Tattenhams Residents Association - Tattenhams Residents' Association

BEACON SCHOOL - OUT OF ‘SPECIAL MEASURES’

The Beacon School has been taken out of special measures in just 11 months.

Schools watchdog Ofsted has ruled that Beacon School no longer requires special measures following an inspection and report issued before Christmas.

The Banstead school was placed in special measures following an inspection in December 2007 and a new interim head teacher, Mrs Jennifer Thomas, was appointed in January 2008. She was given the job permanently in May.

In his report, Lead Inspector Barry Jones said: “A remarkable amount has been achieved in a relatively short time. The new head teacher has led its recovery remarkably well. She has galvanised the staff and is ably supported by her new management team. Visitors to the school comment positively on the transformation in the school ethos. Consequently, the school’s reputation in the
community is growing.”

He added: “There is better teaching, rising standards and achievement and attendance has significantly improved. The 2008 GCSE results* were the best ever. The school’s monitoring shows that this trend is continuing and that the school is on track to further raise standards in 2009.” (* 51% gained 5 or more grade A* – C GCSE’s, or equivalent, and A level results showed real value added.)

Mr Jones also said: “The catalyst for the improved fortunes of the school is the excellent head teacher. Where she has led, others have followed. Teachers’ expectations of what students can achieve have been raised.”

In two of the eight categories – pupils’ personal development and well-being; leadership and management – the Beacon was given the second highest rating (good), while overall the school has been given a satisfactory overall grade, with the inspector indicating it has the capacity to continue improving.

Peter Martin, Surrey County Council’s Executive Member for Schools, Children and Youth Services, said: “This is excellent news and I congratulate everyone, from the head Jennie Thomas to the teachers and pupils, for turning around the school’s fortunes in an incredibly short time. The hard work and effort that must have gone in to achieving this is impressive, and I’m looking forward to seeing the school go from strength to strength.”

Head teacher Mrs Thomas said: “This inspection report recognises all the progress we have made over just a few short months and everybody at the school can be rightly proud of this. Now the challenge is to maintain the rate of improvement – and we’ll do that together. We know there are areas where we can do better and we’ll tackle those in the same determined way that we worked towards getting out of special measures.”

FROM THE CHAIRMAN

Residents’ Association Autumn Meeting

This occasion was devoted mainly to the proposals and implications of the South East Plan for extra housing in our area, and the Borough’s ‘Local Development Framework’ which sets out the detailed policies to respond to the Plan. We are grateful to Councillor Mike Miller for his presentation.

Ben Skipp then updated residents on the Local Community Action Plan (LCAP), as described in the last newsletter.

At the end of the evening those present were invited to complete a draft consultation response, and these, plus previously signed responses, were taken by hand to the Government Offices in Guildford. We took a total of just under a 100 forms.

The attendance at this joint Tattenhams/Nork meeting was 77 plus guests – an excellent turnout.

Federation of Banstead & District Residents’ Associations

The purpose of this body is for RA’s to join together with a stronger voice whenever extra support is needed. In 2008 such a response was prompted by increased inappropriate planning applications from developers. Recently the proposed South East Plan had encouraged more development, although for the time being, the financial crisis will curb this activity.

Meanwhile, the Federation meets four times a year to ensure that the North of the Borough is fairly dealt with. We are grateful to Toyota for generously providing the Federation with meeting facilities at their local headquarters.

Roads

Potholes continue to be a problem, but we constantly pursue repairs, with a consolidated list of problems we are aware of submitted monthly by your County Councillor. Measures have been taken to reduce flooding, and the soakaway in Great Tattenhams has been rebored again; exceptional rainfall still collects in Downland Way but it is now noticeably quicker to clear.

Litter

Despite much national and local publicity, dropped litter and fly-tipping still spoils our environment and results in an unnecessary burden on our Council Tax. This autumn, Committee members and friends joined in the voluntary clear up scheme (badged as ‘Love Where You Live’) and tackled the section of Burgh Heath adjacent to Chetwode Road. We collected plenty of rubbish, including a large amount of glass bottles and tin cans. We are now seeking assistance from the Banstead Commons Conservators for equipment to safely clean up the pond at that location.

