former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[James Barber]

Hi pipsky2008,

Will take a look.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Thanks, James.

[pipsky2008]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi pipsky2008,

> Will take a look.

I appreciate that. Thank you

[LS1234]

Hi James. Have you had any ideas on how we might be able to get the new dropped kerb rules changed? Thanks.

[intexasatthe moment]

Hi James ,I'm watching this space for news about yellow lines to new dropped kerbs . And whether Southwark really intend to routinely extend them 2 metres each side to neighbouring properties .

[LS1234]

They are doing it already...

[MarkT]

James,

dropped kerbs not only have a dedicated thread on the forum, but have now been separately raised (so to speak) with regard to school parent parking. May I suggest a way forward?

The new rules are contained in The Southwark Streetscape Design Manual (SSDM) which has been written by officers. The Authority for the writing of that Manual seems to have been granted by:

the Cabinet Member for Transport, Environment, and Recycling on 23rd October 2012 - Report title: Adoption of Southwark Streetscape Design Manual, from the Strategic Director Environment & Leisure.

The SSDM now being applied seems to have been finalised over a year later. There was some public consultation leading to that Report, for the Member's Decision, but to illustrate the degree of detail that was left for officers to fill in, here are one of the Policies and one of the Objectives, that were directly agreed by the elected Member through that Report. They seem to be rather broad brush strokes:

Strategic Design Policy SD03: ?Improved road safety and reduced road danger?

Strategic Design Objective SDviii: ?Road danger reduction: Require proposals to tackle safety concerns by addressing the things that are the root cause of actual or perceived danger (rather than restricting users likely to be impacted by those dangers). Require that safety improvements provide enhanced conditions for pedestrians, pedal cyclists and social activities, rather than solving safety issues by designing these users and activities out.?

I don?t think anyone would disagree with those aspirations, but the resulting rules are being questioned on this Forum. My suggestion of a way forward relates to the abbreviation ?SPD? (Supplementary Planning Document) in Paragraph 21 of that Report:

?21 Notwithstanding the recommendation to progress the Framework Plan as a SPD it is recommended that Interim Highway Strategic Design Objectives and Strategic Design Policies in appendix 1 be agreed by the Cabinet Member. This will allow the Highway Authority to use these to permit the further structured development of the SSDM whilst awaiting the agreement of the SPD in several years time. These Interim Highway Authority Strategic Design Policies and Strategic Design Objectives will be superseded by those contained in the Framework Plan SPD once this is agreed.?

That means that the Decision has already been taken to put it all in a Planning Document. As an SPD, it should go out in draft form, for a statutory period of public consultation as set out Southwark?s Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). The policy could therefore be tested in the public domain, eg for safety, practicality, legality and community relations.

The whole process of finalizing an SDP may indeed take years, but as this would be a new, rather than a replacement SDP, it would have initial ?weight? from day one, with no competing rules, in deciding each application. As a planning application, open to public comment, each case would be decided, under that policy, on its own merits. Perhaps double yellow lines would be judged appropriate in one case, and not in another.

The rules now causing consternation on the ED forum were supposed to be ?interim?. The Decision to produce an SDP was taken nearly 2 years ago, why has this not already happened?

MarkT

[intexasatthe moment]

Mark ,is there any way you could simplify your above post as I'm afraid I'm struggling to grasp all of it ?

I think I get most of it ,but I'm not clear on the last 2 paragraphs ,particularly the penultimate one . Are you saying that each dropped kerb should be treated as a planning application ? Is that the suggested way forward ? And are you saying that the decision for this to be part of an SDP ,and therefore consulted on ,has been by passed ?

I'm not being picky or anything ,just a bit slow !

It sounds as though you've got a really good grasp on this ,which is great because I think we're going to need expert knowledge .

[MarkT]

intexasatthe moment,

let's not hijack James' thread. I'll respond to you on the dropped kerb thread.

MarkT

[intexasatthe moment]

Sorry ,good point .

