former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[James Barber]

Reading the London Mayor's Draft Municipal Waste Management Strategy, I know I need to get out more, it highlights that on average flats on estates only recycle around 10%. This is a mega problem as half of London's homes is in the form of flats. In Southwark I've been told by a council officers we have 70-80%.

[karter]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi edf,

> During the summer we should expect to see a proper

> pedestrian crossing of Lordship Lane where

> Sommerfields/coop shop is.

Hi James,

Have you carried out a proper formal consultation this time round with the locals and what do TFL make of thi?? especially as it would take up the bus lane and would be situated on a curve.

[James Barber]

Hi karter,

A consultation was completed last summer. Conusultation papers with freepost reply, email, etc was delivered roughly to all homes within something like 200m radius of areas from Goose Green to Northcross Road - from memory 1,200 homes. Huge majority wanted a crossing outside Somerfield supporting the views I and my ward councillor had gleaned from many doorsteps in the area and residents surveys. Hence why we requested the works.

The problem was TfL Buses stating that a zebra crossing could not proceed as so many people would clearly want to use it to cross the road and this would delay buses. We suggested via council officers that narrowing Lordship Lane at the pelican crossing clsoe to Northcross Road would allow shorter green time for pedestrians and thus less red time for buses. They weren't interested. We suggested meeting on site. No interest.

So we've now been told that TfL buses could probably accept a Pelican crossing outside Somerfield. Not as good as a zebra but better than dashing across hoping to make the other side.

The bend. We had originally hoped that the kerb would be built out on both sides so that the bend would make little difference to a zebra crossing. It also halves the distance to cross. It would also minimise issues around car parking being lost as one car park space from each side would be lost. But then the bend would'nt be an issue for a Pelican as the lights will be clearly visible.

Hope this makes sense.

[James Barber]

Heber School lights are coming on at 4am.

I've had one resident contact me about this as it wakes them up shining into bedroom. Any other experiencing this?

Eitherway I've asked how we can hel pthe school avoid this, save some money and reduce its CO2 emissions.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Probably cleaners. They come to St John's at some ungodly hour, usually making a huge racket opening the gates.

[karter]

Dear James,

Thanks for your swift reply.

The consultation last year was for raising the tables ( ends of roads) on the end close to GG, also looking at the East Dulwich Grove and LL junction and also regarding having a crossing outside Somerfield. Only 10% of those surveys were returned and correspondence has been with Sonny Udegan, Chris Mascord and Todd Trehlow. The tables were raised but the crossing were not put in due to the lack of response to people actually wanting those crossings so was thrown out, as only 10% actually responded, you went door to door you say and people were up for it, you say. You also say that you would like the crossings so that you and your family can cross the road safely. Fair enough. It's up to TFL though, not you right. This time round you could perhaps carry out a proper, formal consultation and maybe have an open day up at the library. Nobody has been killed to warrant the crossings ( don't laugh PGC as you did last time ;-)). Having spoken to most of the traders and alot of the residents in that patch where Somerfields is, most of them were against a crossing but up for traffic calming, perhaps a sign and speed monitor. The ED grove section also needs something. What do you think?

thanks

[edf]

karter Wrote:

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

> Dear James,

>

> Thanks for your swift reply.

>

> The consultation last year was for raising the

> tables ( ends of roads) on the end close to GG,

> also looking at the East Dulwich Grove and LL

> junction and also regarding having a crossing

> outside Somerfield. Only 10% of those surveys were

> returned and correspondence has been with Sonny

> Udegan, Chris Mascord and Todd Trehlow. The

> tables were raised but the crossing were not put

> in due to the lack of response to people actually

> wanting those crossings so was thrown out, as only

> 10% actually responded, you went door to door you

> say and people were up for it, you say. You also

> say that you would like the crossings so that you

> and your family can cross the road safely. Fair

> enough. It's up to TFL though, not you right. This

> time round you could perhaps carry out a proper,

> formal consultation and maybe have an open day up

> at the library. Nobody has been killed to warrant

> the crossings ( don't laugh PGC as you did last

> time ;-)). Having spoken to most of the traders

> and alot of the residents in that patch where

> Somerfields is, most of them were against a

> crossing but up for traffic calming, perhaps a

> sign and speed monitor. The ED grove section also

> needs something. What do you think?

