Present: James Slattery-Kavanagh (acting chair), Gabrielle Garton Grimwood (note taker), Romano Barca, Simon Berlyn, Bernie Bullbrook, Councillor Geraldine Evans, John MacDonald, Councillor Robert McConnell, Richard Moore, Helen O'Brien, Jane Pickard, Ann Ridley.
Apologies: Councillor Jeremy Baker, Michael Grimwood, Anne Orange, Gerry Slaughter.
2. Minutes/Matters Arising
John MacDonald mentioned that the Board had still not reported back on what was happening at the Business Forum (para 3.3 of minutes of meeting of 11 June). Jane Pickard said that the Business Forum was meeting later in the month.
Romano Barca argued that it was unsatisfactory that businesses were in effect 'squatting' on pavement space (para 3.4). Either the council should take enforcement action to clear the pavement or it should assist the businesses to acquire legitimate usage through adverse possession.
John MacDonald and Romano Barca also mentioned that, although staff from Somerfield supermarket did pull the line of trolleys back within the supermarket's curtilage when it strayed onto the pavement, there had nevertheless been some complaints about obstruction.
Simon Berlyn complained that the previous minutes (para 3.5) had not captured the finer nuances of his suggestions about the unacceptably long wait for pedestrians at pelican crossings and about conserving the frontage of Norwood Road.
Pat Fisher confirmed that the sum spent on the business initiative (para 4.4) was £24,000. Ninety people had attended a business seminar and 24 had received computer training. A forthright discussion ensued. It was suggested that there was a discrepancy over the reported cost: some Board documents had (according to Romano Barca) quoted a cost of £40,000. Richard Moore argued that the cost should be further scrutinised and Simon Berlyn said that the Board had been cavalier with public money. Jane Pickard said that there was to be a wider audit of the NRF grants and lessons would be learnt from that.
It was agreed to ask for a report back at the next meeting, when Romano Barca would also report the outcome of his separate submission to the scrutiny committee.
3. St Luke's Gardens
Simon Berlyn read a paper summarising the steering group's progress to date - which, he said, had been considerable - and invited NAG to make an important decision on the future direction of the gardens project. The steering group considered that St Luke's Gardens should retain their role as a cemetery, war memorial, setting for the church and community facility and open space. Their nine specific proposals, which NAG was invited to agree, were that:
1. the steering group's remit should be limited to the garden itself
2. there should be notice boards within the garden
3. the railings should be reinstated, possibly with gates
4. the gardens should be attractive, with lights both for safety and for aesthetic effect
5. the gardens should remain set out as a war memorial garden
6. there should be access from north and south ends of the garden. The steps should remain in place and there should also be wheelchair access at the south end.
7. a water feature could be included
8. the trees should either be pruned or removed and appropriate new trees planted; and
9. there should be some seating in the gardens.
Simon Berlyn and other members of the steering group present then fielded questions on (inter alia) access for people with disabilities; security against vandalism; maintenance and upkeep; and compliance with relevant legislation. The steering group intended to seek police advice on designing out crime and Bernie Bullbrook undertook to mention this at a forthcoming meeting of the crime prevention panel and at a seminar on problem-solving policing. Simon Berlyn confirmed that the steering group had an action plan but no timetable for project milestones such as having an agreed design, obtaining necessary funding or completing the work. He saw no need for a timetable and suggested that no design would be agreed until it was known whether the railings would be reinstated.
The motion that the steering group should proceed on this basis and work up more detailed proposals was passed by a substantial majority. Two people abstained from the vote, because of their concerns at the slow pace and seeming open-endedness of the project.
4. NAG meetings in August and September
This was discussed as an additional agenda item. It was agreed that the August meeting should be a social event and that the AGM should be held over to September. There were mixed views on whether a speaker should be invited to the AGM. Gabrielle Garton Grimwood asked that those NAG officers who would be presenting annual reports to the AGM should send those reports to the secretary, Michael Grimwood in good time.
5. Norwood Gardens Competition
Helen O'Brien reported that there had been some entries:
1 school
2 front gardens
3 back gardens
4 balconies/patios.
