Rye Lane revamp

[david_carnell]

THIS THREAD!

DO IT HERE......IN THE LOUNGE.

It really doesn't matter what section it's in does it??? You'll get more people in here anyway. And if I recall, you already have a thread discussing the Peckham plan and plans for the station. Would reviving that one be another option?

[RosieH]

Oh dear Eileen, have you actually spent any time at all getting to know the forum? "All those posts" that were on a thread that was never about the issue you raised in the first place.

I don't mean to be unkind, but if you want people to discuss an issue, handwringing isn't going to get you anywhere. You need to get them interested. At the moment, your posts are rather long and impenetrable, followed by "discuss". It reads a little like an A level question... People are probably more likely to give an opinion if they don't have to do hours of homework in order to form one.

Perhaps you could narrow down the scope a bit, summarise the info in layman's terms (and give the salient points rather than expecting everyone to read through swathes of info), give it some context and also offer your own opinion.

[RosieH]

And ignore shouty David, he's probably got the painters in or something...

[Ted Max]

Eileen, what is the relevance of the "List of Objectors towards a Preferred Option"? It seems to have about 500 names on it, from major landowners to private individuals.

[LondonMix]

The lounge isn't for serious discussion. It's sort of a dumping ground for topics that don't go anywhere else. Try your luck in the drawing room!

Eileen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> oh dear

>

> All those posts and not one about the issue I

> raised. Which is the thread then to attract local

> people who are willing to have a serious exchange

> of thoughts about these planning policy matters?

> They are relevant to this EDF because they affect

> many ED residents as the town centre is on their

> doorstep and what happens there has a big effect

> on their own ED neighbourhood and shopping area.

[Eileen]

Ted Max Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Eileen, what is the relevance of the "List of

> Objectors towards a Preferred Option"? It seems to

> have about 500 names on it, from major landowners

> to private individuals.

I haven't looked at this so am responding to what it seems to be from the title. It sounds like the list of all the people and organisations who sent in objections to the last but one version the council consulted on which was in the summer of 2011. They then produced a revised PNAAP draft which incorporated changes stimulated by those objections or comments or greater clarity on their own part. That version which is called 'The Preferred Option' was consulted on earlier this year. That list of objectors you refer to is likely to be part of the background papers relating to that Preferred Option version. At each stage the list of objectors to the previous version is published along with their objections.

[edhistory]

Eileen,

It's just a list of 474 entries like this extract.

Interesting how many outsiders are sticking their noses in.

John K

[Eileen]

Dear Rosie

Thank you for your thoughtful post which I think deserves a response even if that risks being too long and so illustrating one of your points! So my apologies for that at the start...

>have you actually spent any time at all getting to know the forum?"All those posts" that were on a thread that was never about the issue you raised in the first place.I don't mean to be unkind, but if you want people to discuss an issue, handwringing isn't going to get you anywhere.You need to get them interested. At the moment, your posts are rather long and impenetrable, followed by "discuss". It reads a little like an A level question... People are probably more likely to give an opinion if they don't have to do hours of homework in order to form one. Oh dear Eileen, have you actually spent any time

> at all getting to know the forum? "All those

> posts" that were on a thread that was never about

> the issue you raised in the first place.

>

> I don't mean to be unkind, but if you want people

> to discuss an issue, handwringing isn't going to

> get you anywhere. You need to get them interested.

> At the moment, your posts are rather long and

> impenetrable, followed by "discuss". It reads a

> little like an A level question... People are

> probably more likely to give an opinion if they

> don't have to do hours of homework in order to

> form one.

>

> Perhaps you could narrow down the scope a bit,

> summarise the info in layman's terms (and give the

> salient points rather than expecting everyone to

> read through swathes of info), give it some

> context and also offer your own opinion.

[Eileen]

edhistory Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Eileen,

> It's just a list of 474 entries like this

> extract.

> Interesting how many outsiders are sticking their

> noses in.

> John K

Thanks! I should have looked at this for interest if nothing else but just no time. Actually they may all have a legitimate interest as on this page extract they look either responsible for some policy aspect or are developers or commercial interests if not local people. This is what ordinary citizens who take no interest in this process but complain about what happens to their neighbourhoods need to understand - that the commercial interests watch all this planning policy development like hawks and intervene and comment as they have a right to do, but local people whose neighbourhoods it is say little.

Bearing in mind the comments above that this is off topic, can you suggest a better part of the EDF to have a discussion about planning policy, and its practical application in this mid south Southwark area that we all share?

[Ted Max]

Thanks for answering, Eileen.

In fact, far from a lack of local engagement I was struck by the number of local "normal" people on that list; I recognised several names of people I know from both inside and out of the PNAAP area, as well as all the obvious commercial concerns (of which there were also many). If you look at the whole list there are many "private" objectors listed.

I wondered what the list of objectors actually meant because it doesn't state on the list itself - it's just titled "List of Objectors Towards a Preferred Option". Is this a list of people objecting to the current Preferred Option, or (as seems more likely and as you suggested) a list of people who have made previous objections and therefore had an input into the formation of the latest draft?

