former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[James Barber]

Hi Annabel42,

Please email me or PM me your address and the missed collection details and I'll try and help.

Since the food waste/fortnightly collections started many more complaints about the service.

Hi Zak,

I'm sorry you feel that. The problems haven't magically gone. Another family on Derwent have told me they're selling up and leaving the area and the deciding factor for them was inability to reasonably park in the area and feeling East Dulwich vibe wasn't for them anymore. Hopefully other locals bruises will heal quicker.

The Labour administration applied to Transport for London for the funds to investigate controlled parking. Of the 130 something complaints over 3 yr period about parking pressures from all of Southwark 44 came from this tiny area of Southwark. Failing to investigate could have been viewed as maladministration.

It's absolutely clear most of the streets consulted don't want any controlled parking. I'm chuffed my special request that the consultation results be reviewed by both the Camberwell and Dulwich Community Councils took place - if this hadn't happened I suspect we would now be having some form of controlled parking decided without discussion by the cabinet member.

My only regrets are the consultation document wasn't even handed and the mis information, possibly from genuine long term fears, of people stating controlled parking was proposed across all of East Dulwich.

We knew before the DCC meeting that the 3 Tories and 1 Lib Dem would be voting no and after the Labour leader said no we were pretty sure the 2 Labour cllrs would vote no as well. So 6/9 cllrs had made their decision before the meeting. As ED cllrs we didn't want to make up our minds until we heard from the deputations and debate. Politically it might have been wiser to play a game of voting no to please the most people but I didn't enter politics to play games with peoples lives. So I conferred several times with my ward colleagues. We voted for a solution and felt despite the imperfection this was the right thing to do.

Deputations - We had SSBA representing some of the Lordship Lane traders telling us it would reduce visitor parking and we had Zenoria and Derwent residents telling us 1hr controlled parking Mon-Fri would see more parking for shoppers and visitors. The Zenoria ones saying 1hr Mon-Fri wasn't enough and the Derwent ones begging for 18month experiment. We had Giles eloquently highlighting the risk of anything spreading. No one was offering any alternatives to solve the problem. Either they argued no problem existed, then why the oppoisition to streets that wanted controlled parking, OR their is a problem and they don't want any risk it might spread and be dissapated more widely.

Can we please get back to what this thread is meant to be about. People highlighting problems that I try and help them with.

If anyone wants to debate controlled parking or parking issues their are other threads for that. If anyone is desperate to debate it with me I'll happilly meet up over a convivial pint.

[fredricketts]

Once again, Democracy in action in Southwark. Proposed Pelican crossing outside the Co-Op in Lordship Lane. Two years ago most of the traders and residents around the Co-Op opposed the Pelican crossing, on the grounds that more parking spaces would go, and there would be little room for lorries to load and unload to supply the shops, and that the parking in Lordship Lane would once again be pushed on to the side turnings, like Ashbourne grove.

It would appear that, in spite of putting notices up for consultation on lamp posts, everything is in place to go ahead with the crossing, even the marking of the roads and traffic lights are there ready to go. So it does not matter what the consultation reveals, they will go ahead anyway. This is the democracy of Southwark Council. WHEN ARE THEY GOING TO LISTEN TO RESIDENTS AND TRADERS?

[Loz]

Actually, Fred, although the traders were indeed against the crossing, I believe there was significant support for it from ED residents in general.

But yes, if there is to be a consultation then if does seem rather undemocratic to be proceeding. But I thought the consultation was done ages ago?

[the-e-dealer]

We need the side streets to have 'limited' parking - say 20 / 30 mins like Lordship Lane Does so shoppers can stop and buy but not park all day.

[the-e-dealer]

We need the side streets to have 'limited' parking - say 20 / 30 mins like Lordship Lane Does so shoppers can stop and buy but not park all day. This would be say be between 10am and 4pm. Again like the red route restriction. Although thinking about it maybe the red route doesn't need no parking on side streets.