The 2009 Budget

The current economic climate will greatly affect local government income and services. Both the County Council (£20 million) and Borough Council (£15.5 million) have money in Iceland. Initial statements were put out that there would be no immediate impact on local services. Note the word immediate! Inevitably there will be an impact in the coming year – either in council tax, the level of services or in longer-term projects – or probably all three. As for council tax, preliminary forecasts are for a 4 to 5% increase, the maximum before the councils are normally capped.

Thank you

I wish to thank our RA.Councillors, Committee and Road Stewards for the time they have spent in 2008, identifying and distributing information, and helping to deal with local problems and issues.

John Butcher, Chairman

TATTENHAMS PLANNING APPLICATIONS

Care Home Application, Tattenham Crescent: We still await the government inspector’s visit and decision on the appeal for 36 ‘extra-care’ flats, next to the Health Centre at Tattenham Corner. The scheme involves the destruction of four family houses and their replacement by a very dominant and out of character block of flats, with almost no parking.

Long Walk Garage Site: We reported last time that Raven Housing Trust had received approval to convert the central garage site into 6 houses and 6 flats.

The approval required them to be offered on a ‘part buy, part let’ (shared ownership) basis, and therefore to be taken up by people with a real stake in the area. However, because of the crisis in the housing market, these sorts of mortgages are not available at the current time, and therefore the Trust asked for the permission to be changed so the new properties can be fully rented.

The Residents’ Association asked the Trust and the Council to reconsult neighbours about this change in tenure, but only one letter of objection was received, and the change has now been approved. A condition attached to the revised planning permission is that an equivalent number of Trust properties in the area will switch to shared ownership when market conditions allow.

Parking remains a major issue. The 7 additional bays by Chetwode Road / Broad Walk have been given planning permission, and the site at the eastern end of Long Walk next to Burgh Heath, previously used by contractors, is to be brought back into parking use for 12 vehicles. This new parking must be in use before work starts on the new houses and flats. The Trust have now submitted their application for 5 extra spaces at the western end of Long Walk; the application for 5 spaces in St Leonards Road has been withdrawn, following strong feedback from residents.

142 Brighton Road: This application involves the demolition of a house and its replacement by 4 houses on this site, which also incorporates neighbouring back gardens. The site is cramped and impinges on the historic Tangier Wood. The Council won an appeal against a 5-house scheme, and has now won a further appeal on this slightly less dense application.

46 – 48 Waterer Gardens: The first proposal for a cramped development of 9 so-called town houses on this corner site was refused. A second application for 7 houses was also refused, and was withdrawn before a decision was reached on appeal. A third application has now come forward; this is in many respects ‘worse’ than the second application, and we would therefore anticipate that the council planners will also refuse. As always, the applicant will have the right to make an appeal.

Chapel Grove: Raven has been granted approval to build a small modern terrace of three houses in an empty plot behind Merland Rise and next to Epsom Downs School. Raven was severely criticized for pre-emptive felling of some large trees on the site. Neighbours have concerns about overlooking and parking. The Council asked for reductions in the size of the houses, additional parking and an improved layout of the front gardens, all of which were accommodated. Concerns about overlooking could not be satisfied, as the distances between the windows of old and new properties all exceed the national minimum standards.

Extensions: This page of the newsletter necessarily dwells on the major applications in Tattenhams. The majority – over 90 % - of applications are for household extensions, where local people want to improve their living accommodation, cater for a growing family etc. It is often more cost effective to build on rather than move. The majority of these – again well over 90% - sail through the planning department where they are approved by officers without going to the Planning Committee. There are a series of booklets which discuss what is possible and what is not. Provided these guidelines are followed, then the application is usually approved. The major issues which come up are: significant overlooking of neighbours, dominating neighbour’s properties, and out of character changes. We always urge residents to talk to their neighbours before submitting an application. They will always find out when the planning application is submitted! Often, there are design improvements which can help satisfy your neighbour’s reasonable concerns.

SO WHY ARE OUR ROADS SO BAD?

