NEW ACTION BY YOUR COUNCILLORS TO SAVE CROSS-LONDON TRAIN SERVICES

Richard, with Councillor Simon Wales, presents the Thameslink petition signed by Sutton South residents at the HQ of the Department for Transport

As so many Sutton South residents commute into London to work every day, and we value our direct connections to St. Pancras, the loss of our cross-London train services, if the Thameslink / Capital Connect services terminate at Blackfriars, will be a blow to local people.
On 23 August Richard joined Councillor Simon Wales, together with Liberal Democrat activists from neighbouring Boroughs, to present our petition to the Department for Transport at their Head Office in Marsham Street, Westminster. The petiton called on the Department to put a stop to these proposals.
 
September 15 is the deadline to comment on the Department for Transport’s consultation document making this proposal, following a decision by the DfT to extend the consultation period. The link to their consultation document is HERE. You can email comments to     Thameslink@dft.gsi.gov.uk
Below is our own submission.
 

Response to the Department for Transport Combined Thameslink Franchise Consultation

From Councillor Richard Clifton and Councillor Heather Honour, Liberal Democrat Councillors for Sutton South, London Borough of Sutton

1. We are the elected Liberal Democrat Councillors for Sutton South Ward, which is just south of Sutton railway station. Passengers leaving Sutton station to the south, by the side entrance (when it is open), pass into Sutton South Ward as they leave the station.

2. Our Ward is almost entirely residential and a significant number of our residents commute daily into central London for work. Many of these commuters use trains on the Thameslink Loop Line to travel to stations north of Blackfriars, including Farringdon and St. Pancras. Residents of the Ward also tell us they consider they benefit greatly from having a direct service to St. Pancras International, for Continental Europe, and Luton airport. 

3. For that reason we are concerned at the proposal, first set out in the London and South East Route Utilisation Strategy (July 2011), that all Sutton / Wimbledon Thameslink Loop Line trains will terminate at London Blackfriars from 2018.

4. Terminating Wimbledon Loop services at Blackfriars would result in our residents losing their cross-London service. This will penalise those of our residents who have made their residential, employment and educational location decisions on the basis of the existence of the cross-London Thameslink service. These residents, who chose to live in Sutton South on the basis of an existing pattern of transport connections, would lose a service that they have had for many years, and based their life around.

5. Any decision should take account of the impact of changes on the travel patterns of existing passengers, and of consequent requirements to change established travel patterns. It is because of the impact on our residents that we object to any proposal that would result in terminating Wimbledon loop trains at Blackfriars.

6. Not only would our residents lose a through service they have come to depend on, they would lose their connection with Eurostar and domestic long distance trains at St. Pancras International and Kings Cross. Instead they would have to change trains at Blackfriars, carrying possibly heavy luggage onto already crowded trains. This movement could be particularly difficult from the western bay platform when travelling north and to either bay platform when travelling south because of the platform lengths and the position of lifts and stairs at each end of the platforms. The recent Passenger Focus passenger survey found that having to change trains was a strong disincentive to train travel.

 

7. Sutton is identified in the London Plan as one of only four Metropolitan town centres in south London , with a large and growing population and employment base. It is a major business centre with many commuters and business travellers. It is therefore essential that Sutton, as a strategic south London destination, retains its connections to central and north London and beyond, and maintains its direct link to St. Pancras and the City.

 

8. We also believe that the attractiveness of Sutton to employers considering re-location away from expensive offices in central London would be affected. Sutton is a location from which one can travel to Brussels with just two train journeys, one taking 45 minutes and one two hours, and the journey to Paris is only fifteen minutes longer. We have been successful in attracting businesses to Sutton and this change would have a negative impact, particularly given the expected mushrooming of international train travel from St. Pancras over the next few years. These negative effects would impact on the residents of our Ward who want to work locally in Sutton.

9. We thus strongly object to any proposal that would result in terminating Wimbledon loop trains at Blackfriars from 2018.

