News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19 » Lewisham council

FIREWORKS AT BROCKWELL PARK

jerrygreen85 — Wed, 23 Oct 2013 14:04:26 +0000

Brockwell Park is the new home for Lambeth’s annual fireworks display

Lambeth’s 2013 fireworks display will take place in Brockwell Park on Tuesday November 5th and not Clapham Common as originally planned.

Lambeth council say it has confirmed Brockwell Park as the venue for the annual fireworks display after careful consideration of the impact of holding a major event on local transport routes around Clapham during the evening rush hour.

Major roads affected by the event include the South Circular road and red routes around Clapham Common. Over 100,000 people are expected to attend the event.

Brockwell Park will host what Lambeth are calling a “spectacular display” of fireworks created by the team responsible for the London 2012 Olympics fireworks show.

Other activities at the event in Brockwell Park on Tuesday November 5th will include a funfair, stalls, music, food outlets and fully-licensed bars. The event is free of charge for local residents and visitors to attend.

This year, for the first time, people attending the fireworks’ display will be asked to make a voluntary donation which will be used to fund next year’s event by making a donation online or at the event. This follows a voluntary donation initiative at the 2013 Lambeth Country Show

Lambeth’s annual fireworks event begins at 5pm and finishes at 10pm More information on; http://www.lambeth.gov.uk/Services/Environment/ParksGreenSpaces/EventsInParks/Fireworks.htm

Lambeth advise everyone attending should check; http://www.tfl.gov.uk to plan their journey to and from Brockwell Park.

Southwark Council urges women to be ‘breast aware’ this October

Women in Southwark are being reminded to regularly check their breasts and report any unusual changes to their GP as part of October’s Breast Cancer Awareness month.

Female residents in Southwark aged between 50 and 70, who are registered with a GP, should receive an invitation to a free breast screening every three years.

Although breast screening is estimated to save around 1,300 lives per year, take up by eligible women in Southwark is currently at just 63 per cent, lower than the national average of 77 per cent and even lower than the London average of 69.3 per cent.

Women under the age of 50 will not automatically be invited for a breast screening unless they are recognised as having a higher risk of developing breast cancer, such as through a faulty gene or family history of the disease. However, advice is available on how to spot the five signs of breast cancer and how to check your breasts.

Catherine McDonald, cabinet member responsible for health, said: “Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the UK but the number of deaths is falling dramatically thanks to better awareness, early detection and more advanced treatments.

“I would strongly encourage women to take up their breast screening opportunity and if you haven’t received an invitation and you think you should have please visit your GP.

“All women should be aware of any changes to their breasts and make an appointment with their doctor if they have any concerns. If you are not yet registered with a GP, why not register now.”

For more information on breast cancer awareness visit www.breastcancercare.org.uk

For advice on how to checks your own breasts go to the website at http://www2.breastcancercare.org.uk/publications/breast-health/taking-care-your-breasts-mini-guide-bcc211

WOMAN WHO BEFRIENDED VULNERABLE OAP STOLE £92,000…

A vulnerable woman was coned out of more than £92,00 by a woman who had power of asttorney.

On Monday, October 14th at Croydon crown court and following a wide ranging safeguarding investigation by Bromley council and Scotland Yard’s special investigation branch, a woman who was a friend of one of the Council’s vulnerable clients, was found guilty on 14 counts of stealing.

The defendant did not work for the council but had befriended the client and carried out the theft in her role as power of attorney. She received a custodial sentence of over four years.

The woman, aged 64 who lives in Eastbourne, had pleaded not guilty to the charges but following the jury’s deliberations was found guilty on all counts of stealing what amounted to over £92,000.

The safeguarding investigation began in 2008 when concerns were raised with the council about the woman’s role as power of attorney. The council’s safeguarding and audit teams worked together and with the police to unearth evidence, determined to bring a successful prosecution.

A Bromley council spokesperson said: “A key priority for Bromley Council is safeguarding vulnerable residents who can fall victim to abuse, including financial abuse.”

Cllr Robert Evans, executive councillor for care services, said: “The council has been advised the defendant has made a payment of £50,000 to the victim of financial abuse during the first week of October 2013, with arrangements being put in place for the remainder of the monies to be repaid.”

