former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[cl]

Jamees,

even though its only for 3 years, and recognising that there is not any guarantee that one person would take up membership of it?

Surely a better way of mitigating the impact of developments is for Southwark to limit/place conditions upon them at the planning stage, rather than relying on this very flimsy scheme?

[worldwiser]

Firstmate, if so it's a shrewd and cunning plan. I'm not even clear why they felt it necessary to hold a referendum about this in particular. In three London boroughs I've previously lived in, CPZs were simply imposed and to a general outcry. Soon afterwards, when people discovered they were almost guaranteed a spot outside their house, they shut up. They work when done properly without being excessive.

[James Barber]

Hi firest mate,

My recording s pips resisting sub dividing local properties. But the garden centre site was a development waiting to happen and we've ensured the best result possible in my opinion without the developer winning at planning appeal. And for this site I have attended a planning appeal in person to successfully block a more intense and uglier development at this site.

Hi CL,

Council officials have insisted that the only way to restrict this is if a controlled parking zone was present.

I have explored a route I think viable of a condition where the council searches DVLA regularly for any cars registerd to addresses that are em want to be car free. It's illegal to register a vehicle to the wrong address. Officers were clear such a scheme couldn't work. But at least we tried to find an alternate solution.

[KalamityKel]

What?

[cl]

Sorry James - have I understood you right?

I am suggesting that it is within the Council's gift to place conditions upon new developments. So for instance, where twenty new flats are being developed or with the new M&S proposal, the council can demand that a certain amount of parking provision (ie physical spaces, not car club memberships) for the new occupants be incldued in the plans.

Are you saying that the Council could/would only do this where there is a CPZ in place already?

[first mate]

I'm sure that if Councillors were minded it would be possible to place conditions re car ownership/parking on new developments, however some are so rabidly in favour of CPZ that it is slotted in as a condition of this or that at every available opportunity.

[unlurked]

We all know JB, and the lib(con)dems want CPZs despite what the local electorate want as was clearly previously demonstrated. The lib(con)dems have their own agenda which is not democratic in representing local majority views eg dulwich hospital, and ED Police Stn to name but two.

[James Barber]

Hi cl,

Yes it can but it doesnt have such policies to support this on appeal.

Hi first mate,

And how would it enforce such conditions?

Hence my epxloration of whether the counciul could consult DVLA records at regular intervals to ensure no cars registered to addresses with such conditions. As I've stated Council Officers have said they can't do this. i dont see why no.

Hi unlukred,

You hide behind a peseudonym telling me a Liberal Democrat I'm not democratic. As examples you say campaigning publicly for a primary schools and getting the former ED police station (shamelessly closed by Boris after Ken had tried and failed) to house said primary school rather than a block of 50 flats making the school crisis worse. The next example if the hopsital site - after we ran a very extensive survey of all East Dulwich ward residents.

The CPZ proposals. We supported those streets that wanted controlled parking. It didnt happen because other streets didnt want it and formed a majority overall. We hten fought to maximise the space for car parking to ameliorate the parking stress.

So what is the majority views for the former Police station and Dulwich Hospital site and how have you found this out?

Have you knocked on every door asking peoples views as we do every year?

[James Barber]

To the PM I received. Southwark Council designs street s to a design standard DS.007. Like all agreed Design Standards in Southwark it can be found on the Southwark Streetscape Design Manual webpages at www.southwark.gov.uk/ssdm.

This bible is regualrly used to block changes residents have asked for. Better cycle parking and segregated cycel paths being the most recent in East Dulwich.

[first mate]

James, just for the record, were there actually whole streets that supported CPZ unanimously? I recall there being numbers of individuals on various streets in favour but overall the majority of consultees in ED were against. I also recall that many on one street were initially in favour but then did a rather spectacular u turn. If I have this wrong I stand corrected and please do say which street/s were unanimously in favour.

[unlurked]

JB, whose hiding? We all use Forum names unless we want to get elected! You want my real name then pm me and ask for it rather than attempt to score cheap points here.

Lib(con)dems were duplicitous in their "support" to save both hospital and police station running mock 'save' campaigns while actively pushing for closures so can be used for schools. Lib(con)dems even had the ex Tory RCC trying to get an art gallery into the current hospital whilst 'supporting' it! Your local party toyed with the police and hospital supporters, but most nastily the hospital supporters whilst having done loads of prepatory work to pretty much ensure you'd get schools to replace these sites. Who knows what results your 'surveys' return as no one independtly gets to see these.