[fredricketts]

.According to the notices on the lamp post it ends the 9th February. Yet they have everything in place on the road to go on the 14th February. Ashbourne grove residents opposed it the last time it came up, not because of safety reasons, but because of the lack of parking spaces and the overspill once again to the side roads.

I don?t think Southwark Council know the meaning of democracy.

Consultation, It would be nice if Southwark Council knew what it means, and started to consult with the Local residents,giving it enough time to do so would be nice.

[fazer71]

The solution is in here somewhere

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

Sent from a specialist

[BrandNewGuy]

Change the record, fazer71. If you have a "solution", why not get engaged with this thread instead of indulging in pointless sniping?

[fazer71]

Thanks for the link. xx

[James Barber]

Hi fredricketts, Loz,

The decision to approve two Lordship Lane crossings was taken by the Dulwich Community Council. The consultation had a majority of local residents and businesses in favour.

The South Southwark Business Association attended the meeting to say traders weren't in faovur but equal number of Lordship Lane traders attended saying they wanted it and the consultation responses had a mjority in faovur of businesses.

Residents have been asking me repeatedly when it would happen as shown in the consultation responses.

BUT some fine tuning of yellow lines in the area is taking place to ensure overall slightly more parking at the end to replace the places that will be lost due to the crossings.

I'm also expecting the horse box parking to be removed and replaced with general parking behnind the Police station. Tried repeatedly to get that resolved and no horse boxes visited in a decade.

[fredricketts]

Thank James for your reply. It seems a bit premature that all the gubbins for putting down this crossing are already on the road ready to go, when the signs on the lamp post say you have until the 9th Feb. to put in your objections. It seems to me that residents are the last to know about anything that is going on to do with their area.

As for the adventure bar opening times, it seems once again we are the last to know when there hours were changed to 2am, as no one in Ashbourne Grove knew that they had successfully applied for longer hours and they now have a 2am

[peterstorm1985]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi fredricketts, Loz,

> The decision to approve two Lordship Lane

> crossings was taken by the Dulwich Community

> Council. The consultation had a majority of local

> residents and businesses in favour.

> The South Southwark Business Association attended

> the meeting to say traders weren't in faovur but

> equal number of Lordship Lane traders attended

> saying they wanted it and the consultation

> responses had a mjority in faovur of businesses.

> Residents have been asking me repeatedly when it

> would happen as shown in the consultation

> responses.

> BUT some fine tuning of yellow lines in the area

> is taking place to ensure overall slightly more

> parking at the end to replace the places that will

> be lost due to the crossings.

> I'm also expecting the horse box parking to be

> removed and replaced with general parking behnind

> the Police station. Tried repeatedly to get that

> resolved and no horse boxes visited in a decade.

James, you mention the horse box parking in the same breath as reference to parking in the vicinity of the new crossings. Presumably there will be signs up on Lordship Lane to direct people to these hidden away spaces behind the police station. Will there be a transport service to bring them to the shops they actually want to go to?

[the-e-dealer]

Well its kind of obvious- Someone wanting to park outside SMBS wont want to use the box parking but Someone visiting a shop further down might. This reduces the use of LL by one car. Its a bit like Dominos

As each car shunts down this will reduce slightly the load on the top end. More a tweak than a sledge hammer solution.

[James Barber]

Hi fredricketts,

Licence premises fall under a law organised by Tessa Jowell MP. The premise only has to place a notice on its premises about its application. Whenever I receive copies I post them hear and any key emails I have stored for that vacinity.

Sorry it is a rubbish process.

Hi peterstorm1985,

Changing lines and signs for parking are relatively cheap but the administration and advertising/legal orders are not. Hence my desire to add the Police box parknig reoslution onto the planned Lordship Lane parking changes. This avoid around ?3-5,000 of public expense.

Hi the-e-dealer,

Apologies for confusing things. The horse box parknig is different to the net small increase in parking to make up for the two new crossings.

[the-e-dealer]

Tessa Jowell Organises the Licensing Laws? How ? What happened before she became an MP. And why cant Tory-cons organise it now?