If you have any concerns about an elderly or vulnerable adult’s safety please call Bromley council on 0208 461 7777, Minicom 0208 464 7350. For an out of hours emergency call 020 8464 4848 (Source: Bromley council press release)

…while trading standards help put man in prison for money laundering

Bromley Trading Standards has brought another successful prosecution for money laundering following a scam carried out on an 89-year-old man from St Paul’s Cray.

On Tuesday 15 October 2013, a 23-year-old man from East London, attended Croydon crown court by video link from HMP Pentonville and pleaded guilty to two charges under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. He was sentenced to 15 weeks in custody – his guilty plea reducing the sentence from 20 weeks.

The case was brought following a tip off from a local bank in February 2012. The Nationwide building society in High Street Bromley, contacted trading standards rapid response team when an elderly customer had come into the bank to withdraw £3,000 cash from his savings account in order to pay for drainage work at his property.

This was the second withdrawal as the client had withdrawn £4,000 cash the previous day. Trading standards officers attended the bank and were introduced to the 89 year old man.

The OAP told how he had been cold called the day before by a man who claimed that his uncle lived in a house to the rear of Mr Hayden’s property.

He said that his uncle was having trouble with his drains and that they had identified the problem as being in the section of drain that ran through the OAP;s garden. He then asked for £4000 towards the cost of repairs.

The OAP agreed to pay and withdrew the money from his account. A short time later he was again telephoned by the man who sent a young man to collect the package.

The OAP received another telephone call from the man asking for a further £3,000 cash and he went back to the Nationwide which is when trading standards became involved.

Officers accompanied him home and following a number of calls from the mysterious ‘Mr Davis’ asking if he had the money, the 23 year old man arrived. Trading standards officers confronted him and police were called. He was arrested and later charged with money laundering offences.

He failed to appear at any court hearing and was eventually tracked down after being arrested for another matter.

If you are approached at home by builders or you notice something suspicious in your road, please contact Bromley’s trading standards rapid response team on 07903 852090. (Source: Bromley council press release)

Youth Council gets people talking about mental wellbeing

Bromley Youth Council has launched its manifesto campaign to encourage young people to talk about mental health issues by manning an information stand in Intu Bromley.

Research for the campaign highlighted that young people recognised adolescence can be a confusing, pressurised time with many finding themselves in difficult and stressful family situations as well as coping with the pressures that all teenagers face such as exams, relationships, growing up and moving on in life.

They were keen to examine issues which can affect mental health and wellbeing in young people and to raise the profile of these ‘life events’ and the possible impact they may have.

Many myths and misinformation about mental health exist and young people did not necessarily know where to go for advice or help. In addition, they were concerned that by speaking out, they might be judged and people would make assumptions about them.

Bromley Youth Council have made a video to address these points which will available to secondary schools to use as part of their PSHE sessions. A handy wallet-size leaflet called ‘Open your mind’, also masterminded by the young people themselves and handed out on the day, contains tips on how to achieve mental wellbeing.

More information and help is available at: www.bromley-y.org.uk (Bromley Y website)

New code of practice to tackle stolen goods

A new code of practice has been launched by Lewisham council and Lewisham police to tackle the sale of stolen goods in the borough.

The new scheme will see second-hand retailers – in particular money loan stores and mobile phone kiosks – targeted to sign up to a voluntary code of practice which will increase security measures around the buying and selling of second-hand goods like mobile phones, jewellery, game consoles, iPads and laptops.

Under the code, retailers will have to carry out proper checks when purchasing second-hand goods from members of the public; ensuring that two forms of photographic identification are asked for, checked and recorded accurately.

This will enable the police to identify lost and stolen goods and make it harder for thieves to sell-on stolen goods.

Retailers that sign up to the scheme will be able to verify if goods have been reported lost or stolen by checking them against the details held on the CheckMend website.

For each check carried out, the retailer will receive a certificate to confirm that the goods were checked with CheckMend.

Officers from the National Mobile Phone Crime Unit, Lewisham police with support from Lewisham council’s trading standards service, will be visiting traders across Lewisham in October to endorse and implement the scheme.

79 per cent of crimes go unsolved in London

New research shows that police are solving less crime since Boris Johnson became Mayor and that London is well below the UK average for solved crime, say Labour members of the London Assembly.

