Have your say! MOPAC consultation on accessing Met Police services

MOPAC CONSULTATION on accessing Met Police services

Including public meeting…

Please help spread the word!

The Met Police have had to find £600m of savings and must save a further £400m by 2020.

The Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has published draft plans to close costly and underused police front counters in London and provide better ways to contact the Met online. 

Doing this would help to meet growing public demand to be able to access Met Police services from smartphones, tablets and computers, whilst saving £10mill that could be spent instead on frontline policing.

Public consultation session in Croydon

The Metropolitan Police Service is holding public consultation sessions in every London Borough so that local people can learn about the changes described in this document and can give their views.

The session in Croydon will be held on:

4 October 2017 at 6.30pm
 Council Chamber
Croydon Town Hall
Katherine Street

There is no need to book. Just turn up on the night.

Have your say

Have your say

Read the draft strategy – an Easy Read version is also available

Review the Impact Assessment – it investigates how the draft strategy affects different groups of Londoners

You can respond in a number of ways – in person, online or by post 

Public Access Consultation
The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime
City Hall, More London
Queen’s Walk

The consultation is open until 6 October 2017.

Full details, here.



Comments on the main modifications to the Croydon Local Plan sought – 29 August to 10 October 2017

The Secretary of State appointed Planning Inspector, following the examination hearings, is inviting comments on the main modifications to the Croydon Local Plan: Strategic Policies – Partial Review (Proposed Submission) and the Detailed Policies and Proposals (Proposed Submission).

Main Modifications are changes which the Inspector considers are necessary to make the plan sound for adoption. Main Modifications are proposed without prejudice to the Inspector’s final conclusions in the Inspector’s Report, which will take account of all representations submitted in response to this consultation.

This is not an opportunity to raise matters relating to other parts of the submitted Local Plans. The Inspector will only consider representations from this consultation which relate to the Main Modifications.

You can make a representation between 29 August and 10 October 2017, inclusive by:

  • Emailing ldf@croydon.gov.uk
  • Completing the representation form (which will be made available at libraries) and emailing it to ldf@croydon.gov.uk or posting it to Spatial Planning Service, 6th Floor Zone B, Bernard Weatherill House, 8 Mint Walk, Croydon, CR0 1EA.

To be duly made, the comments must:

  • Be received by the Council between 29 August and 10 October 2017 (inclusive);
  • Include a name and either an e-mail or postal address, all of which must be legible;
  • Not contain offensive or derogatory language; and
  • Be related only to the Main Modifications to the Croydon Local Plan: Strategic Policies – Partial Review (Proposed Submission) or the Main Modifications to the Detailed Policies and Proposals (Proposed Submission).

Consultation on the Main Modifications will take place from 29 August to 10 October 2017, inclusive.  Any representations received before 29 August or after 10 October 2017 will not be accepted by the Council as duly made and will not be considered by the independent Planning Inspector.

How to Make a Representation

You are invited to make representations to the Main Modifications to the Croydon Local Plan: Strategic Policies – Partial Review and the Croydon Local Plan: Detailed Policies and Proposals. The representation form and guidance may be viewed at:

Any representations received before 29 August or after 10 October 2017 will not be accepted by the Council as duly made and will not be considered by the independent Planning Inspector.

Croydon Council will acknowledge receipt of your representation(s) as soon as possible. Please note that representations are not confidential, including your name and organisation and will be made publicly available. The addresses and contact details of representations from individuals will not be published on the website or any other public place. You are advised to keep a copy of the representation(s) you submit.

For enquiries or further information: email ldf@croydon.gov.uk or call us on 020 8407 1385.




You can respond to the consultation by letter:
Spatial Planning Service
6th Floor, Zone B
Bernard Weatherill House
8 Mint Walk

or e-mail:




meeting morgue file image

Croydon Council survey on JustBE campaign – Have your say

Diane Bacchus, Croydon Council’s Digital Engagement Officer, is keen to receive your views.

