papinian wrote: Why then did you focus on those three words out of my 144 word post and describe them as a horrible comment? The last time I looked at a dictionary "horrible" was not a synonym for "irrelevant".

what's horrible is that you thought that it was relevant, made worse by being unable to see the problem thus confirming all suspicions.

Thank you Wandsworth Council, though we had already seen your propaganda.

Wandsworth Council has formally called on London Mayor Sadiq Khan to determine the controversial Wimbledon Stadium planning application himself and not hand the decision back to Merton Council.

In response to his consultation asking for views on how he should proceed, the council has written to the Mayor urging him to make an “impartial” decision on the scheme rather than allowing it to be decided by Merton.

Wandsworth argues that because the development lies on the borough boundary and will have a significant impact on both areas, the application needs independent scrutiny.

Merton firmly backs the scheme, which would see a new football stadium, 602 homes and a large supermarket built on the site of Wimbledon Greyhound stadium.

Wandsworth has however expressed serious concerns, arguing that the scale and nature of the development would have a significant impact on people living in Tooting and Earlsfield and also on local businesses.

There are also worries too that this number of new homes plus a stadium will create unreasonable pressure on the area’s transport network, with increased traffic congestion and more passengers accessing local rail services, especially at the already busy and crowded Earlsfield Station.

Critics also say the proposals do not provide enough parking spaces for such a large scale development, especially when this would also need to include coaches for the away team and their fans.

Using his planning powers London’s previous Mayor decided in March that the application should not be determined by Merton alone and that it needed greater scrutiny because it “would have a significant impact on the implementation of the London Plan”.

The decision should be made at a Mayoral level he argued, “because of the scale and public representations received, which raise valid strategic planning matters regarding transport, housing, sports and cultural provision".

In her letter formally objecting to the Mayor handing the decision back to Merton, Wandsworth’s planning chairman Cllr Sarah McDermott states: “It is Wandsworth Borough Council’s opinion, and indeed your report similarly states, that there has been no change in circumstances other than the election of you as the new Mayor.

“It continues to be Wandsworth Borough Council’s opinion that a number of issues, particularly the impact of the development on public transport infrastructure are unresolved.

“Given the scale of the development and the direct and significant impact on the residents of Wandsworth, I remain of the firm view that this matter requires an additional degree of scrutiny and assessment by an impartial organisation. I would therefore request that you maintain the previous Mayor’s decision to call-in this application. Then a balanced decision on the application can be made which reflects and mitigates the strategic impacts on both boroughs and gives a higher degree of public confidence in the planning process.”

Cllr McDermott added: “The fundamental problem with this development is that Merton gets all the gain while Wandsworth gets all the pain.

“Building a large football stadium and many hundreds of new homes here will certainly have an impact on our borough and will inevitably lead to increased pressure on local transport infrastructure and other public services.

“Merton has already stated very publicly that it wants the football club to return, but that cannot be at the expense of residents and businesses in Wandsworth, and nor can this be at any cost.

“There are very valid and sincerely held concerns about this application and these need to be examined dispassionately, objectively and impartially.

“Merton have demonstrated that they cannot do this. It is therefore the job of the Mayor to do so.”

Earlsfield mummy wrote:The comment about being non-British born bears absolutely zero relevance to the topic being discussed.

Why then did you focus on those three words out of my 144 word post and describe them as a horrible comment? The last time I looked at a dictionary "horrible" was not a synonym for "irrelevant".

boonkoh wrote:If there was a report post feature on NVN, I would have used it for your post. The councillor being non-British has nothing to do with the issue or article at hand. What are you trying to suggest or imply?

You haven't said why you would have reported my post - that would have been a meaningful contribution.

Every day I hear someone from the Conservative Party complaining about the pressure that EU migrants have put on schools, hospitals, etc. I am certainly going point out that there are plenty of Conservatives who are migrants themselves.

Oh my goodness, talk about hypocritical. I've just read the actual press release:

Critics also say the proposals do not provide enough parking spaces for such a large scale development, especially when this would also need to include coaches for the away team and their fans.

Wandsworth Council has approved the Battersea Exchange development (currently under construction), nearly 300 new homes and no extra parking provision at all.

I think the "critics" are also characters Wandsworth Council has made-up in this fiction.

