Tileman House revised planning application

Just a quick note as a few residents have been in touch wondering whether they needed to write in again about Tileman House following the very minor revisions to the plan made by the developers recently.

You don't have to write in unless you want to: the original objections will still count. The only thing the changes do is push back decision day as the council is obliged to hold another consultation on the "new" plans.

If you do want to have your say on the revisions, however, email planningapplications@wandsworth.gov.uk citing the new application number 2009/0595.

Free swimming from 1st April

From Wednesday swimming will be free in Putney Leisure Centre for over 60s and under 16s thanks to Labour.

Free swimming is available everyday, at all times, to over 60s. Those aged 16 and under can also swim for free daily, outside school hours.

Over £600 million has been made available by the Government to fund this scheme: Wandsworth Tories decided that they wouldn't let it happen unless they didn't have to put in a penny, and the Conservatives nationally have failed to commit to free swimming if they're ever elected.

I learnt to swim in Putney Swimming Pool when I was growing up and it's great that from the start of the month every Wandsworth family will be able to enjoy free swimming thanks to Labour.

February crime stats

February's crime figures again show good progress; crime down in most categories and in most parts of the constituency.

It's worth comparing the six Putney wards with the London average, because this contrast shows exactly why we are one of the safest parts of the capital:

• Burglaries are lower than the London average in five of six Putney wards
• Criminal damage is lower in four of the six
• Drugs offences are - much - lower in every single Putney ward
• Fraud and forgery offences are - again, much - lower in every single Putney ward
• Robbery is lower in five out of six wards
• Sexual offences are lower in four of the six
• Theft and handling is very much lower in every ward except Thamesfield than the rest of London
• Violent crime is lower in five of the six wards

And the substantial increase in Police and Community Support Officers Putney has recently benefited from should help make Putney, Roehampton and Southfields even safer.

A polluted high street

One of the main reasons Putney High Street is an unpleasant shopping environment is the amount of traffic running through it, and the pollution that is created as a result.

The Council has just been given a government grant to measure the scale of this pollution over a year - and because the High Street is narrow and enclosed by relatively high buildings I expect the findings to be...well, less than healthy.

I support getting the hard facts to substantiate the fairly obvious truth that Putney High Street is congested and polluted - pollution which in turn leads to extra grime in the town centre. But the real question I ask of the council is: "And then what?"

And then what will they do once they have this evidence? All that the Councillor responsible for the environment has said it will do is encourage car drivers to test the fumes their vehicles omit and, bizarrely, fund "environmental theatre", whatever that might be. Neither will improve, let alone transform our town centre.

Yet again, given an opportunity to lead on a plan for Putney, the Conservatives duck it.

They have allowed our town centre to decay; their planning policies have failed to control traffic in Putney; and their failure to invest in the High Street, while our neighbours in Fulham, Kensington and Kingston have sorted out their town centres, is one of the key reasons why Putney is being hit harder by the recession.

So let's have the pollution monitoring. But let's also have a clear path along the lines I've been arguing for since 2005 to a cleaner, smarter, healthier and less congested Putney please.

Stuart vs the potholes round 27

I've tried to resist resurrecting my campaign to shame the Conservative Council into fixing Putney's potholed roads after last year's successes, but I'm getting so many complaints again that it's unavoidable.

The Conservatives have just announced that from the next financial year they're increasing the road repair budget by £1 million. Sounds great, doesn't it - except that this is the amount they chopped from it last year! And they weren't maintaining our roads competently even before the now-reversed cut. Still, it's better than nothing, but they've got a lot of roads to repair.

Here are the first few examples I've been sent or come across myself:


Amerland Road



Amerland Road - junction of Valonia Gardens



Daylesford Avenue - junction with Langside Avenue and Lantern Close. Daylesford Avenue has been in a state for a while, but the cold winter we've just had has really finished it off...Langside and Dungarvan aren't in the best nick either.


Dryburgh Road at the apex of the bridge over the railway: one I reported last summer which the council still hasn't fixed! Proof for the Tories that ignoring a problem doesn't make it go away...in fact it multiplies: here's another one right next door to that crater!:



And while it's good to see some of the roads we highlighted last Summer having been properly resurfaced, like Borneo and Blackett Streets off Hotham Road, not doing so well is next door Westhorpe Road!:

Wally's in Putney High Street!

When Google launched their new - and quite unnerving - street-level views of our streets recently, they said that they'd planted "Wally", from the famouse "Where's Wally?" books somehere in the world.

Where should he turn up but Putney High Street, at the crossing opposite HMV and the entrance to the Putney Exchange!

It's good to know Putney High Street is still attracting the odd celebrity shopper!

To use the Google street-view device, visit Googlemaps, and once you've zoomed into the place you want to explore, drag the person icon from the controls in the top left of the screen onto the map.

Hat-tip to Wandsworth Guardian for the story.

Action on Barnes Station

I've had a really great response from Putney residents who live closest to Barnes Station to my survey about their views and concerns on the station and the surrounding area.

I've already been in contact with South West Trains about getting rubbish cleared that had been thrown down the embankment because of the lack of a litter bin by the bus stop on one side of Rocks Lane.

But several of the concerns raised by residents aren't the responsibility of South West Trains (who manage the station itself): these rest with Richmond Council.

That's why, last week, I wrote to Richmond's Director of Environment asking him for a response on a number of issues including:

• Getting a new rubbish bin for the south-bound bus stop
• Repairing the dreadful, dangerous and narrow path along Rocks Lane
• Improving conditions for bus passengers at the station, who have to wait on a very narrow ledge above a very steep set of steps
• Repairing some of the potholed roads in the area

You can read my letter here. As soon as I have a reply I'll share it with you.

More on the Town Centre Partnership's Tileman response

For those of you who, like me, struggled to believe that Putney Town Centre Partnership could fail to find anything to say about a planning application of such consequence to our town centre as Tileman House - other than to ask about the future of three trees - here is their submission.

Even confining themselves to the issues of "townscape" alone, does not a 15 storey block affect the townscape? Is the fact it comes right up to the pavement, whereas the current Tileman House is at least set back from the street not worthy of observation? What about the relationship between this building and the adjoining beautiful historic terrace?

If anyone from the Putney Town Centre Partnership would like to explain their incapacity to say something about a major part of Putney Town Centre, I suspect the hundreds of Putney people who have managed to voice an objection to this plan would like to hear from them.

Who represents you best?

Below are two responses to the Tileman House planning application. One is what the council officers have described as a "general comment" from Justine Greening - probably because they can't work out whether she's for or against the application. The other is my response. Which one better represents - and advocates for - local opinion?

Click on each image for the larger version.

Who represents you best?

Below are two responses to the Tileman House planning application. One is what the council officers have described as a "general comment" from Justine Greening - probably because they can't work out whether she's for or against the application. The other is my response. Which one better represents - and advocates for - local opinion?

Click on each image for the larger version.

Final days to have your say on Tileman House

The deadline for having your say on Tileman House is Sunday 01 March, so you have today and the weekend to get your views in.

So far we've had another huge response to the campaign to halt the fifteen-storey tower on Upper Richmond Road: over 150 local people have had their say using my survey; and a similar number have contacted the council direct.

Barely a dozen people have submitted comments in support of their ; and of these it seems that some come from an address that doesn't appear to exist or are in fact objections mistakenly logged by the council as supportive comments.

If you want to have your say before the deadline, the quickest way is to email planningapplications@wandsworth.gov.uk citing application 2008/5428. Do please copy me - stuart.king@putneylabour.org.uk - in on your email as it will help me to better represent local opinion on this issue.

Government forces economic reality on train companies

Following my recent report on the government forcing South West Trains to keep Barnes ticket office open pretty much on current opening times, the news that train companies have been denied their request for further inflation-busting ticket incresaes is also good news for commuters.

Train companies have been allowed to increase fares above inflation for years, partly to get investment back into the rail network after years of undefunding. But with inflation approaching zero, all of a sudden the train operators have decided they want a new formula that gives them increases unlinked to inflation.

That would have meant that while workers struggle with pay freezes or even cuts, travel costs would have continued to escalate. I'm therefore really pleased the government gave short shrift to these greedy and unaffordable dreams by the companies.

It means that if the inflation-measuring Retail Price Index (RPI) is negative - prices are actually falling in the real world - in July (the month ticket price changes are calculated for the following January), then in 2010 ticket prices too will become cheaper.

"About time too" many of us will say. Just as bonuses for senior bankers who have done immeasurable damage to our financial system are an outrage, so too are ever-rising fare prices coupled with ever-poorer services for commuters.

January crime stats: Roehampton joins the sub-100 club

For the first time since I've been reporting Putney's crime figures, the number of recorded offences in Roehampton ward fell below 100 crimes per 1,000 residents in January.

This is a remarkable achievement by Roehampton's Safer Neighbourhood team, and I congratulate them. In May 2007; the first month I reported Putney's stats, Roehampton crime rate was 127.5 - last month it was 97.7: that's a drop of 25% in just over a year and a half.

January's figures also show that there was no "Christmas spike" in crime, as there was over the December/January period in 2008. Crime fell in four of our six wards, and in most categories of crime. There is also no sign of a surge in so-called "economic crime" linked to the recession, yet, although drugs offences rose in Putney, Wandsworth and London as a whole.

Thames Tideway Tunnel briefing

Last night I organised a briefing for the Putney Society and myself from the Head of Thames Water's Tideway Tunnel project. You can read about the project in two of my posts from last year: here and here.

I learnt a huge amount about the project and was grateful for the briefing because there will be far bigger consequences for our area than I originally anticipated.

The main tunnel, which will run from West London through to Beckton in the east end, will take eight years to build - completed in 2020 - and will require six massive boreholes to get the drilling equipment down and the tunnel debris up. Those six holes will require an area the equivalent of three football pitches to be acquired along the route, one of which will need to be open space somewhere in the vicinity of Putney/Barnes.

In addition there are two local overflow discharge outlets - which discharge a mix of rainwater and untreated sewage - direct into the Thames at Putney. One of these is by the mouth of Beverley Brook; the other by Putney Bridge. These two areas will need smaller holes drilled as they are connected to the Tideway tunnel.

This is vitally important work needed to stop the discharge of raw sewage into the Thames whenever it rains heavily. This is an especially big issue for us due to Putney's association with rowing and other riparian activities.



As a result of tonight's meeting, the Thames Water team agreed to address a full meeting of the Putney Society on Thursday 25 June - put the date in your diary if you want to come along and learn more.

Good news on Barnes station

The government has told South West Trains (SWT) where to go over its plans to substantially reduce ticket office opening hours at Barnes Station.

Companies like SWT, as well as running trains, also have responsibility for stations on routes they operate, including Barnes, Putney and Wandsworth Town. Barnes' ticket office currently opens from 6.25am to 8.05pm on weekdays, from 6.40am to 8.15pm on Saturdays and from 9.10am to 4.40pm on Sundays,

SWT had planned to close the ticket office entirely on Sundays, operate a cursory service on Saturdays and significantly cut back during the week. But what the operator is actually being allowed to get away with are broadly similar hours to what we have now: 6.45am-6.45pm weekdays, 7am-7pm Saturdays and 10am-1pm Sundays.

I am really concerned about the unacceptable and widening gap between increasing fares, increasing customers but at the same time declining services. The argument goes that taxpayers should subsidise railways less which means customers paying an increasing share - but that's a false choice: the bulk of the subsidy for public transport should come not from rail users or general taxation but from less environmentally-friendly modes of transport.

Ticket offices are more than just a place to buy fares and ask for train information: they help with security at stations - especially at places like Barnes in the middle of nowhere. I'm working hard to get SWT to honour its promise to improve Putney Station and it's why it's good news that the Barnes ticket office is staying open.

Putney Society look set to oppose Tileman House

Last night, while Justine Greening was representing the Conservative Party on the Question Time panel in Bath, I was representing the concerns of St John's Avenue residents - and others -at the Putney Society's Buildings Panel meeting.

The proposed development of Tileman House dominated proceedings. Not a single person spoke in favour of the application and it was clear from the discussion that Putney Society members have a raft of concerns about the application, ranging from height & light, density, overdevelopment and the loss of office space. The other big concern expressed - and one which I have talked about in great detail - is the precedent that the approval of this application will set for other applications along the Upper Richmond Road. I was pleased at how unequivocally the Buildings panel was in calling for this application to be rejected.

The panel's recommendation will be debated at next week's meeting of the Society's executive committee, but all present - including the chairman - seemed confident that the committee would endorse the panel's view. This is an important achievement in the campaign to stop this overdevelopment.

Old maps of Putney 2

As promised, here's the second of the maps of Putney from Bacon's Up-To-Date Atlas & Guide to London, published probably in the 1930s - click here for the earlier post covering the Southfields and Wandsworth parts. And click on the image above for a much higher resolution scan.

This map covers the majority of Putney and Roehampton. The most obvious difference between today's map is that there is no Alton estate in Roehampton: the only resemblance with Roehampton today is what is now the Alton East: Alton Road and Bessborough Road. But even here the type of housing on either side of these roads was very different; grand houses and smaller cottages.

The rest of the land west of Roehampton Lane comprises the estate of Downshire House, Mount Clare, Manresa House and the Maryfield Convent - all buildings which remain today, just surrounded by an estate, rather than expanses of open land.

Similarly, in the north of Roehampton there is no Lennox estate at the end of Priory Lane, and the crescent-shaped housing block today called Fairacres was in those days called Lower Grove.

Moving east from Roehampton you can see how it was that the Telegraph Pub was such an important inn and communications post for travellers into and out of London. Today the pub is part of a relatively isolated cul-de-sac community in the middle of the Heath but until fairly recently, it was right on the crossroads of major traffic routes: Portsmouth Road, Telegraph Road and Wildcroft Road all of which extended right across the Heath.

And just north of the Heath we again see what Putney looked like prior to the building of huge estates: where the map shows expansive grounds around Exeter House is now the Ashburton Estate and Elliott School. In fact the only one of today's estates can be seen already built: the Dover House estate around Dover House Road.

Roehampton and West Putney aren't the only areas where major council estates were built after the war: West Hill ward - the area east of Wimbledon Parkside has also changed unrecognisably. But as I mentioned in my post on Southfields, you can see reflected in the estates of today several of the historic names shown on this map: Levana Lodgeand Park Lodge in Victoria Drive now Levana Close and Park Lodge now a care home of the same name for example. And many of the mansions on Wimbledon Parkside still remain: Chivelston, Albemarle and Spencer House.

Old maps of Putney

As a local historian, I enjoy looking at old maps of the area. A forerunner of the A-Z maps of London, which sadly doesn't have a date of publication in it but would, at latest, have been printed in the 1930s, is Bacon's Up-To-Date Atlas & Guide to London. Price: sixpence.

Today and tomorrow, I'll publish the local maps from that book on this blog, starting with Southfields and Wandsworth town, below. Click on the image to get a much larger version (which is a 3mb file, so may take a while to open). I've added some observations below the picture.



The biggest changes in this part of the world can be found towards the north of the map where the river Wandle enters the Thames. Have a look at the King George's Park area.