>

> thanks

You seam to have made a huge assumption that no response is in favour of the present situation. Please can you publish the actual reposonse statistics. As well as the method used to get these figures, was it done by writing to people or by going door to door when no-one answered would count as a no-response? Also a survey of this type should take into acocunt the whole catchment area of the shops not just one or two streets which may be effeted by bad parcking due less parking on LL. Therefore can you clarify the criteria used to decide whos opionion counts.

If we assume that no response in a survey, for example the election, wss infavour of the present situation then nothing would every change infact the current government would win by a huge majority; I am sure that the current councillors would love this as it would be a job for life. However nothing would ever change and it does not represent democratic principles. I may be misunderstaning the sitaution but there must huge majority against the scheme to prevent the safety improvements going forward.

However you have rasied a few good points about how it would affect busses, and that the shop would not favour it as it's there vechicals and customers vechicals which are causing the problems.

[James Barber]

Hi Karter,

I can assure you the crossing was supported by vast majority of those that responded to the formal consultation. I'm sorry if you personally don't agree a crossing there is a good idea or necessary.

The reason this crossing didn't proceed is mostly down to TfL buses causing council officers concerns and taking fright at what TfL might do if a crossing proceeded.

East Dulwich councillors made a big fuss. Several council officers have since changed. East Dulwich councillors have been assured a crossing as per public formally counsulted support will be constructed and funds have been found to do this.

[James Barber]

Hi peckhamgatecrasher,

I hadn't thought of cleaners at 4am. The lighting comes on term time, weekends, holiday times, xmas day. So I don't think this is down to cleaners.

I'm sure the school would like to half the electricity it uses for this illimination. Most likely they don't even know this is happening.

I've explained how we might be able to help with a really cool timer that can cope with term time, holidays, weekends, lighting levels, etc.

[James Barber]

Residents on Etherow Street have highlighted that no.12 and 40 buses which terminate and turnaround there are dumping all the rubbish they clear out of their buses and overfilling Southwarks rubbish bins. Technically this is trade waste.

Council officers have visited the no.40 bus depot in Camberwell.

They've been assured all bus drivers will be told to dispose of rubbish thoughtfully. Most of this rubbish, around 90%, is newspapers.

So council officers are also arranging with our waste contractors Veolia to deploy recycling bins. These will be in place next month and with the bus drivers help resolve the current problems and result in more recycling.

[KalamityKel]

James re the crossing with "majority of responses" - what are the actual statistics of this? how many responses? how many for and against?

there was much debate on the edf at the time and many were against the idea of the crossing...

yes I appreciate the EDF does not represent all of ED but I am curious to know how, even after speaking with many local residents, the majority comes up in favor.

[karter]

what KK said.(tu)

[intexasatthe moment]

Agree with Karter and KK - would like details of the vast majority and what number it's a majority of .

[James Barber]

When I became a councillor I was keen for work to study Lordship Lane from the pedestrians point of view. That resulted in Living Streets being contracted to undertake a study which you can see via the following link:

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/uploads/FILE_40766.pdf

Dulwich Community Council discussed Lordship Lane traffic issues 24 September 2008 item 12 but I can't see copy of any presentation on the Southwark website:

http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/Data/Dulwich%20Community%20Council/20080924/Agenda/Agenda.pdf

I'll try and make time this weekend to search through my filling. I'm loath to ask officers to spend hours digging out something that was so clear cut.

[James Barber]

Flats above Somerfields.

These flats were granted planning permission 2/2/2005 before I became a councillor. Since being built condition 2 related to arrangements for storitng domestic refuse have never been met. Residents of the 1 x 3 bed, 4 x 2 bed and 5 x 1 bed homes have had knowhere to store rubbish or recyling. They have no real choice but to put black plastic bags out on the pavements with all the issues that creates.

