Agenda and minutes
PDF 91 KBVenue: Darwin Court Healthy Living Centre, 1 Crail Row, London SE17 1AD
Contact: Gerald Gohler, Constitutional Officer
| Note | No. | Item |
|---|---|---|
|
Welcome and introductions
Minutes: The Vice-Chair welcomed councillors, members of the public and officers to the meeting. She went on to inform that meeting that she would be chairing until the chair arrived. |
||
|
Apologies
Minutes: There were apologies for absence from Councillors Catherine Bowman and Abdul Mohamed; and apologies for lateness from Councillors Martin Seaton (chair) and Rebecca Lury.
Councillors Tim McNally, Adele Morris and David Noakes apologised for having to leave the meeting early. |
||
|
Disclosure of members' interests and dispensations
Minutes: There were none. |
||
|
Items of business that the Chair deems urgent
Minutes: There were none. |
||
|
Minutes
The minutes of the meeting held on 26 June 2013 to be agreed as a correct record and signed by the chair.
Supporting documents: Minutes: A resident asked for paragraph 5.1 of the draft minutes to be amended to reflect his comment that he felt the council’s contractor had been at fault regarding the resurfacing of the street. The meeting heard that since the last meeting the problems regarding the footpath in East Street had got worse.
RESOLVED:
The minutes of the meeting held on 26 June 2013, including the above amendment, were agreed as a correct record and signed by the chair. |
||
5.40pm |
Budget Consultation
Councillor Peter John, Leader of the Council, to introduce the item, followed by an interactive consultation exercise.
Minutes: Councillor Peter John, the leader of the council, introduced the budget consultation exercise. In 2010/11 a similar exercise had been conducted, which had also looked at the council’s budget. The feedback given by residents at the time had been very helpful to councillors when deciding on where to make savings. Since 2010, the council had been required to make total cuts of £90m. This represented 25% of the council’s general fund budget. There was a continued need for the council to make savings, because central government continued to cut local government budgets.
The objective of the consultation exercise was for residents to indicate where in the total general fund budget of £349.6m they would prefer to make savings. Attendees could do this with the aid of cheques which they could allocate to the different service areas: Environment, Adult Services, Public Health, Children’s Services, Central Support Services, Housing and Community Services and Culture Libraries and Leisure. Attendees had been given a pack which contained a “protect card”, two green cheques each representing a £1m increase, and 23 red cheques representing a cut of £1m each.
In answer to questions from the floor, Councillor John said that the cuts which needed to be made in the coming financial year were likely to come to £25m – a further increase from the time the consultation booklet had been put together. Councillor John also explained that the council had cut over £1m in chief officers’ salaries by reducing strategic directors posts from 13 to five, with many of the strategic directors effectively doubling their areas of responsibility. In answer to further questions, Councillor John explained that the consultation had started at the beginning of August and comprised many events and exercises, as well as an online consultation, which allowed people to have their say. He invited all residents to input.
NOTE: At this point, the meeting broke into a 30-minute interactive consultation exercise. |
|
6.30pm |
Borough, Bankside and Walworth Youth Community Council
Members of the Youth Community Council to feed back on their recent activities and issues they have been discussing.
Minutes: NOTE: At this point Councillor Adele Morris left the meeting. Councillor Martin Seaton joined the meeting, and continued in the chair.
The chair thanked the vice-chair for chairing the meeting up to this point.
Representatives from the Borough, Bankside and Walworth Youth Community Council (YCC) reported back on their search for facilities for young people along Walworth Road. They had, however, not found any. To address this lack of facilities, they had come up with the idea of a “pop-up youth club” and had been looking for a vacant property. The meeting heard that closed down council offices – like Old Town Hall building on Walworth Road - could be used, but that new facilities were also needed. It should not be left to the young people to lobby for this, parents and the wider community also needed to get involved. There were many faith organisations along the Walworth Road, whose premises were not always used, and which could provide a space for young people to meet.
The Youth Community Council were currently also investigating organising a trip for their members to visit Cambridge, Massachusetts - one of Southwark’s twin cities. The trip would be designed to make connections with young people there. The meeting discussed different ways how this money could be raised, suggestions included: a bake sale, a pop-up showcase to celebrate local young people’s talents (with an entrance fee to raise money).
The meeting heard that the chair and vice-chair would meet with the youth community council before the next community council meeting in order to pick up on the issues raised, and to arrive at a plan of action.
ACTION: Chair and vice-chair to meet with the youth community council before the next meeting. |
|
6.45pm |
Petitions and Deputations
Deputation request from the Walworth
Society. Supporting documents: Minutes: NOTE: At this point, Councillor Tim McNally left the meeting.
RESOLVED: That the deputation by the Walworth Society be heard.
