Follow the link for the:

  • Police discussion of crime in the area
  • Status of the CPZ consultation
  • Plans for the Twickenham Riverside site development
  • Rubbish collection

and more…


Held on 16 October 2006 at The Salon, York House, Twickenham.

Present: Councillors Acton, Carr, Khosa, Morgan (Chair), Trigg and Wilson.

Also in attendance were Police Sergeant Jupp, Mick Potter (Principal Engineer (Parking), LBRUT) and Shane O’Connor (Senior Engineer, LBRuT).

8 members of the public attended.


Sergeant Jupp apologised to attendees that Sergeant Malik had been unable to attend as he had been called away. He informed attendees that the Police Liaison Group would be meeting on 8 November 2006 in York House. He said that they would give feedback on the dispersal zone. He stated that Chief Inspector Edwards would be there and that they would be discussing plans for the Christmas period.

Sergeant Jupp reported that 100 people had been dispersed from the latest zones. He stated that these were sometimes in groups of 5-6 at a time. He said that some residents from Amyand Park Road and Orleans Road had complained that people were dispersed to their roads. He informed attendees that the police would be leafleting residents of these roads to ask them whether they would like the zone extended. He said that this was still in the consultation stage.

Sergeant Jupp informed attendees that all the Metropolitan Police’s crime figures were available on the force’s website. He stated that overall crime was down by 2. Burglary was down by 20, but that robbery was up by 267. He reported that the rise in robbery was not as alarming as it sounded because there had only been eight robberies in the current year as opposed to three in the previous year. He reported that violence and assaults were down 25 and that criminal damage was down 17%. He stated that a Borough-wide concern was theft from motor vehicles. He reported that there had been 7 arrests made for theft of pedal cycles.



Councillor Trigg gave a presentation explaining the proposals for the St Margaret’s CPZ. He stated that the Council were currently undertaking a consultation to see which streets wanted the CPZ. He informed attendees that the boundaries of the consultation were the river, the Borough boundary, the A316 and Cole Park Road. He stated that there was some flexibility over which roads were incorporated into the scheme, although roads in the middle of the proposed zone would probably have to be included.

A resident, who lived in Moormead Road, stated that his road had suffered when Cole Park Road had become part of a CPZ as people parked there instead. Councillor Trigg stated that they were looking to have surveys available by the beginning of 2007. A resident asked what format the survey would be in. Mick Potter showed a copy to attendees. Councillor Morgan stated that this survey was more sophisticated than previous ones, which had asked simply whether people wanted the zones or not. He said that this was one of the reasons why there was some delay. Councillor Trigg informed residents that they would be able to address the Transport Consultative Group, during which the decision would be made.

A resident stated that the last time they had been consulted, the survey had been sent out before Christmas, with a return date of the 6 January. He said that the response had therefore been very low. He urged the Council to ensure that surveys were sent out at a sensible time of year. Councillor Trigg replied that they would not be put out around Christmas and that the Council would try to advertise them as much as possible.

A resident asked whether the CPZ would be included within the existing St Margaret’s zone. Mick Potter replied that it would be separate, as too large a zone risked internal commuting. Mick Potter explained that there was a need to protect people who lived near stations.

A neighbour asked whether it was possible to trial the CPZs. Councillor Trigg replied that any scheme could be reconsidered after 6-12 months, given enough complaints. A resident asked whether experience showed these schemes were successful. Mick Potter replied that generally they were successful, although it was possible things might not be perfect first time around.

Councillor Morgan asked whether there was normally a problem on rugby days. A resident stated that the problems were not noticeably worse on rugby days. He thought that the police handled the situation sensibly.

A resident raised the issue of people having more than one car in the CPZ and the pressure this put on spaces. Councillor Trigg stated that people could buy additional parking permits. A resident stated that people who could afford two cars were not worried about having to pay more for the extra permits. He did not understand why motorbikes were exempt, when he had to pay the full rate for a small car. He also complained about trailers taking up space. Mick Potter stated that whilst motorbikes were allowed in, trailers were not allowed in the CPZs.

Mick Potter explained that the scheme was for an area rather than particular roads, so that, hopefully, people could find a parking space even if it was not in their street. A resident complained that there was currently a problem with parking around the junction of Sydney Road. He said that a fire engine had not been able to enter the road due to parked cars. Mick Potter stated that CPZ parking would begin 10m from any junction. He stated that if the Council felt restrictions were necessary at night, double yellow lines would be installed. He informed attendees that parking attendants were on duty in the evening.