You don't know, which is fair enough. You're not in charge of the process, after all. It's not that important - I was mainly struck by the large number and variety of objectors.

I think in terms of stimulating wider debate, unfortunately you're going to have to lay out some of the options for people. With the best will in the world the mildly interested are not going to plough through dozens of maps with black outlines on them and a bunch of formulaic text - even if they suspect there may be something in there that may have an impact on their quality of life. A certain element of spoon feeding is required, but at least you get to direct the debate to the issues you think are important...

So, for example, in broad terms - what is proposed in terms of planning changes of use and in which areas? What are the likely impacts of that? It's time-consuming, and perhaps not worth it but I can't see people piling into the debate otherwise. Most of us can barely concentrate through a full episode of "Hole in the Wall".

[Eileen]

Ted Max Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, for example, in broad terms - what is proposed

> in terms of planning changes of use and in which

> areas? What are the likely impacts of that? It's

> time-consuming, and perhaps not worth it but I

> can't see people piling into the debate otherwise.

> Most of us can barely concentrate through a full

> episode of "Hole in the Wall".

The time to give this kind of info will be when the new text is available - late September / early October. That is the final version for consultation and there will be until 4 December for comments. Which of these EDF sections will be appropriate for it do you think?

[kiera]

I think the general section - East Dulwich issues. I live in the part of East Dulwich included in this plan, so I'm grateful that you've raised this issue and appreciate your explanations - I'll come along tomorrow to your stall at Peckham Rye to find out more.

[RosieH]

Hi Eileen,

Sorry, my post probably sounded more negative than I meant it to. The reason I asked whether you come on here much is because you seemed surprised at the off-topication, which is pretty much guaranteed on any post.

I am interested in what's going on, but I'm at work and have can only dip in and out of the forum in short bursts. While your post was indeed only 5 lines long, it linked to a website where seemingly I had to read 14 separate pdf files - that's what I was referring to when I said swathes of information. In the face of that, I elected not to wade through them all to try to find what I was looking for, when in fact, I didn't know what it was I was actually looking for. So I wondered if you could highlight the key points as you seem to be quite close to it, and then I could start to understand what's what, and read through when I had more time.

Really I was just making the same point as Ted, although he made it better (when does he not?) By and large, we do have short attention spans, or minimal time.

[Eileen]

H Rosie

Thanks for explaining. I'm not surprised at the EDF focus on the off topic issue, and also the 'is it ED or not', as I have experienced it for years,and understand it. I did not want to argue about it as that is fruitless, but tried asking what people would find an acceptable home for such a discussion.

The big expansion of the EDF topics and sections makes it more difficult without being a very active participant to work out what is acceptable enough. I just don?t have time now to do more than dip in now and again. Anyway we are I think in general agreement about the need for info to be packaged for short attention spans and that is a big influence on my work in other quarters. In this particular topic I was just trying to raise awareness of the night time economy v evening economy issue as it seemed very relevant to the nature of the Rye Lane revamp topic.

From your comment it looks like links to major info is also a demotivating thing. One of the problems is that the Council?s info on all this is so indigestible and I have only limited time to make it digestible. Often all I can do is give the web blinks in case anyone does want to see for themselves.

The time for focused digestible info, which I am working on, is when the new PNAAP comes out which is late September. I will probably post a new thread on it when I have got to grips with it myself. Then I hope that the topic doesn?t get derailed by arguments about off topic or is it ED or not. I did post such a PNAAP topic last time round in Feb and it got derailed by such points and I gave up. But maybe it was too taxing a subject for the EDF. But that gets back to which is the best discussion stream.

Would this be permissible ? a very short post in the Issues section on a related topic like why should EDF care about Peckham town centre?, with the first post giving a link to a detailed discussion in the Drawing Room?

Now I am cringing at the length of this post. So sorry, but can?t avoid it in trying to wrap up this interloper sub-thread.

[RosieH]

Haha, don't cringe. I'm going to try to get down to the fete tomorrow, to learn what I can, and yes, I think a thread when the new PNAAP comes out is a great idea.

Don't be discouraged from posting in the Lounge - the Drawing Room gets fewer visitors so I'd avoid posting there - and a little off-topication generally helps keep a thread alive and fun. Sometimes it goes too far, but people do tend to self-regulate for the most part. As for whether it can go in the ED Issues section - that's probably a better question to PM to Admin, with a good rationale of why you think it should be. As you've seen on this thread, it's already raised a heckle or two, and I think could derail a discussion about the actual issues.

Now then - evening versus night economy. Is that what it sounds like it is? Pubs / restaurants as opposed to late night bars and clubs? Is there more to it than that? I rather suspect there might be...

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Eileen, don't sweat over where you put the thread. If necessary, long-suffering Admin will move it.

Since it encompasses Peckham and parts of East Dulwich, I think the Lounge is fine (ignore that miserable bugger who is hassling you).

[Ted Max]

Stick it in General Issues - there's plenty of East Dulwich "proper" affect by the consultation.