Please take a moment to take part in the survey, which closes on 7 April 2017.   The Council are seeking to learn whether you have seen the Council’s public health campaign messages for JustBE Croydon.

Find the survey, here: https://getinvolved.croydon.govuk/survey/348

Please take a moment to complete the survey and do pass it on to others.


Just Be

Save Our Fairfield Halls – approval of planning application given

Save Our Fairfield is an apolitical campaign group.  Andy Hylton writes,

Dear Friends,

The £30million planning application for Fairfield Halls and College Green has been approved with a vote of 6/4. The good news being they will now get on with it, but the bad news is there are still concerns with the plans.

The application received 381 objections from residents, but the committee allowed only five minutes to those who wished to make a statement of objection. Former technical manager of the Fairfield Halls, Rob Callender spoke on behalf of ‘Save Our Fairfield’ campaign, highlighting our concerns with the current plans. The time limit was strictly enforced, and sadly Kate Vennell, of the Fairfield Arts Board, was not allowed to complete her statement.

Considering the scale of the investment and the experience of the speakers, this shows the arrogance we have faced from Croydon Council throughout the entire process and undermines the credibility of the project.

We have always supported the investment, but we do not support the method the council have chosen for going about this, the treatment of the former Fairfield staff or the implementation of the plans as they stand. If the venue were to fail following an expensive refurbishment that would be a very poor result for Croydon and we object to all aspects which may affect the future operational viability of the venue.

There are inaccurate statements in the Design & Access document and an inconsistency between public statements and the actual approved plans. For example, the truck-lift is still in the plans, although Councillor Godfrey has previously stated this was removed after advice from the Theatres Trust Advisory Review, allegedly saving £4million for the project.  It is also unclear whether Ashcroft stage extension and fly tower improvements are being taken forward or have been removed from the designs as previous press releases and councillor statements have stated. There needs to be more clarity in respect of what is being planned.

Our main objections were:

  • Encroachment of the new Croydon College on the rear of Fairfield Halls, affecting daylight into the Ashcroft Theatre dressing rooms and impacting on privacy in these rooms.
  • Access to yard and ‘Get-In’ plans will make operations LESS flexible and more awkward to manage. This will make the venue less attractive to large productions and affect viability.
  • Lack of parking, will reduce the viability of the venue. The parking assessment suggests a move away from family orientated audiences and from attracting audiences who are unable to use public transport.

Kate Vennell, former Chair of Fairfield Trust, agrees.  “These risk the commercial viability of the Fairfield Halls.  They need maximum ticket sales from high audiences and great shows. Everything absolutely optimised for the large, complex Fairfield to run without any public subsidy. “

It is vital that Croydon Council introduce an operator into the design process at the earliest opportunity. When plans are being developed in the absence of an operator, mistakes mean rework, increasing the cost to the operator.

Art venues play a significant role in the community can have a major impact on people’s lives. It is now time that the Council engaged with the community and listened to their concerns. There needs to be a strong cultural offer throughout the works. This promise is still to be delivered.

We care about the Fairfield and want the project to succeed.  Let us help you to connect with those who have the inside knowledge of the Fairfield so that the project delivers a thriving cultural centre.



Andy Hylton




Find the campaign at www.saveourfairfield.org

On Twitter: @SaveOurFairfld

On Facebook: Save Out Fairfield Halls

Q&As regarding 20mph and the consultation in Croydon

20mph has been introduced on the majority of Croydon roads in areas 1 and 2. The Council are now consulting on areas 3, 4 and 5. For full details, see the Council’s website. See also the council’s FAQs.
The following questions were submitted in the run up to our meeting on 20mph.  Thanks to council officer Waheed Alam who provided the responses:
 A copy of these can be downloaded at the foot of the post.

Questions offered prior to the CCC meeting on 6 February, with responses

1) How will 20mph be enforced, especially in small side roads which folk may use as a ‘rat run’?