The site owner has applied via planning application 09-AP-0678 to resolve this.

The suggested solution has been formally refused by council planning officers.

The next step is formal enforcement of the owner for not meeting a planning condition.

Eventually the problem will be resolve one way or another.

[intexasatthe moment]

Request for more details re zebra crossing Lordship Lane

Thanks for the 2 links James.

And thank you for offering to spend time looking for the info.that we've requested.

I feel a bit as though I'm being told off by you ,so apologies if I come across as not caring that in asking for information this involves you in work trying to find it .

As an individual I don't have access to the details that I would like but believe ,perhaps wrongly ,that in your role you do .

Personally I've had very negative experiences with consultations and I'm afraid that I do like to have claims fleshed out by knowing the details of the consultation that I'm told supports them.

I think many people have little time for consultations and it may be that you spending time feeding back on one and providing figures when asked will restore faith so that people actually bother to complete them.

So your efforts might be for the general good ? Not just to answer queries from one or two individuals who you think should be satisfied by your more general ,unsupported remarks ?

[KalamityKel]

That still doesn't answer my question - any surveyor can mix a report together like that. I wanted to know how many people actually answered the survey in the first place.

[buggie]

Surely rather than going by the results of a survey, watching how many people attempt to/do cross the road near Somerfield would provide evidence of the need for this crossing? Even as walking up/down the lane there are always several people crossing here and the zebra crossing will surely ease this - and, as not using traffic lights won't cause long waits.

Why is the crossing such a bad idea KK and Karter?

[KalamityKel]

the position of it would be dangerous to road users. It's on a bend which surely any one with sense could see this is not ideal, it would push parked vehicles further along in both directions (in particular delivery lorries) creating congestion, and further to this the added danger of blind spots occuring on the Somerfield side of the proposed crossing is that not something to worry about?. These are my issues of which I have expressed in the past.

I think it unproductive to mention in that report the unwilliness of retailers to support the crossing for reasons given it might effect trade. Why had it failed to mention their concerns for safety?

Sadly no matter how many crossings you could place on Lordship Lane people will still cross where ever they choose (mostly ignoring the crossings anyway). perhaps more should be done to promote better road safety awareness to pedestrians...

edited to add: this issue continues to surface and has done over at least 20 odd years. Has no one thought to consider why everyone (residents and shop owners alike) is/are so against it?

[Mark]

KalamityKel Wrote:

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

> Has no one

> thought to consider why everyone (residents and

> shop owners alike) is/are so against it?

But the councillor said the response from the survey of residents was that a "Huge majority wanted a crossing outside Somerfield". It seems to be a case that residents want it but the traders don't, and it's not easy coming up with a compromise to appease both sides. Perhaps the council could commission a Living Streets Sustainable Shopping Survey (as mentioned in the report) to help move the debate on?

[eddie]

One part of the consultation results that has not been mentioned was that the actual forms were misleading. There was space on the form for those households taking part in the consultation to complete their name and address. What the form did not say was that if residents did not complete their name and address, then their returned form would be ignored and not included. A large number of returned forms were ignored. The Council have admitted that this was the case. One of the reasons that this crossing did not go ahead as planned was because that legal action was planned against Southwark Council. The actual FULL consultation results should be easily available from Southwark Council for review.

[tillsworth]

well it would give the footway back to pedestrians.....discouraging cycling on the footway to boot! Seems like a good idea to me!!

[Administrator]

Please can we keep this on topic of "East Dulwich councillor - can I help?", if people want to continue discussing the crossing outside Somerfield please start a new thread.

[intexasatthe moment]

But it's good that James can read these posts and see that it's not just one individual who is persuing something only of interest to them.

[Administrator]

I agree but I think he would also read a thread specifically about the crossing at Somerfield. This is a unique thread where a councillor is offering to help to people and their issues, I am just trying to keep it that way rather than it turn into a five page discussion about a specific subject.