The County Council’s Transportation Select Committee has recently reviewed the roads maintenance programme. Our local County Councillor, Nick Harrison, sits on this committee and he reports on their findings.

What is the brief of the Select Committee?

This Committee has the remit to review and scrutinise the County’s highways service and other transport matters. Just like parliamentary select committees, it has no power to direct council officers on how money is spent or raise additional budgets – that power is held by the County’s Executive Committee (the ‘cabinet’). However, it does review policies and the performance of the Council.

Why are our roads so bad?

The short answer is that Surrey has a huge backlog of maintenance work and a limited budget. Surrey has almost 3,000 miles of roads, and very significant traffic volumes from both Surrey’s residents and those passing through the County, all of which impact the condition of the roads.

Just how bad are they?

The table below shows how these roads are divided between the primary A-roads, B and C-roads, and the unclassified D-roads – the residential streets that most of us live on – which are two thirds of the total. It also shows the condition of these roads (measured in 10 metre segments) based on an annual inspection of every road and pavement (a government requirement) – ‘red’ indicating a poor road, which requires maintenance now; ‘green’ a satisfactory stretch of road; and with ‘amber’ indicating that ideally some form of preventative work is required either now or in the near future. The inspections of A, B and C roads is undertaken by specialist scanning equipment which looks not just at the surface of the road, but also the underlying sub-structure. D roads are measured by a visual inspection.

A roads

B & C roads

D roads

Surrey Total

Miles of Road

427

623

1,903

2,953

Condition:

‘Green’ %

74%

67%

57%

‘Amber’ %

21%

27%

26%

‘Red’ %

17%

equivalent to

‘Red’ Miles

326

384

This shows that the main A, B and C roads are generally in a reasonable condition, but getting on for one road in five of our D-roads is in a very poor condition. These figures are for the whole county; the condition of the D-roads in Reigate & Banstead is worse than any other borough in Surrey.

There is currently a backlog of around £330 million worth of work, covering about 1,800 miles of the network. The County would have to spend significantly more than £150 million over the next 10 years on maintenance for the condition of the roads to be radically improved.

The catch is that in the current year we are spending about £17 million in capital improvements, with the same amount anticipated next year. This is up from about £10 million or so in prior years. (About another £13 million is spent on road safety schemes, drainage works and bridge maintenance etc).

The Transportation Select Committee has recommended that substantially more money is spent on the road network to meet the public’s expectations. The quandary is that the funding for these capital works is mainly sourced by borrowing, which needs to be repaid. Three years ago, central government paid a grant to cover most of this borrowing, but now Surrey is deemed to be “over-funded” by the government, and three-quarters of the money now comes from our own Council Tax.

Another quandary is ‘What sort of road schemes should the money be spent on?’ Road rebuilding or ‘major maintenance’ costs about £650,000 per mile which means even the budgeted £17 million won’t go very far. Furthermore, if it is all spent on major maintenance, then a big slice of the network won’t be treated at all, and many of the ‘amber’ rated roads will become ‘red’ and require expensive major maintenance to fix. Consequently, a balance is struck so that about 40% of the budget is spent on preventative ‘surface dressing’ works on roads which costs about ten times less (£65,000 per mile) than major maintenance – on the stitch in time saves nine principle. This is why you may well have seen schemes to surface dress some of the main roads in our area in the last year, whilst local residential roads have remained untreated. For example, the Reigate Road and Burgh Heath Road (A and B-roads respectively) were down for surface treatment, whereas Rosebushes – which needs major maintenance - is omitted.

This year’s budget allows for 16 miles of major maintenance (about 36 roads treated) and 127 miles of surface dressing schemes (about 175 roads treated), across the whole of Surrey.

A group of councillors has argued that each borough should receive its own funding, largely shared out on the basis of the size of the road network in each borough. This would be unfair to residents as a whole in Surrey, as the areas with the worst roads, such as Reigate & Banstead, would continue for ever more to have the worst roads. There would be no balancing-up mechanism. The majority view, endorsed by your councillor, is that the priorities should be set County-wide. This approach has therefore been agreed.