The Metropolitan Police enforce speed limits in London and they have been clear in their position that their enforcement efforts for a 20mph speed limit will be at the same level as that used to enforce the existing 30mph or any other speed limit in the borough.

Croydon council will also collect current speed information on a number of roads in the area before any change is made. If the new speed limit is implemented, the council will repeat these speed surveys at the same locations to see what effect the new speed limit has had on speed. Where speeds continue to be high, the police will be informed so that they can look to carry out targeted enforcement.

The council may look to introduce physical speed-reducing measures at key locations where speeding is persistent but that will be subject to consultation at the time.

2) Why not have 20mph limit across Farthing Down where people often speed? This would add extra safety for the cattle, when they are there, and generally enhance the environment of the area.

In order to have a lower speed limit along Ditches Lane the council will need consent from the Corporation of London (the landowners) regarding the possibility of erecting signage along Ditches Lane and also English Nature because this is a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). This will require careful consideration as the land is used for cattle grazing and the placement of upright signs and road markings and may be looked at later as a separate scheme.

3) If the majority of road traffic accidents occur on main roads why not prioritise these for speed reduction first rather than the roads proposed, where there are fewer or no road traffic accidents?

Understandably and without doubt, it is agreed that more road accidents occur on main roads as a result of a lot more interaction between the various modes of traffic. The question appears to assume that the council does not prioritise accident prevention on main roads over the residential/side roads.

The council has had and continues to have accident remedial programmes to tackle road accidents on main roads. Main roads have considerably greater road space and good sightlines compared to residential streets, thereby allowing for more innovative and expensive measures to be put in place. Costly measures such as controlled pedestrian crossings or footway buildouts, enforcement cameras, signalised junctions etc. are more justified on main roads where usage is likely to justify the costs.

A 30mph speed limit is generally considered appropriate for the main road network which is generally wider and has the necessary infrastructure/capacity to support the higher speed limit, whilst residential roads have many physical constraints which makes 20mph more suited for those roads.

Maintaining a higher maximum speed limit on the main road network is desirable for a number of reasons amongst which one is so as to encourage drivers not to rat run through residential roads.

Under the Traffic Management Act the council has obligations to cater for all road users which includes both motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. This is key to understanding why the approach adopted by Croydon’s 20mph speed limit has been to maintain higher speed limits on main roads.

The Traffic Management Act 2004 contains various requirements on how a Highway Authority should manage their road networks. The act places a duty on an Authority to secure the expeditious movement of traffic on their network, and to facilitate the same on the networks of other Authorities. This can be perceived as a duty to secure the fast movement of motorised traffic and used as an argument against 20mph schemes. However, this narrow interpretation does not reflect the whole meaning of this requirement, as ‘traffic’ encompasses all modes of transport using roads, including pedestrians. The duty is essentially about balancing the needs of all road users, and also operates alongside other duties, including those in the area of road safety. This is made clear in the DfT’s Network Management Duty Guidance.

4) Can and will the police enforce 20mph speed limits?

The 20mph speed limit is made using statutory powers which the Police can and do enforce. Croydon police have confirmed that they will enforce 20mph speed limits in the same way they enforce 30mph or any other speed limit.

The speed limit in North Croydon came into force in September 2016. The Police have started enforcement of the lower speed limit as is evident in this tweet from the local policing team from Upper Norwood in November 2016.

See original at https://twitter.com/MPSNorwood/status/795968771043291136

5) Will the introduction of 20mph zones have any effect on the speed at which emergency vehicles can travel?

The lower speed limit does not impact emergency services when attending an emergency call. Drivers of other vehicles will have to give way/make way to emergency vehicles as usual.

6) Why was the policy imposed in north Croydon when only 2% of the population felt it important enough to vote on?

