Tag Archives: Peter Carpenter

Can Twitter help you get things done on the Alton Estate?

It has been mentioned at the recent meetings of both the Alton Regeneration Watch (ARW) meeting of 17 January 2018 and Alton Leaseholders meeting of 8 January 2018 how powerful the use of Twitter can be to assist with having things done. It is appreciated that not everyone has access to the internet or is on Twitter, though if people form groups then maybe one or more people can access Twitter to make the points. It is an extremely useful tool for having issues resolved.

Some examples are provided below.

The great water fall of Hersham Close 41-71. This took five months of effort  by the Hersham Close Residents Association (HCRA) to have something done and it kept dragging on. Once a video of the water fall was placed online with Councillor Sue McKinney copied into the Tweet as well as the Wandsworth Borough Council (WBC) this got resolved quite quickly. Now it might be the case that the Tweet and the sorting out of the situation are related though there was a step in attitude from WBC to get this resolved after the Tweet, perhaps it was a fluke? Have a look at the Tweet here –  https://mobile.twitter.com/AltonWatch/status/946741512842498049

A recent bust water tank on Kimpton House (surprisingly a resident of Stoughton Close mentioned this at the recent ARW meeting) perhaps this might have had a similar expediency if the water spillage was filmed and placed on Twitter?

Bessborough Road planning application (2017/6977) somehow, the application date was 12 January 2018 and the date for comments was by 5 January 2018? Clearly an error and was quickly looked into by the WBC and a response by Councillor Carpenter. Here are a couple of links which highlight this –

https://mobile.twitter.com/notwandbc/status/954003331889991681

https://mobile.twitter.com/AltonWatch/status/953976158902681600

There was a hole in Alton Road near Heathmere School. Despite ongoing mentions to WBC even during Stoughton Close/Greatham Walk Resident Association meetings it appeared that being proactive was a bit too much to ask? In the end by placing this on Twitter copying in Thames Water it was resolved very quickly – https://mobile.twitter.com/AltonWatch/status/918461886290628608

Very recent examples regarding fly tipping and a messy work site on Hyacinth Road on the Alton East show how quickly WBC responded –

https://mobile.twitter.com/AltonWatch/status/954272140504784896

https://mobile.twitter.com/AltonWatch/status/954271815060414465

Now imagine that every time there was an issue that was not being resolved quickly or being ignored. You take a picture, Tweet it and copy in the WBC and a Councillor and maybe other relevant groups. Other groups see this and then Tweet it. The situation might become harder to ignore and it might get resolved quicker?

An idea could be that each building or group of buildings on the Alton Estate have Twitter champions who make Tweets and maybe things might be done a bit quicker around here. Who knows?

It’s now up to you.

Please note that all information is provided on a best efforts basis and that readers should make their own efforts to review and assess the provided content.

 Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

 Or email your local Member of Parliament at;

For a different view of Roehampton, especially the Alton Estate

Advertisements

Allbrook House and Roehampton Library in the news

If you haven’t been keeping with the Alton Regeneration Watch (ARW) Twitter feed you may have missed the various articles about Allbrook House and the Roehampton Library in the media. The articles are listed below and each can be read if click on them;

An article by Greg Pitcher, ‘Leading architects call on council to save post-war LCC housing block’ (10 January 2018), was within The Architects’ Journal.

An Article by Geraint Franklin, ‘Allbrook House and Roehampton Library, London’ (January 2018), was within the Twentieth Century Society.

An article by Barnabas Calder, ‘Britain’s most important 20th-century housing is under threat’ (December 2017), was within the Apollo Magazine.

A reminder of what the buildings look like are below.

