former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[edhistory]

> Currently I do not believe any restrictions of professional dog walkers are in place.

Just need prior Council registration and consent.

See current bye law attached.

[Abe_froeman]

"Just because 85% may be closed to the speed limit doesn't mean the other 15% speeding should be ignored"

It's not a case of ignoring an issue, more a case of accepting there are limited resources and the council can't solve every problem. What would it cost to stop the 15% who speed on every street in Southwark? How many people would you need to employ to achieve that?

I think the frustration is borne out of the fetishisation of the very small problems in just one road at the same time that the council is having its pants pulled down on planning applications that may cause far more inconvenince and risk to far greater numbers of residents, like the situation at marks and spencer. The obscene expenditure on what looks like a pet project doesnt help.

[catma]

I'd be a bit annoyed if I had to pay for brown bags just because I have no spaceor routine use for a brown bin! Is that some kind of extra tax on hard working ordinary, don't have a spacious front garden with room for umpteen bins I don't use frequently person???

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi Nigello,

> I popped in on Saturday and asked for brown bags.

> Given 5 and asked for more and given another 5.

> This was Grove Vale library.

>

> Hi 73jem,

> Southwark announced plans some months ago to

> charge for them. I wonder if they're running them

> down in preparation for that. Get them free while

> you can.

> I'll also ask again for more to be supplied to

> both our local libraries.

>

> EDIT: Add link to Southwark Council plans to

> charge for brown bags when bottom of page 3

> -http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s5973

> 0/Appendix%204%20Waste%20Services%20fees%20and%20c

> harges.pdf

> at rate of ?7.50 for 10 down bags. This was meant

> to start 1 April this year - but I've yet to be

> charged for this. Looks like a daft decision the

> council hasn't been stupid to implement....yet.

[jaywalker]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> hi rich,

> I'm bemused. Traffic speed analysed to see what

> 85% of vehicles doing. Just because 85% may be

> closed to the speed limit doesn't mean the other

> 15% speeding should be ignored. Can you imagine

> such an attitude to GBH or worse. Speeding

> vehicles much higher chance of causing death or

> serious injury. The 85% of vehicles going 15-20

> stand only a tiny chance of killing. Those doing

> 25-35mph stand only a small chance of not being

> killed or maimed as well as less time to dodge and

> not be hit.

James, I fully accept you are bemused. But please accept I am bemused by what you are saying here. No doubt we should both look to the assumptions we are making; however, I find it very difficult not to be convinced by what rch has said about this - perhaps you could explain the opportunity costs involved, or why this PARTICULAR street has been singled out for this expenditure when drivers are routinely (and way more than 15%) driving over 20mph in other speed controlled streets (not least Lordship Lane itself)? The point being that on LL and some other streets the variance is MUCH higher than on the narrow Melbourne (that already has bumps). Any driver could confirm this. This is not to say there will not be a fatality on Melbourne in its current state (one prays not). It is to say that such an event seems much less likely than on other road situations in ED.

The 15% figure seems of no interest at all unless accompanied by a supporting figure for standard deviation AND comparable figures for surrounding streets in ED so that expenditure can be prioritised.

[Abe_froeman]

Jaywalker, Southwark did commission a survey which found the 15%tile above the speed limit on Lordship Lane were travelling a lot faSter than the traffic on Melbourne grove.

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/13539/melbourne_grove_south_safety_review_and_feasibility_study_report

It's on page 8. The average speed on Melbourne grove is below the speed limit, the average on Lordship Lane is above the limit. There's no logic to spending ?35k on a road that does not have a speeding issue.

[clive3300]

James - can you help with trying to stop the anti-social behaviour continually occurring in the Goose Green children's play area each Saturday night as most Sundays, the park is trashed? This Sunday morning with my children, I discovered that some lovely people had smashed something like 6 wine bottles amongst the equipment. It was done apparently methodically - 1 smashed on the merry go round, two smashed on top of the metal climbing frames and others around the ground. It was a complete minefield of shards of glass and ridiculously dangerous for small children (though amazingly did not stop several parents letting their kids play around it). A few weeks ago, the bins had been torn out of the ground (suggesting people with adult strength had been involved) and the contents emptied all over the ground. This is now beyond just kids being kids or whatever and appears to be escalating.