There had been no entries for the 'most improved' and business/community categories. Gabrielle Garton Grimwood would pass the details to the Lambeth Horticultural Society for judging. John MacDonald and James Slattery-Kavanagh were obtaining and donating prizes. It was agreed that the prize-giving ceremony would be held at the start of the AGM and that Councillor McConnell would present the prizes. All entrants would receive a year's free membership of NAG. It was also agreed that some media coverage should be sought.
6. NAG priorities
There was some further discussion of issues which NAG might pursue as priorities:
Romano Barca again suggested adverse possession and businesses obstructing the pavement
Councillor Jeremy Baker distributed a list of the potholes in Knights Hill ward and invited views on which were the worst six which should be dealt with first.
Richard Moore suggested that the junction of York Hill, Lancaster Avenue and Norwood Road should have a pedestrian crossing. Jane Pickard argued that there should also be a pedestrian crossing at the end of Robson Road.
Bernie Bullbrook reported that there had been complaints about the barrow at the end of Chestnut Road blocking the pavement.
It was agreed that this discussion should be the first item on the agenda for the October meeting.
7. Any other business
Councillor Robert McConnell reported that a decision on area committees was expected probably in December, with implementation to follow in (provisionally) January 2003.
John MacDonald reported that Norwood had lost its two Streetscene agents with no warning and there was no information about who the new agents were or how to contact them. Councillor Robert McConnell agreed to pursue this. He also agreed to pursue the matter (raised by John MacDonald) of the cancellation twice by the town centre office of a meeting with the victim of the mugging outside the off licence. John MacDonald also mentioned that the lights outside West Norwood station were still not functioning properly.
Romano Barca reported that the injunction against Kavanagh's was now in place. He invited members to give their views on the cannabis issue.
Richard Moore suggested that Grimebusters should tackle the plentiful graffiti in the area. The police had had some success in enforcing curfew orders but were overstretched: a recent double shooting (for example) had taken up all their available resources.
Bernie Bullbrook mentioned that there was a problem with distraction burglary and everyone, particularly older people, should be on the alert.
Tuesday, July 09, 2002
Town Centre Report 2002
Town Centre Report
We support most of the recommendations made by the consultancy, The Project Group, in its 1998 report to Lambeth Council on the town centre development, in particular the need for:
signage of car parks, station, other facilities, and West Norwood itself.
greening/landscaping. We want more trees, tubs of shrubs and flowers, hanging baskets, improvement of St Luke's gardens.
Pavement improvement. We would like to see replacement of broken and damaged pavements in the centre (and a long-term programme of laying paving slabs in residential streets currently under tarmac).
Street lighting. We supported the provision of new street lights. Dark green is the suggested colour, following our newsletter mini-survey.
Grants to improve shop fronts and for training shop staff in customer service, etc
Public toilets - we called for these at our first meeting in autumn 1996!
Image: we discussed image and came up with two ideas for further discussion. One was to create and promote a town centre which was attractive to families, with toilets, a playground, toy shop, etc. The other was to take advantage of the large number of flower shops and promote it as a the flower centre of south London. It has a clear advantage over Streatham of being a manageable size with many food shops and over Dulwich of being more accessible on public transport.
Business forum: we have always supported the setting up of a separate business forum, but Jeremy Galloway has not found many traders interested.
Cycle parking at the stations.
However, we had some criticisms of the report. They included:
its failure to address the problems of Knight's Hill and Norwood High Street.
Its lack of an overall "vision" for the town centre, eg as a place for families. We feel a lot could be made of the fact that a wide range of shopping is available in a relatively small space and within walking distance of local housing.
The implication that the lack of a tube was a serious problem, which would prevent the centre ever becoming really well used. Many other town centres in south London overcome this disadvantage.
The contradictory perception that the town centre functioned well as a local shopping and commuter hub and that an evening economy was developing. We wish it was!
The comment that bus services were good - we feel they could be improved.
We had some additional suggestions:
West Norwood should concentrate on destination shopping rather than comparison shopping (ie it should provide food and household necessities, including one or two shoe shops, a toy shop and a bookshop, rather than numerous fashion chains).
We needed "magnets" to draw people into the town centre and help small shops to survive, including, a supermarket, with parking, in the centre. We are completely opposed to the idea of the old college site being used for a supermarket.
