James Barber

Hi AD, I've asked if parking enformcenemtn could take a look this morning.

Hi fazer71, Please emails me your details and lets explore that freehold purchase. Only has to be 50% private leaseholders to qualify from memory. I can assure you that the managers in Southwark Housing are very keen to not be accountable for acquire street properties as it costs a lot to deliver the nightmarish experience you've described.

The agenda and timetable for tonights Camberwell Community Council can be found at: http://moderngov.southwarksites.com/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=3882&T=0 Deputations are planned for 7.10pm - one definite deputation about the CPZ consultation report and a second one where theperson hasn't completed the arrangements. If you're that person contact the committee clerk ASAP. The Camberwell Community Council chair person, second hand, is planning to stick to the agenda which would mean the main CPZ consultation report is timetabled for 8.55-9.05. That seems ambitious to stick to only 10 mins for this topic but the study is quite clear no controlled parking is proposed for the streets within Camberwell Community Council area.

Hi Fazer71, I understand your anger but if you have evidence of criminality please do go to the Police. Making such unsubstantiated allegations might make you feel better but wont solve the problem at puts at risk the forum itself.

Hi buddug, Councils can't give away freeholds despite as we both know and officers do that for 'acquired street properties' it costs the council a lot of money to deliver its freeholder obligations - much more than the nominal ground rent. They're such a liability that housing associations wouldn't want them.

Hi pipsky2008, Depends what informaiton you want. It may already be in the public domain and I could sign post it for you or acquire it quickly if I request it. Failing either of those use the Freedome of Information route. Feel free to email me and I'll give try giving you a more specific steer. Hi buddug, Grove Vale pondiong. Sadly, another non housing contractor. I've asked when the mini lakes will be resolved and presume this would be undertaken as snagging issues. Housing. Talking to Southwark accountants if they could they'd give freeholds away to tenants as technicalyl they show as an asset but in reality they're a liability and give poor service to boot. As a result of your query I investigated the leaseholder conundrum at length with council officers vs freehold and also delivered and kncked on all leaseholders na tenant doors in East Dulwich ward with my colleagues.

Hi rahrahrah, I did but the school roles forecasts have radically changed so I believe demand can now be shown. The only fly in the ointment for this would be it might be free school. Whereas I suspect most people would just want a good local community school.

I used to live on Brixton Hill 20+ years ago. The parking was horrendous there and then. It was a 5 min stroll down to Brixton tube. I'm not sure we're fortunate or unfortunate in not having a tube station. But we don't, so the attractions of East Dulwich for comjuters are not the same order of magnitude or likely to rippled outwards the same. The proposals are also for 1hour controlled parknig rather than all day. But it would still change the character to some degree and have some risk of spread and it might not work have the desired affect.

Hi buddug, I'm sorry you feel I've not served you well. Sorry. Southwark Council for leaseholders is generally rubbish where a divided house on a regualr street involved. So, yes, in most circumstances buying the freehold for a property is better than expecting an organisation managing 55,000 properties to bend. Southwark typically spends more on admin for each leasehold property than it recieves which means other tenants and council tax payers subsidise the poor service. So when you want new windows such isolated property are at the back of a very long queue where blocks of lfats are easier to do. And Southwark is only allowed to sell such freeholds to leaseholders. A definite lose lose lose situation. But if you have an issue still I'll happily take it up as I have with other leaseholders. The forum is a great place to tell people about risks of crime but it can increase fear beyond the realistic levels. All I've tried to do is ensure some moderation in that fear of crime and advise people to point tht fear at crime prevention. CPZ. Yes most streets consulted have said they don't want controlled parking - espeically those north of Grove Vale. Some streets have said they do want controlled parking to avoid the parking stress they currently suffer. The proposals for controlled parking are now for 1hour on an experimental basis. As for businesses on Grove Vale I'd have thought having more local parking available with commuter parking gone would be of help to them.

You should call 020 7525 2000 - the environment line for Southwark (020 7525 5000 is the general switchboard). Or email [email protected]

Hi fazer71, Southwark has over 5000 empty properties. They have to be severe for te council to follow compulsory purchase route and they attempt to persuade property owners a lot before taking legal action. I they didn't people would suggest the council was legal happy. Other European countries take a different approach of land taxes. You don't get land banks as as result and people get on and use land.

Always call 999 or the non urgent version 101. Always get a cad number for te 101 call as Police resources are allocated based on the number of cad references issued.

Today I received an email from the lead officer. Papa Johns havebeen told Southwark legal dept are asking up their case after the warning letter was ignored and that fine is likely to be ?1,000 + ?40 for every day. I'm sure others will decide that supporting any business that clearly disregards the law and the local environment doesn't warrant their support.

