LOCAL COMMITTEE DEBATES OUR RESPONSES TO THAMESLINK CONSULTATION

Presenting our Petition

Richard and Heather called for action by the South Sutton, Cheam and Belmont Local Committee to support our Thameslink campaign, when initiating a debate at the committee on 11 October.

We drew attention to the submission we had put in on behalf of local residents (go to the category of posts called “Thameslink Campaign” to see our submission) to the recent Department of Transport consultation. Councillor Mary Burstow drew attention to her submission.

We know that many of our residents, with our proximity to Sutton station being a reason to live in our Ward, commute into London every day to work. Richard and Heather themselves did this for many years. Some commute to north London and the proposal to terminate Sutton’s Capital Connect trains at Blackfriars will add more than ten minutes in each direction to their daily commute, almost two hours extra down time a week. Taken with the effect of cutting us off from international services at St. Pancras, and Luton airport, and the fact that our ability to attract businesses to Sutton has been greatly enhanced by our good transport links, this proposal has to be resisted.

The most recent stage in what will be a battle with further, continuing stages was the combined Thameslink franchise consultation on which responses were required  by mid-September.

Richard commented, in the discussion “The reputation of civil servants at the Department of Transport, following the West Coast Main Line fiasco, is not high, and having worked there during the time that I was chair of the Channel tunnel Safety Authority, I am not altogether surprised. We will need to be vigilant in watching and contributing to the further steps in this process.

I know that the way responses to consultation are analysed in the Department means that the volume of reaction is important. Councillor Honour and I put in our own response on behalf of our residents. Councillor Burstow did the same. ”

Richard made some suggestions to prepare ourselves for the further stages.

“First, I suggest that all those Councillors who put in submissions send them to the secretary so they can be included – along with his helpful note – with the papers for this meeting, so they are on the record to be used as necessary as an information quarry in further stages.

Second, we should consider, if it is appropriate at a later stage, passing a motion drawing attention to the difficulties this proposal causes for our residents, and send it to the Secretary of State, and seek a reply.

This is an important issue for our residents. On 23 August I presented a petition signed by over 5 000 residents, largely developed through Paul Burstow’s website, at the Department for Transport in Marsham Street, and the numbers wanting to sign shows how significant this is.”

GOVERNMENT’S PROPOSED PLANNING CHANGES – A RECIPE FOR DISASTER

We must preserve our green and pleasant Borough

As Vice-Chair of the Council’s Housing, Economy and Business Committee, which deals with policy on planning, Richard has joined other Council colleagues in warning that the Government’s proposed planning changes are a recipe for disaster

Sutton Council has joined its south London neighbour Richmond in slamming proposals to relax planning laws for a three-year period. The Borough dubbed the plans a ‘recipe for disaster’ which will split communities, hit house prices and do nothing to encourage economic growth.

It is understood that next week’s Lib Dem Conference in Brighton will call on the Coalition to reject the proposal, arguing that current planning laws do not block development. It will also argue that the proposal goes against the spirit of localism and it will encourage more neighbourhood disputes.

Richard says “The motion we adopted at our Council meeting last October, on which I spoke, went in a different direction. I believe current planning law is quite reasoanable in requiring that a proposed extension is examined to see if it will harm neighbours or the envirnoment. I would like to see plannng law strengthened not weakened.”

Councillor Ruth Dombey, Leader of Sutton Council, said: “These proposals are a recipe for disaster. They have not been properly thought through.”

The proposal came from Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Pickles, earlier this month. He issued a nine-point plan entitled ‘Housing and Growth’ in which he announced a relaxation of planning rules for the construction industry and owners of homes and businesses in England. So far the proposals are not law and there is no White Paper. In the absence of such laws Sutton Council is warning businesses and homeowners to think twice before building an extension without checking if planning permission is required.

If the proposals did become law, owners of mid-terrace homes could find their rear windows flanked by six metre extensions on both sides, plunging them into darkness for most of the day – and they would have no opportunity to object. Developers could be allowed to bypass council planning controls to “fast-track” commercial and housing applications. Offices would be permitted to convert to residential use all without planning permission, irrespective of this impact they will have on a neighbourhood.