And what surveys did you do for CPZ? I remember at the DCC you were shouted down when you tried to speak because you were going against the majority view, and you only had one person speak up in favour of a CPZ because it was such an uttdr nightmare when she had to walk a few metres as she couldn't park directly outside her house-she was laughed out of the meeting. So do tell what whole streets want CPZs?

Oh yeah, the fireworks display that you had banned one year, was that a majority wish?!

[James Barber]

Hi First Mate,

No. No street had a unanimous view for or against.

But a number of streets had majorities but the overall feeling was against when people in non East Dulwich ward streets where no controlled parking was being proposed.

Yes, Oxonian and Zenoria had been for controlled parking but were against it only operating for 1 hour per day as they wanted 24/7.

Hi unlurked,

I joined the forum after being elected as part of trying to provide a better service.

I have campaigned to save both the Police statiino and in the past the hospital. Only when they were closed have we then tried to ensure future community use where a genuine need has arisen.

We have fought the closure of East Dulwich Police station for 10 years when no one was even remotely suggesting we needed new primary schools. so to suggest we've spent so many hundreds of hours on sham campaigns says more about your cynaism than our hard work.

If you have a genune issue you'd like help with then I'm here for you. If you want to take cheap pops at my and my colleagues hard work then please start a seperate thread for that I guess in the Lounge.

[unlurked]

You haven't answered anything but I'm not surprised, just more smoke and mirrors.

[milk76]

Once again we hear dour tones reminiscent of a sulky teenager. It must be unlurked offering his political opinions to you again James. You lucky boy.

[first mate]

James, Funny I remember differently. I thought you had chosen to champion some residents on Derwent Grove who were pro CPZ. Zenoria did a u turn from being pro to against because they realized CPZ was unlikely to achieve what they had hoped. Seem to recall the consultation came out very much against CPZ overall- it wasn't just a feeling.

[milk76]

First Mate, the ballot had Derwent, Elsie, Jarvis, Melbourne, Oxonian, Tintagel, and Zenoria in favour of the lunchtime CPZ about 55 to 45. Some other streets were overwhelmingly against so the total ballot comfortably against a cpz.

[first mate]

Thank you Milk for clarifying.

[BrandNewGuy]

James, that pavement outside the shops on Melbourne Grove is wobbly, broken and dangerous yet again. It was only October when they 'fixed' it last time, namely a lad with a bucket of sand... Once again, please can Conways be told to fix it again - at their expense, as this will now be (I think) the third time it's needed repairing. Useless and contemptuous of the local population.

[James Barber]

Hi BNG,

HAve asked. IT makes me think these types of works should come with a warranty period of 5 or 10years. but then some have done this effectively via PFI which I'd find hard to stomach.

Either way have report it AGAIN!

[BrandNewGuy]

Many thanks.

[AbDabs]

You'd never be able to get a warranty period of 5 -10 years on normal pavement repairs due to the damage caused by misuse. Our street's pavements have been destroyed by builders lorries and skips being parked on, or dragged across, the pedestrian pavements.

If you wanted that sort of warranty you'd have to specify pavements suitable for traffic - much more expensive

[Sue]

Hi James, I emailed you this morning. Just wondering if you picked up the email?

Apologies for posting on here, but you're normally very prompt at answering emails and this one is about something time-critical, thanks!

[Sue]

Bumping as I see you just posted on another thread :)

[BrandNewGuy]

AbDabs Wrote:

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

> You'd never be able to get a warranty period of 5

> -10 years on normal pavement repairs due to the

> damage caused by misuse. Our street's pavements

> have been destroyed by builders lorries and skips

> being parked on, or dragged across, the pedestrian

> pavements.

> If you wanted that sort of warranty you'd have to

> specify pavements suitable for traffic - much more

> expensive

Ironically, much of the pavement along Melbourne Grove used to have vehicles half-parked on it, but no longer. The stretch of pavement outside the shops never has vehicles on it to my knowledge, given the lamppost and bin effectively prevent it. It really is just pedestrians using it. And still the paving slabs wobble, crack and sink.

[James Barber]

Hi Sue,

Apologies for not responding sooner.

I took some time of off work this morning to try chatching up with my councillor emails. I gt around 100 a day from my role as a councillor. I also have a regular day job, and extremely understanding family.