In London 21 per cent were solved in 2012/13 compared to the UK average of 27 pc. This amounts to 606,531 unsolved crimes in London last year.

There has been a rise in certain types of crime in London this year including:

13 per cent rise in murder

5 per cent rise in sexual offences

40 per cent rise in GBH

London Assembly Labour group policing and crime spokeswoman Joanne McCartney (Enfield and Haringey) said: “It is shocking that overall reported crime is down yet the number of unsolved crimes in London is only at 21 per cent.

“Boris talks big about reported crime going down, but so far he has ignored that the number of crimes actually solved on his watch has plummeted.

“Compared to the average in England and Wales, London is trailing on the number of crimes solved where we should be setting the gold standard.

“Since May 2010, in London the number of PCs has been reduced by 8 pc and PCSOs by 48 pc. Boris talks about getting more bobbies on the beat but the figures clearly show this is not happening.

“This proves Boris can’t have his cake and eat it. “If you cut the police budget by as much as the Government has then there will be repercussions. “Victim satisfaction in London is lower than elsewhere in the UK and this is not acceptable. “The Mayor must act now.”

All figures have been produced from the London Datastore: http://data.london.gov.uk/

(Source: London Assembly Labour group press release)

Recycle those electrical items

Lewisham WEEE Week (Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment) is back from 21 to 25 October 2013.

Residents are encouraged to recycle all unwanted small electrical appliances such as stereos, toasters, hairdryers, irons and microwaves. The aim is to exceed last year’s collected two tonnes of waste.

Find out more about what and where you can recycle your electronic equipment.

Contact: Recycling Wearside Service Centre, Wearside Road SE13 7EZ Tel: 020 8314 7171 Fax: 020 8314 3479

Email:[email protected]

http://recycleforlewisham.com/

(Source: Lewisham council press release)

The post FIREWORKS AT BROCKWELL PARK appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

COUNCILS RAISE MILLIONS IN ON-STREET FINES AND PARKING INCOME

jerrygreen85 — Mon, 05 Aug 2013 15:32:05 +0000

LAMBETH, CROYDON AND SOUTHWARK councils raised a combined total of £28.6 million in on-street parking fines – and a collective £47.9 million in parking income – for the 2011-12 financial year, figures issued by the RAC Foundation reveal.

Lambeth finished in the top ten earners for both on-street paring fines (£16.7 million) and in parking income (£25.1 million) despite a 43 per cent fall in parking income.

The RAC Foundation released their figures after supporting Barnet residents in a High Court case where a judge ruled Barnet council had acted unlawfully when it hiked residents’ parking fees to “defray other road transport expenditure and reduce the need to raise income from other sources, such as… council tax.”

In a stinging comment the Foundation’s Philip Gomm said: “So councils are cash strapped? “Not when it comes to parking income it would seem.

“Between them the 359 authorities that run parking operations made an eye-watering £565 million between them in the financial year 2011-12, as our latest report shows. “Before all the councils start leaving comments, yes we realise this figure is before capital charges – that is building and replacing stuff associated with parking – are deducted

“But even after you allow for these the total surplus is still a massive £412 million. “In a way the point is not that a surplus is made – but why it is made.

“Few drivers will have a complaint with a coherent transport policy which manages traffic and congestion through the use of parking fees. “If there were no restrictions or charges then in many towns and cities there would be a free-for all on the roads which would be in no-one’s interests, drivers included.

“And if a ‘profit’, sorry surplus, is generated then this is allowed for in law as long as it is spent on a strict and limited number of things, all of which are essentially transport related.

“What is not allowed for in law are parking charges that are set to generate revenue for hard-up councils facing cuts in central government grants and restrictions on the level of council tax they can set. “We know it is against the law not just because it is there in black and white on the statue book but because a High Court a judge said so just last week.

“According to Mrs Justice Lang, Barnet council in north London acted unlawfully when it hiked residents’ parking fees to “defray other road transport expenditure and reduce the need to raise income from other sources, such as… council tax.”

“One nil to the residents of Barnet who brought the case, supported by the RAC Foundation.

“It is true that there are several councils which do not make money from parking, but they are in the minority. “That they made a loss might actually be a sign of a good parking policy where charges are kept low to actually encourage cars into a town or city centre to support the business of traders in the High Street.