Cllr Dombey added: “If this is allowed to happen it will set neighbour against neighbour and split communities for years to come. On top of the resentment and loss of quality of life, some people’s houses will also plummet in value if they’ve got no light or a noisy factory is within a few metres of their front door.”

The Chair of the Housing, Economy and Business Committee, Councillor Jayne McCoy, said “There is no evidence that this will do anything to promote economic growth and I strongly advise that anyone considering a project seeks advice, otherwise it could prove very costly.”

SUTTON AGAIN THE BEST PLACE TO BRING UP CHILDREN

For the second year in a row Sutton has been named as one of the best places in London to bring up a child, in a national survey.

Children’s savings provider “Family Investments” names the Borough top of a list of Greater London areas, after comparing statistics including house prices, education statistics, low crime rates and expected annual salaries.

In the report, Sutton comes out ahead of areas including Bexley and Banstead, partly as a result of its excellent Key Stage 2 school scores, childcare provision, affordable housing, low crime rate, “green” suburban environment and earnings prospects.

The London list has been divided into two sections with Sutton heading the Greater London area and Islington being named as the best Metropolitan London area to raise a child.

Key Stage 2 test results, including English and maths, improved in Sutton in 2012 by over 3%, to 85%, compared to 2011. According to the report the average expected salary across the area was almost £34,500, and we know (see a post below) that Sutton is surviving the recession well with a high proportion of its residents in employment.

The “Family Investments” report is based on data on all 2,400 postcodes across England and Wales, analysing 67 different data sets covering crucial factors likely to impact a family’s decision-making process when they consider moving to a new area.

DEALING WITH LATE NIGHT DISTURBANCE

A number of residents of Cedar Road have drawn our attention to problems of late night noise and disturbance, particularly on Friday and Saturday nights. We believe this is often from people walking along Cedar Road to get home from nightclubs in Sutton town centre, often in the early morning. We have resisted efforts to open more clubs and extend their hours of operation to yet later in the early hours of the morning (see our post below “Late Night Noise Danger Averted”).   

We raised the matter at a recent meeting with the police. The police say that their planned use of resources are mainly influenced by the priorities set in the ward (currently non-residential burglaries and vehicle crime) and what crime or anti-social behaviour is reported. They pointed out that they had received few reports from residents of noise problems.

We suspect residents are not reporting these incidents to the police at the time as they believe the police can do nothing immediately, or that it is not a serious enough issue with which to bother them. However it is still worth  reporting these incidents to the police – using 101 not 999 – as it gives the police a better picture of behaviour in our Ward and they can target their resources accordingly. 

We have written to residents in Cedar Road with this advice. If you want to discuss any aspect of local policing with a police officer you can contact our excellent Safer Neighbourhoods Team on 020 8721 2497, but let us know your views.

LATEST APPEAL ON St JUDE’S THROWN OUT

Mayfield Road

The Council strenuously fought an appeal relating to an extension at a property in Mayfield Road, in Sutton South Ward (St Jude’s nursing home), and sought an award of costs due to the unreasonable behaviour of the applicant. The Council has won on both counts. 

There is a history of planning difficulties with this site, with three different extensions being the subject, at different times, of appeals to the Planning Inspectorate against Council decisions. 

This application sought the retention of an outhouse built in a garden at the north end of the site, without planning permission, which had already been the subject of earlier appeals that had been lost. 

Unusually, not only did the Planning Inspector dismiss the appeal but made an award of costs. He points out in his judgement that arrangements were made for visits to the site as part of the process of determining the appeal but the applicant did not turn up. He says in the judgement: 

“For these reasons, I therefore find that unreasonable behaviour resulting in unnecessary or wasted expense, as described in Circular 03/2009, has been demonstrated and that a full award of Costs is justified.”