This is more of Wandsworth Council poking its nose in where it is not needed - and trying to get publicity for the fact. If it has a real objection to the plan then it has the right to make representations to both Merton, and the Mayor of London.

I recognise that housing on the site is a strain on services, but that's really a different issue - that Merton will need to deal with. As to parking issues - the surrounding area is fully resident parking and pay and display, so I don't really know what point is being made.

Personally I'd be sorry to see the old stadium go - many an evening spent at stock car and speedway racing there. If you want to think about disruption, you can hear the roar of engines at Plough Lane as far away as Furzedown!

AFC Wimbledon is a small club, and will probably remain that way - the money that dragged FC Wimbledon up through the ranks 40 years ago is no longer available to small clubs.

papinian wrote:

caroline.kennaway wrote:I cannot believe you have just made that 'non British born' comment. You should be ashamed.

Earlsfield mummy wrote:Gosh, what a horrible comment about not being British born.

What exactly is so horrible about making a factual statement? I am not British born myself.

If there was a report post feature on NVN, I would have used it for your post.

The councillor being non-British has nothing to do with the issue or article at hand. What are you trying to suggest or imply?

The comment about being non-British born bears absolutely zero relevance to the topic being discussed.

caroline.kennaway wrote:I cannot believe you have just made that 'non British born' comment. You should be ashamed.

Earlsfield mummy wrote:Gosh, what a horrible comment about not being British born.

What exactly is so horrible about making a factual statement? I am not British born myself.

Gosh, what a horrible comment about not being British born. You should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself. Whether I agree with any individual Councillor not, I respect them for making a contribution to our community. I sincerely hope that people who think in the way that the poster above does are in the very small minority in Wandsworth.

I used to live by the old Plough Lane stadium and never had any issues.

Roll the clock forward 30 years and AFC Wimbledon are on the verge of something really special. AFC Wimbledon is a shining example of community action and fan ownership in a football world dominated by big money. I take my 3 year old and 5 year old to games and I am so happy they are part of this family club. We currently average around 4,000 a game, a 20,000 crowd is highly speculative (11,000 is initial capacity) and probably 15 years away. Hopefully Crossrail 3 will have been built by then.

The article by Wandsworth council is a terrible piece of writing but where the councillor was born is completely irrelevant.

I cannot believe you have just made that 'non British born' comment. You should be ashamed.

Normally, I would agree that Merton should make decisions about construction within its boundaries, but in this instance the construction is taking place on the very limits of the Merton boundaries and the effects will be felt most strongly within Earlsfield where we will have all of the football fans travelling by train and Tooting where they will arrive by Tube. This has the potential to be a real nuisance due to huge influxes of people, some of whom don't care about littering or noise problems. There will also be those who try to come by car and then take up the spaces meant for residents.

600 extra homes are planned on the site. A further 600 homes are planned for a site in Burntwood Lane. I'm all in favour of more homes in London but the local services (schools, doctors, dentists etc.) are already under strain.

If you carry the thinking that decisions within boundaries are purely the responsibility of the legal representative of those boundaries to its logical conclusion then all planning applications should be treated similarly which would mean that homeowners would no longer need to consider their neighbours when planning works. I'm not sure many would agree with that.

Finally, the stadium development is being built on a flood plain, the idea being that the garaging under the homes will be able to absorb the flood effects if necessary. How would you like to know that your car might end up under 6 feet of water? Apparently this is reckoned to be a once in 60 year risk. The last time it happened was about 60 years ago. Go figure.

@Papinan - I was with you until the "non British born" comment. Not quite sure you have a point behind that or you were just trolling?

I know that Wandsworth Council's spokesman is not fit-for-purpose, but it's really a bit of a joke for Wandsworth Council to issue a largely fictious press release.

As the BBC on Friday reported here http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/36904275, Sadiq Khan has begun a 14-day consultation period over AFC Wimbledon's planning application for a new stadium at Plough Lane. Sadiq has indicated that his preference to reverse Boris Johnson's decision to call the application in for review. This would mean that the decision would go back to Merton Council. Most commentators thought that the decision should never have been called in by Boris Johnson in the first place and that Johnson took his decision on political grounds.

It seems to me that non-British born Cllr Ravi Govindia would be better off leaving decisions about planning in Merton to Merton Council and instead dealing with his responsibilities in Wandsworth.