The facts as we know them
Wandworth Council confirmed in a press release issued on 30 January 2008 that it will be seeking expressions of interest from commercial operators to develop part of the Triangle area of Tooting Common:
The proposal was first discussed in September - see paper 07-775:
Here are the answers to questions put Wandsworth Council in December 07:
1. What is the overall proposition contained in the tender document, as paper 07-755 is vague on detail?
No tender document has been produced.
2. Could we see copy of the tender/expression of interest document?
There is no expression of interest document at this stage.
3. How many companies have been approached?
None .
4. How many five-a-side pitches are proposed?
Up to ten or twelve.
5. What is your understanding of the size of a five-a-side pitch?
This depends on the sport, but for football dimensions can vary between 18.5 x 30 metres to 28 x 40 metres. Smaller sizes could be used for juniors.
6. What other buildings are included?
Changing facilities/club room and a one o'clock centre possibly in one building.
7. What is the precise footprint of the area proposed for development?
Not known, but may not extend more than 25 metres beyond the existing hard surface.
8. Can we see a map of the proposed development?
There is, as yet, none.
9. What consultation has been carried out to date?
The MAC and various individuals have been informed of the concept and Paper 07-755 is a public document. Formal consultation has begun only to the extent that the process has been discussed at two MAC meetings.
10. What further consultation will be carried out?
MAC, common users and local residents and interested groups.
11. Does the council have evidence that there is a specific 5 need for five-a-side pitches on Tooting Common?
The Council's other 5-a-side facilities in the Borough are very well used and we are conscious of the fact that this area is under-resourced for Outdoor physical activity compared with ( eg ) Battersea and Wandsworth.
12. What is the timescale of the project - when were tender/expression of interest documents sent out, when are the responses due?
Expressions of interest are being prepared and statutory processes will take place. If there is an acceptable project, it is unlikely that any works would commence before 2009.
13. If the proposal goes ahead, when would building commence?
As above.
14. What is the council's position as to the legal status of the Woodfield Recreation Ground?
Owners.
15. Has Wandsworth council carried out or commissioned an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the proposed plans?
Our bio-diversity officer will conduct an EIA.
16. Have any assessments been made of the impact of light (from floodlights) and noise (from kickboards) from the site on local residents and Commons wildlife?
Surveys have been carried out elsewhere show modern floodlights have little effect on wildlife. Kickboard noise is likely to be minimal and will be topic of discussion with potential developers.
17. What would be the proposed opening hours of the facility?
Discussion will take place with developers but is likely to be approximately 9 am to 9 pm with a possible earlier start at weekends.
18. What surveys have been done on the effect of water run-off of changing the surface of the triangle?
The pitch surface is permeable. Run off water would be captured and drained away.
19. Is it fair to say that putting hard standing and tarmac instead of grass will increase surface run off and likelihood of flooding?
No; adequate drainage would need to be provided.
20. This is in a relatively inaccessible, residential location – how will users get to the site?
Facility users will be encouraged to walk, bicycle or use public transport.
21. Has the council considered the impact of increased traffic on residential streets (Emmanuel, Fernlea and Cavendish Road)?
Groups and teams will have a drop off facility.
22. Has the council considered the increased hazard to pedestrians caused by cars using Cavendish Road Rail Bridge as a possible access point to the Common?
There is a barrier at the bridge which will remain. There should be no more traffic than at present.
23. Has the council considered the impact of greater numbers of cars looking for parking spaces on surrounding streets?
See 20/21.
24. Is there any plan for any part of the common as it now stands to be used for parking?
Possibly parking for 2 / 3 staff.
25. Has the Council carried out any surveys of local residents, visitors, schools and other interested parties to see how the Common is used?
The council is already (from extensive management experience) aware of how the common is used.
26. The Council has the Tooting Commons Management Plan from 1987, which sets out how the Commons should be protected. Tenders have gone out to update the Plan. What obligations do the Council have under each of these Plans and have they considered these in paper 07-755?
The 1987 Management Plan is out of date. Note in particular 2.12, 3.3.3, 3.3.9, 3.3.26 , 5.7, 5.8 which are likely to remain in the new plan.
27. Does the Management Plan cover developments such as those proposed?
It is likely that the principles of proper stewardship, recreational use, no building development and provision of sporting facilities for community will be included.
28. How has the Council determined that there is a demand locally for a five-a- side football facility?
See 11.
29. Has the Council considered alternative sites?
Yes, they do not exist except at the Athletics Track.
30. Is there a reason why the Council have selected the Tooting Triangle site over others?
See 29.
31. How would the facilities be used by local people, by the young, and by disadvantaged/vulnerable groups?
Through a booking service. It is likely there would be times for disabled sessions/coaching and possibly a club for the very young. Local estates would be encouraged to form teams as elsewhere in the Borough.
32. Are the proposed facilities solely for football use?
Unlikely, but somewhat dependent on the surface used. Some pitches may be marked for other sports such as netball.
33. What facilities would there be for women and girls, many of whom do not play football?
Over 1 million females play football, so local teams would be able to use the facility, it is likely some surfaces will be marked out for multi-use, eg, netball.
34. Land Exchange Proposals: Exactly how much Common land would be given up for development?
Not yet known - subject to any proposals, but will need to be considered in the light of 35 below.
35. How much land would be added to the Common from Woodfield Recreation Ground in exchange?
7840 square metres.
36. Playground and One O'Clock Club: How exactly would these be affected by the proposed developments?
The play area would be rebuilt on the style of the new Wandsworth Common site. The one o'clock centre may be incorporated into the new changing room building.
37. If they were re-sited, where would this be? And would additional common land be lost?
There are no plans currently to remove them from the Tooting Triangle.