A resident asked whether there was a limit on the number of permits that could be given out. Mick Potter said there was not and that there could be more permits than spaces. He said that they tried to put in as many spaces as possible but that they also had to try and treat each resident equally. A resident asked what would happen with visitors’ parking. Mick Potter stated that residents could apply for visitor permits. He informed attendees that the these permits would allow people to park for a day, although two permits were needed in an all day zone.

Councillor Morgan pointed out that the visitor permits could be used across the Borough and were not zone restricted. Mick Potter replied that the only separate zones for visitors parking were Richmond Town and Richmond Hill.

A resident asked how long it would take from issuing the survey to the implementation of the new zone. Mick Potter stated that the process involved a two-stage consultation. He said that it could be 12-18 months but that it had been quicker than that in the past. Councillor Morgan asked how much the scheme would cost. Mick Potter replied that there was a cost in terms of officer time to add on, but the installation cost would be £10,000.


This item was not discussed as the interested residents were not present.


Councillor Carr reported that a bid had been put in for the scheme, which would hopefully happen in December.


Councillor Carr reported that the issue had been discussed at Cabinet on 9 October 2006 and that the Cabinet had decided to choose the Riverside Trust scheme. She said that the Council would try to accommodate the other bidders elsewhere. She stated that the site would provide activities for young people and was thought to be the most appropriate for the location.

A resident asked how much the scheme would cost and whether there would be sufficient support. Councillor Carr stated that all the bidders had put in business plans. She stated that the capital investment needed was £2.5m and there were no guarantees the money would be raised. She stated that no guarantee could be given until after the planning process had been completed. She informed attendees that there was not likely to be a planning application until 2008. She stated that the Heritage Lottery Fund might be involved, but that the plans would be examined in more detail. She also told attendees that they did not underestimate the challenges ahead.

A resident said that it was so nice to have the river in the town and that it needed to be exploited. Councillor Carr replied that they wanted to make it the jewel in Twickenham’s crown and that they wanted to encourage more people to use the river. Councillor Morgan thought it was sad that people might not realise the river existed at present.


Councillor Trigg reported that the current situation dated back to 9 September 2001, when the footbridge was closed after police requests that all entrances to stations be policeable. However, he stated that South West Trains had kept the footbridge shut ever since, even after the situation had improved. He said that the Council had made repeated representations to the train operator to open it but they were unwilling to do so due to an increased risk of fare dodging. He reported that the Council had paid for the footbridge to be installed and was keen for it to be opened.

Councillor Morgan stated that the footbridge was open at night. Councillor Trigg said that South West Trains locked the back of the station up at night. He informed attendees that one evening they had locked up the entire station, shutting people in. He reported that South West Trains had just won back their franchise.


Councillor Carr invited attendees to come to the Twickenham Town Centre Public Meeting. A resident stated that not many people knew about the meeting. Councillor Carr said that shops and voluntary organisations had been invited and that she had given invitations to a number of people. She asked attendees to spread the word. She stated that the partnership wanted to come up with a new three-year business plan for Twickenham.

A resident asked whether they could have access to the Town Centre Manager’s job specification. Councillor Carr replied that the job description would not be public but that the targets and objectives would be.


Road Race

Sergeant Jupp asked whether there had been any consultation with the police about the running of the road race. He stated that it had been safe but only just. Councillor Carr replied that Ward Councillors had seen the race route five weeks before. Sergeant Jupp said that there had been a need to stop traffic and that it was important the event was properly policed.

Fortnightly Rubbish Collections

A resident stated that a number of people were unhappy about the plans for fortnightly rubbish collection. He thought that there had been an experimental recycling collection system trialled in Hampton a year ago and asked whether that had incorporated fortnightly rubbish collection.

Councillor Acton stated that the review was ongoing. He said that no decision had yet been made and that the Council was looking at a number of possibilities. He said that the Hampton experiment was successful but collections had still been weekly. He stated that that the Council would soon be collecting plastic and cardboard, subject to Cabinet approval in November. He thought that there would need to be a pilot scheme and that particular attention needed to be given to ways of assist people living in flats.

Bus Lane Cameras

A resident complained about the enforcement of bus lanes on Heath Road. She claimed to have turned into Clifton Road and been caught by the cameras. She also complained about having to pay £10 to see the videos. Councillor Trigg replied that there was no charge for seeing the videos; the £10 charge was only for keeping the videos. He said that if she gave him her PCN number, he would look into the incident.

Speeding in London Road

This was an item arising from the previous meeting. Councillor Trigg replied that the road was unlikely to justify a camera, as the incidence of speeding was not great enough. He stated that a speed volume check would be undertaken.


Monday 16th April 2007 at 7.30pm in the Salon, York House, Twickenham


The meeting, which started at 7.30pm, ended at 8.49pm.