First, note the viaduct that ran across the park, just north of Mapleton Road - it runs from St Ann's Hill across to Merton Road before going underground at either end. And Mapleton Road used to be a through-road to Garratt Lane.

Also, have a look at how much freer the Wandle itself was: where Neville Gill Close is now the river used to form a large pool. It also had a little spur running alongside Buckhold Road, where the new Hardwick's Square development now is.

A more significant branch off the Wandle occurs even closer to the Thames, where it snaked alongside Frogmore to a road that's no longer there: Raft Road, parallel to Sudlow Street (it's now the Wandsworth Council Depot). One of the older members of Putney Labour Party used to live there in the days when the river branched out, and apparently there was quite a scandal when a young girl drowned while playing alongside this section.

It's also interesting that what is now called Ram Street, alongside the Brewery and where the 220 and 270 buses go down, was originally a continuation of [Old] York Road, before the one way system was introduced; and Fairfield Street that runs past the entrance to the Town Hall continued all the way down to the Thames (now that part of Fairfield Street is part of Smugglers Way). There's another member of Putney Labour Party who used to live in Warple Road - which is now Swandon Road which leads to the Wandsworth Bridge roundabout.

On the left-hand side of the map, in what is West Hill ward (west of the District Line to Southfields), you can see some of what the area was like before the large council estates that were built after the war. Whitlock Drive has not been built; instead Edgecombe Hall - after which the estate there is named, and it's acres of grounds - remains.

One of the things that I think is really important is that historic local names survive; in this area in particular a lot of the blocks that now exist are named after mansions, old roads, fields or other historical names; for example "Florys" lives on the corner of Augustus Road and Princes Way lives on in Florys Court; and Allenswood, Ambleside and Fernwood are all now blocks on the Wimbledon Park Estate.

Tileman House consultation problems

A number of local residents have contacted me directly to complain that they have not received the consultation notice from the council regarding the important Tileman House planning application.

In addition, a number of irate residents have posted similar concerns on the local putneysw15.com website. Given the significance and controversial nature of this application I contacted the Borough Planner on Monday to raise these concerns.

I was pleased to receive a very prompt reply from him which I am reproducing in full below as I believe it is important that people have full confidence in the consultation process.

I welcome the acknowledgment that there has been a problem, as I do the action proposed to remedy the situation. I will be doing my bit to help ensure that those residents most likely to be affected by this application are aware of it, and have a full ability to let their views be known.

Here's the reply:


Dear Mr King,

Thank you for your email.

I think it is fair to say that we have had some problems with the company we used on this occasion to deliver the newsletter. Although from the information they have provided to us I hope the number of addresses missed is not as great as suggested.

When we have a major application that is likely to generate more than normal public interest we use a newsletter to notify people in the area. Often, as in this case, the newsletter is in colour and includes visual images from the submission information. So I hope it isn’t binned with other junk mail.

We provide basic details of the application, say where further information can be obtained and invite comments. We adopt a neutral stance, neither in favour or against the application and, in order not to lead respondents, we invite comments rather than objections. Where we use a newsletter, the extent of consultation is wider than would be the norm for most applications where we consult by letter.

For this application I wonder if the boundary of the area could have been more tightly drawn? The map of the area has been posted on the website. In addition, of course, for an application like this we post site and press notices.

We had a number of newsletter drops due to go out around the same time for major applications, including for the Springfield hospital site. Given the pressures this places on using planning staff who often distribute newsletter at the weekends, we took the opportunity to market test and obtained prices from specialist leaflet distribution companies. We received a competitive price from a company and decided to test their services.

We’ve been disappointed with the outcome and it has generated much additional (and unwanted) work for the case officer. She has followed up some emailed complaints from residents that they haven’t received the newsletter with a PDF emailed copy. She has also followed the matter up with the distribution company and has a list of the addresses they concede they have been unable to deliver to. She will try to deliver those herself or put a copy of the newsletter in the post to those addresses, so all the addresses we identified should be covered. On the evidence to date, it seems to me that our market testing exercise shows that our in-house staff are more reliable and do a better job.

If people have internet access then they can get information from the Council’s website. Click on the planning service page, the first thing to come up under planning headlines is "Redevelopment proposed for Tileman House". If you click on that you get:

Redevelopment of Tileman House, Upper Richmond Road
The council has received an application for planning permission to redevelop the site at 131-133 Upper Richmond Road, to construct three linked blocks alond Upper Richmond Road of 12 storeys, 15 storeys and 8 storeys in height, and a 12 storey block to the rear, providing 99 flats plus office and commercial units. For more information contact Helen Keegan on 020 8871 8411. Comments must be received by 1st March 2009.

More information: consultation leaflet

More information: search the planning register and enter application number: 2008/5428

At the moment, I’m keeping an eye on what has happened but, provided the case officer doesn’t have difficulties dispatching the newsletters, I don’t think we will need to either extend consultation or the consultation period.

Please let me know if you need any more information.

Have your say on the Tileman House application

In response to the widespread public concern about not being adequately consulted by the Council over the significant Tileman House planning application I have today launched my own consultation here online.

It contains all the information you need about this application and the opportunity to have your say via my online survey.

The address is www.stuartking.net/tileman - you can also access it from the drop down Campaign HQ menu above - it's the first link.

Every survey you submit I will send on to the council provided that you tick the box giving your consent.

And don't forget that there are two ways to keep up to speed with all the overdevelopment issues facing Putney: by visiting my overdevelopment page in the issues drop-down menu, or by subscribing to my e-news bulletin: as well as the regular fortnightly bulletin I have a special group for anyone especially interested in these overdevelopment threats.

Thames Water fined £125,000 for Wandle spillage

As I reported late last year, Magistrates referred Thames Water up to Croydon Crown Court for sentencing over the terrible spillage of bleach into the River Wandle that killed tonnes of fish and did severe damage to the river.

The Magistrates passed the case on because they were limited in the amount of fines they could impose on Thames Water but felt the mistake had been so catastrophic that a bigger punishment needed to be imposed. And so it was: Croydon Court judges are making Thames Water pay £125,000 for the damage they did.

I think this fine is proportionate and sends a clear message that London's tributary rivers are as important as the Thames to our capital.

Office space - especially now - is vital for Putney's economy

In an earlier post I outlined the three big concerns I have about the Tileman House planning application. These were:

1. Height
2. Loss of office space
3. Housing - too much and not enough of it affordable

I'm going to talk a little about the second of these, because it is an issue that often gets overlooked. I've written before about the concerted attempt by developers to keep office blocks in Putney empty for years, so that they can exploit another Tory planning loophole that allows them to change the use of the buildings after a period of time into much more lucrative housing.

Tileman House is the classic example of this. The office part of the building has been empty for years - I can't actually remember the last time it was occupied. The only use made of the building in recent years has been the occupation of 19 residential flats.

In recent years Putney has become far more dependent on restaurants and cafes, while losing the wide range of shops and market stalls it used to benefit from. Many of these food and drink outlets depend on the lunch trade which in large part is made up of those who work in Putney's office blocks.

The parts of the country weathering the current bad economic conditions the best are those that have a diverse jobs base drawing equally from different sectors of the economy. The Conservatives locally are pursuing the diametric opposite of that sensible, pragmatic policy: reducing the diversity of Putney and, in so doing, weakening the remaining sectors such as our food and drink outlets.

One of the reasons we so urgently need a plan for Putney - other than the need to stop the slew of high-rise overdevelopment - is to close the loophole that's allowing this loss of office space and threatening our economy. We can all see how damaging the lack of a plan for Putney is: our High Street remains a disgrace, the lack of diversity in our shops is ridiculous and the empty shops that have for years been evident in the High Street itself are now spreading into Putney Exchange for the first time.

The Conservatives lack any vision for Putney and any local leadership to provide it.

Dramatic license...

Just before Christmas, the Conservatives sent out an absurdly over-the-top letter to residents of Kenilworth Court and surrounding areas scaremongering about an application to extend the time the small Eatmore Express shop at 9 Lower Richmond Road (just opposite Putney Bridge) can sell alcohol at weekends only.

The Conservatives all-but told residents that if this extension was approved the world would pretty much end: there would be hordes of drunken yobs rolling around in Lower Richmond Road and for some reason they failed to explain, it would all be the fault of the Labour Government. This despite licensing applications being a matter the Conservative-run council decides.

A stunning total of eight people were prompted to write in and object as a result of the Conservatives' scaremongering. And then the Licensing sub-committee - all Tory councillors - went ahead and granted the license extension without any amendment whatsoever! Read the decision here, if you like.

What a surreal episode, and what an extraordinary way to behave.

"Economic" crime? December crime stats

I often go on about the high level of crime in Thamesfield ward, which is almost entirely due to the amount of crime that occurs in and off of Putney High Street.

Let me try to put how much more crime there is in Thamesfield compared to the rest of Putney into context. There are more theft and handling offences alone in Thamesfield than the entire amount of reported crime in East Putney, West Hill or West Putney wards.

That's why my campaign for town centre patrollers in the High Street are so important: when they were tested out in Clapham Junction and Tooting about four years ago they cut street crime by one third. And they'll allow the Thamesfield Safer Neighbourhood teams to give more attention to the residential parts of their patch. It's why I'm also campaigning against the £472 million the Conservatives want to cut from the Metropolitan Police, which cannot but mean reductions in front-line police locally.

So-called economic crimes like theft, or burglary - ie property crimes, are likely to rise during an economic slowdown. Politicians always struggle to talk sensibly about such crimes for fear that talking about the reasons why a tiny minority become more likely to thieve and steal in such a climate equals condoning or understanding such behaviour. Of course there is never justification to take someone else's property -period.

Fortunately there isn't that much sign of property crime increasing in Putney - yet. Burglary is somewhat down in five wards and slightly up in one. Thefts did pick up noticeably in December in four wards, dropped in two. Drug offences were down across the board and sex offences down in five out of six wards. There also seems to be a delay in reporting any crimes during the Christmas period in the figures - maybe these will feed through to the January figures due out next month.

Buzz Lightyear...no, Buzz Greening!

Today's Wandsworth Guardian reports that Putney's Tory MP has discovered that Putney has been beset by power shortages - some three months after they started!

I know some MPs get a little absorbed in the Westminster bubble and lose touch with their constituency but even I didn't realise that it takes three months for local news to reach them there. Maybe she should reconsider her decision to close down her constituency office in Putney soon after she got elected - something I pledge I will never do.

On this basis, it'll probably be round about March when she discovers that I've already raised the catalogue of power outages with EDF Energy and had a really positive response from them over two weeks ago, back on 13 January, as I reported here and my original letter to the National Grid, back in November here, and on the putneysw15 website here.

But if 90% of success is showing up, I'm just happy that Justine Greening's standing up for the other 10%.

How high is high enough?

In my earlier post I promised to post some photos I've taken from the block next door to Tileman House, No.125 Upper Richmond Road. These were taken from the 8th floor a few months back. Although at the resolution I'm using to fit them in here you can't see it, take my word for it that you can see the City of London, the Wembley arch, the Post Office Tower and much more from the top of this building.

And just as importantly, you can see 125 Upper Richmond Road - and most of the other blocks along this stretch of Upper Richmond Road - from Putney Bridge. These are highly visible buildings, made more so because Upper Richmond Road is slightly elevated up Putney Hill. In short, the views from and to these buildings is incredibly important. Before too long, we could see at least three high rise overdevelopments in this stretch, to mix in with the sixties office blocks that add so little to the environment.

That's not the Putney I know - and it's not the Putney I want. How about you?

Tileman House planning news

The Council has at last got round to producing a Planning News leaflet on the Tileman House application for Upper Richmond Road near the corner with Putney Hill. You can download it here.

My initial reaction when I opened the file is that we're on course to have exactly the same issues here as residents are having with the Clapham Junction towers consultation (and Danebury Avenue), namely the questionable veracity of the artists' impressions of the impact of the plan.



Take this one: you'd never take from this impression that Tileman House is almost TWICE the height of the brown building this side of it - the Heathbridge Clinic building - 125 Upper Richmond Road. Later on I'll post some photos that I've taken from the top of 125 Upper Richmond Road just so you can see how high this building is - Tileman will be almost doubly high.

The elevations also employ considerable artistic license: the one below is supposedly the "rear" elevation - ie the view as it towers over St John's Avenue. Curiously, all the blocks in St John's Avenue have vanished, to be replaced by lovely trees.



The plans for Tileman House are clearly of a superior design and fit less badly into their surroundings than the Putney Place towers, further up Upper Richmond Road did. They are also an improvement on the current Tileman House. But the fact that they are better does not mean they are the best they can be - and design alone is not the biggest problem here.

That would be the height, followed by the loss of office space, followed by the housing. And I'll write more about each of these in subsequent posts.

November crime stats

Crime fell again in all six Putney areas in November 2008 (remember there's a two month lag between the month they happened and the reporting of them).

As this graph shows, with the exception of December 2007, when crime spiked in the run-up to Christmas, all wards are now safer than they were in May 2007 when I first started reporting these figures. There have been marked falls in crime in Roehampton and Southfields during this period - during which Roehampton has become substantially safer than the London average.



As we saw at the end of last year, it's probably wise to forecast a notable jump in crime in the December figures - but what we also saw was a January fall larger than the December "blip" - so that's also something to watch out for.

Here are November's figures - a reminder that green figures show a decline or the same level of crime as the preceding month; red shows an increase.

Power cuts

I've just received the following reply from EDF Energy to my recent letter about the power cuts that have affected Putney over the past few months. It's really good to learn that as a result of the problems I raised, EDF are now taking action to strengthen the power cable network in Putney, which should reduce the likelihood of outages in future.


Dear Stuart

Thank you for your correspondence regarding the electricity supply in the SW15 area. I was sorry to learn of the power cuts that may have affected both domestic and commercial properties and for any inconvenience this caused.

On receipt of your email I contacted the Lead Field Engineer (LFE) for your area and he has provided me with the following which I hope will be useful.

SW15 is fed from our Carslake Main Substation and in recent months we had four faults on our high voltage underground cable network:

• 17 September 16:56hrs - 256 customers restored in under 3 minutes by remote control
• 10 November 17:54hrs - 1578 customers affected with final restoration at 21:14hrs. This fault affected a shopping centre
• 27 November 06:55hrs - 817 customers affected with final restoration at 10:56hrs. This fault affected Upper Richmond Road including the railway station
• 1 December 19:19hrs - 213 customers affected with final restoration at 20:15hrs

We strive to give all our customers a safe and secure supply of electricity. However, despite our best efforts, interruptions to supply can occur for a variety of reasons. Some of these are not within our control and for this reason we cannot guarantee a continuous supply.

However, I wish to assure you as soon as we become aware of a problem on our network every effort is made to restore supplies quickly so the resulting impact is kept to a minimum.

I can confirm that the above faults are unrelated and we are not aware of any inherent problems with the network in your area but we will continue this area closely and should further problems arise we take the necessary action to resolve them. At the time of writing we have not had any faults on our high voltage network so far this year.

However, in order to reinforce the network which we believe to be vulnerable we are going to replace and upgrade a considerable amount of underground cable. The first 100metre section has now been commissioned and will be in the area of Carslake Road, Westleigh Road and Genoa Avenue.

