Figures presented to the South Sutton, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee show Sutton is the most generous Council in London for providing free visitor parking in the controlled parking zone.
Of 32 London Boroughs 28 provide no free visitor parking atall. Only four Councils provide any (Newham, Wandsworth, Hillingdon, sutton) and of these four Sutton is the most generous with 50 hours of free parking annually.
Richard planting a tree in Farm Road.
Richard, Nali, Heather and Sue with trees
There is a new programme of tree planting in our Ward, over the winter. Exciting news. Some of these are already planted. Here is a listing of sites. Contact us if you have other nominations to make.
There will be a number of different types of tree including laburnum, malus trilobata, corylus colurna, prunus sargentii rancho, crataegus laevigata “Paul’s Scarlet” and acer campestre “Streetwise”.
|
SUTTON SOUTH WARD |
ALBION ROAD, SUTTON | Outside number 20 | |||
|
|
ALBION ROAD, SUTTON | 10 (FLATS 1-8) near FERNDOWN CL | |||
|
|
CHRISTCHURCH PARK, SUTTON | AMBERLEY COURT(FLATS) | |||
|
|
DEVONSHIRE AVENUE, SUTTON |
PENARTH COURT | |||
|
DEVONSHIRE ROAD, SUTTON |
10 | ||||
| DEVONSHIRE ROAD, SUTTON | near junction Egmont Road | ||||
|
DEVONSHIRE ROAD, SUTTON |
near junction Egmont Road | ||||
|
|
EFFINGHAM CLOSE, SUTTON |
57 | |||
|
|
FARM ROAD |
7, and opposite Kayemoor Road | |||
|
|
KAYEMOOR ROAD, SUTTON |
Outside 24/26, outside 10, outside 32/34 | |||
|
|
PRIOR AVENUE, SUTTON |
Outside 41 |
|||
|
|
STANLEY ROAD, SUTTON | 3-15 ESPRIT COURT (entrance) | |||
|
UPLAND ROAD, SUTTON |
Close to number 90 | ||||
|
|
UPLAND ROAD, SUTTON |
Outside 45, 53/55, 76 |
|||
|
|
UPLAND ROAD, SUTTON |
Outside 9, 62, 4 |
|||
|
|
MAYFIELD ROAD, SUTTON |
Outside 15 |
|||
|
|
WILLIS AVENUE |
Outside 15/17 |
|||
|
|
EFFINGHAM CLOSE |
Outside 5, and outside 6 | |||
|
|
CAMBORNE ROAD |
4b |
An additional tree has been planted outside 3 Chalgrove Road at the suggestion of a resident.
Residents have the opportunity to foster these new trees and help leave a green legacy. Under the Council’s Tree Fostering Scheme they can help look after trees that are planted near their homes for up to three years. Maintenance duties include watering the trees with three buckets of water a week in the dry months and, if they want to, loosen tree ties and trim off broken twigs. By signing up, residents will receive a tree care guide with information on how to look after their tree.
Fly tipping in Prior Avenue
The latest public satisfaction survey shows most of our residents really like living in Sutton, and the Borough achieves higher satisfaction scores than most comparable London Boroughs.
Amongst the things that bug people, however, is the litter people drop. The Council has taken new powers, including to impose an £80 on-the-spot fine, enforced by new litter wardens.
An 11 tonne mountain of rubbish, one day’s worth of litter was created in the middle of Sutton High Street on 6 February as part of the anti-litter campaign to change bad habits and save council tax payers money.
The pile, over 10ft tall and just as wide in clear plastic bags, demonstrated how much street litter is collected each day at a cost of £4m a year. That is the equivalent of running a library service for a year, repairing 100,000 potholes, providing 210 residential care places for the elderly or building half a primary school.
The anti-litter event also included a display of fly tipping collected from the Borough’s streets. Despite the Council having a dedicated service for collecting larger goods, some people still fly tip at a cost of £170,000 a year to clean up. Fly tipping can include anything from TVs and sofas to large tipper trucks dumping commercial waste. There have been particular problems at certain roads in our Ward such as Prior Avenue.
Residents have suggested places in the Ward where an additional street bench would be useful, particularly for people struggling home with heavy shopping.
