott said that there was an application to amend an approved planning application for 213 Worple Road. He would like it to go to the Planning Applications Committee rather than being dealt with by officers.

There had been no decision yet on the Sun Alliance site appeal.

5. Section 106

3 50 Bartle Sawbridge put this item in context by referring the forum to a discussion on community forum involvement in the section 106 process, at the last meeting. All 5 forums had discussed the issues, and would do so again in the current round of forums, and a meeting had been held on 7 June of representatives of all the forums, to consider possible ways forward. Pat Erricker had volunteered to feed back from the borough wide meeting to this forum.

Pat summarised key points from the meeting: Residents in Longthornton had managed, with some effort, to get figures for spend on s106 from Longthornton developments over the past five years. Only 4% of the s106 funds generated in the ward had been spent there. There was general agreement at the meeting that more information was needed about the process by residents. Section 106 is in the process of being superseded by the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL), which is likely to produce less money than s106, and may be more restricted in its use. The new Government may replace CIL with yet another measure. There seems to be a lot of negotiation between officers and developers. This assumes that officers have a shopping list for s106 when they go into discussions. Residents need to know earlier about proposed developments, have more information about the process, and greater involvement in it. There are large areas where residents do not expect to have a say on the expenditure, and where the council simply must have the money for its own programmes. There was a lot of unspent s106 money. Community Forums will need to show that they can use money well. They can learn from examples such as the Raynes Park Enhancement Plan. Three questions that the forums would like answers to are: Can they create their own wish lists? Can they be involved early in the process? Could a small percentage of s106 funds be made available to each forum?

He asked for any ideas to be sent to himself or Bartle Sawbridge.

In discussion Councillor Gilli Lewis-Lavender said that the process needed to be looked at in far more depth, and far more residents needed to be contacted. Councillor Rod Scott thought that the rules kept s106 spend fairly local. It would be interesting to see how CIL worked. Neil Milligan thought that the process was quite transparent already. He referred to the quarterly reports to Cabinet (which can be accessed on the council’s website at ‘Your Council’), and said that residents could always ask officers for any information they needed. He also pointed out that CIL had some restrictions.

Pat thought that the borough wide group should look at what had happened in past years; most of the dissatisfaction with the process was a result of ignorance.

4 51 A resident asked if there was a link between the amount of s106 and the value or size of a development.

Paul McGarry said that Raynes Park was ahead of the game, and pointed to the use of s106 in the Town Centre. As an example he said that Manuplastics had appealed, partly on the basis that s106 should not be used for the Enhancement Plan. The Inspector rejected this, and said that the council had been quite right to demand it. Residents could let Paul know of any projects that they wanted and he would see how they could be achieved. He added that there was no set percentage of a development’s value for s106.

Neil Milligan said that most schemes were tested independently for viability. In some cases the council might get benefits in kind – eg more affordable housing as part of a development. He also said that the unspent £1.5 million was in a process – it was not just sitting there.

Myrtle Agutter was concerned that Cannon Hill did not have a Community Forum to relate to; it was neither Raynes Park nor Morden. How could residents there become involved? Councillor Debbie Shears replied that there were no developments in Cannon Hill that would generate s106 contributions. Paul McGarry said that Cannon Hill was included as part of Morden for the purposes of regeneration, and residents were canvassed for their views on town centre regeneration issues.

6. Soapbox Michael Woods introduced himself as a local resident and an architect. He was a Friend of Cottenham Park, and had helped to raise money for various local causes. He described the view of the vast west façade of the Waitrose development, and was very concerned that it should not become a massive hoarding. This could be pre-empted by creating a large mural, which would act as a welcome to Raynes Park. He mentioned the great amount that the city of Philadelphia had done to improve the public domain, including murals on facades. He referred residents to the City of Philadelphia Mural Arts Programme website. With 2012 coming up, perhaps a competition could be run for the best design.

Councillor Debbie Shears thought that this was a wonderful idea, but suggested inviting Wimbledon School of Art to be involved. Pat Keith asked how the idea could be taken forward. Paul McGarry said that he would speak to Waitrose. And it might be possible to link this to other 2012 aims.