Can you please liaise with the police to come past several times each weekend night and move these people on? If I complain directly to the police I am fairly sure that either (1) nothing will be done at all bar sending me some sort of letter or (2) they'll pop past once only and that will be the end of it. Ideally they will commit to coming past enough to make these "people" move their party spot someplace else.

Many thanks

clive3300

[Nigello]

Maybe the parents ought to have picked up the glass and allowed their children and other children to play in safety. A responsible adult ought to be able to remove a relatively small amount of rubbish - even broken glass - without coming to any harm, but most folk simply CBA. (I speak as someone who CBA and who does pick up cans, bottles etc.)

I agree, though, that the police ought to be told and asked to patrol there at the times in question.

[clive3300]

Since you raised it, myself and my children binned a bottle's worth or so before realising the glass was covering a wide area. Removing the large pieces is one thing but the tiny shards are everywhere and can go through shoes. It is not a small job.

[Abe_froeman]

Of course the parents are at fault here and not the yobs who leave smashed bottles, beer cans, scraps of fried chicken and kebab boxes and other detritus lying around, week in week out.

[Rosetta]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> > Currently I do not believe any restrictions of

> professional dog walkers are in place.

>

> Just need prior Council registration and consent.

>

> See current bye law attached.

Interesting. How do they get the consent?

[James Barber]

Hi edhistory,

I would suggest supplying the service exclusively in the park is covered by this provision. Not starting the service somewhere else, walking through the park, and leaving and still undertaking the service.

The council would need to specifically state a service that visited the park.

Equally the transaction takes place elsewhere.

Otherwise the council would not have had to introduce a specific charge for people running fitness training in council parks.

edhistory Wrote:

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

> > Currently I do not believe any restrictions of

> professional dog walkers are in place.

>

> Just need prior Council registration and consent.

>

> See current bye law attached.

[James Barber]

Hi Abe_,

A number of other quieter streets with less traffic and less speeding we're previously introduced speed humps and they've done most of the job of solving that speeding problem - Chesterfield Grove, Ashbourne Grove to name just two local streets.

I don't recall people being against solving the problem on those quieter streets with similar numbers of residents.

And the traffic/highways team is totally different different to the planning teams. My lot when we ran the council made planning enforcement. I've taken up 4 issues so far this month and these are being worked on by officers.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> "Just because 85% may be closed to the speed limit

> doesn't mean the other 15% speeding should be

> ignored"

>

> It's not a case of ignoring an issue, more a case

> of accepting there are limited resources and the

> council can't solve every problem. What would it

> cost to stop the 15% who speed on every street in

> Southwark? How many people would you need to

> employ to achieve that?

>

> I think the frustration is borne out of the

> fetishisation of the very small problems in just

> one road at the same time that the council is

> having its pants pulled down on planning

> applications that may cause far more inconvenince

> and risk to far greater numbers of residents, like

> the situation at marks and spencer. The obscene

> expenditure on what looks like a pet project

> doesnt help.

[James Barber]

hi Clive,

I've mentioned it to the council parks team and the Police Safer Neighbourhood Team.

I;ve asked them to tell me what they're going to do about it. Clearly unacceptable anti social behaviour.

clive3300 Wrote:

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

> James - can you help with trying to stop the

> anti-social behaviour continually occurring in the

> Goose Green children's play area each Saturday

> night as most Sundays, the park is trashed? This

> Sunday morning with my children, I discovered that

> some lovely people had smashed something like 6

> wine bottles amongst the equipment. It was done

> apparently methodically - 1 smashed on the merry

> go round, two smashed on top of the metal climbing

> frames and others around the ground. It was a

> complete minefield of shards of glass and

> ridiculously dangerous for small children (though

> amazingly did not stop several parents letting

> their kids play around it). A few weeks ago, the

> bins had been torn out of the ground (suggesting

> people with adult strength had been involved) and

> the contents emptied all over the ground. This is

> now beyond just kids being kids or whatever and

> appears to be escalating.