The above relates to our high voltage network but as mentioned in my message yesterday there may have been more faults, such as the one you mention on 6 January 2009, that we will only be able to look at via specific postcodes.

I appreciate the links you provided but due to company security I only have access to sites regarded as business critical. Therefore I would once again ask for specific postcodes if possible, coupled with dates of the failures relating to that postcode.

Should you have residents who would like to know about specific faults particular top their properties please as them to either email our Customer Relations team at customer.relations@edfenergy.com or write to Customer Relations, EDF Energy Networks, Fore Hamlet, Ipswich, IP3 8AA.

They can also call a free phone number 0800 028 4587.

I hope the information I have provided is useful to you. However, you have my details below and if you require any further assistance please let me know.

Regards,

Mark

Mark Methven
Senior Customer Relations Officer

Today's Lord Jenkins plaque unveiling

Me and some of the Putney Labour Party members who knew Lord Jenkins




Bruce Kent, the former CND Chairman, speaks before the unveiling of the plaque.




The plaque, which can be seen on the entrance to Kenilworth Court beside the 22 bus stop.

Plaque for Lord Jenkins

This weekend some long-standing Putney Labour Party members and I will be joining members of the Putney Society to unveil a commemorative plaque for Lord Jenkins of Putney at Kenilworth Court, where he lived for a long part of his life.

Hugh Jenkins was Labour MP for Putney between 1964 and 1979; he was the first-ever Labour MP for the constituency, defeating Conservative Sir Hugh Linstead. His wife Marie also served as a local councillor in Southfields. In parliament, during which time he was returned five times as MP for Putney, he rose to become Arts Minister.

Outside parliament, Hugh was a committed peace campaigner and after he was defeated in Putney in 1979 he became chairman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. He was elevated to the House of Lords as Lord Jenkins of Putney, in 1981. Before becoming MP for Putney, Hugh was Deputy General Secretary of Equity and after his service he served on the Board of the Royal National Theatre.

Hugh did a huge amount for Putney and was a great supporter of the local Labour Party until his death almost exactly five years ago. He even wrote a book profiling the work of grassroots Labour Party members in Putney: Rank and File: Portrait of a Constituency Labour Party. Many of those who are referred to in the book will be attending the plaque unveiling on Saturday.

You can read more about Hugh Jenkins' life in The Guardian obituary here.

Chuggers Law?

A few days ago, the Labour Government announced it was looking at introducing a licensing system for public charitable collections - the so called Chuggers (Charity Muggers) who accost us when we're out shopping, trying to get us to sign up to a standing order for their cause.

This is something I have called for myself, and from the correspondence I receive through my Save Putney High Street campaign, something that animates a lot of you.

The aim is for a new licensing scheme for public charitable collections that will ensure responsible fundraising and deter bogus collections and prevent any nuisance to the public. I look forward to this review being completed so that we can better control what is at best a public nuisance and at worst can approach harrassment.

The planning threats just keep on coming

The Wandsworth Borough News is reporting on a reception held by the council last night to unveil yet more overdevelopment they're championing - almost all in the Putney constituency.

The schemes unveiled included:

• The next phase of the Riverside Quarter development between Wandsworth Park and the River Wandle
• South Thames College on Putney Hill
• Hardwick's Quarter, which is presumably their fancy name for the Cockpen House development
• Southside shopping centre
• The nearly finished Parkside tower block beside King George's Park, which they are misleadingly calling affordable housing

The thing I find most disturbing is the relish with which the Conservatives keep rolling out these plans (just before Christmas, when they think we'll have our minds on other things, note) as if the views of local residents are irrelevent, the character of our area immaterial and the strain these developments will place on local infrastructure inconsequential.

Bizarrely, at the very reception the Conservatives were announcing their plans alongside their developer chums, they also announced a redesign of the Wandsworth one-way system to show off the "elegant Georgian terraces, churches and pubs that characterise the area": as if all this new development won't more than offset any small improvements to traffic flow a redesign may provide.

It's bad enough that they keep giving the green light to all this overdevelopment - but now they're actually wining and dining the developers in lavish receptions funded by local taxpayers: and putting out press releases to make sure we all know it.

Parking permits up 27%

The day after Tory Leader David Cameron lectured us about the evils of tax increases, Wandsworth Conservatives unveil a 27% increase in the cost of residents parking permits.

The price of a permit will now be £95 - a cost that has increased 44% since the council elections two years ago.

Curiously, the Conservatives mentioned nothing about their plans to hike up the cost of parking permits in their election manifesto for those elections - just as they forgot to tell us about their plans to close Wandsworth Museum or West Hill Library.

This is the reality of Wandsworth: Council Tax may be low but only because the Tories claw back the money through stealth taxes like this.

Inflation busting parking permit hikes are just one example; council tenants pay among the highest rents in London; pensioners needing home helps pay among the highest charges in London; charges for collecting bulky rubbish are among the highest in London; the amounts raised through library fines among the highest in London (and slammed by the Taxpayers' Alliance, no less); leisure centre charges among the highest in London; even the cost of dying - burial charges - are among the highest in London.

The irony of this 27% parking permit hike is that at the last council elections Labour in Wandsworth under my leadership pledged to make parking permits for the first car in every household free - which we'd have paid for by increasing the costs for second and subsequent parking permits in multi-car households. Of course, the Conservatives won those elections - so they'll say you get what you voted for.

It goes to show the real difference your vote makes locally.

Thames Water face unlimited fine over Wandle pollution

Thames Water's pollution of the Wandle last Autumn has been referred up to Croydon Crown Court after local magistrates in Sutton decided that the incident deserved a more severe punishment than the maximum £20,000 fine they were able to impose.

Two tonnes of dead fish had to be extracted from the Wandle following the spillage of 1,600 litres of hydrochloric acid (bleach) into the river last year. Fortunately, no lasting damage was done to the river and after remedial works and extra investment the Wandle is again thriving.

The company now faces an unlimited fine; which is right except even though the people who ultimately pay for this criminal negligence are you and me. Thames Water behaved appallingly over this incident - not only by letting the acid escape in the first place but then trying to cover up their error by tightening security and putting up new signage before the Environment Agency had arrived to find out exactly what happened. And yes, they have spent over £500,000 rectifying the damage but that doesn't erase the original error.

I write regularly about issues affecting the Wandle: you can read my news stories about the river at www.stuartking.net/blog/wandle.htm

Roehampton redevelopment; English Heritage weigh in

English Heritage are one of the bodies always consulted on major planning applications because of their potential impact on existing buildings, the overall setting of a community and the architectural opportunities a demolition provides.

They have today sent in a response to the Council advising them that there is insufficient information in their planning application to enable the plans for the redevelopment of Danebury Avenue to be determined one way or the other.

English Heritage go on to say that the Council has so far failed to justify its demolition plans, stating:

"There is a statutory obligation for local planning authorities to pay special attention to preserving the character of a conservation area but there is no consideration [in the planning application] of the implications of the loss of the buildings identified for demolition for the Alton Conservativon Area.

"In addition, no information has been provided as to the impact of the proposed development on either the Alton or Roehampton Village Conservation Areas. In our view the information provided in support of the application is insufficient to provide a full understanding of the proposal without which we do not consider the application can be determined."

They go on to recommend that "without this information our view is that this application should not be determined at this point."

This is another warning to the Conservatives to stop railroading their unpopular, unsupported, and damaging plans for Roehampton through. There is no need for the haste with which they're lurching on with this application - it is undemocratic and the economy makes their ideas less viable by the day.

I agree with English Heritage that the Council should not determine this application; and as the people approving as well as submitting this plan it is entirely within their power to pause for thought, consider the views of local people, think about the damage they're trying to inflict on Roehampton and - at long last - do the right thing.

You can read the English Heritage submission here.

Putney power outages

I have today written to the Chief Executive of the National Grid plc asking them to explain why central Putney has suffered three power outages in recent months. Here's the text of my letter:

30 November 2008


Mr Steve Holliday
Chief Executive, National Grid plc
1-3 The Strand
London
WC2N 5EH


Dear Mr Holliday,

Power outtages in Putney, London SW15

I am writing because, in the past four months - the most recent being on Wednesday - there have been three power outages in the centre of Putney in the evening.

These blackouts have affected the town centre including the High Street, the Royal Mail sorting office for Putney and Putney mainline rail station, as well as thousands of local homes. Having an overcrowded mainline rail station go dark in the middle of the rush hour is exeptionally dangerous. Supermarkets including Sainsbury's and Tesco have lost perishable items, other shops have lost trade having to close early - and have been exposed to a greater risk of break-ins as electronic security systems have failed; and huge numbers of residents have been inconvenienced.

The High Street is one of the busiest roads in the constituency and for it to be without light is dangerous, especially given the number of pedestrians seeking to cross the road throughout its length. And a huge number of households have been inconvenienced for several hours at a time.

I am writing to find out the cause of these outages and what you as the body responsible for ensuring stable electricity supplies is doing to ensure that this does not recur. Furthermore, if there is a long-term structural problem with electricity supplies in Putney that cannot be quickly resolved this must surely call into question planned development in the area if the existing demand is regularly exceeding supply.

The constituency is obviously deeply interested in your reply so I hope you will let us know the answers to these questions at the earliest opportunity.

Yours sincerely,

Stuart King

More on the Thames Tideway Tunnel

I wrote a few days ago about the plans by Thames Water to build a super-sewer along the route of the river to, hopefully, prevent untreated sewage flooding into the Thames whenever it rains heavily.

I said that I was awaiting a more detailed briefing from Thames Water, and this has now arrived. Anyone interested in knowing more can download a copy of my briefing letter here.

Crime: how does Putney compare with the rest of the borough?

The October crime figures, just released, again show good progress by the Police in cutting crime. East Putney and West Hill wards all saw declines in every single category of crime; in West Putney all categories bar one were down. Overall, crime fell in five of our six council wards, with only a small rise in Southfields.



With crime figures, context is everything - it's why, alongside the ward by ward figures, I also provide the borough and London averages - so you can see how Putney is doing compared to larger areas. But this month, I thought you might be interested in seeing how Putney's six council wards compare to their fourteen counterparts elsewhere in the borough.

In the table below I'm just showing the "total" number of crimes per 1,000 - the figure that's in the shaded grey box in the table above. And, instead of ordering them alphabetically, I've ranked them in terms of that total crime rate - with the lowest crime areas at the top, and the highest at the bottom.

Three of the safest four council wards anywhere in the borough are in Putney - and four of the top ten. But Putney's Thamesfield ward is the most crime-ridden ward in the borough by far. Putney probably has the largest shopping centre in the borough, so it is to be expected that the sort of town centre crime that affects Thamesfield will be higher than other town centres. But I don't think the gap should be quite so stark.

The tower plans came in two by two...

Plans to redevelop Tileman House, at the Putney Hill end of Upper Richmond Road have just been unveiled.

Tileman House, like Putney Place, is currently an eyesore building. The office space element has been empty for years, while the residential side has become more and more run-down. In the photo to the right I'm standing in front of Tileman House.

Now Berkeley First working with Carey Jones Architects (who designed the Riverside Quarter development next to Wandsworth Park) have proposed a building that is up to 16 storeys tall.

That compares with 25 and 18 storeys at Putney Place, and a proposal for a 22-storey Carlton Tower on the Capsticks site. You'll find the artist's impression of the new Tileman House at the foot of this post.

Here's the good news: the design is nowhere near as garish as the Putney Place towers that were rejected a fortnight ago.

Now the bad news: they're twice as tall as the next door building, No.125 Upper Richmond Road (the building that houses the Heathbridge Doctors surgery), and four times the height of the beautiful curved Victorian terrace that sweeps round onto Putney Hill. The buildings are also well over twice as high as the abutting apartment blocks in St John's Avenue: Albany and Marlin House as well as No.18 St John's Avenue.

The developers want to provide 2,322 sq m of office space coupled with 106 apartments (that compares to 19 flats in Tileman House). You can read more on the website skyscrapernews.com.
I am, to say the least, exasperated with the developers, and with those elected representatives locally whose do-nothing approach has led to the situation we're now saddled with. It is totally unfair to the local community to have to fight and fight again to defend Putney from these threats. One could be forgiven for thinking that this is a campaign of attrition by developers to wear residents into submission in the knowledge that if only one application can be forced through the precedent will be established that will open the floodgates.

The new blocks, while architecturally better than Putney Place, reminds me of Campden Hill Tower that looms over Notting Hill Gate. I have to question the wisdom of replacing one genuine sixties monstrosity with a new neo-sixties monstrosity of even greater size.

So, I hope you have one more good battle within you - I do, and I'm up for the fight. We've defeated one set of poor plans: now its time to cross swords with another!

The tower plans came in two by two...

Plans to redevelop Tileman House, at the Putney Hill end of Upper Richmond Road have just been unveiled.

Tileman House, like Putney Place, is currently an eyesore building. The office space element has been empty for years, while the residential side has become more and more run-down. In the photo to the right I'm standing in front of Tileman House.

Now Berkeley First working with Carey Jones Architects (who designed the Riverside Quarter development next to Wandsworth Park) have proposed a building that is up to 16 storeys tall.

That compares with 25 and 18 storeys at Putney Place, and a proposal for a 22-storey Carlton Tower on the Capsticks site. You'll find the artist's impression of the new Tileman House at the foot of this post.

Here's the good news: the design is nowhere near as garish as the Putney Place towers that were rejected a fortnight ago.

Now the bad news: they're twice as tall as the next door building, No.125 Upper Richmond Road (the building that houses the Heathbridge Doctors surgery), and four times the height of the beautiful curved Victorian terrace that sweeps round onto Putney Hill. The buildings are also well over twice as high as the abutting apartment blocks in St John's Avenue: Albany and Marlin House as well as No.18 St John's Avenue.

The developers want to provide 2,322 sq m of office space coupled with 106 apartments (that compares to 19 flats in Tileman House). You can read more on the website skyscrapernews.com.
I am, to say the least, exasperated with the developers, and with those elected representatives locally whose do-nothing approach has led to the situation we're now saddled with. It is totally unfair to the local community to have to fight and fight again to defend Putney from these threats. One could be forgiven for thinking that this is a campaign of attrition by developers to wear residents into submission in the knowledge that if only one application can be forced through the precedent will be established that will open the floodgates.

The new blocks, while architecturally better than Putney Place, reminds me of Campden Hill Tower that looms over Notting Hill Gate. I have to question the wisdom of replacing one genuine sixties monstrosity with a new neo-sixties monstrosity of even greater size.

So, I hope you have one more good battle within you - I do, and I'm up for the fight. We've defeated one set of poor plans: now its time to cross swords with another!

Thames Tideway Tunnel

The problem of untreated sewage flooding straight into the Thames whenever there is heavy rainfall in the capital is one that affects Putney as well as the wider environment.

Thames Water are now proposing to build a new "super-sewer" - the London Tideway Tunnel - which will follow the course of the river from Hammersmith (where much of the sewage that affects Putney is jettisoned from) to the Isle of Dogs and then on to Beckton treatment works.

This is a massive engineering task and a controversial one - a meeting was held on Monday in Hammersmith where experts and consumer groups questioned the effectiveness of the project.