The area defined as West Norwood should include Knight's Hill and Norwood High Street. We disagree with the view that the one-way system has had no impact on these streets. Speeding through-traffic makes both streets less attractive for shopping. There is no desire to linger. Signs denoting the "boundaries" of West Norwood need to take this into account.
We support most of the recommendations made by the consultancy, The Project Group, in its 1998 report to Lambeth Council on the town centre development, in particular the need for:
signage of car parks, station, other facilities, and West Norwood itself.
greening/landscaping. We want more trees, tubs of shrubs and flowers, hanging baskets, improvement of St Luke's gardens.
Pavement improvement. We would like to see replacement of broken and damaged pavements in the centre (and a long-term programme of laying paving slabs in residential streets currently under tarmac).
Street lighting. We supported the provision of new street lights. Dark green is the suggested colour, following our newsletter mini-survey.
Grants to improve shop fronts and for training shop staff in customer service, etc
Public toilets - we called for these at our first meeting in autumn 1996!
Image: we discussed image and came up with two ideas for further discussion. One was to create and promote a town centre which was attractive to families, with toilets, a playground, toy shop, etc. The other was to take advantage of the large number of flower shops and promote it as a the flower centre of south London. It has a clear advantage over Streatham of being a manageable size with many food shops and over Dulwich of being more accessible on public transport.
Business forum: we have always supported the setting up of a separate business forum, but Jeremy Galloway has not found many traders interested.
Cycle parking at the stations.
However, we had some criticisms of the report. They included:
its failure to address the problems of Knight's Hill and Norwood High Street.
Its lack of an overall "vision" for the town centre, eg as a place for families. We feel a lot could be made of the fact that a wide range of shopping is available in a relatively small space and within walking distance of local housing.
The implication that the lack of a tube was a serious problem, which would prevent the centre ever becoming really well used. Many other town centres in south London overcome this disadvantage.
The contradictory perception that the town centre functioned well as a local shopping and commuter hub and that an evening economy was developing. We wish it was!
The comment that bus services were good - we feel they could be improved.
We had some additional suggestions:
West Norwood should concentrate on destination shopping rather than comparison shopping (ie it should provide food and household necessities, including one or two shoe shops, a toy shop and a bookshop, rather than numerous fashion chains).
We needed "magnets" to draw people into the town centre and help small shops to survive, including, a supermarket, with parking, in the centre. We are completely opposed to the idea of the old college site being used for a supermarket.
The area defined as West Norwood should include Knight's Hill and Norwood High Street. We disagree with the view that the one-way system has had no impact on these streets. Speeding through-traffic makes both streets less attractive for shopping. There is no desire to linger. Signs denoting the "boundaries" of West Norwood need to take this into account.
Norwood Action Group: Aims
Overall aims of the group. These go beyond the town centre itself. Discussions have covered:
Environment: We want to see the greening of West Norwood. There is a strong desire to see St Luke's Gardens improved and a number of us would like to be involved in a working party to make proposals on that. There has also been some discussion about the possibility of providing a small children's playground either in St Luke's Gardens or on/near the green outside Norwood Hall. We believe that a playground might attract more families into the town centre or persuade those already there to linger. It is understood that the residents' association for the Hainthorpe Estate views the green as the property of estate residents only and not for general community use. We have not wanted to interfere with the association's rights to the land, but would like to feed into any discussion about the green's future. We have also agreed that a tree-planting programme is needed in local streets and welcome the start that has been made.
Education: We feel West Norwood is becoming progressively disadvantaged in terms of easily accessible, local education. We were against the closure of the further education college, in favour of broad community use for the old library, incorporating the ideas of West Norwood Community Development, and in favour of the introduction of adult and continuing education in West Norwood, preferably using the old library. The group has never taken a vote on the closure of Norwood Park School, but has expressed concerns that the over-provision of school places in West Norwood may be more apparent than real.
Sport and recreation: There are very few sports facilities in West Norwood (there is a tennis club and there are tennis courts and a cinder pitch for football in Norwood Park). We were in favour of Norwood Hall being re-opened and possibly used for indoor sports activities and have discussed the possibility of unwanted sites being turned into sports facilities, rather than sold off for housing. We also support the efforts of the Friends of Norwood Park, which is affiliated to Norwood Action Group, in improving the park.