>

> Can you please liaise with the police to come past

> several times each weekend night and move these

> people on? If I complain directly to the police I

> am fairly sure that either (1) nothing will be

> done at all bar sending me some sort of letter or

> (2) they'll pop past once only and that will be

> the end of it. Ideally they will commit to coming

> past enough to make these "people" move their

> party spot someplace else.

>

> Many thanks

> clive3300

[rch]

Hi James... we're going around in the same circles again. Ashbourne and Chesterfield have a different road layout than Melbourne with different traffic issues.

The roads are wider so the knock-on issues from the passing problems are less extreme and the houses are set further back from the roadside, so they aren't affected as much by the vibrational issues.

In other words, the One Size Fits All mentality doesn't work...

Those of us who are concerned about how this is being handled (at a constitutional level as well as technically) are now at the point where we just want to protect our properties... once the MGTA group have the humps, hopefully in locations that won't cause damage, then maybe we can look at addressing the real traffic problems on Melbourne Grove!

Abe - in an effort to protect my home, I've now circumvented the obstacles and am liaising with the cabinet member and I'm keeping in touch with the residents of the second deputation where possible (no one from the MGTA group will speak to me, or they just repeat the same mantras). In the meantime, there's even more madness that I've discovered, which I don't have time to write out. I'm still happy to liaise with any councillor who wants to actually talk to me and I'm copying them on my emails to the cabinet member, which I suspect is just annoying them.

My prediction is that everything is being stalled until the review of the community councils is complete and devolved highways powers are taken away from the CCs...

[first mate]

I thought fitness trainers had to pay for a licence to operate in any if the S'wark parks?

[first mate]

Rch,

Thanks for update. When you have a moment please do tell about further madness you have uncovered. BTW think you are right about the stalling. Is there any way to try to oush this through before devolution of powers?

[James Barber]

Hi rch,

As I've repeatedly stated to you both verbally and by email, we've requested of council officials and they've agreed that the houses with cellars, of which your home is one, don't have full humps outside them.

Really not sure how many times I have to repeat this response to your understandable concern.

As with Ashbourne and Chesterfield the majority of your neighbours would like full humps and so that's what we're doing - except on your bit.

Hi first mate,

They now do if they run and operate their classes from a Southwark Park.

[rch]

Thanks for replying, James, but this is the first time I've seen this confirmed in writing and I now feel that any verbal promises are too vague. I haven't been cc'd on any of your email updates to residents (although residents have contacted me for advice citing your emails) and all that council officials have said to me is that "we are aware of your concerns", which is meaningless.

On the other hand, the problem with this terrace isn't just the cellars... it's the Thames Water flood pumps along the length of the terrace and the unstable Victorian water mains in the junction which have burst twice now. Some of the newer residents of the terrace aren't even aware of the implications of this.

So, without going into long explanations again, what I'm actually trying to confirm is that the seven speed cushion upgrades that the engineer's report cited (and which I believe councillors approved funding for at the last DCC meeting, but I don't have access to the minutes yet) will only be six upgrades - in other words, I want to be reassured that the speed cushions in front of our terrace won't simply be offset to a nearby location - because the locations of the existing cushions are cited to avoid problems, so moving them at random could simply cause other problems.

There appears to have been a turnover of council staff with no continuity, which is why I've asked the cabinet member to ask an engineer to do a walk through with me. If nothing else, I have copies of corrected Thames Water diagrams which I suspect haven't been updated in the council records yet.