I start from the basis that something needs to be done to reduce the amount of raw sewage contaminating the Thames - a problem that stems back to the way our Victorian sewer network was built in the 19th century but which, through population growth and a reduction in the amount of green space available in London to absorb rainwater, has overflowed more and more frequently. The problem is now so bad that Thames Water has regularly been fined for the leaks, not least last year during that Summer's heavy rains.

But I do want any work to be effective - so I've asked Thames Water to brief me more fully on the plans. When they do, I'll report back, but in the meantime you can find out more about the London Tideway Tunnel here.

Putney BNP members outed

The entire national membership list of the fascist, racist British National Party has been posted on the web.

I managed to get a look before the website was taken down, and found that the BNP has a grand total of eleven members in Putney - not exactly a mass membership party!

But you'd be surprised where some of them live - mainly in more affluent parts of the constituency like the Southfields Grid, a street off Lower Richmond Road, the Lytton Grove area and leafy West Putney.

These are usually regarded as affluent, Conservative-voting areas, somewhat removed from the stereotyped BNP member as working class, living on a council estate and poor. But wherever they live, BNP members are just pathetic, usually poorly educated people who can't handle the modern world and who are too cowardly to do anything other than blame "outsiders" for that.

Conserving Putney

As regular readers will know, I think the character of Putney, Roehampton and Southfields is under real threat from greedy developers who've been given the green light to put forward the most appalling plans for overdevelopment by the lack of leadership of local Conservatives.

One of the main weapons we have against overdevelopment is our conservation areas. These provide extra protection (or, as developers would claim, restriction) over those parts of our area most steeped in history or of special character.

The Council has begun the process of reviewing these areas, of which Putney has several. First up in our area are three conservation areas, each of which has a special public meeting coming up to which you are welcome to attend and give your views:

• Landford Road along with Lower Common: Thursday 04 December, Dryburgh Hall
• Putney Heath: Friday 05 December, Elliott School, Pullman Gardens
• Victoria Drive: Tuesday 09 December, St Paul's Community Hall, Inner Park Road

By clicking on each area title above you can download the conservation area profiles and find out how to have your say. Aside from anything else, they offer some really interesting insights into local history and how Putney was transformed, in a very short of space, from a rural outpost of London to a bustling town.

You can also read some of the other profiles for elsewhere in the borough here.

Local dentists

Click on image if you need a larger version.

Safety checks for electric blankets

Wandsworth Fire Brigade and local Trading Standards officers have rescheduled their free safety check session for electric blankets to this Wednesday, 19 November.

The checks take place at Wandsworth Fire Station in West Hill - nearly opposite the former West Hill Library and on the corner of Lebanon Road.

The horrifying injuries an electric blanket catching fire can cause makes it surely worth the ten minutes or so it takes to make sure it is safe and set to go this Winter.

To book a time to pop in, or to see if you can schedule a different day, call 020 8871 6178. Or email tradingstandards@wandsworth.gov.uk - you'll need to provide a contact phone number in your email though.

Planning our town centres

The BBC is reporting on plans by Waltham Forest Council, in north east London, to tighten its planning rules to limit the number of fast food outlets near schools or places heavily frequented by children.

The report proves again that tougher planning rules to protect town centres are entirely achievable and desperately needed in Putney High Street. In Waltham Forest the problem appears to be too many fast food "restaurants"; in Putney its coffee shops, mobile phone shops, gambling premises and what the Americans call "Dime Stores".

A cohesive plan for Putney is what the Putney Society has been calling for and it is one of the essentials of my SOS plan to Save Our High Street. It goes hand-in-hand with ideas like shop-front improvements, to introduce a cohesive character to the town centre and longer term suggestions like relocating the Chelverton Road bus garage away from the High Street and replacing the ugly concrete building that currently houses Woolworths, Halfords and Superdrug.

The Council's Local Development Plan is currently being reviewed and this is an ideal opportunity to draw a line under past disagreements and work together to draw up a strong, clear and radical plan that safeguards local shops, improves the environment for shoppers and other pedestrians and makes the High Street the attractive heart of Putney it should be.

You can read more about my ideas for Putney High Street and give me your own views here.

"Landmark" buildings

The ever-helpful architects for Putney Place have provided some more images of their "landmark" designs for us all - even here slightly misleading as the cylindrical tower will be black, not the sort of soft, gentle, almost transparent white they've drawn it as:


From Fawe Park Road, junction of Skelgill Road


From Brandlehow School.....................................From Wadham Road


From Disraeli Road jct Bective Road.......................From Oxford Road

Putney Place latest

A message from the Chairman of The Putney Society:

Council officers tell me they have met with the developer. Oracle will not withdraw or amend their plan. If it is rejected by the Planning Applications Committee then Oracle will appeal to the Planning Inspectorate.

The Planning Committee date is likely to be 6 November 2008. Rejection would mean an appeal some months (maybe 3 - 6) later.

I am optimistic about rejection - but we cannot assume that this will happen.

It is important that there is a continuing flow of objections to this application in order to both strengthen the case pre-committee and be in place as evidence at an eventual appeal if required.

Letters will count after the Council's cut off date of 17 October - desirably they need to be in by 31 October 2008

Regards

John Ewing

You can either write to the council direct by emailing planningapplications@wandsworth.gov.uk or by visiting my Putney Place page and completing my online survey which, if you tick the relevant box, I'll submit to the council for you.

Local Guardian reports on Putney Place

The Wandsworth Guardian was at the Putney Place meeting last Thursday, and you can read their report of the meeting here.



Local residents have also set up a blog to help people keep in touch with what's happening:
http://saveputneyfromthetowerblocks.blogspot.com/

Sharing The Road: What Cycling Can Do For Putney

The Putney Society, Hotham Primary School and Wandsworth Cycling Campaign (WCC) have got together to organise a series of events on the weekend of 18th and 19th October.

Saturday 18th October; 10.30am-12.30pm
Brewer Building, St Mary's Church, Putney

• Video presentation on WCC's award-winning Movers and Shakers project

Saturday 18th October 1-5pm
Cycling Events for all at Hotham Primary School, Charlwood Road, featuring:

• Lunch and Afternoon Refreshments from Hotham's Global Kitchen - Delicious home cooking from around the world (hot dogs for the less adventurous!)
• Tea, coffee and homemade cakes available all afternoon
• Dr Bike session by WCC & Putney Cycles - let them check your shed-bound bicycle for roadworthiness
• Putney Cycles and Go-Pedal on hand with adult bikes for free tryouts and hire for Sunday rides
• Thamesfield Safer Neighbourhood Police Team
• Stalls with cycling info, fun cycling activities for children, help with route planning, bicycle security marking etc.
• 1.45pm Display of cycling skills by Hotham School children
• 2.30pm & 3.30pm Cycle Training UK will run two sessions in the playground on basic cycle skills. The one-hour sessions must be pre-booked by calling 07989 974406 or emailing info@wandsworthcyclists.org.uk Cost £5, payable on the day.

Sunday 19th October, 11am
WCC guided rides around Putney

Starting at St Mary's Square at 11am, short guided rides for all ages will demonstrate how easy it is to get around Putney by bicycle. Bring your own bike, or arrange to hire one for 24 hours at a reduced rate on Saturday, to be returned on Sunday. Riders can join in with one or more of the short rides to enjoy local shared paths and the new sculpture trail.

First ride to the Wandle Delta along the riverside.
Second ride to Barnes Wetlands Centre along the riverside (ride timings to be confirmed)

For more details, visit http://www.wandsworthcyclists.org.uk/

Tonight's Putney Place meeting

I'm just back from the Putney Society-organised meeting between residents and the developers at St Mary's Church which I was able to address briefly.

Over 300 people turned up - as you can see from the photo below the hall was packed - as was the upstairs gallery. It's really pleasing that so many turned up over what is such an important issue; though I'm a little surprised at how few Putney councillors bothered to attend.

I'll write more about my thoughts on the meeting in the next few days but I don't think the developers' team had a good night. In all likelihood they were never going to - this is a massively unpopular plan and deservedly so. But they did themselves no favours by arguing that white was black: that the plans were not intrusive, that they would not overshadow, that public transport capacity could accommodate them, that the towers were just what Putney needed.

I think one resident summed the scheme up perfectly when they said that this was a plan to win architecture prizes for daring, not a plan for the people. And the presentation was pitched at architects rather than local residents: it was a very, very poor show and I wonder why the public relations person present hadn't sat them down and gone through it with them before they spoke.

I've had almost 300 surveys back so far, and I can tell you that just 9 have been in favour of the plans. Those nine I don't think were present tonight!

Anyway, a good night for Putney, a good night for local democracy and a bad night for Oracle.

Don't forget the Putney Society meeting this Thursday

Just a quick reminder that the Putney Society meeting with the developers of Putney Place, Oracle Ltd. takes place at 7.30pm at St Mary's Church, Putney Bridge.

Everyone is welcome regardless of whether or not you're a member of the Society.

I've now sent out almost 2,000 copies of my Putney Place survey - thank you if you've already returned one either by post or online. And if you haven't yet had your say, you can do so by visiting the special Putney Place page on this website: www.stuartking.net/putneyplace.

There's also plenty of time to submit any thoughts you may have on Putney Place - for or against - to the Council and you can find out where to send them to by visiting my Putney Place page. The deadline is 17 October.

I look forward to seeing you on Thursday.

My Putney Place page

I've now set up a special page on this website dedicated to the Putney Place planning application. From it, you can:

• Complete my online survey - whether you're for or against the plans
• Read my submission to the council's consultation on the planning application
• Download the Council's planning news briefing on the application
• Visit my news archive on this and other overdevelopment stories
• Sign up for my fortnightly email news bulletin to keep in touch with this and other stories.

This is a comprehensive resource for anyone interested in the Putney Place planning application, so please take advantage of it. The address?

stuartking.net/putneyplace

Putney at dusk

Putney Place: when a picture speaks a thousand words

This is a "section" drawn by architects of the Putney Place developers of Upper Richmond Road from Putney High Street (on the left) along to Oakhill Road on the right.

It shows the scale of the two Putney Wharf Towers and the overbearing, oppressive impact these two ugly skyscrapers will have, dwarfing the surrounding streetscene.

As someone who opposes this gross overdevelopment, I'd actually like to thank the applicants for this drawing, because - as I say in the headline - this artist's impression makes the case against this scheme better than 1,000 words ever could.

You can click on the image to get a full-size version.

What is it with Putney Bridge?

A few weeks ago I highlighted the appalling state of Putney Bridge; in particular the bus lane, which had simply disintegrated. Wandsworth Council - who are responsible for Putney Bridge - got onto that one a good deal faster than they've dealt with some of the other potholes around the constituency - and the bridge was resurfaced.

But whether they used the wrong sort of tarmac, or there's some underlying erosion within the bridge, or their contractors aren't up to the job, there are already potholes in the new road surface, exacerbated by today's heavy rainfall.

Yes, a bus lane carries heavier vehicles than the rest of the bridge generally - but equally it is a far less used lane. There is no reasonable reason why newly-laid tarmac should last just a couple of months before needing to be repaired.

Putney Place plans now out for consultation

The owners of Putney Place, the site opposite East Putney tube where they want to build two massive tower blocks, have at last submitted all the documentation to enable Council officers to begin deciding whether to recommend that councillors grant planning permission.

This includes a 52-page "planning statement" which is produced by contractors of the applicants rather than an independent and impartial agent, but which is supposed to represent an objective assessment of the impact the development will have on the area and a justification or mitigation for that impact.

The EIA is a detailed document and I haven't yet had the time to plough through it, but the basic application is as follows:

• Two blocks: one 26 storeys (84 metres high) and one of 21 storeys (67.5 metres high)
• 300 residential units, approximately a third of which will be what the developers call "affordable" housing
• 3,439 square metres of office space
• 114 square metres of retail space
• 443 square metres of restaurant, retail or office space
• 84 square metres of space for a cafe
• 2,862 square metres of what they call "public amenity space"
• and "New public art"

You can find all the relevant documents about this application - the reference number for which is 2008/3321 here

Are we winning the High Street improvement battle?

As someone who has been campaigning to improve the state of Putney High Street for almost three years, I welcome the Council's new announcement of further improvements to the pavements.

Slowly - too slowly, grudgingly and ungraciously, the Council is (without admitting there's any problem at all) starting to take the first tentative steps to improve our town centre.

Of course, this work isn't being funded by them - it's money provided by Transport for London and approved when Ken Livingstone was London Mayor - but new paving will have a big impact. That is, if the Council keeps them cleaner than the current greasy, grimy paving.

Likewise, if the Council is now serious about clearing away the clutter than congests the High Street's pavements for pedestrians, then that could actually be a second item ticked off from my ten point plan to save our high street. But are they just going to tinker, or are they serious about taking out the control boxes, the pedestrian barriers, the signposts, the rubbish bags and the bike racks (that should be relocated around the side street corners) that clog our pavements?

It's a shame it's taken the Conservatives three years to catch up with the Putney Society, the hundreds of Putney residents who've filled in my High Street surveys and my Labour campaign team. I wonder if the Tories are yet willing to admit there's a problem and that there is a role for local government in rectifying it? And will Putney's Conservative MP break her vow of silence on this issue to help us wield more influence with her Tory friends in the Town Hall?

If not then we're not going to make any progress on the remaining problems: high levels of street crime, flyposting, grotty shopfronts, getting a better mix and quality of shops and improving traffic flow. But whether the Tories admit it or not, keep dragging their feet or not, these problems will not disappear and nor will my campaign to Save Putney High Street.

You can have your say on the state of the High Street by taking my online survey here.

June's local crime figures

There's not much to write about in this month's crime figures - it's fallen very slightly in three Putney council wards and risen very slightly in three. Without further ado, here are the tables:



And May's comparison:

The high rise signal from Boris that should worry Putney

Today's Evening Standard reports that London Tory Mayor Boris Johnson just can't be bothered to submit an objection to a 43-storey tower block on the South Bank, the Doon Street Tower.

This is a complete reverse of his campaign pledge to block tower blocks across the capital and should be a major concern in our neck of the woods where, of course, we are under threat from several tower block plans - some of similar height to this one.

I am someone who isn't opposed to high buildings on principle: they can be appropriate in the City of London and central London. Putney isn't such a location. But that's not Boris's position. He ran for election and, I suspect, won quite a few votes, for his blanket opposition to tower blocks.

Yet today he couldn't even muster the interest to jot down a few words of opposition and submit them to the Secretary of State for Communities, Hazel Blears, who has to rule on this application following a Public Inquiry earlier this year.

If Boris can't be bothered to object to a tower block plan that was backed by a Labour Mayor, was reviewed before he was even elected and which no one will hold him accountable for, the prospects of him standing up to his Conservative allies in Wandsworth over their planning mistakes aren't high, to say the least.

We need Boris to honour his election pledges - not sell out at the first test of them.

Have your say on Putney Place

The long-awaited, much-dreaded plan to build two high-rise blocks across the road from East Putney tube station has finally been submitted to the council.

I am 100% opposed to this application which you can read up on here.