Transport: the group has spent a large amount of time putting forward its views on the need for short-stay shoppers' carparking spaces in the town centre. It has also noted the need for an east-west bus route through West Norwood and pressed for improved public transport at Christmas. It is in the process of agreeing further policies.
Safety and crime: the group has supported the introduction of CCTV with some reservations. However, it opposed aspects of a police campaign around the station last summer, which it felt would frighten people away from the town centre.
In summary: West Norwood needs to be made more appealing to business and consumers, attracting more money into the area. We need to ensure the people who live here have jobs and therefore money to spend. So the area needs training and job opportunities, good public transport links and to be relatively crime-free. It also brings us on to our wish list for the town centre.
Environment: We want to see the greening of West Norwood. There is a strong desire to see St Luke's Gardens improved and a number of us would like to be involved in a working party to make proposals on that. There has also been some discussion about the possibility of providing a small children's playground either in St Luke's Gardens or on/near the green outside Norwood Hall. We believe that a playground might attract more families into the town centre or persuade those already there to linger. It is understood that the residents' association for the Hainthorpe Estate views the green as the property of estate residents only and not for general community use. We have not wanted to interfere with the association's rights to the land, but would like to feed into any discussion about the green's future. We have also agreed that a tree-planting programme is needed in local streets and welcome the start that has been made.
Education: We feel West Norwood is becoming progressively disadvantaged in terms of easily accessible, local education. We were against the closure of the further education college, in favour of broad community use for the old library, incorporating the ideas of West Norwood Community Development, and in favour of the introduction of adult and continuing education in West Norwood, preferably using the old library. The group has never taken a vote on the closure of Norwood Park School, but has expressed concerns that the over-provision of school places in West Norwood may be more apparent than real.
Sport and recreation: There are very few sports facilities in West Norwood (there is a tennis club and there are tennis courts and a cinder pitch for football in Norwood Park). We were in favour of Norwood Hall being re-opened and possibly used for indoor sports activities and have discussed the possibility of unwanted sites being turned into sports facilities, rather than sold off for housing. We also support the efforts of the Friends of Norwood Park, which is affiliated to Norwood Action Group, in improving the park.
Transport: the group has spent a large amount of time putting forward its views on the need for short-stay shoppers' carparking spaces in the town centre. It has also noted the need for an east-west bus route through West Norwood and pressed for improved public transport at Christmas. It is in the process of agreeing further policies.
Safety and crime: the group has supported the introduction of CCTV with some reservations. However, it opposed aspects of a police campaign around the station last summer, which it felt would frighten people away from the town centre.
In summary: West Norwood needs to be made more appealing to business and consumers, attracting more money into the area. We need to ensure the people who live here have jobs and therefore money to spend. So the area needs training and job opportunities, good public transport links and to be relatively crime-free. It also brings us on to our wish list for the town centre.
Norwood Action Group: Introduction
What is Norwood Action Group?
It is a non-party political group of people who live and work in West Norwood, dedicated to the economic, environmental and social regeneration of the area.
The group started informally following a public meeting in autumn, 1996. The suggestion for regular meetings of local people came from Anne Orange, a youth worker for St Luke's Church. She now chairs the group. After about eight monthly meetings, the group called a further public meeting in June 1997 at which it was properly constituted and a committee elected. The committee has 13 positions currently filled by 11 people.
At the 1998 annual public meeting, the constitution was amended to provide for membership. Individuals pay £3, or £1 unwaged. Affiliated organisations pay £5. Membership has built up slowly, mainly through our quarterly newsletters and now (June 1999) totals 42.
The group includes people of varying social and ethnic backgrounds and ages and has a balance of both men and women. Although we make no claim to officially represent the people of West Norwood, we feel we are fairly representative of people in this area. We keep in touch mainly through our newsletters which usually have a questionnaire on the back. We invite people to fill this in and post into one of a number of boxes we set up in town centre retail outlets.