“But as for the rest there will be the suspicion amongst drivers that they are increasingly coming to rely on parking surpluses as a way of protecting other services.

“This might be a laudable aim, but it is not a lawful aim. Why should councillors decide that the best way to break even is to arbitrarily tax one section of society?

“The RAC Foundation would encourage all councils to publish an annual parking report containing their traffic management strategy and detailing what they are charging and why. if a set of charges has risen dramatically, why have they gone up? “What is the traffic problem the council is trying to solve?

“The irony is that these huge profits come against a backdrop of a decline in traffic volume because of the recession. “Arguably parking charges should be generally coming down, not going up.

“And of course pigs might fly.”

(Tables below courtesy RAC Foundation. Remaining figures for Lewisham and Bromley awaited.)

Table 4 On-street penalty income On-street penalty income									On-street penalties as % of on-street income
£ million		2011/12		2010/11		2009/10		Change 2011 on 2009			2011/12		2010/11		2009/10
1	Westminster		25.3		22.1		20.5			24%		32%		31%		29%
2	Camden		18.5		18.7		20.3			-9%		50%		51%		53%
3	Hammersmith & Fulham		18.2		11.0		8.5			114%		59%		39%		34%
4	Lambeth		16.7		16.8		34.0			-51%		67%		69%		82%
5	Islington		11.2		9.5		14.9			-25%		43%		39%		51%
6	Newham		10.8		7.7		7.8			39%		73%		70%		76%
7	Ealing		10.0		10.1		8.7			15%		55%		77%		72%
8	Brent		9.6*		7.2		11.4			-16%		60%		56%		81%
9	Kensington & Chelsea		9.4		10.2		12.2			-23%		23%		29%		34%
10	Haringey		8.0		7.2		7.2			11%		55%		58%		62%
11	Waltham Forest		7.7		6.1		6.3			22%		79%		70%		67%
12	Barnet		7.2		5.1		5.9			21%		55%		60%		62%
13	Wandsworth		7.1		6.0		6.1			16%		26%		24%		25%
14	Croydon		6.4		6.0		5.5			16%		63%		63%		60%
15	Hounslow		5.7		4.9		4.5			25%		57%		53%		54%
16	Manchester		5.6		3.6		3.8			45%		53%		47%		48%
17	Harrow		5.6		5.6		5.1			10%		79%		80%		78%
18	Hackney		5.5		9.3		5.3			3%		36%		57%		41%
19	Southwark		5.5		4.6		5.4			1%		93%		53%		61%
20	Tower Hamlets		5.4		5.2		5.1			7%		31%		31%		31%
ENGLAND				45%				45%					48%

(The Foundation says there is certainly evidence of a decline in the number of penalty charges as motorists become more aware of the rules and are more careful to park legally.)

Table 2 Parking income (on and off street) £ million		2011/12		2010/11		2009/10		Change 2011 on 2009
1	Westminster		80.0		84.3		83.4		-4%
2	Kensington & Chelsea		42.8		36.5		37.6		14%
3	Camden		39.3		39.2		41.0		-4%
4	Hammersmith & Fulham		31.1		28.3		24.9		25%
5	Wandsworth		27.0		25.2		24.2		12%
6	Islington		26.1		24.2		29.0		-10%
7	Lambeth		25.1		24.3		44.0		-43%
8	Brighton & Hove UA		23.6		23.1		21.6		9%
9	Ealing		20.0		14.5		14.0		42%
10	Birmingham		18.7		17.7		19.2		-2%
11	Tower Hamlets		17.5		16.8		16.5		6%
12	Newham		17.2		13.1		12.1		42%
13	Brent		16.9		13.7		14.8		14%
14	Hackney		15.3		16.5		13.2		16%
15	Haringey		14.8		13.0		12.0		24%
16	Cornwall UA		14.0		13.9		13.9		1%
17	Barnet		14.0		9.2		10.3		35%
18	Newcastle upon Tyne		13.9		12.5		13.5		3%
19	Manchester		13.7		12.5		11.1		24%
20	Leeds		13.0		11.7		12.0		8%
21	Hounslow		12.2		11.2		10.6		15%
22	Croydon		11.9		14.6		16.0		-25%
23	City of London		11.1		10.0		9.3		20%
24	Southwark		10.9		11.9		11.2		-3%
25	Bristol UA		10.8		9.9		9.7		11%
26	Enfield		10.8		10.9		13.0		-17%
27	Bath & North East Somerset UA		10.7		12.3		11.4		-6%
28	Guildford		10.7		10.1		9.4		13%
29	Waltham Forest		10.4		9.3		9.9		4%
30	Bromley		10.3		10.0		9.5		9%

Note: Local authorities are required to submit details of their finances to the Department of Communities and Local Government, following a detailed set of rules prepared by the Department each year. They are normally published in November.