Richard has attended previous appeal hearings relating to this property. He says “I am not surprised at the view the Inspector took. This appeal was never likely to succeed. I have tried to assist in sorting out the planning problems the applicant faces by arranging meetings between him and local residents. I hope he will now take the necessary action to resolve the remaining planning issues.” 

The Inspector says “The proposal would cause harm to the living conditions of the residents of the adjoining property by reason of its overbearing nature contrary to DPD Policy DM2 and the Framework, which aims to protect amenity by ensuring no adverse affect (sic) on the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties.” The Inspector also makes reference to the importance of the Area of Special Local Character.

 

SUTTON IS SURVIVING THE RECESSION

Sutton continues to survive the recession.

At the meeting of the Housing, Economy and Business Committee on 18 September Richard drew attention, during a discussion on economic trends in Sutton, to a number of indicators of good economic performance.

House prices in Sutton in June of this year were 2.9% up on the figure for a year previously, with the average price of a house sold in Sutton standing at £ 246 449. This is very slightly down on the figures for the previous two months, with the peak figure being in April (£ 246 935). Rising house prices are taken to be a sign of buoyancy in the local economy, though Sutton remains an area of London that has a comparably large amount of housing that people can afford.

Other indicators paint a varied picture, but with most showing that Sutton is surviving the recession well.

For example:

The unemployment rate in Sutton, measured by the proportion of the working age population claiming Job Seekers Allowance, is 2.7% compared to a London average of 4.1%. 

The economic activity rate (percentage of the working age population that is economically active) is 78.3%, above the London average of 75.1%.

The number of unfilled job vacancies locally is over 50% higher than a year ago, an indicator of strong local growth, though at 869 vacancies are well below the numbers unemployed (3391 claiming JSA).

The percentage of empty properties, Borough wide, is over 1% down on the figure for a year ago.

Sutton will be bolstered by the decision of businesses in the town centre to vote in favour of  the establishment of a Business Improvement District, which will bring more money into Sutton town centre. This will support the Council’s “Opportunity Sutton” programme to attract inward investment, promoting Sutton as one of the few metropolitan centres in south London with a skilled workforce, available industrial and office sites, good transport links, a pleasant suburban environment and low crime.

Richard drew attention to a firm he had visited in Sutton South Ward, Synergy UK, that has been very successful as a recruitment and training adviser. The firm has grown from nothing to employ over 40 people locally, in just a few years. Aside from providing a service to its clients it takes young people from unemployment into training, providing a City and Guilds qualification in social care work, and finds them jobs.

Richard said “I believe Sutton has great strengths. It is a good place to live and people locally are finding work, despite the recession.”

SUPPORTING NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING

The Devonshire Avenue Nature Area could be an element in a Neighbourhood Plan

Richard made an important speech at the meeting of the Housing, Economy and Business Committee, of which he is vice-chair, on 18 September, setting out his views on the subject of Neighbourhood Plans. Several organisations in the Ward have indicated an interest in preparing a Neighbourhood Plan, but none has made a specific proposal so far.

Richard said “I am an enthusiast for Neighbourhood Plans as any process that brings the community together to discuss such plans for their locality is an integrating process promoting social cohesion, which I applaud. But I think such plans should be ambitious in their scope rather than looking narrowly at the design of buildings. The impetus for such plans must come from the community, so the role of the Council should be largely advisory (in particular advising on the definition of a neighbourhood, how to ensure a neighbourhood forum is representative and how bodies can ensure draft plans are consistent with broader planning strategy), and undertaking certain statutory functions (arranging independent review of any plan and a referendum on the plan).

The Council should give a basic level of support to all bodies preparing plans – including signposting to sources of advice and application arrangements – and additional support for the process in areas where there is more scope for development, where plans will help meet other Council objectives such as tackling social isolation and social exclusion, and where there is deprivation.

Neighbourhood plans could be an important step to promoting social cohesion, motivating the local community, spreading good practice on tackling loneliness and tackling social isolation, by community action. This has happened in Hackbridge, with their plan, and is happening in the village in Oxfordshire where my brother is leading the development of the village Neighbourhood Plan.”

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.