The spokesperson for the deputation set out the concerns of the group regarding the protection of historical buildings in the Walworth area, which were under threat of being demolished by developers, especially those not currently listed, like the Victorian sorting office on Penrose Street, several pubs and other community assets. The spokesperson went on to say that retaining historical buildings would make the area more vibrant, and that the council’s Elephant and Castle Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) proposed putting in place a system of “local listings”, but that this process was too slow. The deputation said that constant campaigns to save individual buildings were beyond what the community could undertake, and that it was for this reason that they proposed a subgroup of the community council be created. The deputation suggested that the group should include representatives of interested groups, officers and councillors, and that it would be designed to:
Councillors thanked the deputation for raising this issue and commented that the work of a group looking at historical buildings (and an officer to support them) may be funded through the Community Council Fund or the Cleaner Greener Safer revenue fund. A neighbourhood plan would also be useful in supporting the aims of the deputation.
The meeting heard that officers needed to respond more quickly, for example in the case of the proposed demolition of the sorting office, and that a neighbourhood plan would take too long to put in place. Recent changes to the planning regime, which had made it more difficult for councils to block the redevelopment of certain sites.
The Chair drew the attention of the meeting to the comments by the Director of Planning in the supplementary agenda pack 2.
Members discussed the viability of a working group, and that this must have officer support. The proposed group should include the whole community council area. Planning officers should be involved in this group.
RESOLVED:
1. That the formation of a working group to look at protecting historical buildings in Borough, Bankside and Walworth area, and its remit be investigated.
2. That the chair investigate what officer support would be available for such a group.
3. That some members of the Walworth Society and other interested groups in the area be invited to join this group.
The chair thanked the members of the deputation for attending. |
|
7.00pm |
Community announcements
Minutes: Southwark Civic Awards Councillor Lorraine Lauder, MBE, informed the meeting that the Southwark Civic Association was inviting nominations for the Southwark Civic Awards from the end of October. Nomination forms would be available from libraries and from the council offices at 160 Tooley Street. There were different award categories, for example the Mayor’s discretionary award, Southwark lifetime award and others. The nominations process would close on 31 January 2014. Nominations could be submitted on paper or online at: http://www.southwarkcivicassociation.org
Walworth’s got talent Father Andrew Moughtin-Mumby informed the meeting about the “Walworth’s got talent” event on 12 October 2013 at St Peter’s Church. All were welcome, but only Walworth residents could participate on stage.
Police update PS Barton from the Metropolitan Police informed the meeting that since 24 June 2013 the Metropolitan Police was operating the new “local policing team model” with one dedicated officer and one Policy Community Support Officer in each ward. There was also a team of seven to eight officers covering several wards. Apart from crime reporting and patrolling the area, the teams would be doing investigative and problem solving work in the wards. The police in the area had recently been focusing on road traffic safety, anti-social behaviour patrols along the Old Kent Road and on thefts of smartphones by people on cycles and in pubs and clubs, as well as on residential and non-residential burglaries.
Responding to questions, PS Barton responded that the police were doing work around cyclists using the pavement, especially given the spate of smart phones being snatched by people on bikes. Cyclists who used the pavements would be warned and/or fined.
The meeting heard that cyclists using the pavement was a particular issue for some disabled people, especially visually impaired people. A general speed limit of 20mph on all the borough’s road should also be looked into. The meeting also heard that there had been an overall cut in the borough’s police officers of more than 100, and that residents had noticed a lack of police presence around Camus House, where the under-5s play area had been used by adults drinking, smoking and behaving anti-socially.
PS Barton said he would take people’s details and pass them to ward officers. |
|
7.10pm |
Launch of the Cleaner Greener Safer and Community Council Funds 2014/2015
Launch announcements. Minutes: Rupert Hill, the manager and coach of the Burgess Park Cricket Club, spoke to the meeting about the club, whose under-16s team had recently won the Kent Metropolitan League. The club had received £6,500 of Cleaner Greener Safer funding, with which they had funded their teams, plus a programme for young cricketers in schools, girls’ cricket and cricket for disabled players. The club, who were celebrating its tenth anniversary this year, were also working on setting up an indoor cricket league to start at the end of January 2014.
Responding to questions, Rupert Hill explained that five years ago most schools did not have facilities for playing cricket, now eight in the wider area did. In the summer there had been a 6-week 20/20 competition which London Nautical had won. Currently the club shared their grounds with the Southwark Tigers Rugby club which caused some issues. Furthermore, in order to progress into the next league the club needed a club house. He invited all to come and watch the games.
Councillor Neil Coyle announced the launch of the Cleaner Greener Safer (CGS) funding 2014/2015. He informed the meeting that since the start of CGS a total of £28.5m had been spent. In the coming financial year £500,000 of combined capital and revenue was available for the Borough, Bankside and Walworth area, which was roughly £110,000 per ward. The closing date for ideas for next year’s programme is Friday 8 November 2013, with decisions scheduled to be made at the community council meeting in February 2014.
The meeting heard that it was important for organisations to work together to attract funding.
