Apologies were received from Councillors Joan Hartfield, Peter Wallis, John Keys and Community Representatives Lisette Scott, Keith Knight, Dee Hyatt and Colin Wadeson. 

 

Glenise Coxon, substituted for Lisette Scott (Onslow Gardens Residents Association), Peter Atkinson substituted for Keith Knight (Springboard Residents Association). 

 

Councillor Margaret Ali apologised for lateness and arrived during discussion of Elms Pond under item 5 on the agenda and was in attendance to the end of the meeting.

 

Councillors John Leach and Jenny Slark left the meeting at the start of item 8 on the agenda, Wallington Station Access Scheme and Councillor Richard Bailey left at 9.40pm.

The Minutes of the 2 December 2008 meeting were agreed as a correct record, subject to the following amendment, and signed by the Chair:

 

That the 13^th paragraph under Minute 1015/08 be amended to read:

Council Colin Hall read a quote from Mayor Boris Johnson’s Way To Go document and said that at a recent meeting with him, Boris Johnson was supportive of contra-flow schemes in principle.  He felt that the committee should agree to go to consultation to get local peoples views on the issue.

There will be 15 minutes allocated for the public to ask questions on non-agenda items.  Please submit these in writing to the Area Co-ordinator at least 10 minutes prior to the meeting.

 

There is in addition the opportunity to ask questions or make contributions on each item as it arises.

The following six written questions were received, prior to this meeting; from Mr David Aylett.  He had received written responses from Paul Tugwell, Traffic Engineer and are given below.  These were taken as read.

 

a)     As a cycle user and promoter of cycling I am concerned that the road narrowing in Butter Hill is clearly a danger to cyclists. It is evident that this experiment should not have been implemented and that the borough's policy of increasing cycle use as an alternative method is being given lip service and not encouraged by its actions.

 

The London Borough of Sutton has demonstrated its commitment to promoting all sustainable modes of transport, particularly cycling. This has been demonstrated more recently with the success of 'Smarter Travel Sutton'. I can confirm that our commitment to building on our previous successes remains the same. Until recently, our working relationship with the cycling bodies and other stakeholders has been helpful and constructive. Although, we cannot always satisfy the needs of everybody.

 

b)     Pedestrians and cyclists should never be put in confrontation with other road users as currently caused by this kerb build out.

 

Paul Tugwell: The existing traffic management places an obligation on eastbound road users to 'Give Way' to those travelling westbound. However, during peak periods reports suggest that some drivers failed to ‘Give Way’, as it was felt that there were too few opportunities for eastbound drivers to proceed. Furthermore, the distance between the ‘Give Way’ road markings and the far end of the buildout, meant that some drivers who had driven considerately, found themselves facing the opposing traffic before they were able to pass the buildout. Unfortunately, it is not feasible to relocate the ‘Give Way’ road markings further forward, due to carriageway width restraints.

 

c)      Why was it not made clear to this committee that the proposals were alternatives and not a unified package?

 

Paul Tugwell: The minuted resolution states: It was proposed to trial the following two options:

 

Ÿ     Introduction of a 'Priority System' located within the vicinity of the junctions with Leechcroft Road and Caledon Road. Eastbound drivers would be obliged to give way to westbound drivers at a location just west of the junction with Leechcroft Road. This would help alleviate any congestion between that point and the A237 London Road. This proposal would be relatively inexpensive to introduce and would not require a statutory consultation. However, it would rely on driver discipline, as it is unlikely that the police would be able to give the facility adequate enforcement.

 

Ÿ     To introduce three-way signals at the same location, allowing one flow of traffic with each phase. Drivers are more likely to abide by the traffic signal. However, a statutory consultation would be required, some flexibility would be lost and the scheme would be relatively expensive.

I have underlined the text that clearly states that two options would be trialled.

 

d)     Why has the narrowing been installed with apparent disregard of applicable standards, guidelines and safety aspects  ...  view the full minutes text for item 186.

There will be a short explanation of the Council’s budget proposals with the opportunity to discuss and ask questions.

 

Indicative time 30 minutes

Sue Higgins, Strategic Director for Resources, apologised for this late meeting but that comments made by the committee would be fed into the Council meeting.

 

She explained the process for this year’s budget consultation and explained some of the proposals for extra spending and areas for budget reductions.  The council tax level had not yet been set but there was a recommendation of an increase of 2.9% being put forward to the Council on 2^nd March which reduced to 2.26% when the 0% increase for the Greater London Authority was added to Sutton’s part of the tax.

 

A few of the community representatives expressed their disappointment that Council Tax was going up at all and cited various other London boroughs where Council Tax has been set much lower.  Some councillors pointed out that those councils had only achieved their low rates by drastically cutting staff and services.

 

There was a question from Mr Dodwell, resident, about the value of recycling, which had reduced, as opposed to the cost of landfill.  Councillor Hall explained that the value of recycling did fall quite dramatically for four weeks but that the value was rising again and that our contracts meant we were not adversely affected by these changes. 