And I agree that most residents think that full length humps will solve the perceived problems, but I think someone still needs to be prepared to address the genuine issues once the humps are installed. Some of the incidents I'm seeing on a daily basis are quite shocking, and they're nothing to do with speeding, so humps won't make a difference.

BTW, the Community Roadwatch program has now been reviewed and some of the roads which have been monitored have now been removed from the list because speeding issues haven't been confirmed. But the one road which is remaining on the monitoring list is Barry Road, as that is displaying genuine monitored issues.

first mate - we should probably start another thread so that we don't divert James' councillor work on this thread. I have no idea what to call it, but it would be useful for the local community to be able to discuss various issues with a view towards supporting each other.

[James Barber]

So the latest I've found out. The charging of ?7.50 per ten brown garden waste bags was expected o raise ?20,000 each year. The delay in charging is that the IT systems and processes aren't in place yet to make this happen and wont be this financial year.

So keep stocking up and Grove Vale library always seems to have some when I visit.

They offer 5 but will concede another 5 if you ask.

Regards James.

73jem Wrote:

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

> James, I have noticed that the brown paper sacks

> for extra garden refuse usually available in

> libraries are in short supply.

>

> As we are coming into the season for garden

> clearance, please would you confirm that there is

> no plan to phase these bags out.

>

> I would be happy to pay for them, but do hope that

> they will be available in the future, it is

> difficult to dispose of all the year's growth in

> the garden otherwise if you do not have transport.

[Nigello]

Only take what you need!

Most gardens in ED are pretty small and wouldn't need much more than five bags, but some around the library are likely to be bigger.

[James Barber]

Indeed Nigello.

[73jem]

Many thanks, James, for your helpful research about this. Great to know what is going on.

[Vanessa3]

Hi James,

Several years ago I raised a question about the safety of the Whateley Road / Fellbrig Road junction. I am one of the many parents who walk children to Heber Road & find crossing this junction really dangerous. The traffic heading down Whateley road rarely stick to the 20mph limit. Since the opening of the new Harris Academy on the corner of Whateley Road & Lordship Lane, traffic has increased considerably. If the junction is deemed 'safe' due to the lack of accidents, could this junction be considered for a 'lollipop' person during the school run?

Cheers,

Vanessa

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Nigello Wrote:

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

> Maybe the parents ought to have picked up the

> glass and allowed their children and other

> children to play in safety. A responsible adult

> ought to be able to remove a relatively small

> amount of rubbish - even broken glass - without

> coming to any harm, but most folk simply CBA. (I

> speak as someone who CBA and who does pick up

> cans, bottles etc.)

Speaking as someone that does quite often show up at 7am on a Sunday morning at the playground (sometimes I even take the kid), it's not easy to clear up a whole playground of rubbish while simultaneously making sure your child doesn't swan dive off the top of a climbing frame. I don't often pack gloves, broom and shovel into the pram but maybe I should start. I'll pick up the worst of stuff but I'm not going to be able to clear away a ton of smashed glass.

In addition to kids and dickheads making a mess, I also think there is a hardware problem with the bins: if it's busy, they get full and people balance their crap on top of the bins (and obviously they scatter everywhere). If there's food chucked in the bins, I suspect the foxes are digging it out (which again scatters stuff everywhere). More bins with a flap might reduce the problem. But tbh I would have thought the best thing would be to get a sweeper around at 6am every day and to stop the naughtiness at night (I have no real idea how realistic that is).

[bil]

thc Wrote:

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

> Dear James

>

> Do you think there's any possibility of the cycle

> hire scheme being extended further into Southwark?

> I haven't heard anything on this in a while and

> can't find anything about it in the mayoral

> candidates' manifestos.

>

> This article

> (http://www.citymetric.com/transport/why-south-eas

> t-london-doesnt-have-boris-bikes-805) seems to

> suggest that Southwark Council would need to stump

> up ?2 million. Is it just about the money, or is

> there some other reason why our corner of London

> has been excluded from the scheme?

>

> Thanks

> thc

Dear James

Any news on this?

Thanks

Bil