richard tudor

Reply from Cllr Livingstone is response to mine re brown bins Dear Richard Thank you for your email. Yes, the council has decided to introduce a ?30 per year charge to collect garden waste and this will start on 3 June. The charge will be for a financial year (April to March) but as the first year will be for ten months, the charge will be reduced pro rata to ?25 for 2019/20. Food waste brown bins will, however, remain as a free service to Southwark residents. The council will be writing to residents next month to outline the charge and there will be further information in May. Most other London boroughs already charge for garden waste and ?30 is the lowest level charged (one borough charges ?75). This has not been an easy decision for the council, but as you observe money does not grow on trees and this council has suffered some of the most drastic cuts in funding from government since 2010. Back then, government grants made up 72% of the council?s budget and since then the government have taken away 63p of every pound given. This is before inflation is even considered. If the council is still to provide quality services and protect what are its most expensive services ? those that protect our most vulnerable residents ? it is necessary for us to start charging for those things that other councils started charging for years ago. I hope this explains why we have had to take this difficult decision. Regards Councillor Richard Livingstone Cabinet member for Environment, Transport Management and Air Quality Labour councillor for Old Kent Road Ward London Borough of Southwark From: richard tudor [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 22, 2019 1:38 PM To: Livingstone, Richard; John, Peter Subject: Brown bins. There are many rumours regarding the possibility of charging for the use of brown bins for food waste and compostable garden waste. Why have we not been informed about the possibility happening and consulting with residents. Is this yet again like the charging for using parks, no one being informed just a decision taken hoping no one will find out until it is to late.It might be better for you and your fellow Cllrs to realise that money just does not appear from the money tree and life is getting more difficult meeting all these new charges. We would all like to get Southwark's staffs cost of living rises and progression up the salary scale every year. I would appreciate an answer.

Those works have been there for a long time. Both there and works outside the new Charter school.

Grove Lane this morning. All the way down to Denmark Hill. To bad if you wanted to get to Herne Hill or Rusking Park, Kings College.The master plan is working. Can anyone remember it this bad before Champion Hill was closed. A revision of this crazy plan is needed immediately. They could not see this happening.

Following an email to Richard Livingstone regarding timed restrictions the following has been received back. As it was never proposed as an option in the consultation document I do find it hard to believe it was ever considered but never mentioned. The answer could have come from Sir Humphrey Appleby, GCB, KBE, MVO, MA (Oxon), "Yes Minister.himself. If all viability and criteria had not been considered in full why implement the closure. This ridiculous idea should not have been implemented. So people you have been legged over 100% by Southwark who wanted this scheme and no other. They will not consider anything thing until a years time and then it will stay. I think we all know that. "Livingstone, Richard Tue 12/02/2019 16:15 Dear Mr Tudor Our officers have considered the proposal for timed restrictions. However, at this stage they are unable to implement such a timed restriction as they are still exploring the viability and criteria to introduce such a restriction I have bene told that our officers are happy to explore this option in the future, depending on the outcomes of trial" Regards Councillor Richard Livingstone Cabinet member for Environment, Transport Management and Air Quality Labour councillor for Old Kent Road Ward

Almost 10 years ago you mentioned you lived on the front of the estate facing the road beyond the grass and pavement where you found it was not to your liking so you left. Would those living in front and behind now in 2019 have the same views as 2015. Champion Hill is now very much quieter for cycles, pedestrians and for cars. A new consultation should have been made before closing this road off, since 2015 when this was conducted things have greatly changed. It is a very pleasant street and safe street for all to use, not that it was not before. So how many votes were cast yes/No is important to know. Distance from the front of a property to a road could be important as it might effect how to vote. To some not all.

Only in your mind. All I wanted to know was how many voted yes and how many voted no.

The question asked was how did Ruskin Park House vote?