Previously, the roads were selected solely by the senior engineering team at County Hall, following technical engineering criteria, which also gave priority to the more important A-roads. Because the process was secret, there were suspicions that there was political interference in the process. So now, a more visible points-scoring process has been introduced.

The worst roads are identified by the periodic County-wide inspections, plus input from the local highways manager / engineer for each borough, and from councillors and members of the public. There are currently just over 1,000 roads on the master-list.

Not only are the engineering criteria considered, but the following are now also taken into account: councillor recommendations, public complaints, insurance claims made against the Council, the type of road and the volume and type of traffic (e.g. HGV’s, buses etc).

The schemes implemented are strictly those with the highest points - within the budget split of 60% allocated to major maintenance and 40% to surface treatment schemes.

Councillors are given the opportunity to nominate three roads, which are awarded points. But there is no guarantee that councillor-nominated schemes will be chosen - that depends on the total points score. The engineering view is still given more weight, and public input is also important. In fact, only 22 of the 36 major maintenance schemes this year have been included on the basis of nominations from the 80 Surrey councillors.

Of course we all have views, but the following are certainly amongst the worst and deserve treatment:

· In Tattenhams: Beech Grove, Brighton Road service road (southern end), The Drive, Shawley Way, Garlichill Road.

· In Nork: Rosebushes, Nork Way (particularly the service road section), Green Curve, Beacon Way.

There are, of course, sections of many other roads which are poor, and certain cul-de-sacs such as The Brindles and Parsonsfield Close.

The number of complaints is a factor in selecting roads. Do write or email (not petitions) to the County Council, and express your views. Write to: Jenny Isaac, Head of Surrey Highways, Surrey County Council, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. Please copy Nick Harrison.

This change should save many residents money, as it is generally cheaper to call 0300 numbers rather than 0800 numbers. 0300 numbers are often included in the all-in packages provided by the phone operators. (Surrey County Council has always claimed they did not benefit from any pass back of premium call charges from the phone companies.)

In addition, seven new subsidiary 0300 numbers have been introduced, allowing the caller to by-pass the voice messages and go through straight to the team they need. These numbers are:

The old number will not be switched off for five years, and will work as normal until then, to help residents in the switch over. The extended lead time will mean there is time to update all the places where the old number is listed, and the cost of ditching old stationery and publications is avoided.

It is believed that, nearly 22 years after the Chernobyl nuclear explosion, more than 2 million people living in contaminated areas still have no access to 'clean' food or water, giving rise to a high incidence of childhood cancer and illness. A four-week break from radiation, eating uncontaminated food and breathing clean air, is believed to increase significantly the children’s life expectancy, by giving their immune systems a chance to recover. Each year, nationally, the charity helps over 4,000 children in this way.

Since its formation in 2002, The Mid Surrey Link has brought more than 115 children, in seven groups, each accompanied by a Belarusian leader, to the Epsom, Ashtead and Banstead area for respite. The children are around 10 years old, and stay in pairs with local hosts, who in turn are supported by willing volunteers providing practical help. All the children visit the dentist and optician during their stay and are provided with any treatment they need. The visitors participate in a programme of activities that enables them to get together and enjoy educational and fun outings, for example to London, the seaside, Legoland, horse riding at a local RDA and swimming at Epsom College.

In 2009 our visit will run from Friday 17^th July to Friday 14^th August. We are particularly keen to hear from anyone living within easy reach of Epsom or Ashtead who would consider hosting two children for two or four weeks during this period, or supporting a host.

An information evening was held on Thursday 5^th February at the St George’s Christian Centre hall, Oakfield Road, Ashtead. To find out more, please look at our website at www.midsurreylink.org or telephone to 01372 -741228. We would love to hear from you.

As we go to press, Waitrose have come forward with outline plans to rebuild their store destroyed by fire in December.

Two alternatives have been prepared – one quite similar to the old shop, and the other a more modern design. Waitrose are holding a public exhibition to get residents’ views, before coming forward with the final design.

They hope to re-open by next Christmas. For the interim, there are discussions about using the old Woolworths site on a temporary basis, but rear car park spaces may be lost to allow for refrigeration plant.

To keep shoppers in Banstead, the Council are looking at short-term free parking.