Alton Conservation Area Appraisal & Management Strategy

Something which didn’t quite seem to make any sense was how the proposed demolition came about given the positive comments in the past of from the ‘Alton Conservation Area Appraisal & Management Strategy’ which stated the following comments;

“There are however some buildings that do have architectural interest outside the conservation area such as Allbrook House and Roehampton Library”. (page 8)

“3.14 The shopping parade in Danebury Avenue, completed in 1959-60 and the library, in 1961, are outside the conservation area. The library has architectural interest, distinguished in part by its curved walls and undulating roof form but also by the associated (though detached) Allbrook House which seems to float above – it too has an interesting form and details, including decorative block detailing to its balconies which unifies and softens the harshness of the structure. The library was one of the last buildings in the original development of Alton West. It was designed by John Partridge of the London County Council (LCC) Architect’s Department incorporating ideas from Wandsworth Council’s library service. It was opened in September 1961 by the children’s author Noel Streatfield. There was originally a mural by Bill Mitchell in resin and plastics”. (page 12)

“4.29 Some buildings outside the conservation area have an influence on the area’s character, particularly noticeable along Harbridge Avenue, just off Danebury Road, where there are shops, the library and Allbrook House (all of which fall outside the conservation area)”. (page 19)

“6.9 Generally, those buildings that fall outside the conservation area do not have the same architectural rigour or quality of those that are within. There are however, buildings in the vicinity of this character area – Allbrook House and Roehampton Library – that are of interest in terms of their architectural presence and relationship to the Alton Estate. The presence and connection of these buildings to the north-eastern edge of the estate makes them difficult to go unnoticed – though outside the conservation area, their impact is complementary due to their applied architectural treatment and form, directly linked to the modernist principles established for Alton West, namely monumentality and originality”. (page 28)

“Boundary Review

1.3 As part of the appraisal process, the boundaries of the Alton Estate Conservation Area were reviewed and considered to be acceptable. However, during the public consultation people strongly urged the Council to extend the conservation area to include areas including Allbrook House and its green space, Roehampton Library and buildings along Danebury Avenue. At its Strategic Planning and Transportation Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 18 November 2010, the Council undertook to consider further research on this matter”. (page 44)

Redeveloping Danebury Avenue What Roehampton Wants….Labour Survey regarding previous regeneration attempt

With regards to the previous regeneration attempt on the Alton Estate, the Labour Party conducted a survey of residents on the Alton Estate and the results were published in the document ‘Redeveloping Danebury Avenue, What Roehampton Wants’. Interestingly, the Labour Party did not conduct any such survey this time around and it is wandered what the reason(s) are for not doing so, especially given that presently the ward has three Labour Party Councillors since 2014 these being Councillor Peter Carpenter, Councillor Jeremy Ambache and Councillor Sue McKinney. The feedback contained within the report stated;

“The whole council plan rests on the demolition of Allbrook House, the “landmark” block above Roehampton Library.  This is the one question where there was no majority opposition to the council plan, but a clear plurality – 45% – don’t want the block demolished. Barely a third – 34% – supported demolition and a sizeable number – 21% – didn’t feel able to give a view.  We had 21 surveys back from the parts of Danebury Avenue, including Allbrook House, under threat of demolition.  Of these, 4 supported demolition and 14 opposed it”.  (page 3)

“It’s a great shame that the Council never even considered improving Allbrook House, which contains some large properties within it with spectacular views of Roehampton.  Recladding or even more radical remodelling of Allbrook House could transform this block – the gateway to the Alton estate”. (page 3)

To highlight the “landmark” comment in pictures, have a look at the following photos.

This is taken from Roehampton High Street.

Conservation review 2010

Earlier in this article within the Alton Conservation Area Appraisal & Management Strategy there was a mention of this review within the Boundary Review comment. At the Strategic Planning and Transportation Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting (18 November 2010) the following was discussed “Background. The Council has a 5 year programme for updating appraisals of the Borough’s 45 conservation areas. In the fifth year, the conservation areas were divided into two groups. The first five appraisals were reported in February 2010 (Paper No. 10- 211) and the second and final four appraisals are being reported to this Committee”. (Paper 10-876).

What is very interesting about this is that in 2010 one of the current ward Councillors was supportive in trying to extend the Alton conservation Area to protect these buildings, as the following comments highlight (Appendix 2 to Paper No. 10-876, Consultation comments);

“Comment from Councillor Carpenter:

a) Recommends redrawing the boundary of the CA to include Harbidge Ave, Allbrook House, Roehampton Library and the green in Alton West; and the Cornerstone and low odd numbered buildings on Alton Road in Alton East for their architectural interest.

b) The Council could produce a leaflet on conservation areas and listed buildings so people understand them better.

c ) It was clear from the meeting that there is general opposition to plans for demolition of the eastern end of Danebury Ave. It should be remembered that there were earlier plans for a more sensitive refurbishment of the area which had greater support from residents”.