The decision to implement the scheme was taken following a ‘Statutory Consultation’ process through which all objections were considered prior to a decision being taken. Everyone living or working in the area was entitled to have a say in that process; that so few people objected can be seen to indicate the broad level of satisfaction that existed with the council’s decision.

7) What level of objection would have an effect on the proposed scheme?

The decision whether or not to proceed with the proposal will be made following a full consideration of all the objections received, as well as any responses submitted in support of the proposals.

Road safety officers base their advice on how the proposal may benefit/disbenefit the public by looking at available studies/research carried out by other Government departments, practical experience of other local authorities and the nature of the objections received. Bearing this in mind, officers often try and put forward an elaborate analysis which covers these issues so that decision makers can have as much information as reasonably possible when making decisions.

What is important is that although the question assumes that there is a level of predetermination of the scheme going ahead no matter what, officers have an open mind and will consider the nature of objections before providing an officer report.

8) Why was Smitham Downs Road included – it is a B road and is wide, not very busy, has no schools and not dangerous in my opinion?

The starting point in the determination of which roads to include in the 20mph speed limit has always been whether the road is part of the A and B road network. However, it has always been the intention to consider our main road network carefully and amend the scheme to include or exclude roads based on local knowledge of their traffic carrying function.

Smitham Downs Road may be the B2030 historically, but is not considered to be a major traffic through route and as such it is proposed to be included in the 20mph speed limit. Similarly, Pampisford Road, Canterbury Road, Shirley Church Road, Mitchley Hill and Purley Downs Road are local distributor in nature, include schools or are otherwise considered inappropriate for high-speed traffic, and have therefore been included in the 20mph speed limit.

Conversely, roads like Croham Valley Road, Beddington Farm Road, Ampere Way, Addington Hills Road, and Lodge Lane are clearly major traffic routes and have been excluded from the 20mph speed limit. This is not to say that the scheme is fixed, and if individuals wish to object to the inclusion or exclusion of any road within the 20mph proposals they can voice this opinion through the public notice/objections process and changes may then be considered if appropriate.

9) If the scheme includes Pampisford Road, this will drive all the traffic onto the Brighton Road, which doesn’t seem sensible.

See answer to question 8 above.

Traffic movements can be complex in nature and so to simply assume that all of the current traffic flows on Pampisford traffic will shift to Brighton Road is not necessarily true. Why would not some of it remain on Pampisford Road? Or why would not some of it not shift to Purley Way? If Brighton Road or Purley Way are congested why would drivers not continue to use Pampisford Road where a 20mph speed limit has the potential to offer a smoother more consistent speed throughout its length?

A study carried out by The Centre for Transport Studies at Imperial College London found that, across several routes in central London, a greater range of speeds occurred on 30 mph segments compared to 20mph segments. A large proportion of time was simply spent accelerating and decelerating on 30 mph segments suggesting that 20 mph routes may facilitate smooth driving.

10) Shouldn’t Chaldon Way/Mead Way stay at 30 as again they are both wide, with little traffic and very few parked cars, and are bus routes.

See answer to question 8.

11) How will objections be counted (e.g. per number of signatories, per number of objections listed, per individual objections logged as separate objections) and will they be weighted in any way ( e.g objection from Residents Association, household, individual?)

Officers will endeavour to report objections, both qualitatively and quantitatively.

The focus will be more on the content of objections so as to ensure that objections are considered appropriately and not on the number of times that any one person writes in. To date it has been observed that some individuals have written in numerous times and presented one issue at a time in each of their correspondence.

It is the issues which will be quantified and not the number of times the individual has written in.


Download a copy, here: Premeeting Q&A on 20mph consultation

Is 20 plenty for Croydon? Arguments AGAINST 20mph

Is 20 plenty?

20mph has been introduced on the majority of Croydon roads in areas 1 and 2. The Council are now consulting on areas 3, 4 and 5. For full details, see the Council’s website.
If you are anti 20mph, why not add your view as a comment to this post?