A resident wondered how the mural might be maintained over the years. Would it not be cheaper to light up the wall with a design?

5 52 Michael Woods said that a colour-fast self-cleansing render was now available. Councillor Mary-Jane Jeanes suggested a low maintenance ‘green’ wall. Two other suggestions were for a mosaic, and a Virginia creeper.

A resident asked who had right of way at the filter lights under the bridge. Paul McGarry said that this was a historical problem which probably needed to be lived with, as none of the alternatives were any better. Pat Erricker wondered whether a ‘Traffic merges’ sign would help to warn road users.

A resident said that the forthcoming Raynes Park Festival had been arranged without residents being given any opportunity to participate. The Chairman said that it had been organised by local churches, and no one else knew about it. Jan Bailey suggested that people talk to the Lantern Theatre at the Methodist Church, if they wanted to be involved.

Ian Dysart asked whether the Review of Community Forums would be available by the next meeting. Bartle Sawbridge said that it would, and would be sent to everyone on the mailing list.

7. Recycling of Food Waste Rachel Phelan, Principal Community Engagement Officer in the council’s Waste Services, spoke about an expansion of the food waste recycling service, which would include some of the forum’s residents. The service was being brought to another 40,000 residents. 20% of Merton’s waste is food. It can be recycled by turning it into agricultural compost. All food waste, including bones, can be used. Rachel showed the bins and degradable liner bags that residents receive, and said that they would be collected on the same day as their other rubbish collections. Residents receive two liners per week.

Items for future meetings: Section 106 A debate on parking, controlled parking zones, and charges Drainage of Cannon Hill – who is responsible for it?

Next meeting: 7.15pm, Thursday 30 September

6 53 Wimbledon Community Forum Item 8 (e) 6 July 2010 Chair’s Report

The meeting was held in the Mansel Road Centre and was chaired by Councillor David Simpson. 21 residents attended, as well as 6 other Merton Councillors, and officers from the council and its partners.

Apologies had been received from Councillors Simon Withey, John Bowcott, Samantha George and Chris Edge.

1. Councillor David Simpson welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introduced Elizabeth Lozovoy, a graduate student from Brighton University who was writing a dissertation on the impact of major events, such as Wimbledon Tennis Championships, on local communities. He asked residents to stay behind after the meeting to talk to her and complete a survey.

2. Action Points from the previous meeting Bartle Sawbridge read out the responses to the action points. They are attached with this report.

3. Section 106 – the next steps Bartle Sawbridge put this item in context by referring the forum to a discussion on community forum involvement in the section 106 process, at the last meeting. All 5 forums had discussed the issues, and would do so again in the current round of forums, and a meeting had been held on 7 June of representatives of all the forums, to consider possible ways forward. Joyce Pountney had volunteered to feed back from the borough wide meeting to this forum. Joyce said that frustration about the planning process was expressed at the meeting. There was a concern about lack of transparency, and residents in Longthornton ward had needed to use the Freedom of Information Act to get detailed information about section 106 money generated and spent in their ward. There was not proper resident involvement in the section 106 process. She gave an example of a planning application that local people had supported on the condition that the section 106 contribution should be used for a community facility. The application was approved, but the Planning Applications Committee decided to use the section 106 for a different purpose. Residents wanted to be involved at the pre-application and later stages of the application process. It was accepted that all section 106 would not be spent in the area where it was generated, but some part of it should be. Community Forums could create project lists, and choose between projects for the use of section 106.

54 People could become involved at a very local level around proposed developments adjacent to them. Returning to transparency, residents would like to know when it was likely that a planning application would be made for a site, to know why projects are supported, and where the money is spent.

Andrew Wakefield, who had also been at the meeting, added that most of the relevant information, including quarterly reports to Cabinet, was available on the council’s website. He also said that, in the Longthornton case, only 4% of section 106 generated in the ward in the past five years, had been spent in the ward.

John Hill, lead officer for the forum, and Head of Public Protection and Development for Merton Council, acknowledged that transparency was a big issue. One aim of the Community Infrastrucuture Levy (CIL) legislation introduced by the last government, was to achieve greater transparency. CIL would supersede section 106 in time.