[James Barber]

Hi the-e-dealer,

Changing laws isn't trivial and so far the currnet government hasn't agree as a coalition or found parliamentary time to change or replace the licensing laws introduced by Tessa Jowell.

[the-e-dealer]

So Tessa Jowell introduced all the Licensing Laws?

[Loz]

I think James meant TJ was responsible for the most recent changes to the licensing laws. But I think you know that already.

[the-e-dealer]

Thankyou - Looking Back I think James is talking about the extended hours. Not All Licensing laws. She was indeed responsible for this rather noxious piece of legislation. However I am not sure whether it was a Cabinet Decision and whether she was in favour or not.

[James Barber]

Tessa's licensing law moved the previous presumption of the applicant from needing to prove a licence or licence change wouldn't cause harm to objectors proving it would cause harm. It was a huge change and has since seen huge step increase in alcohol emergency ambulance and A&E calls. It appears to have kick started the binge drinking culture and not continental southern Europe cafe culture hoped for.

Unlikely we'll get the tory part of the coalition to agree to new more restrictive licensing laws as big business wouldn't like that - and that suits the more Liberals element of the Lib Dems.

We have a bad law aimed at benefiting businesses at the expense of civil society - but apart from that I hold no views on the subject.

Back to Freds concern about Adventure bar enxtensing it opening to 2am Thursday and bank holiday.

Email [email protected] if you wish to object or support it.

The legally valid reasons to object are:

- The prevention of crime and disorder

- Public Safety

- The prevention of public nuisance

- The protection of children from harm

[ed_pete]

James - I live in Village Ward, very close to the hospital. I'd be happy to answer the Dulwich Hospital Site survey http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DHNVXR2 but would have liked some context. Is the presumption that the hospital is closed completely and some/all of the existing buildings demolished ?

[fredricketts]

No wonder Tessa Jowel never answered my email

About the adventure bar.it is a noxious piece of legislation

And goes against residents rights to object.

Ashbourne Grove objected the last time against the licence

And now it would seem that it's all been done behind our backs.

[fredricketts]

Hi James Barber

Is there anything we can do to change this? As at the moment, residents do not have any say in this matter. Before we were informed of any changes, now we have to rely on someone seeing the notice in the bars window, which I think is unfair on residents that have to put up with this unsocialable behaviour late at night. And surely this cannot be right.

[skyblue]

Hi James, this time last year I was a bore about the need for kids east of east dulwich to have access to a co-ed. Now with the Charter catchment area not going past lordship lane this need has become even more acute. Could you please raise with Harris boys academy the prospect of turning into a co-ed. I am not asking for Harris girls to be included as I understand parents have objections?? A Harris coed could mop up all the kids east of east dulwich who have no hope Charter or kingsdale. This is what the Eden project wanted all along - a local state co-ed. Many thanks

Ps just seen the aske's post even more reason for a coed. Kids round the rye are being squeezed out of co-eds.

[James Barber]

Hi Fred,

When I see any potentially interesting licensing changes I'll post something either on this thread or if potentially VERY interesting will create a new thread for it. Hope that's the sort of answer you're looking for.

Hi ed_pete,

Please do complete the online survey. The more responses the better.

The context. After 20 years of services being gradually removed relatively little happens on this 7 hectare site now. Lots of false starts for new facilities and when the economy felt flush they didn't happen - ie a new community hospital. So either we all pray for a miracle or we settle on a realistic plan for the site. Dereliction for another 20 years or a mix of uses for the site with a good sized proportion of any development probably being housing to fund things.

Hi skyblue,

The Charter School has never had a fixed catchment area. It varies from year to year with applicant numbers and with a large bulge in primary schools places just about to start applying for secondary school a contraction in the effective catchment area would be likely due to that but...

Southwark has more girls schools than boys schools. When asked the ex.Waverley School governors and parents were clear they did not want the school to go from a girls school to a mixed school. Hence the 'new' Harris Boys school.

BUT with the East Dulwich Harris Boys Academy recently being awarded an outstanding by Ofsted this should be become even more popular with local families. So I would expect that to make a positive difference in places at The Charter School.