10. We are aware that Sutton Council is submitting comments, and support those comments. However, we are making this submission to draw particular attention to the impact on our residents in Sutton South Ward.

RICHARD CLIFTON

HEATHER HONOUR

  Liberal Democrat Councillors for Sutton South, London Borough of Sutton

NHS CROYDON MESS RAISES NEW CONCERNS ON St HELIER

Where’s the money gone?

Heather is playing a major role on a newly-created committee probing the massive hole in NHS Croydon’s finances. She is determined to find out what mistakes were made, who was at fault and what impact it will have on future healthcare in south west London.

The South West London Joint Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee on NHS Croydon finances met for the first time on 6 September and set itself the task of answering three crucial questions.

First, how was it that on 8 June 2011 the year’s accounts were signed off with a £5.54million surplus, yet when the same books were re-examined a year later they revealed a £22.7million overspend?

Second, why were officers – charged with managing a huge and vital job – not properly monitored, and were they given the right tools to do the job?

And, third, why in July 2012 did the South West London Cluster Board decide to try to cover up the huge deficit as a ‘prior period adjustment’?

Heather, one of two Sutton councillors sitting on the committee, said: “It is vital that we reach the bottom of this and that we do that quickly.

“If this is the sort of financial mismanagement we see from NHS bosses how can we be sure that the NHS BSBV team, which is after all proposing a multi-million pound plan which would close vital parts of St Helier Hospital, be able to run such a huge scheme successfully? Their track record is simply dreadful.”

Some observers believe the problems started in April 2010 when NHS Croydon was given the added responsibility of hosting London Specialised Commissioning Group. It is thought that running the £800million project may have stretched the resources of officers beyond their ability to cope.

The committee, which is comprised of councillors from Sutton, Richmond, Croydon, Merton, Wandsworth and Kingston, meet again on 24 September. It will call a number of witnesses including Ann Radmore, Chief Executive of NHS South West London.

Ms Radmore was appointed Sector Chief Executive for South West London in 2009 and led the establishment of the SWL Cluster in early 2010.

Another witness will be Dr Peter Brambleby, who was Croydon’s Director of Public Health from March 2010 to February 2012. On 6 July he blew the whistle on NHS London’s decision on 28 June to try to hide the deficit as a ‘prior period adjustment’ which, despite Dr Brambleby’s revelation, the South West London Cluster tried to repeat on 26 July.

Heather added: “Key personnel involved in the Better Service Better Value team planning the future of healthcare in south west London are involved in this Croydon mess. What confidence can we have in their plans for St Helier?”

A BUSY COUPLE OF DAYS

 

Richard and Heather with SHP staff inspecting the Sutton Court estate

Every day we are involved in some activity as Councillors, be it on behalf of our residents in Sutton South Ward or in respect of our responsibilities as Vice-Chair of the Council’s Adult Social Services and Health Committee (Heather) and Vice-Chair of the Council’s Housing, Economy and Business Committee (Richard). The 12th and 13th of September were no exception.  

On 13 September we attended the police consultative panel for the Ward. The attendance was a little disappointing, though with new members representing the Sutton Court residents’ association and the Highfields residents’ association. The panel congratulated the police on the latest crime figures, showing an overall drop in crime in the Ward in the year to date of almost a quarter. There were some significant variations between categories, with assaults causing injury and harrassment both up. However, there were large falls in non-residential burglaries and criminal damage, which mainly accounted for the overall reduction. The area remains a low crime area with the police confident they are on top of the overall situation.

The panel discussed the three Ward priorities – drug use in the Brighton Road, motor vehicle crime and theft from garages. Theft from garages and motor vehicle crime have fallen but it was agreed that we want to keep it that way and these should remain priorities. It was agreed that drug dealing and drug use in the Brighton Road would be put into a “normal vigilance” category for the immediate future. Significant action also continued to be taken on the theft of metal.