The post COUNCILS RAISE MILLIONS IN ON-STREET FINES AND PARKING INCOME appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

COUNCILLOR LODGES FORMAL COMPLAINT OVER LAMPPOSTS REMOVAL “Croydon council is not here to be served by residents – but to serve residents”

jerrygreen85 — Mon, 08 Jul 2013 10:15:20 +0000

A NORWOOD councillor has lodged a formal complaint over the removal of lampposts in Mowbray Road where ‘huggers’ found themselves face to face with police after spurious claims of ‘harassment’ by workmen.

Cllr Wayne Lawlor, in a scathing response to an email from Croydon’s head of highways and parking services Mr Steve Iles, says: “Residents and local councillors views do not count for anything at all. “Croydon council needs to get back to the basics and start serving this area and residents, not imposing unwanted change just because a contractor has tied this council up in financial knots.

“Croydon council is not here to be served by residents but to serve residents” says Cllr Lawlor, (Lab. South Norwood). “That ethos seems to be missing in this policy. “That this work has just gone ahead without a response to my query is deeply concerning.

His comments come in the wake of the ‘lamppost huggers’ incident in Mowbray Road (see our story: WORKMEN BLOW A FUSE OVER LAMPPOST HUGGERS – Police called to Mowbray Road amid ‘harassment’ claims dated July 4th) dubbed ”Send in the Light Brigade” by the London Evening Standard.

“Local residents have chained themselves to lampposts to stop these historic features being removed from their area. “This shows the strength of feeling.

“I am quite stunned that Croydon council feels that any dialogue would be pointless because the PFI (private finance initiative) doesn’t permit any flexibility over the contract. “These contracts and projects are tax-payer funded by the same residents whom this council now seeks to disenfranchise.

“It has taken nine weeks for a response, and in the meantime works have gone ahead. “I would like this to be investigated as part of a formal complaint. “Communication on this issue has been appalling both with councillors and residents. “I know that local residents will also be making complaints on the matter.” (Mr Iles’ responses can be found later in this article).

EMAIL FROM NORWOOD SOCIETY’S PLANNING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN

Cllr Lawlor’s comments come in the wake of a letter from Philip Goddard, chairman of the Norwood Society’s planning committee, to Mark Richardson,Mowbray Road resident and lamppost hugger.

Mr Goddard tells Mr Richardson: “There is no such entity as a ‘street light conservation area’. “What has happened is that Croydon council have decided to replace all the street lights, with some exceptions, partly to improve the lighting and partly because they can make a lot of money out of selling the old ones for scrap, given the current prices of scrap metal.

“Naturally, they have gone to town on the former motive and kept very quiet over the latter. “It seems that all lighting outside conservation areas is to be replaced,regardless of the harmony and elegance which the older columns may contribute to the street in which they stand, with new columns which may or may not be appropriate to the particular street. “It is clear from

correspondence that they will brook absolutely no exceptions whatever to this.

“The present administration is not conservation minded; one councillor from the majority group recently expressed his opposition to the whole concept of conservation areas, on the grounds that they were a hindrance to large scale redevelopment (which of course is exactly what they are designed to be).

“Conservation areas have been divided up street by street, with the old lighting to be retained in some streets and replaced in others (hence the totally inappropriate term “street light conservation area”, referring to those streets in the conservation area where the older columns are to be retained). “You have asked by reference to what criteria the council has

divided the conservation areas up but I doubt whether you will be told, given the attitude of the present administration.

“So far as Skanska is concerned their function is to make money for their shareholders, not preserve Croydon’s heritage, which is the job of Croydon council. “In short, they will do whatever the latter requires as long as they get paid for it. “A contract between Croydon and Skanska will already have been signed and neither side will be prepared to renegotiate its terms merely because those of us who live in Croydon don’t like them.