[just_browsing]

James,

Out of your specific area, perhaps, but no doubt with some potential with regard to anything from traffic flows to local economy boosting - any initial thoughts on the burgeoning campaign for the Peckham Lido to be resurrected/exhumed?

Thanks

[James Barber]

Hi just_browsing,

Great idea recreating Peckham Lido - I signed the petition several weeks ago and would encourage other to do the same. Please see - http://www.change.org/p/southwark-council-re-open-peckham-rye-lido

Sign up to the Facebook page - https://www.facebook.com/peckhamlido

And follow -

[Zenoria]

Hi Mr Barber,

Apparently ED Warehouse is under offer - any word on what it might be?

Thank you!

[James Barber]

Hi Zenoria,

I was approached by a developers agent several times earlier this year asking about it becoming a restaurant. I made it very clear this would be an unacceptable use to the neighbours who already suffer from the minicab office. They have decided to push ahead.

Or it might be someone proposing to convert it into residential property.

The developers keep trying to describe it as being on Lordship Lane - I'm sure they'll try and hoodwink planning officers in this way. So if you spot any notices on a lamppost please report it to me.

[cwjlawrence]

Hi james,

Is there any news yet on this years Cleaner, greener, safer scheme yet please?

Thanks,

Chris

[James Barber]

Hi cwklawrence,

Yes, applications need to be made during October ie. now for schemes to be delivered financial year 15/16.

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200256/cleaner_greener_safer/1554/applications

If anyone plans to apply please do get in touch if you need infomration about typical costs of things etc or any advice.

[Beej]

'suffer' from a minicab office? How so?

[StraferJack]

is a restaurant on a side-street mere yards of the main Lordship Lane junction really so bad?

It would be a much different restaurant to anything else in the area for a start - much bigger space instead of the usual shoeboxs (© ????)

That's got to be a plus

Would street residents "suffer"? It doesn't seem to be a problem in other parts of London where I can see many restaurants down side streets of the main drags

[intexasatthe moment]

James - have you made any progress on Southwark's plan to install yellow lines over properties neighbouring new dropped kerbs giving access to park on a forecourt ?

[Beej]

there's just something that makes me groan inside when I hear East Dulwichites brandishing the word "suffer" about

[James Barber]

Hi Beej,

Dulwich Cars minicab office is located on Zenoria Street close to its junction with Lordship Lane. It operates 24/7. Their drives park up leaving engines running, coming and going from what otherwise is a very quiet residential street. This happens through the night. So all these issues of a high turnover of people coming and going 24/7 residents from Zenoria and Oxonian reported to me by a number of resident, that it causes them a loss of amenity and much inconvenience. I've interpreted this as suffering.

Hi StraferJack,

Yes, when the applicants wanted long hours and assumed zero customers would travel along Zenoria/Oxonian.

They also hadnt sorted out a proper fire exit and were talking to planners as being 8-10 Lordship Lane when they're not.

[StraferJack]

sorry James - I'm not understanding this

"Yes, when the applicants wanted long hours and assumed zero customers would travel along Zenoria/Oxonian."

Long hours fair enough, can see the need to manage that but the applicants assumed what about customers?

The ratio of people who travel down from East Dulwich Grove to LLis expected to increase significantly because of the opening of this restaurant?

I don't really see that. Far more likely custom will come from peolpe on The Lane deciding they want to go to the restaurant and go past Nero surely?

[LS1234]

Hi James. Are you able to help with the new double yellow line dropped kerb issue? If not, have you any suggestions of who else might be able to? Thanks.

[intexasatthe moment]

I'm beginning to think it's only you and me that are bothered by this new crazy policy LS1234 .

[LS1234]

I don't think many people knows about it as it's a new rule this year and has only just started to happen around the borough. People are going to mind though when double yellow lines start cropping up in front of their houses! I have now asked three councillor for help but am getting nowhere, should I assume we're stuck with it James?!