Other issues discussed included:

– late-night noise problems at the weekend in Cedar Road

– the application of a nightclub in Sutton town centre to extend its opening hours from 2am to 3am

– cutting of a hedge at the ball court at Sutton Court to increase the visibility of the ball court and its surrounding area

– fencing at Sutton Court

– petrol theft from a local garage

– speeding in Cavendish Road

– security arrangements concerning some specific locations

– a cannabis factory in Ferndown Close. 

The meeting was pleased that the local police had kept things under control when the Olympics had placed a strain on resources, though the Sergeant felt this had been less of a strain than expected. While we were pleased the Olympics were now over and demands on police resources would return to normal, we felt the police had done a superb job during the Olympics.

On Thursday 13 September we both went to Sutton Court to the estate “walkabout” with staff of Sutton Housing Partnership (SHP). These are essential to keep on top of the repairs and maintenance work needed on the estate. We met a number of residents who have problems we have taken up and were able to check on the progress of issues as varied as the work on the fence separating Sutton Court from Forest Dene Court, the cutting of the hedge separating the children’s play area from the ball court (discussed yesterday with the police), the repairs to the garages and the operation of the lighting system. We then went to Beauclere House where there are various issues of concern to us raised with us by residents, including the arrangements for disabled residents to enter and exit the building and how they can make better use of the grass area at the side.

OVERTON ROAD PLANNING APPLICATION THROWN OUT

We have actively campaigned against the planning application for 54-58 Overton Road and were delighted when the Development Control Committee, after considering a paper in which our objections were recorded, threw it out, on Wednesday 5 September.

Although the development is not in Sutton South Ward it is right next to the Ward, as the Ward boundary runs down the middle of Overton Road. Our residents are among those affected by and objecting to this proposal.

We objected to the proposal on the grounds that it is overdevelopment of the site, with 50 dwellings crammed in. It is the type of low-quality accommodation that we continue to oppose in Sutton South Ward, where so many houses have been demolished to give way to flats. There is as a result a shortage of larger family homes and many children grow up in a flat with no garden. In addition, as many objectors pointed out, the provision for car parking (33 car parking spaces for 50 dwellings) was inadequate and will lead to great pressure on parking, with additional demand for parking in an area that is already fully parked up much of the time.

We will continue to oppose this type of development. We oppose the demolition of family homes to make way for blocks of small flats as it is leading to an imbalance of housing in the Ward. Unfortunately the developer can appeal to the Planning Inspectorate and in both Albion Road and Eaton Road (the site pictured above) there are current examples of houses demolished after the Council rejected the application but the Planning Inspectorate granted it. We cannot control that aspect of the process but will continue our campaign to protect the quality of housing, and life, in Sutton South.

COUNCILLOR HEATHER HONOUR GETS FUNDING TO IMPROVE DANGEROUS ROAD

Mums with children in buggies,  walkers with dogs and pedestrians generally  have diced with death for years as they walked along Kings Lane Bridge, which lies at the end of Hillcroombe road and is a busy  thoroughfare leading  to Carshalton Road.

For years concerns have been raised about pedestrian, cyclist  and  driver safety on Kings Lane bridge which is only 3.6 m wide over the railway and only allows one line of traffic at a time.  Approaches to the bridge are at 90 degree bends and the bridge parapets are a combination of solid brick with rails on top which makes the sight lines very poor.

There have been 3 personal injuries at the junction between April 2008 and April 2011, and residents who use the park have reported numerous “bumps” as cars failed to negotiate the difficult twists and turns safely.

Heather Honour, Lib Dem Councillor for Sutton South, raised this in April at the Sutton South, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee,  Discussions followed with other councillors in Sutton South and the neighbouring ward, Carshalton Central, residents and with the council’s traffic engineers.