Allbrook House and Roehampton Listing attempt

In 2015 there was an attempt to list these buildings through Historic England. MP Greening wrote in favour of not supporting the listing though there was no such comments, supportive or not, from the three Labour ward Councillors and the question is, “why not?”.

Where are we now?

The buildings (Harbidge Ave, Allbrook House, Roehampton Library) mentioned in Councillor Carpenter’s comments in point (a) above are all proposed for demolition as part of this current regeneration scheme. With the 2018 Local Council elections coming up, one has to ask whether voting for Labour or the Conservatives will make any difference?

Please note that all information is provided on a best efforts basis and that readers should make their own efforts to review and assess the provided content.

Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

 Or email your local Member of Parliament at;

For a different view of Roehampton, especially the Alton Estate

 

Roehampton Partnership (21 November 2017) – comments from the gallery

This meeting of the Roehampton Partnership (RP) was rather underwhelming according to one attendee’s view. The following comments relate to that attendee’s view and obviously others that attended may have a different view of the following contents.

  1. Apologies for absence

There were many attendees that were absent, including the Chair and Vice Chair, and Councillor Mrs Steffi Sutters was the Chair for this evening. There were at least nine absences plus two roles which have not yet been filled.

Interesting, the representatives from University of Roehampton and University of Roehampton Student Union did not attend. This non-attendance was noticed and will be commented on later in this article though bear the following meeting dates in mind when considering this;

  • 21 September 2016 – University of Roehampton attended
  • 23 November 2016 – University of Roehampton Student Union attended
  • 15 March 2017 – University of Roehampton Student Union attended
  • 14 June 2017 – was cancelled.
  • 26 September 2017 – neither attended.
  • 21 November 2017 – neither attended.
  • 14 March 2018 – date of next meeting

In other words, if the University of Roehampton attends the meeting of 14 March 2018 that would be almost one and a half years between attending meetings, and one year for the University of Roehampton Student Union.

  1. Declarations of Interest

There was none.

  1. Minutes – 26th September 2017

Hersham Close Residents Association (HCRA) mentioned the following regarding;

  • Matters Arising – the follow up to be provided by Ibstock School was not given though the HCRA asked for this after the meeting.
  • Alton Area Regeneration – it was their suggestion to have Paper 17-268 included within the meeting which was taken up by the Chair.
  • Future Agenda Items – there was no mention of the request to include the retro-fitting of water sprinklers within tall buildings and that this was declined by the Chair.
  1. Alton Area Regeneration

There was quite a bit mentioned under this section.

The Redrow PR team, Communications Potential, apologised that Redrow could not attend due to some reason or other. Interestingly, Redrow did not appear at the Western Area Housing Panel (WAHP) of the 4 December 2017 either due to conflicting schedules. Given Redrow are about to begin work on a major regeneration in the area one might think more effort by Redrow to appear at such meetings may not too much to ask. The PR team provided some information regarding how many people attended the recent exhibitions and the feedback from them.

HCRA raised the issue that not all residents were aware that the Bessborough Road Consultation was held on 15 November 2017. It turns out that Councillors Peter Carpenter and Jeremy Ambache were not aware either of the event though Councillor Sur McKinney commented she was aware. HCRA asked whether this consultation would be presented at the RP and the silence appeared to indicate this was not going to happen.

HCRA also mentioned that various related regeneration items should be raised at the RP and were currently not, these being the Bessborough Road Consultation, Council Papers such as 17-268, and the Environmental Impact Assessment. A Council representative highlighted that we could comment on the planning application, which seemed to defeat the purpose of this advisory group and might be a bit late in terms of providing any feedback?

Councillor Ambache suggested that all regeneration documents should come to the RP first before going to the various Council Committees though this did not garner much support, even from Councillors Carpenter and McKinney. One might argue that this makes sense given the RP’s role?

  1. Public Health Regeneration

There was a short presentation though it seems as though there has not really been any substantial move forward on this topic or ‘social regeneration’.