 

Mr Dodwell stated that an area newspaper was needed for this sort of information to be advertised and not the Sutton Scene which does not go to all households.

 

Resolved: To thank Sue Higgins for attending the meeting.

• Public Realm update, report by Malcolm Barker, Locality Lead Officer, For Noting.

• Wandle Gateway Scheme, report for decision by Jeff Wilson, Head of Strategic Planning.

• Elms Pond, report for decision by Malcolm Barker, Locality Lead Officer.

Indicative time 30 minutes

a)     Public Realm Update

Malcolm Barker, Locality Lead Officer submitted a report for noting on the Public Realm Projects. The report provided feedback on the status of schemes that had already been approved, those schemes awaiting approval and the remaining uncommitted funding available.  He pointed out an error in the report under paragraph 2.2 – the projects listed as achieved had not as yet been achieved.

 

            Resolved: To note the report.

 

b)     Wandle Gateway Scheme

Jeff Wilson, Head of Strategic Planning submitted a report for decision on the Wandle Gateway Scheme.

 

Viridor Waste Management Ltd had agreed to fund 90% of the cost of an access/environmental improvement scheme along the River Wandle, with a 10 % contribution from the council.  The report requested approval of £13.500 from Public Realm funding as this committee’s 5% contribution.  The other 5% would come from another affected local committee.  The Report outlined the scope of proposed improvements and arrangements under which the improvement works would be carried out. The four areas, under this committee’s remit, where this scheme will focus included Guy Road, Hilliers Lane, Richmond Green and Cedars Road. 

 

The Chair explained that there was £6,500 public realm money uncommitted but suggested that the £50K currently allocated for the adventure playground project in Beddington Park might be released as this project was unlikely to be achieved in this financial year. The project had been suggested by the Friends of Beddington and Grange Parks and after discussions with the chair they had indicated that they were happy with this proposal so that the Wandle Gateway project could be funded as long as the adventure playground remained on the committee’s wish list.

 

Councillor Hall stated that the council should ensure good value for money on this project as some of the Wandle Trail project was not good enough.

 

Resolved: (i) To thank Viridor Waste Management on behalf of the Council for assigning £270,000 of its landfill tax receipts to this project.

 

(ii) To approve the Wandle Gateways Improvement Scheme.

 

iii) To redesignate the £50,000 allocated to the adventure playground in Beddington Park as unallocated funds.

 

iv) To approve the allocation of £13,500 in respect of the Beddington and Wallington Local Committee Public Realm funding as a contribution to the project.

 

c)      Elms Pond

Malcolm Barker, Locality Lead Officer submitted a report for decision identifying the refurbishment of Elms Pond, London Road as a potential project.

 

There was much discussion about whether or not the pond should be an ornamental or a natural pond, as was originally envisaged by residents.  However, the committee were reminded that revenue costs for a natural pond were too high and could not be funded and that there was a natural pond across the road from Elms Pond.

 

There was discussion on whether to ask Viridor for funding for this project and consultation with residents.  Mr Dodwell offered to consult with local residents.

 

Resolved: (i) To agree, in principle, to make public realm funding available to refurbish the Elms Pond as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 188.

Paul Blunt, Traffic & Highways Works Manager & Lynn Robinson, Engineering Technician will be presenting the results of the consultation to the committee.

 

Indicative time 15 Minutes

Further to Minute 1015/08 Paul Blunt, Traffic & Highways Works Manager & Lynn Robinson, Engineering Technician presented the results of the public consultation to implement the cycle contra flow in Redford Avenue, Wallington, between Link Lane and Stafford Road.

 

In response to members’ comments it was reiterated that although this was a stand alone scheme, it was an important link to other parts of the network and was part of a whole transport package to improve cycling and walking.  It would also be of benefit to the many schools in the area.  It was reported that 2% of transport usage was made up of cyclists.  Members requested to know the up to date figures of how many cyclists were in Sutton and how these figures were obtained.  Members of the public expressed their support for cycle schemes.

 

A summary paper of consultation responses was tabled as Appendix B.

 

Resolved: (i) To note the summary of the comments received during the public consultation as shown in appendix A to the report.

 

(ii) To note the summary of all comments received during the public consultation which was tabled as appendix B.

 

(iii) That officers proceed to make the traffic orders necessary to implement the parking restrictions and contra-flow cycle lane and construct the facility on site.

 

(iv) That the statement of reasons for the parking restrictions be, “The waiting and loading restrictions are necessary to complement the contra-flow cycle lane in Redford Avenue between Stafford Road and Link Lane to ensure the cycle lane is not obstructed by parked vehicles.”

 

(v) Councillor Hall requested that officers provide up to date cyclist figures with an explanation as to how these figures were collected.

Paul Blunt Traffic & Highways Works Manager will submit a report for this item.