(as people who have *looked at the maps* will know)

[RosieH]

Ted, could you just draw me a map, and maybe post it here?

[Eileen]

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Haha, don't cringe. I'm going to try to get down

> to the fete tomorrow, to learn what I can, and

> yes, I think a thread when the new PNAAP comes out

> is a great idea.

>

look forward to meeting you! weather forecast is sunny at times, no rain. Should be a great day. Look for dark green gazebo and Peckham Residents Network stuck on the front.

> Now then - evening versus night economy. Is that

> what it sounds like it is? Pubs / restaurants as

> opposed to late night bars and clubs? Is there

> more to it than that? I rather suspect there

> might be...

an extract from one of my medium/longer posts - above

** http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264275106000448

From ?creative city? to ?no-go areas? ? The expansion of the night-time economy in British town and city centres

Marion Roberts, Central Cities Institute, University of Westminster, 35 Marylebone Road, London NW15LS, UK : **In a time span of 10 years, many English town centres have been transformed from being relatively deserted at night to being filled with concentrations of young drunken people out on the streets until the early hours of the morning. This paper considers this transformation: its origins, process, impacts, policy responses and the lessons that may be derived from it...**

and more, including some muddled language and fog at times.

[Eileen]

RosieH Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ted, could you just draw me a map, and maybe post

> it here?

Rosie I'm not pretending to be Ted? but here is a link to the Council's map http://www.bellenden.net/sites/default/files/PNAAP%20fig%2015%20p85%20character%20area%20boundaries.pdf showing the PNAAP boundary which is almost coterminous with the Peckham & Nunhead Community Council boundary. This gives ammunition to the boundary purists as it deliberately doesn?t include some western streets that are in the Peckham & Nunhead CC area bcause they are included in the ED planning policy area... However street coverage within an admin boundary is not my case for why it is relevant to the EDF and people who take part. It is that admin boundaries are not relevant to how one neighbourhood affects another, they are for very different purposes.

The fact is that Peckham town centre, which is at the heart of the PNAAP in a variety of ways, is also ED's town centre as it is not a neighbourhood centre but has a much wider reach. A lot of ED residents are affected by some aspect of it or another,and vice versa. eg I live in Bellenden near East Duwlich Rd and my neighbourhood stretches from Peckham Rye station to North Cross Road... There are so many different ways Peckham town centre impacts on ED interests,and all seem good reasons for it being a highly relevant topic for the EDF, unless I am ignoring a technical purist rule which is devoid of common sense.

[Huguenot]

I think many people would disagree with Peckham being ED's town centre, including me when I lived in ED. Lordship Lane meets that role admirably.

You are right that what takes place in Peckham has an impact on EDFers, as do things that take place in Camberwell, Nunhead, Forest Hill, Sydenham, Dulwich, Herne Hill etc. etc. etc.

For that reason, all of those subjects are covered in the EDF in the appropriate section.

I'm sure you'll respect that a section called 'ED Issues' is, however, about East Dulwich. If Peckham was East Dulwich, then it wouldn't be called Peckham now, would it? Your programme would be called the East Dulwich Plan.

But it's not.

ED issues for ED issues keeps the place tidy and manageable, and everyone knows where they stand. If we were to make an exception for Peckham, we'd have to make an exception for everywhere else.

That way madness lies.

I suspect that your motivation is by the conviction that ED issues is the 'main section'. As you have been told many times, it is not, and anyway it attracts less activity than the lounge.

I know you have a great deal of respect for the forum Eileen, but you do have a habit of suggesting that rules should always be broken just for you ;-) You really aren't the only person who believes that their thread is more important than everyone else's!

[Jeremy]

Peckham and East Dulwich are close to each other, but have quite distinct and separate centres.

[Eileen]

Thanks to all who have responded to me on various points. I will leave it now till the PNAAP comes along and will do my best to get it into the right slot and probably make gross errors again from ignorance of some nuances.

[mynamehere]

First: Eileen, you are a local treasure. I lined up to thank you on Saturday but the scrum was too intent on talking to you and keeping you for themselves

Second: communities do not start and stop. Possibly an intersection and a slab of broken paving is truely local but everything else fits together like films and books that get bigger and bigger until you have the universe and smaller and smaller until you have a higgs boson

Third: There are 3 councillors that post by name. Very clear and I think all three of you are wonderful and brave and honest. I'm just a resident in a house on a street as I imagine most of the rest of you are. I pay taxes and have opinions based on how my life has played out to this point. I just wonder who the handful are who say things with the implication that they have amazing political connections and power and insights that cannot be shared but which make asses out of x or y or z.

Is the third group councillors who chose annonymity? Do you work for government and have an instictive fear of ideas that aren't yours? I'm referring to comments like the one directed to me elsewhere when I opined that not enough has been done over the years to connect parts of Southwark to high speed transit. Yes, I understand this might be a difficult problem but certainly I am allowed to voice my observation, felt everyday by hundreds of others. And I would think a great politician/ thinker would rollup their sleeves and enjoy the intellectual/ fiscal/ spacial problem of improving and correcting an historical oversight