The HCRA suggested that it might be worthwhile reaching out to Wandsworth Voluntary Sector Co-oridnation Project Manager who provides regular useful updates on grants and health initiatives. To which the presenter commented that she was to meet with this team the following week. The HCRA also suggested that it might be worthwhile having a Roehampton based such distribution, accepting that not all residents on the Alton estate have internet access, though this might be useful.

  1. Transport for London (TfL)

TfL did not attend.

  1. Future Agenda Items

None were mentioned.

  1. Future Meeting Dates

HCRA asked if there was a reason for five meetings dates next year when there are usually four. A person from the Council mentioned that one could always be removed. HCRA followed up with an ask about whether these dates linked in with events next year as this may have been the case for the extra date. The answer from the Council person was that there was likely an error in producing the dates.

The Roehampton Forum member asked if any of these meetings could be held at the University of Roehampton as then it might attend a meeting.

Please note that all information is provided on a best efforts basis and that readers should make their own efforts to review and assess the provided content.

Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

Or email your local Member of Parliament at;

For a different view of Roehampton, especially the Alton Estate

What became of the portacabin planning application?

For background on Roehampton University’s portacabin planning applications this can be found in previous articles within this blog under variance references such as ‘portacabins’, ‘2016/1385’ or ‘2016/5912’. Many people have asked about this planning application, for various reasons whether it be what happened or how did it not go to the Council’s Planning Application Committee (PAC), and this blog is to highlight some further background which might be of interest, not just for this application, though perhaps for others.

There were three retrospective planning applications, with the first two being withdrawn.

Application number: 2015/5648

Proposal: Erection of six portacabins for a temporary period of five years.

First Council document mentioned is on 14 October 2015 and the decision notice of 19 February states this application was withdrawn on 14 February 2016.

The portacabins in question are highlighted in the photo below taken from Kimpton House. Keep an eye on the portacabins in the red rectangle. Parkstead House (Grade I listed) is in the background.

Application number: 2016/1385

Proposal: Retention of seven portacabins sited against the southern boundary for a period of three years (affecting the setting of a Grade I listed building).

Decision: Withdrawn

Notice the retention change in the proposal from five years to three years, though the number of portacabins increased from six to seven?

This application was started on 15 March 2016, only a month after application 2015/5648, though was able to continue until December 2016. At this stage, this retrospective planning application had been in motion for a year with two withdrawn applications. There were a lot of objections which were lodged against this withdrawn planning application meaning that objectors had to start again with the next planning application.

Application number: 2016/5912

Proposal: Retention of three portacabins at the southern end of the site for use as additional teaching space for a further 3 years (Affecting the setting of a Grade I listed building).

Application Registered: 14 November 2016, though documents started to be uploaded on 11 October 2016

Decision: Approve with Conditions 14 February 2017

Again, there were a lot of objections, though have you noticed two further amendments.

The retention is now for three cabins instead of seven. Also, the date of approval is 28 months after the first document was uploaded (15 October 2015) with the first planning application (2015/5648).

The following photo, also taken from Kimpton House, highlights the now removed portacabins.

Didn’t Councillor Carpenter suggest he was going to provide resident representations at the Council’s Planning Application Committee (PAC)?

Yes, this was stated at the Roehampton Forum, yet didn’t happen. It has been suggested that Councillor Carpenter may not have been aware of the Council’s delegated power which permits planning application to be agreed by the Council’s planners rather than the PAC. This application was approved as it was less than 500 square metres of non-residential floor space. If this is true, one hopes that Councillor Carpenter is aware of the delegated powers now that he is on the PAC?

Another suggestion was that maybe Councillor Carpenter did not make his views known to the PAC that he wished to make representations at the PAC regarding this planning application. If this is true, then could Councillor Ambache, who was on the PAC at the time, could have informed Councillor Carpenter to make his representation position known to PAC members?

At the Let’s Talk event of 12th September 2016 wasn’t the portacabin planning discussed?