It is this planning development that I made the front page story of the latest edition of The Putney Paper - because while the existing Putney Place carbuncle is an absolute eyesore, my solution is to replace it with a better building of similar or smaller scale that complements the area and which our infrastructure can cope with. Instead the site's owners, Oracle, want to cram two ugly 25 and 19 towers onto this tiny triangle of land.

The planning application that has been submitted is incomplete and incredibly vague:

* It doesn't assess the impact on the environment or on local services

* It doesn't address the grotesque overdevelopment this plan amounts to, or the precedent it will set for the middle of Putney.

* It doesn't explain why surrounding residents should have to be overlooked and overshadowed, or why they think they have the right to transform Putney's skyline for decades to come.

* It doesn't talk about what proportion of the housing will be affordable

The Council must extract satisfactory, detailed and practical answers to each of these questions from the developer and tell us what it believes is a satisfactory development on this site. If it cannot or will not, this application must be refused.

Please register your views - and hopefully your objections - to this scheme. A groundswell of local protest will make it far harder for the Conservatives to cave in to the developers and blight our environment further.

You can comment online here, or email planningapplications@wandsworth.gov.uk, referencing planning application No. 2008/3321.

More Post Office nonsense

The Post Office has announced that it is willing to negotiate with the Council to provide replacement services for the community served by the former Lower Richmond Road branch.

But at the same time it has refused to consider negotiating a similar return of service for the area served by the Putney Bridge Road branch - on the ridiculous basis that doing so would put at risk the viability of surrounding branches that have survived to date.

The absurdity of this position beggars belief. First, which branches do they believe will lose so much custom if the branch in Putney Bridge Road is re-opened? There aren't any post offices in the locality. Only in the surreal world of the Post Office would the provision of services in Putney Bridge Road affect branches in Barnes, Parson's Green or Garratt Lane.

Second, they cannot possibly argue that basing services in St Mary's Church in Putney High Street - if indeed they are considering such an idea - would be ok for Lower Richmond Road but not Putney High Street: St Mary's is equidistant between both branches.

And third, our predictions about the failure of the Upper Richmond Road post office to cope with the additional custom - when it was already failing to provide a decent service before the two branches were closed - are becoming reality. People - especially the elderly - are finding it very difficult to get to the Upper Richmond Road branch; and if they manage that difficult feat despite the lack of direct public transport options they're met with abysmal service.

The Post Office really needs to overhaul its whole business model, because the current one that has seen these ridiculous closures in Putney is clearly flawed. They refuse to publish in any detail their financial forecasts to justify closure, their definitions of local are preposterous, and their investment in the remaining branches is non-existent.

Not good enough.

Putney Bridge disintegrates

Today's wet weather has washed away large chunks of the long-eroding surface on Putney Bridge - again the responsibility of Wandsworth's neglectful Conservative council.









The road surface here has been worn down for months and the bus lane had become warped; almost like waves of tarmac. Signs of erosion were already in evidence right across the bridge, and as usual the council had either ignored them entirely, or splodged a few dollops of tarmac into them in the mad hope that this would somehow substitute for competent road maintenance. It's simply not good enough for the Council to lay down metal sheets because they're too miserly to keep the bridge in good shape.

The Bridge is an icon of Putney: it presents our area to the rest of the world, so the state it's kept in by the council has even more of an impact than the (in itself unacceptable) neglect of residential backstreets. Just as with our grubby, run-down High Street, the Conservatives are evidently quite happy for people to get the impression that Putney is a shabby, neglected area in which no pride is invested.

That may be true of the council - but I know it isn't true of the residents.

UPDATE: Even this council seems to believe that the state of the Bridge is unacceptable as tonight the bus lane has been cordoned off. Whether that is for essential roadworks or for the Police traffic census they've been conducting all day today we'll have to wait and see.

Brewhouse Lane bays in by end of August

I've now received confirmation from the council that the changes to parking in Brewhouse Lane, which I wrote about here, will be implemented by 25th August. Good news for local residents and their visitors, who will get more parking opportunities close to their home.

It takes a little time to amend a traffic order like those that govern all Putney's controlled parking zones, and once that's been sorted out the Council needs to order new signs and provide a ticket machine for the new shared-use bays I persuaded them to bring in.

Putney - safer than other parts of London?

Every month when I publish the ward-by-ward crime statistics I usually focus on the change over the previous month.

This month it's worth looking at how crime in Putney compares with London as a whole.

Every single ward in Putney has a lower record of drug offending, fraud or forgery, robbery and other notifiable offences than the Met Police average.

Every single ward in Putney bar one has a better record on burglary and theft & handling (Thamesfield being the exception); criminal damage and violence against the person (Roehampton); and robbery (Southfields) than the London-wide figures. Roehampton has a stastically insignificant higher rate of sexual offences, which are a very small percentage of the total anyway I'm pleased to say.

Putney also compares favourably to our borough as a whole - though the pattern is very slightly different. The overall Wandsworth figure for crimes per 1,000 of the population is 99.6; the overall Putney figure is 89.9.

So what these crime figures show, month-in, month-out is that Wandsworth is safer than other parts of London, and that Putney is safer than other parts of Wandsworth. Don't let the Tories tell you different.

Here are the year to May 2008 figures:



And the April 2008 figures for comparison:

Just the ticket? Not if SWT have their way!

South West Trains (SWT) are set to announce reduced ticket office opening times later this month. Although the plans won't affect Putney Station, they are going to hit Barnes Station and Wandsworth Town, which many constituents around the edges of our area use.

Under the SWT proposals, Barnes Station will have its ticket office closed for six and-a-half hours more on Saturdays, closed entirely on Sundays, and during the week cut back by half an hour.

Wandsworth Town is even harder hit: during the week the ticket office here will be open three and-a-half hours less and will be closed entirely on both Saturday and Sunday.

These plans are bad news. Unstaffed stations increase the potential for vandalism, graffiti and other crime making them unwelcoming for the public. That's especially true for Barnes Station which is very isolated, set in the midst of Barnes Common.

Wandsworth Town is already an unpleasant and virtually unstaffed station, with its dingy, foreboding subway - and given the huge riverside developments either side of Wandsworth Bridge, the new housing at the top of East Hill and the plans for the Ram Brewery site we should be talking about expanding capacity here, not cutting it back.

If you'd like to protest these closure plans, you can sign my online petition here. Every response I get strengthens the case against closure, so please sign up.

It's working!

Kingsmere Road...................................... Hotham Road

The other day I spotted that one of the potholes I'd flagged up on this website - in Kingsmere Road in West Hill - had finally been patched by the Council. Success Number One.

On Saturday, the Hotham Road potholes had also been patched - though large chunks of this street need a proper resurfacing, not just a slapdash patching. But success Number Two, none-the-less.

These happen to be two of the earliest potholes I flagged up on this website and while the Tory Councillors will of course deny any relationship between our naming and shaming exercise and them finally getting their act together, I leave you to determine the reality.

Far too many roads remain in a disgraceful state, so if the Council thinks filling-in one or two potholes is going to make us back off and leave them alone, they've got another thing coming. Putney Heath and Victoria Drive in particular remain in a completely unacceptable condition so if I have to publish five, ten, twenty or one hundred potholes a week before they get the point, so be it.

One of the reasons it's important to have a Labour MP is because your Conservative representatives (every single one of Putney's councillors, and your MP, are Conservatives) simply will not stand up for their local patch. I will - and as you see, I get results.

Brandlehow demolition: accept the verdict

The Council is absolutely right to insist that the property developer who demolished the Grade 2 listed Brandlehow School Caretaker's Cottage start work rebuilding it immediately.

The developer responsible was prosecuted in November 2007; taken back to Court this March, ordered to reinstate the building to its original condition and pay over £30,000 in fines and costs. By the time the building has been rebuilt and his own legal fees have been calculated, the total cost of his folly will be getting on for £100,000. And that's excluding the cost of his actually buying the site in the first place. Yet despite these two Court experiences and the expense he is being subjected to, no work has yet been undertaken.

If being fined over £30,000 has been ineffective then further action appears necessary. If he fails to fulfil the obligations placed on him by the courts, maybe a further fine or a spell of community service is in order. Planning regulations exist to preserve and enhance our built environment. It is important that those responsible for enforcing these regulations are robust in their efforts in such open-and-shut cases like this.

Pothole of the week: 27 June 2008

Werter Road, which runs off Putney High Street along to Oxford Road (or vice versa as it's a one-way street!). Generally this road is in pretty good nick - though the bit around Sainsburys is decaying rapidly, but even in the few road surfaces in Putney that aren't falling apart you come across potholes like this.

The representatives responsible for this example of neglect are Putney Conservative MP Justine Greening and her three Thamesfield ward Conservative Councillors: Edward Lister (the Council leader), Jim Maddan and Rosemary Torrington.

Pothole of the week: 23 June 2008

You're sending me so many photos of Putney's potholed roads that pothole of the week is now going to be published twice a week for the forseeable future.

Last week I exposed the dreadful state of Rotherwood Road on this blog and alluded to the fact that neighbouring roads weren't much better.

Well, here's the evidence. Let's start with Putney Embankment itself - this just past the junction of Festing Road (and thanks to putneysw15 discussion forum contributors for the heads-up on this one):



Adjoining Rotherwood Road is Bendemeer Road:



And off Bendemeer Road is Gladwyn Road:



Finally (for this batch, at least) the road after Bendemeer Road towards Putney Bridge is Glendarvon Road:

High Street's vacant shops on the up

Conservative Councillors in Wandsworth are now openly admitting on the putneysw15 website that landlords in Putney High Street are starting to struggle to let their premises.

The number of vacant shops in our town centre is on the increase again. In fact, we're probably back to the position we were in 2005 when I launched Labour's Save Putney High Street campaign.

If Putney High Street is facing economic difficulties, that isn't the fault of the Council - it's a consequence of the international credit crunch (though consumer spending was remarkably robust last month).

No, the charge I level at Putney Conservatives, including the MP, is that had they acted to recession-proof the High Street when times were better over the past three years, retailers would be in a better position to weather whatever economic turbulence we're in line for. I believe Shadow Chancellor George Osborne calls this "fixing the roof when the sun is shining".

My ten point plan to fix the High Street has been around for three years now; common-sense points which those of you who've taken my survey have supported hands-down. The Putney Society has been similarly vocal in its concerns about the state in which the Conservatives allow our High Street to remain. Yet the Tories have ignored us - they've even denied there's any problem at all.

For the past three years, when Putney High Street needed some political vision, leadership and direction from its elected representatives, its had none. Let's hope that High Street retailers do not pay too high a price for this absence of courage from the complacent Conservatives.

Rotherwood bother

I know I'm only supposed to be doing a pothole post once a week (next one on Monday, incidentally), but just look at the state of Rotherwood Road. The thing that makes Rotherwood Road stand out - and be under no illusions that all the riverside roads in this area are in a thoroughly disgraceful state - is that it's potholed along its entire length, which is a remarkable feat even for this neglectful council.

The elected representatives responsible for this sorry excuse for a road surface are Putney Conservative MP Justine Greening and the three Conservative councillors for Thamesfield ward. I have to ask, given that Thamesfield has the highest number of potholed roads in Putney: what is the benefit of having the Leader of the Council representing your area? Maybe he needs to spend a little more time with his ward?

Here are five photos of Rotherwood Road, running from the Putney Embankment end up to Lower Richmond Road:

The Politics of God

On Friday I attended the inaugural annual lecture organised by the Wandsworth Labour Party. The lecture, presented by Revd Dr Giles Fraser, vicar of St Mary's Putney, was entitled The Politics of God and was a stimulating, engaging and entertaining exploration of what I think could be described as the politics of God and church.

As you might imagine given the breadth of views within the audience, from atheist to confirmed believers, the debate was lively but moderate. The event was, by unanimous aclaim, a great success, attended by over 80 residents, many of whom were not members of the Labour Party.

The lecture begun with an exclusive preview showing of Giles' 20 minute documentary on The Putney Debates, focussed on footage shot last October when St Mary's Church celebrated the 360th anniversary of this historic event.

After the lecture and my presentation of a thank you gift to Giles (picture), Putney Labour Party and I hosted a drinks reception upstairs in the Cromwell Room which gave everyone a chance to continue the debate that has begun earlier in the evening. I was pleased to be able to make contact with representatives from a number of local churches, including Southfields Baptist Church in Wimbledon Park Road and Our Lady of Pity & St Simon Catholic Church in Hazlewell Road.

Potholes, potholes everywhere...

The race to find Putney's worst pothole intensified this week following the posting of photos from The Platt last week.

Not to be outdone, residents of Abbotstone Road, Gwalior Road, Gamlen Road and Hotham Road - all streets in the ward represented by Council Leader Edward Lister - have sent me photos of potholes they have to put up with due to the Council's neglect of our roads.

The thing I notice, going around the constituency, is not just the number of potholes but the number of road surfaces that are on the verge of becoming major pothole problems - surfaces where you can see the wear and tear, that have been patched and patched and patched but never properly resurfaced.

My message to the Council is simple: either reverse the £1 million cut you've made to the Highways budget that has reduced it by a third in just two years, or gain the reputation as the borough with the worst roads in the capital - to add to the dubious accolade of being the flytip capital of London.


Abbotstone Road


Gamlen Road


Gwalior Road


Hotham Road

You can see other examples of Putney's pothole crisis here.

Putney gets safer - again

The April crime figures for Putney's six council wards are out and show another decline in crime compared to April 2007.



The only ward to buck the trend substantially was Thamesfield - I'm particularly concerned about the amount of burglaries taking place in this ward and it's disheartening that the Council - especially given that the Tory Council Leader Edward Lister represents this area - isn't doing a lot more to help the police cut crime.

One of the things that would help tremendously here would be town centre patrollers: when the Labour Government funded two trials of such patrollers in Clapham Junction and Tooting town centres, street crime - by far the biggest problem in Putney town centre - fell by a third.

Town centre patrollers wouldn't directly cut the burglary figures, but what they would do is free the Thamesfield Safer Neighbourhood Police up to focus on the rest of Thamesfield ward away from Putney High Street, and that can only be helpful.

Regretably, when the Government street patroller funding stopped, the Tory Council chose to sack the wardens rather than find the money itself to continue the excellent service. And before the Tories scream "Council Tax rises" just think how much this Council spends producing Brightside, and how it finds the money to run off (and pay to be delivered) fancy leaflets whenever it wants to attack the government - campaigning on the rates, big time. Cutting back on propaganda would go a long way to funding town centre patrollers in Putney.

As usual in these reports, here's the comparison table for March 2008:

New entry in worst Putney pothole competition

Residents of The Platt, just across the road from my campaign HQ in Felsham Road, have a very strong entry into my Putney potholes competition. This is the state the Council has allowed Gay Street, on the estate, to fall into:



Here are a couple of close-ups of what can no longer be called a road - more like a gravel track (you can click to enlarge):



The state of Gay Street - and a lot of the roads on Putney's council estates - leave much to be desired, though of course as my earlier post, here shows, The Council aren't discriminating: they're neglecting all roads equally as dreadfully.