We have agreed a number of locations in the Ward for additional benches, including in Cavendish Road, Cedar Road, Worcester Road and Grange Vale. In addition a number of the existing benches that are now in a somewhat dilapidated state will be repaired and cleaned. This includes the bench pictured here in Brighton Road, which has slats missing.
Homeland Drive, Belmont
In earlier posts on this site we have set out our concerns about the proposed closure of the Grove Road and Belmont surgeries, used by many residents of our Ward, and opening of a replacement surgery in a building in Homeland Drive, in Belmont. This is of particular concern due to the high proportion of over 75s in our Ward (a higher percentage than for any other Ward in Sutton) and the lack of any GP surgery in the Ward. There is a problem of access to the site, which is poorly served by public transport.
At the Council’s Strategy and Resources Committee on 11 February and at the Council meeting on 3 March Richard and Heather repeated their opposition to the proposal and pressed for improvements to the proposed community transport scheme. This would go some way to ameliorating our concerns.
In speeches to Council on 3 March both Richard and Heather expressed concern that the doctors did not seem interested in proposals from Ruth Dombey, our Council leader, to help find a better alternative site.
We are writing to NHS England and continuing our campaign within the decision-taking structures of the NHS. Here is the text of Richard’s speech to Council on 3 March summarising our position.
“Councillor Honour and I, as Councillors for Sutton South Ward, have consistently opposed the move of the two surgeries to the Henderson hospital site. Our Ward has the highest proportion of elderly residents of any Ward in Sutton and there are many residents of our Ward who go to the Grove Road or Belmont surgeries. Our objection to the site is that it is not sufficiently accessible by public transport. What has been offered by way of a community transport service, to deal with this problem, is a help but does not resolve the problem.
This motion applauds the efforts made by Councillor Dombey to resolve this issue, and I would like to warmly support that sentiment.
This is a decision taken by local doctors who work within the National Health Service. I understand from the evidence that NHS England gave to the Council’s Scrutiny Committee last year that the doctors have to put their case for the move to NHS England. Councillor Honour and I have written to NHS England to remind them of their responsibilities in this matter and ask them not to endorse this decision.
The local authority has come into this by the back door in three ways. First, as local planning authority, because the doctors need planning permission for the building. I sat through the discussion at the Development Control Committee and respect the fact that the Committee concluded ultimately that there were insufficient planning grounds to turn down the application. Its decisions are subject to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate so it cannot capriciously ignore the published planning policies. Second, I understand that the authority is a joint owner of the site but legal advice is that the Council would be in breach of contract were it not to proceed to completion of the sale – if the decision is taken, by the doctors and the NHS, to go ahead with this move. Third, the offer of Councillor Dombey to act as a mediator. I still hope that will be taken up.
So the spotlight has to focus on the decision-taking processes in the NHS.
Councillor Honour and I have written to NHS England to remind them of their responsibilities in this matter and urge them consider alternatives to this decision.”
Here is the text of our letter to NHS England.
“Unsuitable Location for Proposed GP Surgery in Sutton
As Councillors for Sutton South Ward in the London Borough of Sutton we are deeply concerned at proposals to close two GP surgeries and replace them with a new medical surgery at a site unsuitable for many of our residents.
There is at present no GP surgery in our Ward, which has the highest proportion of residents aged over 70 of any Ward in the Borough of Sutton. Our residents use a number of local surgeries but many go to the surgery at Grove Road in the centre of Sutton and to the Belmont surgery, close to Belmont railway station. These are to close, under the proposals.
The proposed new medical centre is in Homeland Drive, at the site of the former Henderson hospital. However, the site is not sufficiently accessible for the elderly and those without a car. It is rated PTAL 1b, which means that it is not accessible to public transport. It is in fact at least 300 metres up a steepish inclined road that is dark and uninviting. Our GPs state that 75% of patients will use a car. The remainder are likely to be elderly, unable to drive a car, or on a low income. They also are likely to be amongst the most frequent patients at the surgery.
There are severe limitations on the use of dial-a-ride and taxicard, so use of these services is not an option for people who find it difficult to access public transport and this site.