From: richard tudor Sent: 09 November 2018 16:58 To: Livingstone, Richard; Ali, Jasmine Subject: Re: Champion Hill Closure Thank your for your prompt reply. I have now found the 2015 scheme on the Southwark web site that prompted this scheme and have already replied to the current scheme from the website. What I found interesting on the 2015 questionaire response is only 30 people from Champion Hill voted. The response from all the surrounding streets balloted just about got on the the reply side which shows peoples concern is not as urgent as is being made out but allowed the instigators to use these figures to push ahead. Ruskin Park House produced 99 responses. However there is no breakdown on how Champion Hill, on the actual road voted or how the flats of Ruskin Park House, with most way off the actual road, voted. It would be interesting to know how many actual local residents have asked Southwark to reduce the impact of cars along Champion Hill over the last few years as you stated below. I hope you/Southwark Council are going to produce the full results of the current survey. "We wouldn?t ask if we didn?t intend to listen." if people voted no from the current survey would you shut the scheme down? Again I appreciate your prompt response. Regards True to say I have never received and reply or response to thee above email of 8th November 2018. Like all of Southwark's Consultations they only take the figures they need to get what they want through. There is no need for this trial closure to happen.

Thank you

ITVNEWS Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi all, > > Martha here from ITV LONDON. > > We are looking to report on what has been > happening to your post and the closure of the East > Dulwich depot on the news tomorrow. > > I am looking to speak to as many of you that have > been effected as possible. > > I have put in a bid to speak to Helen Hayse who I > understand has been leading the campaign. > > I also also requested to speak to someone from > Royal Mail. > > Please get in contact if you would be happy to > speak to us - [email protected] > > Thanks so much! > Martha Does anyone know what time this will happen?

"As today is the first day of the DKH CPZ, can you confirm, as per your email below, parking will be enforced with the hand held computers to detect all non paying cars. Parking and permit holders? Second, We have just been told that the on street pay parking is ?2.70 an hour, hardly likely to deter commuters to the city. I have just seen a Zip car just park on a resident only bay when told it was resident parking he said "so what"and said I am leaving the car here and walked off Will it get a ticket? How long will that car stay there Top of the hill before the railway bridge on Chadwick Road I look forward to receiving your response". In response to this question below is the answer, Be under no illusion Southwark wants private cars off the road and a CPZ is taking us towards that aim. Good morning Mr Tudor, Thank you for your email. Parking enforcement started yesterday for the new Dog Kennel Hill parking zone. On street parking in a section of Chadwick Road is ?2.70 per hour. As stated, most of the kerbside space across the whole of the zone is for permit holders only and thus cannot be used by commuters. The council is actively supporting car clubs as an alternative to car ownership, every car club vehicle removes the need for our residents to own a car or own a second car. Zip Car and DriveNow have a contract with Southwark Council and they have purchased virtual permits for their vehicle fleet which allows them to park in any permitted parking bay in Southwark. Therefore this vehicle is not parked illegally and is parked where it is permitted. Kind regards Joanna Redshaw The Southside of Chadwick Road has resident permits CPR 11-1 ,the Northside is park and pay. So park up on Northside residents/commuter bays and ring up at 11am and pay to allow all day parking. Also commercial company vehicles just pay for a blanket permit and can just take residents spaces. Not what residents thought they were getting 'As stated, most of the kerbside space across the whole of the zone is for permit holders only and thus cannot be used by commuters." As another poster mentioned take a look at the signs now up and you will be in for a surprise, park and pay.

As I recall, but cannot like you spend time going through old posts, I am sure I have previously said I have no idea who Dullywood is. Up up and away with the clipboard and door knocking. Have other things to do now, goodnight.

Very simple. Traffic patterns change. Not difficult to understand. Life changes on a daily basis. Each day is has its own pattern. I am surprised you could not see that. Please let me and forum know the result of your house to house survey. Who is Dullywood?

Like Rupert James I would like to hear from you when you have knocked on Chadwick Road residents and asked them what the problem is really like. A 1 week survey to my mind means zip. Figures produced for a short period means nothing. A survey over 1/2/3 months would reveal a great deal more. Glad you feel you are yet again right. Did I ever doubt it

I believe that Southwark Council had its own agenda on traffic flow and this traffic chaos will prompt them to bring in traffic regulation that the pen pushers want not the general resident population. How many of the pen pushers actually live in the area? Not many I would think. Local residents know best. Have you every been asked. Real residents not the cycle mafia.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well apparently I've interpreted something as > racist, supported by evidence. Suits me. I think I have missed this evidence. what was it?