On July 5th Heather presented a proposal to the Local Committee drawn up by traffic engineers.  Building out the footways on both sides of the junction would slow and guide vehicles on a more visible line and provide a longer footway for pedestrians.  The warning signs will be upgraded and re positioned and be more prominent.  The cost of implementing the complete scheme is £16,000.  Other improvements, amounting to £500  will be made at the Carshalton end of the bridge.

Funding will be allocated  from the Local Implementation Plan.  The work should begin in November 2012.

Councillor Heather Honour said,

“ Someone said to me  that the road is so dangerous we should leave it as it is. I don’t think that is good enough for our residents who risk their lives every day as they walk or drive over Kings Lane Bridge.  Our traffic engineers have worked hard to find the best solution because no one wants the road closed  to traffic or made one way.  

It is great that funding can be found quickly and let’s hope that the work can be completed before we have snow and ice on the bridge”.

MORE CONCERNS ABOUT PROPOSALS FOR St. HELIER

The London Ambulance Service has revealed alarming journey time figures to Sutton Councillors.

[ Heather, Paul Burstow MP and Richard demonstrating their opposition to the threatened closure of of the Accident and Emergency Department, outside St. Helier hospital ]

Alarming figures from London Ambulance Service stunned Councillors at the special meeting, attended by Heather, of Sutton Council’s Scrutiny Committee, a meeting focusing on St Helier Hospital, on Monday June 11.

Bill Arkell, Operations Manager for Sutton and Streatham, shocked the meeting by revealing that journey times for emergency patients will more than double if St Helier’s Accident and Emergency (A&E) ward is closed.

Currently, the average journey time to St Helier is 8.5 minutes. Under the new proposals that will soar to 14-15 minutes to St George’s in Tooting, 16-17 minutes to Kingston and up to 20 minutes to Croydon Hospital.

Liberal Democrat Councillor Mary Burstow, Chair of the Scrutiny Committee, said: “These are truly alarming figures. Report after report has shown that the quicker people get treatment the better the outcome. Doubling journey times can only put Sutton residents at greater risk.”

The well-attended meeting also heard that turnaround time – how long it takes from an ambulance arriving at a hospital to being ready to go on another call – is 15 minutes or less on average at St. Helier Hospital, again half the time of neighbouring hospitals.

Councillor Burstow added: “In light of these figures, it is absolutely astonishing that Better Services Better Value (BSBV) [the NHS body that recommended closure of St. Helier’s Accident and Emergency Department] didn’t bother to ask seek wider views and opinions.”

The BSBV panel last month recommended that St Helier Hospital’s A&E, maternity and children’s wards should be closed – leaving St George’s, Kingston and Croydon to deal with the patients.

St Helier would instead become a centre for planned operations.

Age UK Sutton, which represents around 27,000 people – and Sutton Carers – which has 4,500 registered members looking after thousands of people – also told the meeting that they had also not been consulted before BSBV made its recommendations.

In robust exchanges between councillors and Rachel Tyndall, BSBV Senior Responsible Officer, and Mike Bailey, Acute Medical Director for BSBV, Sutton Council Leader Ruth Dombey referred to previous threats to St Helier saying: “We have been through years of uncertainty, so we are more than a little cynical.”

Councillor Dombey added: “Under the proposals St Helier would become the site for elective surgery for patients from Ham to New Addington.

“Is there any guarantee they would come? What about the transport issues? Where would they park when they got here?”

During the meeting it was revealed that BSBV’s recommendation supposes that between 2013 when the decision is due to be made and 2017 when it should be implemented, up to 50% of A&E patients would be persuaded to seek treatment in the community instead of going to hospital.

Click here to sign our petition organised by local LibDems, on the website of Paul Burstow. [Click on the word “petition”]

Resident served with Sutton’s first ‘Acceptable Behaviour Contract’

A resident has been served with Sutton’s first ‘Acceptable Behaviour Contract’ for the alarm and distress caused to her neighbours by her dogs.