Do you know of a pothole worse than this one? Let me know - email stuart.king@putneylabour.org.uk or sms it to 07533 384 895 and we'll add it to our gallery. Sooner or later, even Wandsworth Conservatives will be shamed into taking action on their neglect of our roads.

Fair parking for Brewhouse Lane

Residents of the Putney Wharf development just behind Putney Bridge became the latest to contact me about unfair council parking restrictions in their area.

Just as residents of the Whitelands Park and SW15H developments - mainly, but not exclusively key workers - have fallen between two stools because they have either not been allocated or cannot afford to buy an exhorbitantly priced off-street parking space and, simultaneously, the Conservative council is refusing to even allow them to apply for an on-street residents' parking permit.

The motivation behind the policy of tackling parking stress is sound, but it is only fairly applied if residents are treated equally; by which I mean that all residents must either be given an affordable off-street parking space or, if the intent is to promote car-free living, no off-street spaces should be provided for anyone.

However, in respect of Putney Wharf we have won a small victory. I have persuaded the council to remove the permit-holder only restrictions in Brewhouse Lane - the road just behind Putney Cinema that runs down to the Thames. Because the only residents in the vicinity of Brewhouse Lane are, in fact, residents of Putney Wharf there is a strong case for the few bays in this road to be shared-use, rather than permit-holder only.

This will enable residents who do not have off-street parking spaces in the Putney Wharf development and their guests to park closer to their homes.

As a consequence of my campaigning on this and other parking problems created by the council's short-sighted, dogmatic parking scheme - behind the SW15H development in East Putney and Whitelands Park behind West Hill - Councillors have admitted that they got this wrong and are reviewing its parking policies.

I hope that residents of any future developments in Putney will therefore be spared the frustration and inconvenience that some - too many - have been subjected to.

Post@St Mary's?

The news that Revd. Giles Fraser and St Mary's Church are in discussions to see whether they can take on some of Post Office functions when the two local branches close is a glimmer of hope and I wish Dr Fraser well in his negotiations.

It's important that the council doesn't use this offer to avoid serious consideration of whether it could integrate its services with the post office - for example at the Parking Shop in Lower Richmond Road. However, in terms of location and accessibility I can think of few better locations than St Mary's Church.

The Politics of God

...That's the title of a lecture being given by Revd. Giles Fraser on Friday 6th June at St Mary's Church, Putney Bridge (click on the image for a larger version of the invitation).

The lecture's being organised by Wandsworth Labour Parties and while the audience will consist of mostly Labour Party members locally, we're extending an invitation to anyone in the community interested in hearing about the relationship between religion and politics, and contributing to the debate.

As I wrote a few days ago, last week I attended a lecture by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac O'Connor, on a related theme.

Given that today and tomorrow MPs are debating very substantial ethical issues regarding the Embryology Bill this will be a timely debate on a very topical issue.

If you'd like to come you'd be very welcome, but please let us know as we need to plan for numbers. Please email us to do so.

Mystery shoppers?

Tory Council Leader Edward Lister has been bragging about some retail survey he claims proves that Putney High Street is the oasis among town centres.

Curiously, he's provided very few details of the survey, and there's nothing about it on the council's website, which is usually the first to trumpet good news for the Conservative administration.

If anyone knows more about this mystery survey could they let me know because I'd like to read it. As you know, I've been championing the High Street for the past three years: I launched Labour's Save Putney High Street campaign coincidentally at the same time as the Putney Society raised their concerns about it. If I think there's a problem; if the Putney Society thinks there's a problem and if the huge number of respondents to my campaign think there's a problem ,why doesn't the council?

Precious little has changed since we started pointing out the embarassment that is Putney High Street - the local councillors and Tory MP for Putney are in denial that there's any problem with it at all, and Cllr Lister's spin on this mystery report is just the latest evidence of it.

I'd like to read the report in full to see what it really says. If local shops are doing a brisk trade then that's great for Putney - but it doesn't negate the greasy, grimy pavements, the uneven, cracked paving; the rubbish; the clutter; the congestion; the pollution and the poor planning that led Putney to be branded a clone high street not so long ago in a national survey.

Tell me what you think about Putney High Street: spare two minutes to fill in my Save Putney High Street survey here.

Transport Police now patrolling Putney

The British Transport Police have just set up a new team specialising in patrolling stations in South West London, including Putney.

The team of nine officers, based at station 9 in Clapham Junction will be focussed particularly on cutting down assaults, but will be taking on any policing concerns on the rail network in south west London, including drug dealing and knife crime.

The team was only launched this week, and they've already arrested what appears to be a gang member carrying a six-inch long kitchen knife who assaulted a police officer.

The stations covered by the team include Clapham Junction, Wimbledon, Richmond, Staines, Twickenham, Earlsfield, Mortlake, Norbiton, Putney, Strawberry Hill, Wandsworth Town, Kingston, Feltham, Hampton Wick, Raynes Park, New Malden, Teddington, St Margarets, North Sheen, Barnes, Whitton and Ashford.

"Where do I vote?"

It's been a few weeks since the Council sent out pollcards telling us where our polling station is in the elections this coming Thursday.

We're sending out our own cards letting thousands of Labour supporters in Putney, Roehampton and Southfields, know where to vote on Thursday. But if you want to check where you vote, you can do so on my website by clicking here.

There's a list of polling stations down the side, or you can check using the map - by clicking on the links you'll get a list of streets that vote at each station and a satellite image of the location on it.

Most polling stations are where they've always been, but a couple have changed since the last elections in 2006:

• The Putney Vale estate now votes at Stag House in Stroud Crescent, following the Tory council's closure of Newlands Hall;


• Residents of the Alton East estate are back voting at Roehampton Parish Hall (now called Cornerstone), on the corner of Alton Road and Roehampton Lane.

Out and about in Putney

The main reason I've been posting a little less frequently in recent days is because of the London election campaigning my team and I are up to.

We've been out all over the constituency, and I've just today finished adding all the places we've been too in the past month to my constituency map page.

We've been talking to you about your concerns and priorities for London in the next four years and the clear choice between the experience, tested leadership and delivered improvements to the capital over the last eight years with Ken Livingstone; and the bluster, blunder, lack of substance, lack of vision, and lack of any credibly-costed plans of his Tory opponent.

So far this campaign we've been to the Longstaff Estate, Galveston Road, Lebanon Road, Sutherland Grove, Skeena Hill, Combemartin Road, Girdwood Road, Whitefield Close, Arcadian Place, Wimbledon Park Road, Albert Drive, Hayward Gardens, Pullman Gardens, Beaumont Road, Whitlock Drive, Kersfield Road, Lytton Grove, Littlecombe Close, Arlesey Close, Chepstow Close, Whitnell Way, Gay Street, Crown Court, Waterman Street, Kingsmere Close, Felsham Road, Glenthorpe, Hanover House, William Gardens, Minstead Gardens, Aubyn Square, Toland Square and Vanneck Square - apologies if we've visited you but aren't listed above.

We've a lot more campaign stops all around Putney, Roehampton and Southfields before polling day on Thursday 01 May so look out for us!

My Post Office response

I've just submitted my formal response to the Post Office on their consultation over the proposed closures of the branches in Lower Richmond Road and Putney Bridge Road. You can download it here.

I've also submitted over 700 response cards and online petitions that residents have sent back to me: this is getting on for a 20% response rate which market research experts tell me is a very high return, so thank you if you took the time to respond to my campaign.

There are still two days to register your views - write to:

Anita Turner
Network Development Manager
Post Office Ltd.
Freepost Consultation Team

or email consultation@postoffice.co.uk

Keep track of my Don't K.O. our P.O.s Campaign

I've just added my work on saving our local post office branches to the list of key issues on the side bar. if you scroll down on the right, you'll find this the second issue listed, after dangerous dogs. That means that you can now read all the entries to this blog that I've made on the specific issue of post offices rather than ploughing through the main page or the monthly archives.

You can also keep in touch with what I'm doing on this and other local issues by signing up to my monthly e-news bulletin: click here to add yourself.

And if you haven't yet signed my online petitions, there's still time: click here for the Lower Richmond Road branch and/or here to save the Putney Bridge Road branch.

Tonight's Post Office meeting

I had the opportunity of addressing tonight's meeting on the proposed closures by The Post Office of their branches in Lower Richmond Road and Putney Bridge Road.

About 100 residents attended tonight's meeting as did representatives of The Post Office and PostWatch, which I applaud them for given the hiding-to-nothing they, unsurprisingly, got.

I made the point that sticking a poster up in the branches under threat and making available some notices within them is not close to being satisfactory consultation. Nor is the shortness of the consultation period - inexcusable given that they reached the decision about which closure proposals to proceed with back in December. And their response: that the consultation period is fixed and unmoveable, is - I understand - simply wrong.

The Council representative present was asked about the innovative approach taken by Essex County Council in taking over local branches threatened with closure. The council replied that the branches Essex are taking over have already been through the consultation process and have now been confirmed for closure, so they're further down the road. They undertook to give serious consideration to similar measures if our local branches are confirmed for closure after we've made our case for a reprieve. I welcome that.

To date over 700 of you have signed my online petition or returned the postcards I circulated locally: thank you so much for the cross-party support I've received over this. The next stage in my campaign will be to make my formal submission against closure backed up by the response cards and online petitions you've sent me.

More on this soon.

Post Offices: will Wandsworth follow the Essex lead?

Essex County Council has been negotiating with the post Office to take over the running of Post offices in their county. The BBC are covering the story here.

This issue has already been the subject of some debate on the Putney SW15 website; it's also something that Labour Councillors in Wandsworth have been investigating.

The Essex plan is important because so few local Post Offices win reprieves once they have been tagged for closure. It's of course important that any deal between the Post Office and Council Tax payers don't just end up subsidising the branches instead of national taxpayers (every week, the Post Office needs a 2million subsidy).

I'd like Wandsworth Council to look at a similar deal to save the Lower Richmond Road and Putney Bridge Road Post Office branches. Whether or not they have the courage to follow Essex County Council's lead, there are other ways the council could support Post Offices - by making it possible for residents to collect council benefits and pay council tax or rent at local branches; even by combining housing offices with post offices, possibly as part of a one-stop-shop facility for the community. There are so many innovative and enterprising possibilities here.

I commend Essex County Council - a Conservative-run authority - for its innovation. It seems to me that this is now a fundamental test for Wandsworth's Conservative council. Are they genuinely committed to saving local Post Office branches and doing the right thing for local people - or in fact do they actually want to see the Post Offices closed so that local Conservatives can continue to play politics?

Why not attend the public meeting the Council's holding this Thursday at St Mary's Church, 7.30pm and find out?

Putney School of Art expansion

It's great to see that Putney School of Art in Oxford Road is set to expand after submitting a bid for Government Learning & Skills Council funding.

It's also good to see Wandsworth Council celebrating this success - not least given that not that long ago they tried to close Putney School of Art down: only thwarted by a spectacular groundswell of local opposition from the local community.

I'm reminded of the saying about there being no-one quite as enthusiastic as a sinner who repents. Let's hope the bid is successful, and that this kicks into touch forever any attempts by the Conservatives to close Putney School of Art and replace it with another luxury apartment building.

The risk of flooding

Yesterday the Environment Agency held an exhibition and consultation at St Mary's Church about its plans to protect riparian communities like Putney from the growing threat of flooding.

Although this is a chance for us to have a say over how the powers that be protect the Thames area from flood risk through to 2100, the exhibition was as much a chance to reassure residents that Putney and London are not at any imminent risk of severe tidal flooding.

Protecting against severe flooding also needs to be offset against, for example, the visual impact of flood barriers. Many would argue that a great concrete wall along the Putney embankment similar to the one in Barnes would not be worth the loss of our riverside vistas or accessibility to the foreshore for pedestrians and rowers alike.

The Environment Agency is also looking at protecting communities that live alongside the Thames's tributaries - in our neck of the woods that means those in Southfields and Wandsworth town living near the Wandle, and the Roehampton and Putney Common areas alongside Beverley Brook.

Given that both these areas experienced some flooding during last Summer's downpours, the Agency is looking at ways of diverting "fresh water" floodwater (as opposed to tidal floodwater) onto flood plain land and away from homes; meaning in the case of The Wandle onto King George's Park, and in respect of Beverley Brook Richmond Park and Barnes Common.

But the underlying message to come out of the consultation was that London is secure from flooding; the Thames Barrier - while it needs some strengthening - is still fit for purpose for decades to come; that we do not yet need a new barrier further towards the estuary and that communities like Putney, if we do experience flooding, will do so due to freak downpours of rain rather than tidal surges.

You can find out a whole lot more about the flood risk, what the Environment Agency is proposing to do to protect us, and have your own say, by visiting: www.environment-agency.gov.uk/te2100

Putney farmers' market returns

It was good to see that the farmers' market is now back in Church Square by St Mary's Church and the Odeon Cinema, after a couple of false starts earlier this year.

If you missed it today, it's back again tomorrow and every weekend from now on, between 10am and 3pm, with around 12 stands offering free-range meats, fresh fruit and veg Speciality Cheeses, Organic and Artisan Breads, Salads, Oils, pies, fresh flowers and much more.

This is one of the very few pleasant features of Putney High Street: the redevelopment of this riverside quarter - which the Conservative Council opposed - has really shown how new life can be breathed back into a town centre.

While we look forward, desperately, to the repaving of some more of the High Street - work again paid for not by the Council but by Ken Livingstone's Transport for London - this still leaves too much of Putney's town centre cluttered, grubby, grimy and run down.

The Putney Society are rightly heralding the repaving works but I hope they won't regard this as job done: I need them alongside me continuing to crusade for a Putney High Street we can all take some pride in.

Visit my Save Putney High Street campaign pages to give me your views on how we can improve our town centre.

Post Offices push unique web visitors past 2,000

Putney, Roehampton and Southfields residents wanting to register their concern about the Post Office's closure of local branches in the constituency helped set new records for this website in February for the fourth successive month.

2,091 different people visited last month - that's up from just over 1,700 in January; with two days exceeding 200 visits for the first time ever. It's really nice to see readership of my local site grow by so much every month - so thank you very much for visiting, and I hope you find the content beneficial.

As well as the obviously huge number of visits to my campaign pages to save the Lower Richmond Road and Putney Bridge Road post offices, the real problem dangerous dogs are causing continues to make my work on this issue the most viewed section of the site.

There's only so much growth a local website with a very specific focus like this one can go on experiencing, but I very much hope you'll keep returning here and telling your friends and neighbours about this source of news in your neck of the woods.

They don't even know which post offices they're closing!

I've just heard that the Post Office branch in Fulham Road, which the Post Office claims in its closure consultation notices is "in your area" as an alternative if they shut the Lower Richmond Road and Putney Bridge Road branches - is also being closed.

London Labour Mayor Ken Livingstone is already seeking a judicial review of the Post Office's consultation on the grounds that it is of insufficient length (among other arguments) - so, if correct, the fact that the Post Office are also publishing incorrect information and don't even seem to know which branches they're attempting to close can only strengthen this case.

A quick update: I received over 140 response cards today alone, so thank you so much to everyone who has replied so far. If you've yet to send your card back please do so; and if you live outside the area we delivered them to but still want to register your views, you can do so online.