38. Has this been discussed in the Planning Committee?
No - since we do not yet have any detailed proposals.
39. Has the council carried out any research into the use of the playground?
The Council is aware of the shortcomings of the facility from constructive comments from users. The Council has a specialist play area development officer who is aware of needs.
40. Has the council carried out any research into the use of the One O'Clock Club?
As 39.
41. What is the exact position of the council regarding the lease of the Waldorf School of SW London?
The school has always known that the lease with the Council was a temporary arrangement which expires on 18th April 2008. The provisions of the lease make it quite clear that the school has no renewal rights. It was for the school to plan its long term future knowing that it could not rely on the lease it had with the Council. Some suggest the Council is evicting the Steiner School; it is not. The lease expires and it is as simple as that.
42. What was the initial reason for this proposal?
The Council's Sports Strategy and London 2012 focus on sport, well being and physical activity. The Council has spent £15 million on improving leisure centres since 2000 and has increased budgets to enable more physical activities to be available and delivered within the Borough. This, together with national concerns over obesity, dovetails with the Council's corporate objectives. Plans and developments across the Borough will improve sporting facilities but a lack of space in the south of the Borough, apart from Tooting Common, has resulted in this proposal.
RECENT HISTORY IS INSTRUCTIVE.
Further comments from a MAC member...
'Recent history is instructive. You will recall that I agreed to do some digging into the "archives" since my recollection was that proposals for football pitches on the Triangle Field had been put forward before and had met substantial public opposition.
The Management Plan for the Common (dated circa 1990) did indeed contain as one of its key proposals (para 4.3.2):
"a feasibility scheme including possible traffic and parking implications will be commissioned to see if the sports pitches and changing facilities could be relocated in one area for ease of supervision………five of the nine football pitches currently located along Tooting Bec Road, would be resited to the Tooting Triangle Field….. The new pitches would all be full size. A junior pitch would be sited in Woodfields recreation ground. This would involve the drainage of the fields and the construction of new changing rooms and showers associated with the play buildings on Tooting Triangle.
"one full size floodlit, modern, synthetic football pitch sited at Tooting Triangle would replace the existing outdated small redgra pitches at Tooting Triangle and Streatham woods. This would extend the use of the facilities. It would also enable the provision of an all-weather pitch for netball, hockey, 5-a-side football, basketball or tennis courts during summer
"the four football pitches which could not be resited at Tooting Triangle due to lack of space could be gradually phased out if demand continued to fall off ……"
Earlier at para 3.3.6 it is stated "There is potential for relocating the pitches to ……Tooting Triangle. This would have the advantage of releasing "green desert" for other users such as passive reacreation and ecological areas…" The council in my opinion had, and in all probability still has, the intention to remove 'undesirable' and 'unattractive' uses of the common away from its own residents and dump them on the part of the Common most used by Lambeth residents - not Nimbyism but Nimbocism (i.e. Not In My Bit Of Common).
The plan goes on to state: "there would be a need to implement a thorough traffic, parking and access study before any such scheme was implemented to assess the current situation……Lambeth traffic engineers have been approached and their view is that the fifty or so cars (maximum) generated on any Saturday or Sunday from September to April would not have a significantly bad effect on traffic and parking in the roads surrounding the Tooting Triangle and Emmanuel Road fields since at these times parking capacity is saturated and this would be a self limiting factor"
NB the last words which I have emphasised - plus in the 20 or so years since then there has been enormous growth in parking pressures and the added complication of controlled parking zones.
5.4.10: "A feasibility study of likely traffic/parking implications resulting from relocation of football pitches would be undertaken with the cooperation of London Borough of Lambeth Traffic Engineers."
It was proposed (4.2.11) that the "possibility and implications" of creating "a new car park" on the common next to Triangle "activity centre" would be investigated
Consultation
Opposition to these plans was considerable, with the number of objections to the Triangle Field proposal (32) exceeded only by objections to the proposed car park (47). By comparison the many other proposals in the overall Tooting Commons plan received very little comment at all, one way or the other.
Objections to the Triangle Field plan are listed in the Management Plan as:
"Against concentrating pitches here (32) because it will detract from peace and quiet of area; generate litter, noise, fly tipping disturbance; cause traffic and parking problems; spoil appearance due to goal posts and worn grass; floodlights and fencing would look like a prison; unfair to concentrate least pleasing facility at north of common; won't be used; spoil area for walkers, dogs and children; badly drained so unsuitable; ruin only area not bounded by roads; remote from bus routes; no existing car parks; upgrade existing pitches instead; against fencing pitches."
Only four people supported the plan.
Conclusion:
This demonstrates 1) that it has long been the ambition and intention of LB Wandsworth to use Tooting Triangle Field for controversial football use, 2) that it is, or should be, fully aware of opposition to such proposals and concerns about traffic and parking and 3) has gone ahead in full knowledge of local opposition and objection. Most striking, perhaps, is the awareness of traffic and parking impacts, yet I am unaware of any approach having been made (other than some 20 years ago) to Lambeth traffic engineers to assess the situation. I shall be submitting a member's inquiry to ascertain what recent approaches, if any, have been received by Lambeth traffic dept on this matter – Wandsworth at one stage made clear that a traffic study was a precondition of its proposals. Further we see that in the background there is the threat of having to tarmac more of the common for a car park to accommodate users of the site. (Convenient, is it not, that just such an area has been cleared for parking next to the Culverden Road rail bridge).
In all the years I have been on the MAC, including a spell as chair, I do not recall any discussion or proposals being put forward by LB Wandsworth in relation to increased footballing facilities on the Triangle Field and had assumed that in the light of the substantial objections to proposals in the Management Plan that this little oasis was safe.'