The statistics on the population of the Ward illustrate the problem. Sutton South has much more sheltered housing, and more care homes than other parts of the Borough. 2.94% of Ward residents live in managed residential accommodation compared to a Borough average of 0.78%. Over 75 per cent of properties in Sutton South are flats, many of them single occupancy. 46.3% of households in Sutton South are single person households, with 15.5% occupied by people over 65. The population of the Ward is elderly.
Sutton South Sutton average National average
Over 65s 17.49% 14.32% 16.74%
Over 75s 10.62% 7.07% 7.96%
Over 85s 4.13% 2.1% 2.31%
Although 73% of residents in the Borough say they are ‘well connected’, 10% of respondents in Sutton South say “they have no one to turn to locally for help”, compared to a Borough average of 6%. This means that they would not have people to assist them with transport.
We therefore consider that the proposed site for the new GP surgeries does not meet the needs of the most vulnerable in our Ward and we would prefer a more accessible site.
From the information that we have received it does not appear that the GPs have considered the transport needs of their elderly patients, a growing demographic, who will need to use the surgery often, possibly as much as once a week for visits to the other services at the centre as well as their GPs. Many have said to us that they will need to change their doctor if this goes ahead.
In response to our concerns the developer of the site, Assura, has offered a community transport scheme. However, after close examination of this, it does not appear to be a practicable solution.
Once again the NHS, which declares that it is patient centred, is failing its patients by not taking account of their transport needs. This has been a major local issue in the abortive Better Services Better Value plans to change the status of our local hospital, St Helier.
It is by no means clear to us what the process is in the NHS to take a wider view of the optimum location of GP surgeries in the interests of the patients. However, we understand from evidence that NHS England gave to Sutton Council’s Scrutiny Committee last year that NHS England have a role. We would therefore like to meet you to discuss how you conside that these proposals meet the needs of our most vulnerable residents and your most needy patients.
Yours sincerely.
RICHARD CLIFTON
HEATHER HONOUR”
On 11 February action by the police team from Merton that is helping combat speeding in our Ward led to 13 drivers being stopped and spoken to about the speed they were travelling at in Cavendish Road.
Following the speed survey we arranged in the area, funding is now in place for the coming financial year for two width restrictions in Cavendish Road – “Road narrowing with one lane and informal crossing, with pedestrian centre-refuge island” outside Fiske Court and Hampton Lodge, with the same outside Richard Sharples Court. In Cedar Road there will be “Raised zebra crossing, with road narrowing, one lane and informal crossing” close to Forest Dene Court” and “Road narrowing with one lane and informal crossing” outside Ashdown Court. We have arranged for additional 20 mph roundels in the road (see picture above) and 20 mph signs on lamp-posts (see picture below) to further reinforce the message.
The following statement was issued at the start of January by Six South West London Clinical Commissioning Groups – Croydon, Kingston, Merton, Richmond, Sutton and Wandsworth.. They are the NHS decision makers for South West London:
“The six south west London CCGs are actively discussing the next steps for local health services following the withdrawal of Surrey Downs CCG from the BSBV programme. As we have made clear in the past, the BSBV business case is now invalid and the options put forward through the programme are no longer on the table for consultation. It follows that all six CCGs are in the process of dissolving the committees to which they had delegated decision-making on BSBV.
“However, the challenges outlined in the BSBV case for change remain. If we do not address these challenges, we know that local services will decline in quality and that we will not be able to meet the required quality and safety standards. We are discussing with each other and with our boards how we address these challenges and we hope to make a further announcement in February.”
The key phrase is “The challenges outlined in the BSBV case for change remain”. They are right in saying this. Too many people do go to A&E, who should instead be going to a pharmacist or their local GP. The reason they do is often because they can not get an appointment with their GP and they do not realise that visiting a pharmacist is even an option!
We are concerned that even though the BSBV business case is now invalid, the original solution proposed by the six CCGs of closing St Helier A&E and closing St Helier’s Maternity Ward still remain as favoured options, by the CCGs. We have to wait to see what they say.
An indication was given on 18 February when GPs and healthcare professionals from across South West London announced that the BSBV review that recommended the closure of key healthcare services at St Helier hospital has been scrapped.
A new strategy on how to deliver health services in our area will now be developed by local Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) so that the best possible care can be delivered in the future.