Just go to www.stuartking.net/postoffice if you want to protest the closure of the Lower Richmond Road branch, or www.stuartking.net/post for the Putney Bridge Road branch. Or why not sign both petitions?!

UPDATE 29.02.2008: The Post Office is in fact closing the Fulham Road branch at the "Putney" end of Fulham Road - the one near the junction with Fulham Palace Road; the branch referred to in their closures paper is staying open but this is the Parson's Green branch right up near Fulham Library.

Our Post Office campaign gets going

This weekend local volunteers delivered letters, posters and campaign response cards to around 4,000 homes (and 6,000+ residents) in Putney that will be affected by The Post Office's plans to close two of their branches.

If you've been out and about in Putney Bridge Road and Lower Richmond Road over the past couple of days, maybe you'll have seen that we've enlisted the support of lots of local businesses who are also displaying our "Don't K.O. our P.O." posters.

I was able to visit both local branches this weekend. Outrageously, the Post Office forced the Postmaster in Putney Bridge Road to sign a document promising not to help those of us fighting to keep his branch open: and while I'm not sure what they could do if he reneged on that promise (shut him down? - oh no, been there, done that!) being an honourable man he is abiding by his word.

That hasn't stopped us though. The Post Office thinks that just delivering four or five boxes of their "consultation" leaflets to the branches affected meets their obligation towards giving the community a reasonable say. It does not. That's why it's so important that, if you value the service your local Post Office branch provides, you write to The Post Office expressing your views; you sign my petition; you display a poster and you encourage your friends, neighbours, work colleagues and anyone else you can think of to do the same.

What's becoming clear is that The Post Office is not basing its decision on any in-depth analysis of the local economic and geographical circumstances of each branch they're proposing to close. In fact, their closure plan is so random I wonder whether they just stuck pins in a map blindfolded.

The response to my campaign has already been impressive. I'll keep you informed regularly here, but if you haven't registered your views yet please do so at:

Lower Richmond Road Post Office: www.stuartking.net/postoffice
Putney Bridge Road Post Office: www.stuartking.net/post

Don't K.O. our P.O.

I learnt late yesterday afternoon that plans have been published to close two of our local Post Office branches in Lower Richmond Road, on the corner of Erpingham Road AND in Putney Bridge Road, near Oxford Road.

Anyone who's been around in Putney for more than five minutes will know that Lower Richmond Road has already lost a post office, a few years ago, and this plan will remove any proximity to postal services for a community relatively isolated, bordered on three sides by Putney Common, the river Thames and the mainline railway.

That's why it's frankly laughable for The Post Office to claim that "in the area" are no less than five other branches: one in Barnes, two in Fulham and the others in Upper Richmond Road: a good half an hour's walk or two bus journeys just to get there.



I'm not someone who believes that post offices deserve to be kept open by some divine right. The public is subsidising the Post Office to the tune of 3 million a week because of the losses they are making. Where, in the past there have been duplicate services in close proximity and branches that are hardly used, it is right that Royal Mail considers their future. But these branches are not duplicates - they're busy and popular - and perhaps most significantly of all the area they serve is a genuine community that values their post offices.

Those are the reasons I've launched the campaign to save the Lower Richmond Road Post Office - you can find out more at www.stuartking.net/postoffice. If you're in the area surrounding the Lower Richmond Road or Putney Bridge Road post offices you'll be hearing from me soon with ways to get involved and help stop this K.O. of our P.O. - but I'd welcome your support where ever you live and whichever political party you vote for: this isn't a party political issue.

We have until 2nd April to make our views known about the closure plans: as well as signing my online petition you can also write direct to Anita Turner, Network Development Manager, Post Office Ltd, FREEPOST CONSULTATION TEAM or email consultation@postoffice.co.uk. If you could copy me in to your submission this will help strengthen our collective voice against these plans.

Save Putney Bridge Road Post Office campaign now live

I've now set up campaign pages to help residents living near the Putney Bridge Road Post Office, also threatened with closure. This is the second Putney branch the Post Office is seeking to close, after they announced plans to close the one in Lower Richmond Road yesterday.

So, if you want to support the campaign to save Putney Bridge Road post office, please click here.

And a reminder that if you want to support the campaign to save Lower Richmond Road post office, please click here.



Of course, you're very welcome to support both campaigns - the more responses, the stronger our case! And if you intend to respond directly to the consultation, do please copy me into your letter, as it will help strengthen our collective voice. The consultation address to write to can be found on the campaign pages above; to copy me in, e-mail me at stuart.king@putneylabour.org.uk, or write to me at Putney Labour Party, 35 Felsham Road, SW15 1AY.

Out and about in Horne Way

My campaign team and I, along with local London Assembly candidate Councillor Leonie Cooper, were in Horne Way - also known as the Ranelagh Estate - just beside Putney Common earlier today. This is a pleasant estate of nine 1930s blocks, nestled alongside Beverley Brook at the end of Sefton Street.

But it could be even better with a little more care and attention from the Council. We spoke to almost 100 residents in just a couple of hours. Several residents had complaints about outstanding repairs, problems with rats (given the proximity to the Brook), and no-one had ever seen their Conservative councillors - who include the Leader of the Council - on the estate.

Some residents were also really concerned about the plans by Richmond's Liberal Democrat-run Council to sell off a huge chunk of next-door Barn Elms playing fields when we told them about it. And some residents were also very keen to get the ball rolling on the redevelopment of Putney Hospital, so that they can benefit from excellent NHS healthcare on their doorstep once again.

I have recently been in touch with the office of the Minister responsible for sorting out the legal technicalities that have been delaying the work to the Hospital, and hope to be able to report progress soon. I want work to be able to commence later this year so we get these new health facilities we all deserve.

The sell-off and sell-out of Barn Elms

Barn Elms is a local treasure. It provides acres of school playing fields and other recreational facilities right on the edge of our borough, just across Beverley Brook.

Now, Liberal Democrat-run Richmond Council is planning to sell-off a sizeable chunk of the site - which would include the athletics track - to a private developer for a luxury sports centre most of us will never be able to afford.

By now, I'd have thought politicians of all colours would have understood that the consequence of selling off playing fields is unfit children and worsening obesity. That self-evident truth is clearly lost on Richmond Liberal Democrats.

Before joining my current Sunday league football side based in Roehampton Vale, I played for Fulham Compton Old Boys which was based on Putney Common just behind Barn Elms - so I'm not just sounding off about this issue - I've directly benefited from this local open space for sport.

As someone heavily involved in politics, I come across so many examples of the Liberal Democrats hypocrisy over issues like this. Just google "Liberal Democrat playing field sell off" and you'll get a tirade of examples of Lib Dems campaigning to defend playing fields - it was even a manifesto pledge of theirs - and just as many examples of Lib Dem councils selling them off. Richmond is just the latest.

Of course, it's easy to be against sell-off. Successive councils have evidently struggled to generate revenue from Barn Elms, which is no doubt a substantial drain on council tax. Equally, councils have shown time and time again that they are not the best entrepreneurs around - ill equiped to market themselves or their assets to the maximum and often excluded from applying for grants from outside sources to help finance them.

In such circumstances, I'd like serious consideration given to creating a trust or conservatorship for Barn Elms - to protect this precious land from the short-termist instincts of councillors and establish an organisation solely responsible for and interested in the protection, preservation and success of Barn Elms.

The Tories' "affordable" housing scam

Two examples of how Wandsworth Council and their developer friends are making a laughing stock of affordable housing targets have come to light this week.

The first is that the Conservative definition of an affordable home is 250,000 for the tiniest one bedroom flat on the Riverside Quarter development just past Wandsworth Park.

As usual with Wandsworth Conservatives, they've refused to build a single affordable home for rent as part of this huge scheme while the proportion of so-called affordable homes here is barely 15%, despite requirements to make 50% of these huge developments affordable.

Now the Council will say that anyone interested in their poky quarter-of-a-million pound flats (which have all been bunged close to the railway line - the Tories don't believe ordinary Wandsworth residents deserve riverside views) only has to buy a minimum 25% share of that - and for some a 62,500 mortgage is more attainable than one for 250,000.

But that's not the end of the costs. Because while you're repaying that 62,500 mortgage (that's an outgoing of roughly 450 a month) you also have to pay rent on the 75% you don't own - so add another 260 a month to that total. Plus, these are serviced blocks - so add the service charges on top.

And then, if that wasn't crippling enough, I was contacted just today by a resident of the 'affordable' section of Castle Court, which is part of the Brewhouse Lane development by Putney Bridge. For the privilege of being able to park off-street (which she has to, because the council has disqualified residents of these developments from owning a residents' parking permit) her landlord, St George, is demanding the outrageous sum of 12,000!

All this adds up to totally unaffordable 'affordable' housing. It's nothing short of a scandal that whilst our local housing crisis grows ever worse the Conservatives block affordable homes, have the front to claim a 250,000 flat is affordable, and allow their developer chums to fleece those local families.

AirTrack

Today, I'm launching my Putney4AirTrack campaign.

AirTrack is a proposal for a rail service between Heathrow and Waterloo. The beauty of the idea is that 96% of the track for this service already exists so it's an incredibly affordable infrastructure scheme - all that's required is for a spur of just 4km between Staines and Heathrow itself to be built.

The plan is for AirTrack services to run every 10 minutes in both directions; with end-to-end rail journeys of between 35 and 45 minutes. The service is forecast to reduce car journeys by 5,000 in the morning rush hour alone.

It's such a great scheme that it really is surprising that it hasn't been done already. The concern is that AirTrack appears to being linked with development of a third runway at Heathrow - but there really is no reason it has to be: AirTrack is a stand-alone viable scheme that will provide a vital south-of-the-river service to complement and relieve the Piccadilly Line.

The other big issue for us locally is that at present, the service isn't planned to stop at Putney: the nearest station to us will be Clapham Junction. Obviously, it's important for the service to get to and from Heathrow quickly, but Putney is the largest population area between Clapham Junction and Staines, with a large number of Heathrow users.

To support my Putney4AirTrack campaign, click here.

For a larger version of the AirTrack map above, click here.

And for more on the AirTrack proposal, click here.

Out and about in Upper Richmond Road

My campaign team and I spent some of yesterday campaigning in the area around Upper Richmond Road. I thought I'd share a couple of the photos we took of Putney: both are from the top of Ormonde Court, one of the apartment blocks on Upper Richmond Road.



In the foreground are the backs of houses in Norroy Road - in the very bottom right is the railway line. In the background, centre-right, is Putney Wharf Tower. You can't see it on the low resolution picture above, but if you click on it you'll get a higher resolution version in which the London Eye is visible almost in the centre.



...And this one is of Putney looking west - again, the back of Norroy Road in the foreground, the trees of Putney Common on the far left. And if you click on the photo above, you should be able to make out the arch of the new Wembley Stadium in the distance.

As you can see from the sky, and will know if you were out yesterday too, while it was a bit nippy it was an otherwise lovely day, and good to be busy in the constituency.

Oh, and if you're someone who we contacted yesterday - or even if you aren't - do please take five minutes to complete my online residents' survey.

Putney stays safe

December saw very little change in our crime figures - Putney remains one of the safest parts of London with very much safer streets in almost every part of the constituency than anywhere else in the borough or capital.

Crime fell again in Roehampton, Southfields, West Hill and West Putney - in the case of Southfields markedly, suggesting that November's much higher figures were a blip. West Hill and West Putney wards have a crime rate almost half that of the London average: a remarkable figure and testament to the work of the local Police Community Support teams that are making such a difference to our patch.

But I'm getting really concerned about the level of theft and mugging in Putney town centre, which is behind the high Thamesfield crime figures.

Three years ago the Tory Council had the opportunity of introducing town centre patrollers to Putney - the Government had funded them in Clapham Junction and Tooting town centres with the result that street crime fell by a third. But instead of seizing the chance to make Putney High Street safer, the Council refused to find the funds to employ them (an amount equivalent to about 5p per week on council tax) - and worse still, sacked the ones in Clapham Junction and Tooting.

Correcting this situation and bringing town centre patrollers to Putney is one of the ten points in my Save Putney High Street campaign. Please complete my Save Putney High Street survey and give me your views on how to cut crime in the town centre, and on other aspects of the problems blighting the area.



Here are the crime figures for December by ward, with comparisons for the whole borough and Greater London:




And here, as usual, is the previous month's table for comparison:

The sorry tale of a Putney pub banning Putney people

You may have picked up on the outrageous treatment of long-time Putney residents by the management of the Queen Adelaide Pub in Putney Bridge Road just on the corner of Oakhill Road - it is after all front page in this week's Borough News and centre of debate on the putneysw15 discussion forum.

For years and years, a group of Putney residents - several of them personal friends of mine - have been part of a cricket team that plays on Wandsworth Park - and which has socialised at the Queen Adelaide following matches.

Now they have been banned by the pub manager who told them "they clearly weren't happy" drinking there! The absurd reason the pub claims for kicking them out is that they have been rowdy and abusive. This despite no complaints ever having been raised with them prior to their ban.

This isn't some rowdy gang of lager-louts; it is a group of young at heart, responsible, long-standing Putney residents. Of all the reasons they are no longer welcome there, improper behaviour is the most incredible. Far more likely that they no longer fit with the Pub's corporate image.

In recent years the Queen Adelaide seems to have lost its character after being made-over to pander towards a new luxury riverside development clientele. To be honest I'm surprised surprised the brewery - Young's - seems so relaxed by this story. It's time they realised the mistake this is before all their good will is lost through such clumsy public relations.

And the good news is that the cricket team has been taken in by the Bricklayer's Arms in Waterman Street - still a genuine local pub for Putney.

Putney Station improvements

I've just received an email from the Area Manager of South West Trains confirming that Putney Station is to get some new cash-and-card ticket machines in March. This is the first of a series of improvements to Putney Station I've been campaigning for as part of my Save Putney High Street campaign.

The state of Putney Station is pretty dreadful; aside from being inaccessible and congested very little has been spent on the station by the operators, SWT, for years, so it has become shabby as well.

I think it was a mistake years ago to let-out so much of the station's floorspace to shops and takeaways - while I'm sure it's a nice little earner for SWT and Network Rail, it has meant that what's left of the station can't cope with rush-hour commuters surging in and out.

That mistake in turn led to another bad decision: to site two of the ticket dispensers outside the station, further congesting a very busy area where several buses stop and where the shops clutter up the pavement by setting out their goods. My Save Putney High Street plan proposed moving the ticket machines back inside and making the news kiosk again face out, which I suspect will also be better for their trade.

Because of the more radical improvements planned for Putney Station I'll write about soon, as well as getting a much needed revamp, there will be sufficient space created to achieve these goals. In the meantime, we'll have to make do with extra ticket vending machines, which is at least a first step in the right direction.

Wandsworth Park stabbing

You may have read that on Boxing Day a teenager was stabbed in Brandlehow Road, near Wandsworth Park. Our community has now become part of this worrying and unacceptable crime.

This is an issue that must be thoroughly debated in the run-up to May's Mayoral and Assembly elections, because the politicians who run the Metropolitan Police Authority - and are therefore accountable for the response to knife crime - are the Mayor and Assembly members.

