Notes of the meeting held at Merton Civic Centre on 28th September 2000

Present:
Marcus Beale RIBA Chair Wimbledon Civic Forum UDTF
Steve Clark Director of Development LB Merton

Contents:
1. Raynes Park
2. Wimbledon Park
3. Wimbledon Town Centre
4. Merton Priory
5. Metropolitan open land - Prince George’s Playing Fields
6. Advisory bodies to Local Authority.
7. Conservation Areas - requirement to preserve or enhance

1. Raynes Park

1.1 Library. Library brief will be met: plenty of feedback . Analysis offeedback in planning process. Will feed into formal agreements with property. Land purchase/covenant route. Section 106 Local consultation - run by libraries, library service will make a decision then move on to a detailed planning work. Adequate 21st Century library - not good. Better than what's there now.Why only adequate? In C19 commercial sector involvement in public services- philanthropic giving. Various companies in the borough might be in a position to give, maybe fit out with IT Facility.

1.2. Big areas of change in Raynes Park:Abbots Avenue Thames Water pumping centre. Residential redevelopment - granted - will improve this corner of Raynes Park. Less disturbance.

1.3.Shopping area at Raynes Park - talking to developer. Co-op plus adjacent.Will be looking to secure a development that fits in, is mixed use, and adds to security. Developers at pre-application discussion stage.

1.4. Any movement on station is likely after refranchising SW trains. Bids are in, expect 6 months to 1 year before decided. New route to Kings Cross a possibility. Keeping in touch through GLA. Mayor of London.Raynes Park Station: Local Transport Expenditure controlled by Mayor. Not yet decided whether to put money into surface rail re think. Whether require operators or spend your own money. Borough is asking for Mayor of London to allocate funds to surface rail.

1.5. Street Furniture: new design of bin for town centres - larger than existing and hope to have differences - logo or something‘Streets for All’ publication - street design manual will be completely revised, by early 2001 to adopt principles in council implementation. WCF involvement in consultation.

1.6. Railtrack - cattle arch to be used by cyclists - before end of financial year.

2. Wimbledon Park

2.1. Issues raised by the UDTF workshops were passed to LB Merton, include:Rubbish collection

2.2. Streetscape. Council is developing a number of programmes assisting improvement of town centres Town Centre Improvements Scheme - grants to help fund improvements to shop fronts.Some prospect of more money to be spent on street - identify potential programme - give LBM a shopping list.

2.3. 50% increase in local transport expenditure expected.

2.4. Council is fighting Plough Lane enquiry. Lots of resources - one of the main reasons is prejudicing of Arthur Road local centre.

2.5. Any consideration based on issues of need - expenditure is fairly evenly spread across borough

2.6. Urban village. UDP 2nd deposit consultation mid October to end November forms at Wimbledon Library and Merton Civic Centre. Currently Urban Village proposal is confined to Mitcham - English Partnership study was a precursor to this. In response Wimbledon Park Forum can propose Wimbledon park as an Urban Village - a perfectly proper idea - consider:
• what benefits would be
• where designation should extend to.
The reason for Mitcham being proposed: market for different uses is not strong: enabling development less of dependence on retail. LBM hopes the outcome will be investment in public realm. Is Wimbledon Park needy enough? It is small suburban centre under threat - could be a pilot study set in context of sustainability - reducing need to travel. Focus attention: Urban Village creates mix of uses - may be pepper-potting of residential or other uses in the shopping arcade - consider the critical mass of centre.

3. Wimbledon Town Centre

3.1. P3 now under construction- more public space - some amendments to the scheme - seen as positive: not quite the same as consultation.

3.2. Wimbledon Hill is going ahead - council fought this and lost at appeal.

3.3. Will shortly be issuing a brief on old cinema site. looking for a mixed use:not too intensive. Business partnerships looking for a substantial office development: office location TM will be helping: advice on format - feedback any thoughts from UDTF to LBM.

3.4. Trinity Road and Broadway: 3 sites for development - trying to pursue mixed use on all those sites. SE site however is all residential which may be a constraint on mixed use: LBM will be seeking a ground floor active use.

3.5. San Lorenzo - a residential development for their staff is proposed.

3.6. Broadway Mews north side: various developments mooted - live/work accommodation

3.7. Civic Hall - Pleased that they have appointed architect - a struggle to get all the accommodation on the site: Ashbourne Terrace will be a key urban design issue. Officers will be open-minded in considering the development. Parking requirement - a requirement exists to provide a working car park throughout construction. Why was this condition entered into by the LA? To secure Safeway involvement in the overall scheme.

3.8. P1 site - any movement on station is only likely after refranchising SW trains. Bids are in, expect 6 months to 1 year before decided. New route to Kings Cross a possibility. Keeping in touch through GLA. Mayor of London.

4. Metropolitan Open Land [MOL]. Concerns about Prince George’s playing fields - football academy and David Lloyd Centre..

4.1. LBM opposed the original David Lloyd application which was granted at appeal. Not sure how government inspector granted it but they did. Now reviewing current situation. Government of London have asked LBM to review MOL designation- otherwise degrades concept of MOL.

4.2. Protection to MOL greater now than then. LA would seek to protect leisure use on David Lloyd Centre if there were a proposal to redevelop it.

4.3. As regards the football academy, whatever development proposed must be appropriate for MOL and stay within designation -outdoor recreation and ancillary uses only.

5. Merton Priory

5.1. Draft brief has been circulated - whole of vacant site. Looking for an enhancement of Priory site, and future arrangements for maintenance/protection. Consultation period for draft brief until Monday 2/10/00.

5.2. Savacentre development - was only granted an appeal, retrospective approval for unauthorised destruction of remains was advice from central government.

6. Advisory bodies to Local Authority.

6.1. Jack Zunz suggestion (CABE - design review) that local eminent professionals might advice council on matters of design:

6.2. LBM is reviewing advisory bodies including CAAC - more design advice. Possibly a more general urban design group. local area forums. Suggestions: be pleased to consider roles for Civic Forums Groups such as UDTF.

7. Conservation Areas - requirement to "preserve or enhance" The legal view regarding criteria for preservation/enhancement is no need to seek an improvement - planning cases gone to law as precedent. Rear of Wimbledon Girls School, Wimbledon Hill Road officers report stated 'did not preserve or enhance?' did make noise - refused planning permission