None

None

Matters arising:

·         Care leaver accommodation reference going to Cabinet on 16 October 2017; and

·         It was agreed to review (not remove) recommendation 12 of the housing supply task group

The Chair reported that she will present the reference to Cabinet on the 16^th October.

The Chair clarified that recommendation 12  of the Housing Supply task group will be reviewed rather than removed as previously thought.

Councillor Oonagh Moulton reported that she will speak on behalf of Wimbledon Park; there had been one decision in relation to the four parks but  individual decisions would have been more appropriate . Overall residents were not aware of the proposals  as the consultation was poor and councillors resorted to sending out ward letters about the plans.  There are two car parks in Wimbledon Park the officer report did not state why only one will be subject to parking charges.  Also there were was no consultation on the proposed times for the parking restrictions.

The Wimbledon Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) is in place between11am to -3pm, which does not align with the parking charges time of 8am to 4pm.   Residents are concerned that this will result in cars being displaced to other busy roads and will not deter commuters. Timings should be shorter and aligned with the CPZ time.

There is also an equalities issue; as the parking charges may have an effect on people with disabilities and those with buggies and heavy sports equipment who are essential users of the car park but are not addressed in report.

Councillor Holmes said he is speaking on behalf of Haydons Road recreation ground which does not have a commuter parking issue. The car park is near to a parade of shops and is used by shoppers.  Cabinet members should balance use of park and support for local businesses.

Councillor Holmes expressed concern that the proposals will not achieve the desired purpose, it will impact local business impact sports clubs and those with disabilities.  We should not deter those participating in sports as this could have a negative effect on our public health agenda. Councillor Holmes suggested the impact of the proposals are reviewed in 12 months time, to look at the issues raised and ensure the changes are effective.

Panel members were given the opportunity to ask questions of Councillor Moulton and Councillor Holmes.

A panel member highlighted that people with disabilities can make use of designated bays.  Councillor Moulton highlighted this is a  problem if the car park is busy. Councillor Holmes said that people may have mobility issues but are not registered disabled and these measures should not discourage them.

A panel member asked for a suggested recommendation on preferred hours. Councillor Moulton suggested 11-3pm in line with the CPZ hours.

Hayley Morris, representative from Colliers Wood Bowling Club  asked the Panel for further details about the proposals and how it will benefit the Club. Ms Morris said she was unsure about the details but not against the idea of charging for the use of the car park.

Councillor Guy Humphries, London Borough of Wandsworth reported to the Panel that Wimbledon Park has a borough boundary with Wandsworth. The lack of consultation was extraordinary, with only one sign on the gate of the park. Parking measures should be introduced to both Wimbledon parks and it is not clear why this is not the case. Hours for the parking  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

A verbal report will be provided.

The Assistant Director of Public Protection reported that discussions between Parking Services and Love Wimbledon had taken place.  At those discussions it was confirmed by Love Wimbledon that there was no evidence emerging from the business community which could demonstrate that the current Christmas parking concessions were having an adverse effect on the local economy. In the absence of such evidence the Assistant Director confirmed 

that the council will continue with the current scheme.

A panel member suggested that it must be possible to obtain evidence of the success of the scheme. The Head of Parking and CCTV Services reported that it would be costly to run consultation to find evidence. It would cost  £14,000 to compare figures between two  Christmas periods. The parking scheme does bring footfall, however this is a loss in parking revenue.

Some Panel members expressed concern that we are losing money on the scheme. It was reported that the scheme costs £60,000 a year.

A Panel member suggested that the scheme is reconsidered as part of future budget rounds

RESOLVED

The update report was noted.

The deputy Future Merton Manager reported that the team wants to publish short consultation to discuss areas for  protection and development  in the local area

Panel members sought clarification that it would fit in with existing plans such as the Estates Plan and London Plan and asked for assurance that the consultation will meet resident’s expectations and comply with best practice.

The Deputy Future Merton Manager reported that the Local plan makes reference to other plans and the consultation would be carried out to the highest standard.

RESOLVED

The Panel agreed the recommendations set out in the report.

The Assistant Director for Public Space Contracting & Commissioning reported that it is first event of its kind and hope to continue to provide future events which can bring an income and residents will enjoy. Feedback from residents indicates that noise was not a great cause for concern and there were limited incidences  of anti-social behaviour. Local businesses,  especially food outlets, benefitted from the event with increased custom.

Panel members reported that the event was reasonably well received by many local residents.

RESOLVED

Officers were thanked for their work in making the event successful.

The Director of Environment and Regeneration highlighted three main issues from the performance data

For the target “Parking Services Estimated Revenue” there is significant income above estimate, this is due to Automatic Number Plate Recognition which highlights the effectiveness of the moving traffic system.

In waste and street cleaning we cannot report links between the council and Veolia system, we hope this will be completed by the end of the year. We are working closely with Veolia to implement contract and seek improvements.

Within development control and enforcement there are, a number of vacancies filling them at the moment successful in recruiting , process of this ongoing performance will improve. We can increase planning fees by the promised 20% by the end of the year.

A panel member queried SP:318 “No of outdoor events in parks” and if this should now be related to level of income. The Director of Environment and Regeneration reported that this could be looked at it in the service plan 2018/19.

A panel member asked if data can be provided on the age of enforcement cases and if they can be resolved. The Director of Environment and Regeneration said this information can be provided.

A panel member asked if indicator:

SP 282 – Partnership numbers (Libraries) can be replaced with one that is more challenging. The Director of Environment and Regeneration said it is not within his portfolio but will discuss it with the Director of Community and Housing.

RESOLVED

The report was noted

Work programme

The Chair reported that the next meeting will focus on the

first budget round and the Veolia contract.

RESOLVED

The work programme was noted