Hi Fazer71, Southwark Council is compulsory purchasing this property. When that purchase completes it will back to back be selling it onto a developer who specialises in social housing in such historical rebuilds for the price Southwark Council pays. However the legal fees te owner is incurring for themselves and the council I'm not clear about. That developer already has lined up planning permission for the works required. After 13 years I'd expect te council to have a water tight case and leak fees to be awarded against the owner. If you ever talk to the residents of the neighbouring property you'd understand that the freeholder has been challenging. As for te architectural meritso f te building - it is listed. I think Britain would be much the poorer if we didn't preserve some of our heritage which is te purpose of grading.

Hi tomsav, This all comes down to subsidiarity. Who should have the most influence about changes to a street? The people who live on it or people who don't live on it? As I've always said I think residents who have to live with changes on their street should have the most but not all the influence. 22 streets of residents were asked if they wanted their street to be included in a controlled parking zone. A tiny few have a very clear majority of residents who want controlled parking on their street. Some more have said that if a neighbouring street were to have controlled parking they'd want it. What do we say to residents on that street? Do we say to them many people who never park on your street, who have little or nothing to do with you and your street have decided you can't have what you feel you need on your street. for example I've had a number of local businesses say they need more local parking for visiting shoppers. They've asked for mroe 30mins parking only spaces alnog side roads. If we consult those side roads and lots of visitors say they want this parking should we ignore residents on those streets. If people are really opposed to any controlled parking then please survey those streets. If you find honestly that they've changed their minds then great. I'd personally be hugely relieved.

Hi Peckhamboy, Melbourne Grove around the shops already has controlled parking - namely 30 mins no return for 2hours and some 3 hours maximum. Three of those businesses responded to the consultation that they didn't want any controlled parking. That feels to me like asking to have your cake and eat it. Hi Loz, From memory business permits for CPZ are over ?400 pa. Which reduces the demand for them significantly but obviously runs the risk of parking elsewhere. Hi puzzled, People who have asked for controlled parking also care about East Dulwich and many have lived hear as long or longer than you. They just have different perspectives on what the problems of East Dulwich are. I'm afraid Southwark has never nuanced its consultations asking people how long they've lived or worked in an area and factoring that into any recommendations.

Hi tallulah71, Did you ring 999 or 101 to report this? I had the same happen to me. I mentioned it in passing to local Police who were really miffed I hadn't dialled 999 (101 is the non emergecny version). Even now, please do consider dialling 101 and get a CAD number. The more CAD numbers an area gets the more Police resources they get.

Hi first mate, The Dulwich Community Council where I need to have collected my thoughts and reached a conclusion is 24 January. I'm sure I'll reach a conclusion before then but the officers report only came out on 23 December and its now only 5 January and I did make it clear I was taking a break from non urgent work for Christmas until the new year. But as I've stated the consultation asked 22 streets whether a majority on each of those streets wanted to be part of a controlled parking zone. Three of the 10 streets in East Dulwich ward have said yes bordering ones yes if a neighbouring street were proposed to proceed with controlled parking. So options 2,3,4 and 5 could be argued for but with so many non residents of those streets signing petitions etc saying no to any controlled parking the decision isn't black and white for me. Hence the lack of a snap knee jerk decision. Hi grisett, I also asked you before Christmas who leaked the officers report to you and you've completely silent on that. When do you think you'll answer that question?

The first average speed cameras to enforce 20mph are about to be switched on in Southend on Sea.

Hi Loz, I believe 3 of the no's counted on Melbourne Grove were commuters and not residents. Hi Peckhamboy, My problem is that the consultation was asking individual streets whether they wanted to be part of a controlled parking zone. Hence Q.6 asking whether they would change their minds if a neighbouring street were planned to proceed.

puzzled, I clearly didn't say that. I said I was curious why anyone on Scutari Road would be so anxious about potential controlled parking near East Dulwich station. Equally I wouldn't expect the residents of Derwent Grove to make decisions for you and your neighbours on Scutari Road. I am undecided at this point and attempting to brow beat wont accelerate or sway me. As I also explained I have the happy luxury of not having to make a decision until 24 January.

I've just been assured that all the Veolia crews have been rebriefed. That a special visit along Silvester Road to collect any missed real xmas tress will take place this afternoon.

Hi Bobby P, I wasn't suggesting that. The consultation shows that residents on Derwent, Tintagel and Melbourne want controlled parking. That residents on Zenortia, Oxonian and Elsie would want controlled parknig if a neighborunig street has controlled parking. That people outside of those streets are clearly and in very large numbers against them having controlled parking. So councillors will be faced with weighing up these conflicting demands. The decision making process is clearly documented in the officers reports. It would appear few have read that document including the most volcal on this thread.

GLA Assembly Members have just been told 9 December. Amazing. I was Boris I'd ensure it was delivered before the London mayoral elections in arly may.

Each community council has nine Councillors. Most will have read the officers report. Most will not have read this forum. If you are happy for those Councillors to base their recommendations solely on the officer report of the conusltation and their presentations then fine. But I had assumed you wouldn't be grisett from everything you've posted here.