At the invitation of the chair, Jon Abbott from the council’s regeneration department informed the meeting of new developments at Walworth Road Town Hall. Since the fire the council had worked with contractors to stabilise the building and retrieve objects from it. The council was currently consulting on future uses for the building including a new library, a place for the Cuming collection, a flexible meeting space, the registry office, or a cafe. The closing date for this consultation was 31 October 2013. As part of the consultation, officers would also speak to the Walworth Society and the Youth Community Council. There would be a community conversation on the following Saturday. Residents could also participate on the council’s website. The feedback from the consultation would be going to cabinet in February 2014.
In response to questions from the floor Jon responded that the insurer would pay for the refurbishment, but only to reinstate the building to its previous condition, so the changes discussed would need to be paid for by the council. The council’s conservation team and English Heritage would be consulted about the planned changes, so that the plans would be in line with the rules regarding the “listed building” status of the Old Town Hall. In terms of the location of the library, this was also part of the consultation. |
|
7.20pm |
Community Council Highways Capital Investment 2013/14
Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors to consider the information contained in the report.
Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Members considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
That the “Alice Street / Green Walk scheme” project be allocated the £34,876 of currently unallocated Community Council Highways Capital Investment funding (2013/14).
|
|
7.25pm |
Alice Street and Green Walk Streetscape Improvement Scheme
Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors to consider the information contained in the report. Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Members considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
That the implementation of the above scheme, subject to statutory consultation and in line with the recommendations in the consultation report, be approved. |
|
7.30pm |
Local parking amendments
Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors to consider the information contained in the report.
Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Members considered the information contained in the report.
Resolved:
That the following local parking amendments be approved for implementation, subject to the outcome of any necessary statutory procedures:
· Royal Road – install one disabled persons’ (blue badge) parking bay
· Alice Street – install one disabled persons’ (blue badge) parking bay
· Great Suffolk Street – install one 4 hour disabled persons’ (blue badge) parking bay. |
|
7.35pm |
Doddington Grove Cycle Hire Scheme
Note: This is an executive function.
Councillors to consider the information contained in the report. Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function.
Members considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
That the installation of the cycle hire docking station on Doddington Grove be approved, subject to the outcome of necessary statutory procedures. |
|
7.40pm |
Public Question Time
This is an opportunity for public questions to be addressed to the chair.
Residents or persons working in the borough may ask questions on any matter in relation to which the council has powers or duties.
Responses may be supplied in writing following the meeting.
Supporting documents: Minutes: The following public questions were submitted in writing:
|
|
7.45pm |
Community Council Question to Council Assembly
Each community council may submit one question to a council assembly meeting that has previously been considered and noted by the community council.
Any question to be submitted from a community council to council assembly should first be the subject of discussion at a community council meeting. The subject matter and question should be clearly noted in the community council’s minutes and thereafter the agreed question can be referred to the constitutional team.
The community council is invited to consider if it wishes to submit a question to the ordinary meeting of council assembly on 27 November 2013. Minutes: Following a discussion the community council considered whether to submit a question to the Council Assembly meeting on 27 November 2013 and agreed the following:
“Why is there no dedicated telephone line which handles calls from older people to the council’s Adult Social Care Department?” |
|
|
Neighbourhood Forum Reports
Councillors to comment on the reports below. Minutes: NOTE: The chair announced that the following two items would be heard together, as one overlapped the other.
Juliet Seymour, Planning Policy Manager, introduced the items, outlining that the community council was being asked to comment on the proposals in the report, specifically on the boundaries of the proposed areas, as shown on the maps in the reports. The decision about the boundaries and the Neighbourhood Forums would be taken by the cabinet member for regeneration and corporate strategy in December.
The chair invited a representative of each group to make short statements to provide councillors with more information about the respective proposals, and the reasoning behind their proposed boundaries.
Councillors discussed the proposals, and asked questions about how the respective areas fit in with the already agreed Bankside neighbourhood plan, about the boundary with regards to Tower Bridge Road, and about the specifics the forums proposed for their neighbourhood plans.
The Chair reiterated that the community council was only asked to comment on the proposals, with the decision being taken by the cabinet member for regeneration and corporate strategy.
RESOLVED:
That the official feedback from the community council is:
· The western boundary of both areas must reflect the boundaries of the existing Bankside neighbourhood plan. Both sides of Borough High Street should be part of the Bankside neighbourhood plan only, for reasons of consistency, and to ensure future development is addressed in a cohesive way.
· Both sides of Tower Bridge Road should also be included in the area, for reasons of consistency and to ensure future development is addressed in a cohesive way.
· The two organisations should work together to come up with a joint plan.
The meeting heard that other suggestions and comments could still be submitted to juliet.seymour@southwark.gov.uk until the end of October. |
||
7.50pm |
Bermondsey Neighbourhood Forum
Supporting documents: Minutes: See item 17. |
|
7.55pm |
Bermondsey Village Action Group
Supporting documents: Minutes: See item 17.
The chair thanked everyone for attending.
|