We welcome that, in contrast with the failed BSBV review, healthcare services will be viewed in a holistic way and that the CCGs will be working closely with all health providers and local authorities to deliver high quality care services.
While t is good news that the BSBV review has been scrapped we still need to continue demonstrating our support for St Helier and make sure that essential health services remain accessible.
We want to see Sutton CCG working closely with St Helier Hospital, Sutton Council (Adult Social Services and Childrens Social Services) and the Royal Marsden (Community Health Visitors) to resolve the issues raised by the original BSBV plan, and not promoting the closure of the A and E Department at St Helier.
The house being demolished
Youth unemployment in Sutton has fallen by 31% according to the latest figures.
Between November 2012 and November 2013 the number of 16-24 year olds claiming Job Seekers Allowance dropped from 790 to 545.
This reduction is greater than the averages for both London and the UK. In London, youth unemployment fell by 28.7%, whilst the drop across the UK was 26.4%.
The next year will bring more investment in Sutton with the Subsea7 project bringing jobs and prosperity to our own Ward.
The fall in Sutton is attributable to the range of initiatives that Sutton Council and its local partners have introduced to reduce youth unemployment in the borough. Together the partners form the Sutton Economic Support Taskforce (SEST) and include representatives from the public, private and voluntary sectors such as Jobcentre Plus, Carshalton College, Sutton College of Learning for Adults, Training and Recruitment Partnership, JACE Training, Sutton & District Training, and Sutton Chamber of Commerce.
The Council also runs its own apprenticeship scheme and encourages its contractors and local businesses to provide training and work experience to young people.
The proposed office block
Plans to generate hundreds of jobs by allowing Subsea 7 to build their new Project Office in Sutton have been given the all clear after the High Court backed Sutton Council’s planning process.
The decision by Sutton Council on 11th September 2013 to award Subsea 7 planning permission to develop the Brighton Road Car Park site was the subject of a Judicial Review application by local property developer Centro.
However, the High Court has ruled that Sutton Council’s planning process was sound and rejected the application for a Judicial Review. It also ordered the applicant Centro to pay for all the costs involved.
The decision paves the way for the council to continue the sale of the 1.36 acre site to Subsea 7 to expand its operations. The new development allows Subsea 7 to more than double its workforce over the coming years, preserves up to 780 jobs for Sutton, and makes the area more attractive for other firms to invest.
It is the third major investment secured by Sutton Council’s investment arm Opportunity Sutton in recent months with almost 500 new homes, retail and other commercial opportunities planned for the Sutton Point and the old gas works sites.
The High Court’s decision vindicates Sutton’s planning process. We now we have the green light to work with Subsea 7 to ensure Sutton benefits from a major investment, new jobs and other economic opportunities.
Our Opportunity Sutton economic programme is working to attract new businesses and development, and in just 18 months of operation it has already attracted over £322 million in planned investment, including the new Subsea 7 office.
While the Judicial Review application was waiting to be heard, Sutton Council had to pay for a package of security measures – expenses which could have been avoided if the JR application had not taken place.
The Council will now work with Subsea 7 for them to take responsibility for the site’s security arrangements – freeing the tax payer of this burden.
The plans are one of a number of high profile developments that Sutton has attracted through its inward investment arm Opportunity Sutton.
Last summer developer CNM Estates was given the green light to extend the existing Sutton Point building next to Sutton Station to a 22 storey high building with two new buildings connected to it that altogether will offer deliver 300 apartments, a 130 bed hotel and shops and restaurants. The development could generate up to 750 jobs.
In October Sutton Council granted developer LXB Retail Properties permission to build 186 apartments, a supermarket, shops, restaurants and a public plaza on an old gas works site off the High Street. The development is expected to generate 500 jobs.
The Subsea7 project came about because last year a report by Sutton Council found that there were high levels of surplus parking spaces in council run car parks in the town centre – enough to absorb any displaced by the closure of Brighton Road Car Park. Since the closure of the car park, traffic monitoring has indicated that there have been no adverse effects on the parking or traffic in the town centre.
This project will bring jobs to the Ward, raise property prices as demand for local housing increases, and have an uplifting effect on the local economy with 800 workers spending money in local shops, hotels and restaurants.”