Joyce Pountney commented that it was hard to find the relevant information on the council website. John Hill agreed, and said that he had just had difficulty finding some information on it, which suggested that it would be even harder for a resident.

Marcus Beale questioned whether it would be possible for residents to be able to be involved at the pre-application stage, since discussions between developers and the council were confidential.

John Hill said that he would like to make pre-application information public, but agreed that anything that was commercially confidential could not be included. He would like developers to hold public meetings earlier in the process.

Councillor Henry Nelless said that the lull in development resulting from the recession provided a good opportunity to prepare for the next period of growth, in terms of incorporating the ideas coming out of this discussion into the council’s practices.

John Hill said that the CIL requirements will be an integral part of the Local Development Framework, which meant that the council would be in a strong position to deal with planning applications and developers’ contributions in the future. It would also give residents and other stakeholders the opportunity to comment on the draft CIL as part of the LDF consultation process.

4. Police update Chief Inspector Mark Lawrence introduced himself as the new head of Safer Neighbourhoods and Partnerships for Merton Police. There had been a number of changes in the Senior Management Team, with Chief Superintendent Chris Bourlet moving to another post on

55 secondment and being replaced by Chief Superintendent Dick Wolfenden. The new team is:

Police Senior Management Team for Merton Chief Superintendent Dick Wolfenden - Borough Commander Superintendent David Paterson - Operations Superintendent Pete Dobson - Community and Partnerships Chief Inspector Jerry Peppin - Operations Chief Inspector Mark Lawrence - Safer Neighbourhoods and Partnerships

Inspector Jim Cook was moving to the Partnership Inspector role, and was being replaced as the Wimbledon SNT Sector Inspector by Inspector Chris Verney. Crime figures were still moving in the right direction. Burglary, hover, was starting to creep up, and Insp. Lawrence expected this to continue because of the economic situation. Nothing had been decided yet about the future of Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNTs), although the ‘Public Confidence’ measure and the Policing Pledge were to be scrapped. The new Assistant Commissioner for the Met does not think that the current SNT structure supports need. For example, in Merton, there are around 300 crimes each year in Lower Morden, and over 1,000 in Trinity, yet the two wards have the same size SNT. Ringfencing of funding may be removed (it ends for PCSOs in 2012), and there will be a need to use PCs and PCSOs across the borough as necessary, without them losing their local role.

Merton continues to be a low crime borough (second in the London league table at the moment) with excellent community contacts. There was a need to target gang violence in Mitcham.

Chief Insp. Lawrence offered to provide his contact details. Action: Bartle Sawbridge to seek contact details from Chief Inspector Lawrence

Andrew Wakefield spoke as Chair of the Merton Community Policing Partnership. The Partnership’s next meeting was on 13 July at Morden Baptist Church, from 6-8pm. The Borough Commander would be there to take questions from the public. The most recent meeting of all of the London borough chairs had been attended by the Territorial Commander, in the absence of the

56 Commissioner. He was committed to local policing, but not necessarily to current numbers. Andrew suggested that it might make more sense to people to have ‘Place’ policing, rather than ward based SNTs. People did not generally associate themselves with wards, whereas they would relate to a Wimbledon or a Morden team.

A resident complained about cyclists riding fast down Wimbledon Hill and jumping the red lights at the bottom. She had seen three people had nearly been knocked down there. Another resident suggested that the police film them with a camera-phone. Councillor Andrew Judge agreed that photographic evidence was very powerful in court. Chief Insp. Lawrence saw problems around privacy, and also said that cameras could not be afforded. He saw no reason why a member of the local SNT should not stand at that junction sometimes during peak periods to observe cyclists’ behaviour and take appropriate action.

Councillor Andrew Judge said that the SNTs were welcomed very broadly across the borough, and that it would be a real retreat to move to policing over a wider area. Chief Insp. Lawrence replied that there would be consultation before any changes were introduced.