This way, we can tell people what we have said to the council and other bodies about developments in the area - and we can find out what you think, as well, and pass this on. The group meets on the second Tuesday of each month, usually at 8pm. Meetings are open to anyone who is interested. We regard our catchment area as stretching from Crown Point to Tulse Hill and from Croxted Road to Leigham Court Road, although we are not inflexible about this.
Issues we have addressed so far include car-parking, community facilities, such as the need to re-open the old library building as a youth and community centre, the closure of Lambeth College's Norwood Centre, environmental improvements, transport and even Christmas decorations.
The group has been advised and encouraged by Lambeth Council, although it remains strictly independent. In particular, it receives help from, and supports, the West Norwood town centre manager, Isabel Elder.
We are now looking forward to further contributing to council work through the new West Norwood town centre forum - one of five which the council intends to set up throughout Lambeth.
The group can be contacted through Isabel Elder (ielder@lambeth.gov.uk) in the West Norwood area office in the Nettlefold Hall/library building, or by emailing Jane Pickard, secretary: jane@norwoodaction.org.uk
It is a non-party political group of people who live and work in West Norwood, dedicated to the economic, environmental and social regeneration of the area.
The group started informally following a public meeting in autumn, 1996. The suggestion for regular meetings of local people came from Anne Orange, a youth worker for St Luke's Church. She now chairs the group. After about eight monthly meetings, the group called a further public meeting in June 1997 at which it was properly constituted and a committee elected. The committee has 13 positions currently filled by 11 people.
At the 1998 annual public meeting, the constitution was amended to provide for membership. Individuals pay £3, or £1 unwaged. Affiliated organisations pay £5. Membership has built up slowly, mainly through our quarterly newsletters and now (June 1999) totals 42.
The group includes people of varying social and ethnic backgrounds and ages and has a balance of both men and women. Although we make no claim to officially represent the people of West Norwood, we feel we are fairly representative of people in this area. We keep in touch mainly through our newsletters which usually have a questionnaire on the back. We invite people to fill this in and post into one of a number of boxes we set up in town centre retail outlets.
This way, we can tell people what we have said to the council and other bodies about developments in the area - and we can find out what you think, as well, and pass this on. The group meets on the second Tuesday of each month, usually at 8pm. Meetings are open to anyone who is interested. We regard our catchment area as stretching from Crown Point to Tulse Hill and from Croxted Road to Leigham Court Road, although we are not inflexible about this.
Issues we have addressed so far include car-parking, community facilities, such as the need to re-open the old library building as a youth and community centre, the closure of Lambeth College's Norwood Centre, environmental improvements, transport and even Christmas decorations.
The group has been advised and encouraged by Lambeth Council, although it remains strictly independent. In particular, it receives help from, and supports, the West Norwood town centre manager, Isabel Elder.
We are now looking forward to further contributing to council work through the new West Norwood town centre forum - one of five which the council intends to set up throughout Lambeth.
The group can be contacted through Isabel Elder (ielder@lambeth.gov.uk) in the West Norwood area office in the Nettlefold Hall/library building, or by emailing Jane Pickard, secretary: jane@norwoodaction.org.uk
Norwood Action Group: Policies
Norwood Action Group was formally constituted on 11 June 1997 at a public meeting. The purpose of the group, agreed by the meeting and amended at the 1998 annual meeting in July, is as follows:
"to promote the regeneration of West Norwood by creating better living and environmental conditions, business and job opportunities and improving retail, educational and recreation facilities".
For public consumption, we usually shorten this to:
"campaigning for the social, environmental and economic regeneration of West Norwood".
Since we first met informally in Autumn 1996, there has been much discussion of what we would like to see happen in West Norwood. What follows (see Town Centre Report) is an overview of improvements we have put forward since then. It was drawn from decisions and discussion over the past 21 months and approved at meeting of NAG in March 1999.
"to promote the regeneration of West Norwood by creating better living and environmental conditions, business and job opportunities and improving retail, educational and recreation facilities".
For public consumption, we usually shorten this to:
"campaigning for the social, environmental and economic regeneration of West Norwood".
Since we first met informally in Autumn 1996, there has been much discussion of what we would like to see happen in West Norwood. What follows (see Town Centre Report) is an overview of improvements we have put forward since then. It was drawn from decisions and discussion over the past 21 months and approved at meeting of NAG in March 1999.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)