Present: Gerald Slaughter (Chair), Michael Grimwood (notes), Jane Pickard, Helen O'Brien, Simon Berlyn, Lawrence Hayden, Claudette Henry, Barbara Malcolm, Michelle Barrett, Bernie Bulbrook, Cllr Gerry Evans, Rod Brown, Jenny Vickers, John McMillan, Jeremy Galloway, Jane Pickard, Clover Williams.
1.1. Graham Fearon-Wilson, James Slattery-Kavanagh, Anne Orange, Robert McConnell, Jeremy Baker.
2. Minutes and Matters Arising from the April Meeting
2.1. Item 6, Gerry Slaughter welcomed Michelle Barrett, Barbara Malcolm and Lawrence Hayden who had come to up-date NAG on the nursery scheme. He said NAG members would be interested to know about the structure and management of the project, how it related to existing provision in Norwood Park, loss of open space, access, parking and site problems (water logging etc).
2.2. Michelle Barrett had been appointed by Surestart to develop the proposal with the nursery committee (local residents committed to seeing provision for children), which was still being formed. There was much to do and the committee would need expertise from elsewhere. Any nursery would be run by professionals, that was why Surestart was involved. Until funding was secured, it would be premature to set up a management structure for the nursery. No new access to the site was envisaged. A quantity surveyor had visited the site that day to investigate the feasibility of the costings. There would be a meeting with Surestart to see if the project should go ahead. The provision in Norwood Park was the One o'Clock Club, not comparable with a nursery.
2.3. Michelle said that the drawings previously shown to NAG had been too ambitious. What was now being considered would be little bigger than the present buildings. Open space was important. The committee wanted a secure, accessible, building that did not infringe on the park. Bernie Bullbrook suggested approaching the local crime prevention officer so that designing out crime could be considered from the start. Rod Brown asked what area of the park the nursery would take up. Michelle said it depended on the precise size of the building and Ofsted guidance about play space. Gerry Slaughter said a plan for vehicle access would be needed.
2.4. Simon Berlyn thought previous discussions had resulted in a feeling against the project in NAG. The planning sub-group of the Norwood Board had opposed it. He thought there were planning objections about parking, traffic and loss of public space. He thought a suitable site for a nursery could be found elsewhere. Jane Pickard thought that a majority had had reservations about the scheme in its previous form, but she was certainly sympathetic to the general idea. She thought a smaller scheme might help to lever in other improvements to the recreation ground and encourage greater use of it. Michael Grimwood thought that the outline just provided was clearly a very different project from that previously presented and it ought to be considered on its merits. Helen O'Brien supported the proposal and would support use of the premises outside nursery hours. Simon did not see how the scheme might lead to improvements and encourage more use of the park. Summarising Gerry Slaughter thought NAG would like to see a more formal outline of the new proposal. For it to progress, he thought the issues of access, security, improvements to the park and the problem arising from the presence of a natural spring on the site would have to be addressed.
3. NAG Gardens Competition 2003
3.1. Gerry Slaughter noted that Anne Orange had agreed to organise the judging.
4. St Luke's Gardens
4.1 Simon Berlyn introduced the procedural motion on the agenda. The Steering Group had agreed it should be put to NAG and to St Luke's PCC. Previous resolutions allowed the Steering Group to work up proposals, but this required the use of architects and so a further remit was needed. When clear proposals for a scheme could be tabled they would come to NAG and the PCC for approval.
4.2. Gerry Slaughter said that, if NAG gave the authorisation requested it would be liable for the architects fees. He asked if the Steering Group had any idea yet how the scheme would be funded. Simon Berlyn said there had been an unpromising meeting the previous day with a lottery funding organisation. There seemed to be a better chance of success if the scheme for the gardens and railings were linked to a scheme for the church. Further dialogue was to take place between St Luke's, English Heritage and the lottery. Various other grant funding bodies might pay for some of the work. Responding to questions from Gerry, Simon confirmed that the Council owned the land, though the church could veto any proposed scheme. Gerry asked if the church was prepared to provide any funding. Jane Pickard, a member of the Steering Group, said that the Council had no money to support a scheme (hence its desire for a voluntary group to take the matter forward). It had also been clear from the start that the church would not fund any scheme. In reply to Michael Grimwood, Simon confirmed that the Steering Group was itself seeking funding for the scheme. That being so, Michael thought that the Steering Group should also be deciding what expenditure to authorise. An amended motion, as follows, was carried with none against. "That NAG agrees the St Luke's Steering Group may appoint architects for the Memorial Garden scheme provided the Steering Group has the funding and authorisation to spend it."
5. Agenda For Proposed Meeting With Police, Police Authority And Council
5.1. Bernie Bullbrook thought there was a case for a meeting along the proposed lines, though not earlier than October when the new Superintendent had had time to settle in. Rod Brown wondered if it was possible to make comparisons at sub-borough level with crime figures for other areas similar to Norwood. Bernie said that figures were now produced for North, Central and South Lambeth. In the absence of Richard Moore, who had proposed the meeting, Gerry Slaughter said that further discussion of the possible agenda should be deferred to the next meeting.
6. NAG Constitution
6.1. In the absence of Richard Moore this item was postponed.
7. Any Other Business
7.1. None raised.