5. Action in Merton – High Path Estate Rana Bhutta, LBM Consultation and Community Engagement Officer, introduced this item, by describing the activities that took place on the High Path Estate on 21 and 22 May. The event included: the Merton Reassurance Bus, the RSPCA carrying out dog chipping 15 pupils from Merton Abbey School collecting litter from near the school The Anti Social Behaviour unit Advice on domestic violence Merton Safer Transport Abbey SNT PCSO Steve Abbey Children’s Centre A Chemist, Mansukh Sheth, taking people’s blood pressure Staff of Merton Priory Homes Uptown Dance Academy Councillors Andrew Judge, Diane Neil-Mills and Linda Kirby

Residents on the estate complained about people from off the estate disposing of rubbish in the estate bins. On 21 May the SNT, other

57 police and Enforcement Officers stopped six vehicles in relation to this activity.

Residents had also complained about a local minicab firm parking in resident-only areas on the estate. The yellow lines were repainted over the two days.

Councillor Andrew Judge thanked all of the officers who had taken part, and said that it had been a very positive event.

6. Planning update John Hill said that there continued to be very few new applications, particularly for larger developments, because of the economic climate. He updated the meeting on some of the sites. The P3 site (Hartfield Road car park) development was now almost certain not to go ahead. Officers were revisiting the planning brief to see whether it should be changed, particularly in respect of suggested future uses of the site.

B&Q site, Alexandra Road: after a great deal of thought and discussion, including the engagement of an external retail consultant, officers had decided, on balance, to recommend the scheme to the Planning Applications Committee, which would consider the application on 8 July. Residents were very encouraged to attend, and to speak of they wishes to. He confirmed that there would be a section 106 which would include amongst other things a financial contribution of £355,000, to improve Leopold Road to the benefit of local shops there. A resident thought that the money might be inadequate to develop the required streetscape.

Broadway House had now been let to Sutton & Merton NHS.

77 – 91 Hartfield Road: the developer had come back with a revised scheme that took into account many of the residents’ concerns. It was still at the pre-application stage.

Enforcement: 33 Queens Road and 1a Leopold Terrace were both being dealt with as untidy premises. 57 Pelham had an unlawful two storey extension. 10 Bathgate Road was derelict.

The Government’s Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 3 was on housing. It changed the definition of back gardens, so that they are no longer regarded as ‘brownfield’ sites. This will enable councils to refuse planning permission for houses to be built in gardens and will deter developers from submitting such applications in the first place. The downside is that this will create more pressure to build on open spaces. There will be a need to monitor closely the impact of this change in government guidance.

58 A resident asked about an application for an inappropriate nine storey development at the junction of Alwyne Road and Wimbledon Hill Road. John Hill said that the Planning Applications Committee had deferred a decision in April. Officers are still in discussion with the developer. Action : John H. to report back on progress of these discussions.

A resident said that 65 Compton Road was still being used as a language school. John Hill said that he would pursue this. Action: Planning Enforcement to Investigate use of 65 Compton Road.

Andrew Wakefield expressed his appreciation at the offer of a public meeting over 77-91 Hartfield Road.

Councillor Andrew Judge confirmed that the council still owned Hartfield Road Car Park. He also said that the new administration would push ahead with the Wimbledon Station Forecourt scheme.

A resident asked whether there were permitted working hours for loft conversion work. John Hill said that they did not always require planning permission, and even where they did the council tended not to be restrictive. Where restrictions are imposed on a day development the normal hours are 8am-6pm, Monday to Friday, and Saturday mornings. If there is no need for planning permission, the resident could still ask Environmental Health to investigate if he felt that the work was too noisy or disruptive. John Hill pending the resident’s (Mr.David Jones’) submission of the site details etc. John offered to follow this particular case up. Action: John Hill to investigate

7. Soapbox A resident asked the council to press Transport for London(TfL) do something about congestion at the bus stops outside Centre Court as part of their investment in the Station Forecourt scheme. John Hill said that TfL had resisted this, but we could try again.

Andrew Wakefield reported that Wimbledon Town Centre Management Board had opened an Information Point at Centre Court, staffed by volunteers. More volunteers are wanted, to extend the point’s opening hours.

Helen Bramsted thanked planning and other officers very much indeed for solving the longstanding problems at Toynbee Road.

A resident said that the smoking area outside premises in the town centre was still polluting the public footpath. John Hill said that he would take this up with the Highways service. Action: John Hill to pursue.

Next meeting: Tuesday 21 September. Venue to be confirmed