After all the discussions on here regarding the 20mph speed limit on roads, it is interesting that Southwark has now put in legal notification notices, Southwark News, to make it official. How many people in the borough actually read these notices and have the time or will to comment for or against. Rather like the manifesto, hidden away on page 7/10 , under healthy living last para. From what I can see it effects all roads. Although they say one can comment I think we can accept they will push it through on all roads no matter what. Do all roads need to be included? Denmark Hill, Sydenham Hill etc. What next, the possibility of traffic speed cameras on all routes. More wardens hiding behind trees? Revenue stream. Everyone has their own views on this but I suspect it is passed no matter what. Be warned.

No idea who that person was, nothing to do with me. "You know, the person who joined the forum when you were called out by me (and several others) for making racial implications about who was responsible for knife crime?" Hyde Park. Burgess Park. Ring any bells? Perhaps you should park your ego and re-enter the real world. "It's not a "horror story" by any means, that's just silly nomenclature, but it's the honest truth that today I had to come to a complete stop as a lady walking a Jack Russell was doing exactly what I said, walking on the outside of the road with her dog on the bridlepath the opposite side with the lead stretching the width of the road - and it's not the first time." Sorry, you now live in ED, well not ED but close enough, not the real world. There you are plenty of scope to continue responses. Am sure I have got something wrong. Await your red pen

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > richard tudor Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > You really are becoming boring now > > > How very charming of you to say so - if you don't > want people to respond to your posts, don't post. > You know as well as I do why you're being so rude > - go and get your "friend" Dullywood to pitch in > on your side like before! "You know as well as I do why you're being so rude" Why and who is Dullywood?

You really are becoming boring now

Perhaps cyclists should employ the skiing rules always look ahead. If you have to stop or avoid so be it. There are more children, people and dogs than pedal pushers. They are not aware of danger. As it should be in a park

Does anyone know if Solmons Passage suffered from the last few days of torrential rain?

farfisamania Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 48 visits don't represent a huge amount of time > over the course of constructing a large > residential building! > > Don't get me wrong, I find it appalling that these > buildings are now having to be demolished. I do > however feel that trying to get 'answers' from > building control isn't going to get you that far > because a) they can point out that they have no > responsibility for quality issues (which most of > the problems listed by Wandle seem to be) and b) > on compliance issues, approval is still not an > absolute guarantee of compliance. > > I think it would be more productive to ask how the > contractor (and their replacement) was procured, > how the contract was managed, what snagging was > carried out, what are the contents of the report > recommending demolition. There was a suggestion y > someone here that the structural problems were > worsened by poor maintenance. What maintenance > regime was in place? How did it take account of > the building's characteristics? Why did it take > several years to uncover these defects? I don't > know if private organsisations like housing > associations are covered by FoI - I think it > depends on ownership. If the HA in this case isn't > covered by FoI then I think it shows some of the > problems with HAs as a way of delivering social > housing. > > Housing associations were at the forefront of > promoting timber framed construction in the UK in > the early 2000s. Up till that point English > homebuilders hadn't made that much use of it. > Detailed info from the HA would help to show > exactly what happened here. Perhaps Harriet Harman, all Cllrs and Southwark Council could take action, legal if necessary, to get the answers to above. Perhaps all parties, including Wandle, would prefer it to remain buried. From memory at the very start of this thread these questions were raised. Due Diligence From all interviews maintenance was a great problem. Last raised on Radio 4 a few days ago

When will Wandle publish the name of the Clerk of Works and others concerned withis build and also make available all the confirmation sign off sheets for the works on this project. So far nothing seems to have been produced to allow MP,s Cllrs, Residents and public to see the depth of this mess. As Housing Ass are no more than extensions of local authorities regarding housing perhaps Ms Harmam could ask the Govt to now take a deeper interest.

As Clint Eastwood said in Heart Break Ridge "This is turning into a real cluster fu.ck