 

 

 

Indicative time 30 minutes

Paul Blunt, Traffic & Highways Works Manager presented this report to the committee.  Russell Troup, Project Engineer, was also in attendance to answer questions.  The report sought the committee’s approval to progress the Beddington Lane Regeneration scheme, so that a formal application for funding could be made to Transport for London (TfL) to implement the scheme subject to consultation and land acquisition. 

 

The scheme aimed to enhance pedestrian and cycle link facilities, encourage better use of existing bus and tram services, and improve access to the industrial units within the estate.

 

It was explained that TfL were funding this scheme in sections of which there were five sections for the whole scheme. 

 

Resolved: (i) To approve the regeneration scheme, in principal, as shown on the drawing T12001-001attached to the report.

 

(ii) To note that the consultation with stakeholders, affected parties and residents is progressing.

 

(iii) To note that approval to acquire land required for the scheme will be sought, from The Executive, subject to consultation and funding.

 

(iv) To approve implementation of the scheme in stages as funding becomes available, subject to consultation and land acquisition.

 

(v) To delegate authority to the Executive Head of Planning, Transport and Highways in consultation with the Chair, Ward Councillors and Lead Councillor, to agree and if necessary, modify details to address any further issues that may arise from ongoing consultations of the above scheme.

 

(vi) To thank Russell Troup for the work he had done on this.

There will be a report on this item by Paul Blunt, Traffic & Highways Works Manager.

 

Indicative time 20 minutes

Paul Blunt, Traffic & Highway Works Manager and George Dougherty, Consultant, presented the report updating the committee on the outcome of the public consultation.  The report also set out the proposed amendments to the scheme as a result of the consultation and was seeking approval to implement the scheme, subject to funding being released by Transport for London (TfL).  George Dougherty, Consultant was also in attendance to explain details and answer questions.

 

A revised plan of the station forecourt was tabled.

 

The proposed amendments to the scheme were as follows:

 

• The proposal to move the bus stop (A) on Manor Road from north to south of Melbourne Road has been dropped;
• The proposed 20mph zone and streetscape improvements have been deferred. TfL have indicated that there would be insufficient funds to fund these from their Station Access budget). However, these proposals are likely to be included in the Wallington Integrated Transport Package scheme planned for implementation in for 2010/11.
• The traffic calming features of the area wide safety scheme and some of the entry treatments have been deferred until further funding can be secured
• The station forecourt proposals have been revised to retain a drop off facility directly in front of the station. A revised drawing showing the forecourt changes was tabled at the meeting.
• The median strip under the bridge has been dropped.

 

Requests and comments made by committee members:

Ÿ     that the flower beds go, as they were presently used as urinals,

Ÿ     that the intended maps for display were contextual maps,

Ÿ     that officers look at other options for optimum tree planting,

Ÿ     that officers encourage Network Rail to take urgent action regarding the mess under the bridge, and

Ÿ     to request that Countdown be installed at the bus stops.

 

In response to questions from councillors and members of the public George Dougherty explained that:

Ÿ     That the number of cycle stands could be extended, if needed, in the future.

Ÿ     That the next stage would be to go back to Transport for London (TfL) for funding, subject to this committee’s approval.  When TfL had approved funding, detailed designs would be drawn up and work may start by the end of the next financial year.

Ÿ     That much of the design was done prior to consultation to enable stakeholder approval and increased the chance of receiving funding.  Therefore, consultation could take place on a scheme that could be funded. 

Ÿ     That a raised crossing was planned for Ross Parade.  This would be set back slightly from Woodcote Road.  Statutory consultation would need to take place on the raised crossing.

Ÿ     That improvement at the southern entrance would be minimal as anything else would require negotiations with Lidl.

 

Resolved: (i) To note the results of the consultation.

(ii) To agree the suggested amendments to the scheme proposals, and the implementation of the scheme, subject to funding.

 

(iii) To delegate authority to the Executive Head of Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Chair and Ward Councillors, to agree and if necessary, modify the scheme details to address any  ...  view the full minutes text for item 191.

There were no urgent items.

 

• Section 106 Monies Update, report, from Andrei Popescu, Planning Obligations Development Officer.

• Site Development Plan Document, update report, from Keith Fraser, Principal Planner.

• STEPS Zone 19, results of informal public consultation, report by David Waugh, Senior Engineer

a) Section 106 monies – Update Report

The Chair urged members to put forward ideas for the unallocated S106 funding and had asked officers to also put forward ideas for agreement.  Members were directed to the project bank listed on the back page of the report. It was noted that the list was for information only and reflected suggestions put forward for discussion in the past and not agreed by the committee.

 

            Resolved: (i) To note the update report.

 

b) Site Development Plan document

 

Resolved: (i) To note the report and the arrangements for making comments.

 

c) Steps Zone 19,

 

Resolved: (i) To note the results of the informal public consultation.

 

The date of the next meeting is on Monday 30 March 2009 at Bandon Hill Primary School, Sandy Lane South, Wallington at 7.30pm.

The next meeting will be held on Monday 30 March 2009, at Bandon Hill Primary School, Sandy Lane South, Wallington at 7.30pm.