Yes, it was, and the following is taken from the Minutes;

“4. Roehampton University

Question/Comment – A resident said that he had contacted the planning service, without response, about the portacabins that had been erected without planning permission in the car park at Roehampton University facing Kimpton House. He said that the portacabins had been in place over 4 years and reduced on-site parking provision at the University that had been pushed out onto already busy roads such as Holybourne Avenue and Fontley Way. He suggested a survey by the University about staff and student parking during term and non-term time to determine the impact of the portacabins and said that residents were being forced into accepting a CPZ because of University demands. Concern also raised that the University is ‘getting away’ with not following due process and who is auditing the process? A resident raised the issue of excessive noise emanating from the University portacabins that affected Kimpton House and ‘terrified’ some residents.

Response – It was noted that an earlier planning application had been withdrawn but a revised one was due to be submitted including a transport assessment. A planning enforcement notice was still valid in respect of the unauthorised structures. Councillor Carpenter said that the University claimed that the portacabins did not reduce parking as the car park had been repainted to provide the same number of spaces as previously. He again advised residents to come along to the councillors surgeries to speak about any problems and if possible to attend the Roehampton Forum and Roehampton Partnership meetings. Councillor Ambache told the meeting that breaches of planning control should be reported to the planning service at the Town Hall and that, as a member of the Planning Applications Committee that would consider any application, he would not be able to ‘take a position’ on the matter but was listening to the related dialogue. He also confirmed that he was available to be contacted on any of the issues raised and this could be done in a variety of ways.

Councillor McKinney said that she understood the portacabin area to be the psychology department.

 With the consent of the meeting, Rev. McKinney then spoke as a governor of Whitelands College to inform the meeting that some concerns had been expressed at the Roehampton Forum. He said that he would raise the issue of the noise with the college and also that as far as he was aware the portacabins would be removed as the need for them had now reduced”.

Note that there is a comment in the Let’s Talk Minutes which states that the “portacabins would be removed as the need for them had now reduced”?

What does this application and Ibstock School’s planning application (2015/5074) have in common?

Both applications have taken at least two years to work their way through the planning system before being approved, though were being utilized by the applicants to some extent. As this is typed, Ibstock School’s planning application was registered on 22 September 2015 and is yet to be approved.

Three attempts for one planning application, maybe something to think about for 66 Alton Road?

With so many objections to the second application having to be repeated for the third application, is this a lesson as to the fate that 66 Alton Road (planning application 2017/3082) may face? Residents and interested parties may need to be vigilant in keeping an eye out for further attempts to demolish this building.

Please note that all information is provided on a best efforts basis and that readers should make their own efforts to review and assess the provided content.

 Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

 Or email your local Member of Parliament at;

For a different view of Roehampton, especially the Alton Estate

 

Roehampton News from Labour (December 2017)

Roehampton News from Wandsworth Labour was popped through the door today and it has the following articles;

  • Introducing Scott Couldridge – who seems to be the person who is replacing Councillor Peter Carpenter at the next local council elections. Maybe there should be a mention about what’s happened with Councillor Carpenter, for instance, is he no longer standing at all for the party at the next local elections or is he going to pop up elsewhere?
  • Fair Funding for Schools
  • Our Priorities for Wandsworth
  • Need help with a local issue? – what about water sprinklers, this ward has most of them and not one mention…….maybe something about the regeneration, no mention?

Please note that all information is provided on a best efforts basis and that readers should make their own efforts to review and assess the provided content.

Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

For a different view of Roehampton, especially the Alton Estate

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

Putney Labour Party materials on the Alton Estate

When discussing what the various parties offer the Alton Estate, one aspect that pops up is that not everyone is informed about what they are doing other than the infrequent letter distributions on the estate and not everyone appears to receive them. So this might be of interest.

If any are missing, please do let us know.

2015 distributions

2010

Articles that may be of interest

Twitter accounts

Contact

Email us at – roeregeneration@yahoo.com – and let us know of any concerns/thoughts you may have or add a comment at the end of the blog entry in the ‘Leave a Reply’ section.

Or email your Roehampton and Putney Heath Councillors at;

Peter Carpenter – pcarpenter@wandsworth.gov.uk

Jeremy Ambache – JAmbache@wandsworth.gov.uk

Sue McKinney – SMcKinney@wandsworth.gov.uk

Or email the Wandsworth Council team managing the ‘regeneration’

Team Roehampton – Roehampton@wandsworth.gov.uk