One of the New Year priorities I'd like to see from the Police is far greater involvement in our schools and communities; something where our Safer Neighbourhoods teams have begun making an impact. It seems to me that one of the clearest reasons why we as a whole feel less safe on our streets despite crime actually falling markedly over the past ten years is because we no longer know our local police officers. SNTs are gradually changing that - and this is the underpinning of the continuing fall in crime I'll report on shortly with November's crime figures.

That's also a key election issue in May because the choice will be between Labour who have introduced dozens of SNT officers to Putney and the Conservatives who voted against them, attack them at every turn and will axe them if elected. Who says elections don't matter?

Council tree ban - what's the real story?

The Wandsworth Guardian today reports on a campaign by a resident of Felsham Road, close to my campaign HQ, to get some trees planted in nearby Mascotte Street. The Council has claimed that the reason they won't plant any is a fear of damaging the houses and that it costs too much. But that's a strange argument on any number of levels.

First that hasn't stopped them planting trees in any number of streets throughout the borough. Second, any Arboriculturalist will tell you that trees' roots seek out water - so they only attempt to bury into houses if, for example, a sewer is cracked and leaking or where there is major damp - in which case the householder has far more serious problems than trees! Where a house is well looked after there should be no threat of structural damage - especially if trees of a scale appropriate to the streetscape are planted.

I very much doubt that residents of the small terraced steets behin Putney High Street are seeking massive Oaks, Sycamores or Horse Chestnut trees; but modest Rowan or Crab Apple trees would improve the area no end.

In fact, the most common reason why street trees can't be planted is because of underground cables and pipes that we all rely on for electricity, phonelines, cable TV, gas and water. Even in these cases there is usually enough space for one or two trees in any given street, but the council hasn't even ventured that as an excuse this time around.

So come on Wandsworth Council - stop conjouring up scare stories and instead get back to greening Putney! The Guardian story is here.

Christmas could be better if we had a smarter High Street

I was in Putney High Street earlier today - and I have to say that when it is cold and raining, then alongside all the other problems: the litter, the uneven, greasy paving, the pavement clutter, the traffic gridlock and the ongoing gradual decline in quality shops it is one of my least favourite places in the constituency.

Contrast the state of Putney High Street with the hugely successful pedestrianisation of Oxford Street and surrounding areas in the run-up to Christmas.

Now, obviously, there's a limit to how far we can compare London's shopping district with Putney's, but I can compare the dynamism, leadership and (though I hate the term) vision of Westminster Council and London Mayor Ken Livingstone with our own council - that won't even concede that a single thing is wrong with Putney High Street.

This isn't an issue that's going to go away, not least because the Council simply refuses to pay any attention to the - entirely legitimate - concerns residents, The Putney Society, Putney Labour Party and I will continue to raise until we get action. And it's not a party political issue: Westminster Council is Conservative-run as is Kensington & Chelsea, which has done great things to improve High Street Ken; just as Labour did with Fulham Broadway when we administered Hammersmith & Fulham.

The utter disdain our Council has for our High Street can be seen in the sorry excuse for Christmas lights that "adorn" the High Street's lamp-posts. For the umpteenth year in a row dug out from whatever mouldy basement storeroom they cram them into they epitomise the Conservatives' lack of pride in Putney.

The Tories will say they're being frugal with taxpayers' money. I say that their "bah, humbug" scrooge approach to Christmas is pathetically mean and counter productive: the High Street was hardly crammed full of shoppers today - just two shopping weekends before Christmas. By investing in our High Street shoppers are far more likely to invest in Putney.

I've set out a commonsense ten-point plan that would transform the High Street without costing the earth. Click here to visit my Save Putney High Street campaign page, or join my Putney High Street facebook group.

Our Safer Neighbourhood Teams

Putney now has forty Police Safer Neighbourhood Officers - members of teams that didn't exist just four years ago, and which we wouldn't have if the Conservatives had their way - they opposed all funding of them.

Here are the details of our six local ward teams along with any details of forthcoming events they're holding:

East Putney Team

Acting Sgt Matt Snowden
PC Sandrine Tanghe
PC Russ Percy
PCSO Simoni Simoni
PCSO Alison Brownlow
PCSO Douglas Cameron
PCSO Kelly Collins
PCSO Claire Fairman
PCSO Paul Henry

Write to them at: Jubilee House, 230-232 Putney Bridge Road, London SW15 2PD
Phone:020 8721 2433
Mobile: 07920 233925
Email the East Putney team

Upcoming East Putney team meetings and events:

• 28/11/2007 - 19:30 - 21:30 - Community Event - Cadets, Lytton Grove
• 09/12/2007 - 11:30 - 13:30 - Street Briefing - West Hill Road
• 17/01/2008 - 19:00 - 20:30 - Public Meeting - Putney High School
• 28/01/2008 - 18:00 - 19:00 - Community Event - Brownies, Wandsworth Police Station
• 31/01/2008 - 19:00 - 20:30 - Public Meeting - London Mosque

Roehampton Team

Sgt Peter Salmon
PC Andrew Voong
PC Amanda Kennedy
PCSO Lisa Burke
PCSO Noel Perkins
PCSO Nicky Edwardes
PCSO Fuad Osman
PCSO Marco Serrano

Write to them at: Jubilee House, 230-232 Putney Bridge Road, LondonSW15 2PD
Phone: 020 8649 3551
Mobile: 07843 065885
Email the Roehampton team


Southfields Team

Sgt David Mepham
PC Darren Hunt
PCSO Liam McLaughlin
PCSO Jacek Zebracki
PCSO Alexandra Claridge
Write to them at: 146 Wandsworth High Street, LondonSW18 4JJ
Phone:020 8721 2429
Mobile: 07920 233931
Email the Southfields team


Thamesfield Team

Sgt Roger Chapple
PC Bosede Odelusi
PC Stuart Paton
PCSO Gerald Baffoe-Bonnie
PCSO Sophie Wood
PCSO Julie Kirk

Write to them at: Jubilee House, 230 - 232 Putney Bridge Road, LondonSW15 2PD
Phone:020 8721 2434
Mobile: 07920 233924
Email the Thamesfield team


West Hill Team

Sgt Nigel Mussett
PC Glen Cheal
PC Mark Toulson
PCSO Daniel Taylor
PCSO Lisa Tyler
PCSO Laura Smith
PCSO Kirsteen McPhee
PCSO Andrew Morgan

Write to them at: 146 Wandsworth High Street, LondonSW18 4JJ
Phone: 020 8721 243
Mobile: 007920 233930
Email the West Hill team

Upcoming West Hill team meetings and events:

• 01/12/2007 - 12:00 - 14:00 - Drop-in Surgery - 26 Montfort Place SW19
• 05/01/2008 - 12:00 - 14:00 - Drop-in Surgery - 26 Montfort Place SW19

West Putney Team

Sgt Eric Ostrowski
PC Stuart Baggaley
PCSO Sharon Ellis
PCSO Michael Yates

Write to them at: Jubilee House, 230-232 Putney Bridge Road, LondonSW15 2PD
Phone: 020 8721 2760
Mobile: 07747 757590
Email the West Putney team

Congratulations to Our Lady of Victories Primary

Our Lady of Victories Primary School in Clarendon Drive was again ranked in the Sunday Times' Top 25 state primary schools in the country this week. My congratulations to the pupils, staff, governors and parents for making this such a great school.

Council office-block loophole causing problems

Like other councils, Wandsworth has rules to stop radical changes of use of buildings - so houses can't usually be converted into shops, shops into nightclubs and so on. Such policies are important to preserve the identity of our area, keep residential areas residential and shopping areas vibrant.

Last week I met with a local solicitor, whose firm leases quite a large amount of office space in Upper Richmond Road. He told me that the owners of his building had indicated that they will not be extending the lease when it expires so that they can exploit a loophole in council planning policy that, if not dealt with soon will have major impact on Putney's economy. The same has occurred elsewhere in Putney and we will soon lose local lawyers Capsticks from Upper Richmond Road.

This is because a loophole in Wandsworth's planning rules says that if a property is left derelict for long enough, planning regulations relating to a change of use can be waived. The consequence - and this is another side-effect of the local housing crisis - is that land for housing is at such a premium in Putney that it is now in the interests of landowners who hold purpose-built office blocks to keep them empty and then, once they qualify, change the use to housing, then sell up at a huge profit.

At first glance, no-one - least of all me - is going to weep at the demolition of the ugly post war blocks along Upper Richmond Road between East Putney tube and Putney Hill. But think about the number of people that work in those ugly blocks: the business they bring to local shops, cafes and restaurants - and the impact their loss will have on our economy. It's not just shops and bars that are the measure of a vibrant Putney town centre; it's the less visible office economy too.

I hope that the current council consultation on its new Local Development Framework (its planning Bible) will address this problem and offer better protection to the local office buioding stock.

We agree: shop fronts do matter

I genuinely welcome the Council's decision to force a couple of shops in Lower and Upper Richmond Roads to remove the ugly steel security shutters that seal them off after closing time each night.

As Planning Committee Chairman and Putney Conservative Councillor Leslie McDonnell says:

"Shopping streets should be vibrant and welcoming but these shutters present an intimidating, fortress-like facade. There are better ways in which shop-owners can secure their premises and make them more attractive."

I couldn't agree more. But the council can't have it both ways. It cannot say that the appearance of shops is fundamental to the success of our shopping areas and at the same time credibly maintain its opposition to my campaign to smarten up Putney High Street - a central measure of which is tighter control of the appearance of shop fronts and grants to help introduce higher standards and a common visual identity for the whole town centre. To date the council has said that it's neither something they have the power to enforce, nor is interfering with private businesses a matter it should engage with. And yet in the case of these two shops above, that's exactly what the council's done.

The reality is that this is all about local leadership: it's not that the council can't take action to improve the High Street - it's that your councillors and MP, all of whom are Conservative, simply lack the will and imagination to lead on this issue.

You can read more about my Save Putney High Street campaign, take my survey to feed back your ideas, and add your support by clicking here.

Thames Water must put their house in order

I am one of those who thinks that Thames Water got off lightly earlier today with their 12 million OFWAT fine.

A newly published report by the Health Protection Agency has just found that on less than 1% of days when water from the river Thames was tested levels of hazardous bio-organisms were within acceptable World Health Organisation (WHO) levels.

One of the main reasons for this is that whenever it rains very heavily, Thames Water can't cope with the sewage and so jettison it straight into the Thames, upstream of Putney. This is disgusting, unhealthy and damaging to wildlife - not to mention rowers. It has to stop.

Thames Water have a track record. They have the worst record on broken pipes and water leaks of any water company in the UK. Last year they cut pressure through their mains which required extra pumps to be installed (at residents' expense) in blocks in Roehampton and West Hill. Their poor customer service is the reason for the record OFWAT fine.

It just isn't good enough for Thames Water to whine that instead of being fined this money could have been invested in improved service. Yes, it could: but this is the same company that last year claimed they couldn't improve upon pipe repairs because they were doing the absolute best possible. Well, a filthy river isn't the best possible. Cutting supplies isn't the best possible. Wasting water through record leaks whilst lecturing the rest of us on conserving water isn't the best possible. And record profits coupled with huge water rate increases isn't the best possible. Thames Water: must do better.

You can read the Health Protection Agency report here.

The Bricklayer's Arms

It is nice to see that the much improved Bricklayer's Arms public house in Waterman Street off Lower Richmond Road has received recognition at last. It beat thousands of pubs across the capital to scoop the Greater London Pub of the Year Award from CAMRA, the real ale enthusiasts.

Congratulations to Becky Newman and John Marklew who have overseen the turning around of this once notorious pub. I was in there last week and can attest to its warm welcome and cosy atmosphere. A welcome change from some of the clone pubs in our town centre.

The pub even has a website: http://www.bricklayers-arms.co.uk/

UPDATE - 16.09.2007:
The Wandsworth Borough News has also picked up on this - read their story here.

Open House 2007

Next weekend (15th and 16th September) is Open House 2007, when hundreds of interesting and historic buildings - many which are usually inaccessible - are opened to the public.

There is, sadly, only one such building in Putney: the recent extension to Brandlehow Nursery School near Wandsworth Park. For an area with such history as ours, I am sure that there are far more opportunities to open house in Putney, Roehampton and Southfields and this is something I will be working hard to achieve as your MP.

There are more Open House sites elsewhere in the borough and nearby, including the Quaker Meeting House in Wandsworth High Street, the De Morgan Centre next door to West Hill Library, the beautiful, gothic Royal Victoria Patriotic Building on Wandsworth Common and, just up the road, Emmanuel School.

If you'd like to see where Britain's leading architects work, then Sir Norman Foster's studios on Battersea Riverside at 22 Hester Road (and why not visit the lovely St Mary's Church in Battersea Park Road on your way?) or Lord Richard Rogers' Partnership offices, next door to the River Cafe in Rainville Road, Fulham, will be open.

Surprisingly, St Mary's Church by Putney Bridge isn't on the list this year - surprising given that this October marks the 360th anniversary of the Putney Debates which took place there. But across the river All Saints Church is open - a great opportunity to enjoy the view of Putney riverside from its tower. And nearby, one of Fulham's often overlooked treasures: Fulham Palace, the former home of the Bishop of London, tucked behind Bishops Park: just restored.

You can find out more about all the Open House venues in London this year by visiting the website: http://www.londonopenhouse.org/london/home.html

Putney High Street

There's been a lot of coverage and some discussion locally about last Friday's accident when a shop hoarding collapsed, injuring - in one case seriously - two passers by.

I send my condolences, and wishes for a speedy recovery to the two injured and welcome the Health & Safety inquiry launched by the Council.

Some have been questioning the common sense of a shop - any shop - choosing to have a hoarding made of concrete (or at least what was designed to look like concrete, and which was incredibly heavy anyway). I have sympathy with this view.

It was one of the reasons why my Save Putney High Street campaign launched in Autumn 2005 called for both far tighter design standards for the High Street and a shop front improvements scheme.

We proposed such ideas to try to smarten up our High Street - which any impartial observer must agree (still) looks cluttered and grubby almost two years on - but clearly to ensure some consistency in both safety standards and visual quality. This incident, while entirely unforeseen, suggests that the Council was at best unwise and at worst negligent in dismissing out of hand our ideas simply because local Labour supporters rather than Conservatives had proposed them.

Some progress in improving Putney High Street - but nowhere near enough - has been made since the last council elections: mainly thanks to London Mayor Ken Livingstone coming up with investment for aspects of the street scene that the Council is actually responsible for funding.

This isn't just about the Council. We need co-ordinated action from Transport for London, Network Rail and the train companies (to improve Putney Station), the Government's Departments for Transport and Enterprise (to deal with the impact of traffic on the area and to stimulate business growth locally), local businesses and, yes, the Council. What is clear is that the past two years since the Putney Society and my Labour team raised our concerns about the neglect of Putney High Street have been characterised by inaction and lack of imagination. What we need is local leadership. Putney simply isn't getting it from its Conservative MP and councillors.

Links on the hoarding incident:

• Wandsworth Guardian coverage


• putneysw15 website news story


• putneysw15 website discussion forum