The 24-year-old female dog owner, who lives in a block of flats in Langley Park Road, Sutton, allowed her two Staffordshire Bull Terriers called ‘Roxy’ and ‘Governor’ to:

  • Run out of control off the lead
  • Jump up and intimidate residents
  • Carry on barking for long periods

In addition, she also repeatedly failed to clear up after her pets.

Police decided to take formal action following an incident on Friday 30th March when her dogs ran out of their home in pursuit of a man making a delivery in Langley Park Road. The man was forced to run and jump onto a vehicle to avoid being bitten.

As a result the resident was sent a letter on the 13th April advising that this incident had come to the attention of police. A second letter was sent on 2nd July after her dogs had continued to behave in an unacceptable way.

This second letter included an Acceptable Behaviour Contract – a voluntary agreement between the resident and Sutton Council, the Met Police in Sutton and London and Quadrant Housing Trust – the resident’s landlord.

The contract only named one of her dogs – Governor – as she had given up Roxy at around this time. The conditions in the agreement include:

  • The dog being kept on a lead no longer than three metres in a public place including Langley Park Road, public footpaths and roads within Sutton borough
  • Clearing up after her dog
  • Regularly exercising her dog

Failure to comply with the agreement may result in an Anti-Social Behaviour Order being obtained to stop the resident causing harassment, alarm or distress and the tenancy agreement being reviewed and even revoked.

The action is part of borough’s Local Environmental Awareness of Dogs (LEAD) initiative to make owners of all breeds of dog aware of their responsibilities to their pet and the wider community.

Since August 2011 a total of 27 letters have been sent to residents whose dogs have come to the notice of police.

PC Heath Keogh, of Sutton Police station, who is co-ordinating the LEAD initiative for the borough, said: “Whilst we want to work with residents to reduce the nuisance and concerns caused by their pets, we are equally determined that we will take whatever action we need to make sure that this happens in reality.

“The bottom line for Sutton residents is a breach of an ASBO which could result in five years jail or a fine or both, and a possession order leading to a tenant’s eviction, for those in rented accommodation.”

The LEAD initiative was prompted by the fatal dog attack in Demesne Road, Wallington, on 23 December 2010, when a 52-year-old woman died after being attacked by a dog.

LATE NIGHT NOISE DANGER AVERTED

We were recently approached by residents in Worcester Road concerning the licence application to re-open the former “Academy” public house in Grove Road as a nightclub. They were concerned at a likely impact on late night noise problems in the area.

Following discussions with residents, Richard submitted representations on the prevention of public nuisance to Sutton’s Licensing Committee, and spoke at the public hearing held on 28 March.

He pointed out that it would be a matter of concern for premises so close to many residential properties to be offering music, dancing, films and sale of alcohol (for consumption on and off the premises) until 4.30am, seven nights a week, and then – after a break of just a few hours – starting again at 9.00am.  The application, if approved, would lead to an unacceptable degree of public nuisance, particularly due to noise from people coming away from the premises into neighbouring streets in the early hours of the morning.

Although the premises are not in Sutton South Ward, some of the people coming away from the club in the early hours would walk through our Ward. Concerns had been raised by the police about disturbance and noise late at night, drunken people walking home, alcohol-related brawls and anti-social behaviour. The application should be refused. 

We are pleased say that the application was refused, the Committee citing in particular problems with noise, community impact and alcohol-related crime.

ON YOUR SIDE …..

The new "disabled" car bay outside Fiske Court

As active Councillors, we are continually taking up problems brought to us by local residents. It gives a warm feeling if we can solve the problem.

Two recent examples illustrate the range of issues we deal with. A disabled resident at Fiske Court in Cavendish Road has had the problem that she parks her mobility car, which she depends on to get around, in the “disabled” parking bay outside Fiske Court. This is right under a lime tree and the sap means the car gets very dirty. She is unable to wash the car herself due to her disability and has to get it washed frequently, which is expensive in terms of time and money. We have now got the bay moved so it is no longer under the lime tree.

The other example is more problematic. We were alerted by residents to problems with the waste bins at Grosvenor Court in the Brighton Road. This is not the first time there have been such problems. Grosvenor Court is a large block of mansion flats above a row of shops and restaurants in Regent Parade. A set of waste bins at the back of Regent Parade are used by both the businesses and by residents. However, the businesses have their own bins for trade waste. There have been instances when the trade waste has wound up in the bins meant for residents and the volume has meant there has been a dreadful problem of overflowing rubbish.

The most recent problem seemed to arise from one of the businesses in Regent Parade putting its trade waste in bins that were not for this waste. We arranged for the Council’s enforcement team to make an inspection and they concluded that due to the failure of previous attempts to encourage the owner to manage his waste in a responsible manner they would issue a Fixed Penalty Notice. We hope that this will be enough to prevent this issue from re-occurring in the future. Everyone is sorry that things reached this point, but it seemed that the problem would not go away unless it became clear that action would be taken, and it important people know that as active local Councillors we will prompt the Council to take action to protect the interests of residents when problems like this occur.

ACTION ON SAFETY PROBLEM AT MAYFIELD ROAD / RIDGWAY TRIANGLE

The Triangle

Richard has intervened with Council officers to sort out a potential road safety problem at the triangle in the middle of the road where Mayfield Road meets The Ridgway. The opportunity was taken, at the same time, to confirm with residents whether they want any changes made to the layout of this attractive local feature.

The small triangle of land at this road junction is planted with cotoneaster bushes and three flowering cherry trees. It is understood that up to about the mid-1980’s the area was grassed, though with the trees, and it was planted with cotoneaster bushes at the initiative of local residents. It is believed that there was an understanding that the residents would maintain the bushes, but the bushes have always been maintained by the Council.

Correspondence between residents about the maintenance of the cotoneaster bushes led Richard to convene a meeting at the triangle on 9 August 2012, attended by Bill Bailey, the Council officer in charge of the maintenance of hedges, and several local residents.

Mr. Bailey explained that the Council treated the cotoneaster bushes as a slow-growing hedge and cut them twice a year, normally in July and September. The difficulty arose with the first cut, as advice from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds was not to cut any hedges till August, and by then it is likely that the cotoneaster bushes will have grown to a height that means they are interfering with the visibility of drivers. Drivers coming from Mayfield Road have difficulty seeing cars coming down The Ridgway, from the left, as they are obscured by the bushes. In recent years the cut had been scheduled for July but he had usually been alerted by a local resident to a developing safety problem and had immediately arranged for the bushes to be trimmed, ahead of their position in the schedule. The Council would be happy to adopt any solution that was acceptable to the residents.

In discussion the following points were made:

– it seemed unlikely that birds would nest in these bushes, and residents did not believe that this was a real likelihood. Mr. Bailey said that the contractors would always check in any case, and he had no problem about arranging that the first cut would be earlier

– options such as paving the edge of the area or reverting to grass had been proposed but were unpopular with residents, who generally liked the layout of the triangle as it is

– an option would be to cut back the cotoneasters at the corners or along the part of the triangle fronting The Ridgway, but these solutions too would be unpopular

– the problem could be avoided by scheduling an earlier cut, with the additional safeguard that any resident who felt a problem was arising before the first cut could contact the Council or a local Councillor (three LibDem Councillors live in The Ridgway), and the Council would arrange an immediate inspection and cut (if necessary). This was agreed to be the best solution.

Mr. Bailey has now written to the Council’s contractors instructing that next year the first cut will be in June. This will eliminate the potential road safety problem but without making more radical changes to the triangle that residents do not want.

Richard said “There was a potential road safety issue here and I was pleased I was able to sort it out. It was good to take the opportunity to take views on the layout of what is an attractive feature of the area. I am glad we are not going to change it but can at the same time deal with the problem these bushes can cause.”