“What a bizarre notion; anybody would think we were living in a democracy! “Personally I think this is already a lost cause, but if you feel there is anything more that can be done do share your thoughts.”

EXCHANGE OF EMAILS BETWEEN CLLR LAWLOR AND MR ILES

Mr Iles’ email dated July 5th reads as follows:

Firstly my apologies for the delay in responding to you I thought this response had been sent, for ease I have responded to your questions at the end of each question.

I do understand the points that you have raised in your e-mail. I suggest that comments in the body of your own e-mail reflect the situation at Mowbray Road, “accommodate local character where it has been identified as either an historic asset or an area where an increased specification is required.”

Answer:- As previously stated the financing of the PFI contract does provide limited opportunity to vary the specification in certain specific circumstances accommodate local character where it has been identified as either an historic asset or an area where an increased specification is justified. Mowbray Rd is not a designated conservation area and for the purposes of the PFI it is not identified as an area that justifies or requires an increased lighting specification. It is I unlikely that the existing street lighting stock in Mowbray Rd pre-dates the 1940’s and is therefore not representative of the wider Victorian character of the area.

Given the strength of feeling on what is a major project, I would be grateful if you would consider public meeting of Mowbray Road residents to listen to their views. I would also be grateful if you could outline what consultation has taken place with residents of Mowbray Road.

Answer:- Further additional dialogue via a public meeting to listen to the views of Mowbray Road residents would not be able to exert any influence or alteration of the contractual arrangements and financial limitations of the Street Lighting PFI, and therefore I believe would serve little purpose and may inadvertently raise expectations.

The Councils Street Lighting PFI was agreed by cabinet at its meeting of December 2010. With regard to local character and historic assets, the council carried out a Conservation Area review in 2007-8 which underwent an extensive consultation process involving local residents associations leading to the designation of nine new conservation areas.

Whilst the Church Road Conservation Area was extended as a part of this review it did not extend into the adjacent Mowbray Rd (other than to include No’ 2 Mowbray Rd at its eastern edge). The 16 Places of Croydon were developed as a part of the Core Strategy (Croydon Local Plan) and based on a detailed analysis of local and residential character of the borough, this underwent extensive statutory public consultation during the period 2009-2012.

I would point out that ‘standard solutions’ do not necessarily enhance the character of an area, indeed I have seen many planning applications refused on those grounds.

Answer:- The primary objective of the street lighting PFI project is to provide improvement to lighting within the borough from a technical performance (lighting level & distribution) and energy efficiency perspectives. When the scope and extent of opportunity contained within the PFI was investigated and developed in 2008?, it was agreed that the boroughs statutory designated conservation areas, district centres and the metropolitan centre would be the only areas where a variation to the specification would be accommodated. It was not possible to accommodate additional areas due to the financial limitations contained within the PFI contract. Street lighting does not require planning permission to be installed as its provision is covered under the Highways Act. For ease I have copied the link to the council’s website which provides a copy of the “street lighting project document” which was agreed by the Department of Transport http://www.croydon.gov.uk/transportandstreets/rhps/street-lighting/

In relation to your comments, and I quote “It is important to understand that the street lighting stock is old and in the majority of case is approaching the end of its life“. I can understand that argument, but would question why we are not looking at replacing the Victorian style poles in Mowbray Road, like for like? I wonder what maintenance would be required on the existing lights? I would be grateful for further information, please.

Answer:- the standardisation of the street lighting stock delivers greater efficiencies for future maintenance costs as the suppliers only need to keep a limited stock, this combined with the standard column and lantern being cheaper per unit item than an enhanced street light. In terms of whether we could retain the existing street lighting and maintain them, unfortunately as I mentioned the vast majority of columns around the borough are approaching the end of their life, these means the columns are weakening in structural integrity and therefore are at greater risk of falling over and this is a risk we are unable to take.

I hope this addresses your questions and again my apologies for the delay in responding to you. Regards Steve Iles

The post COUNCILLOR LODGES FORMAL COMPLAINT OVER LAMPPOSTS REMOVAL “Croydon council is not here to be served by residents – but to serve residents” appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

WORKMEN BLOW A FUSE OVER LAMPPOST HUGGERS – Police called to Mowbray Road amid ‘harassment’ claims

jerrygreen85 — Thu, 04 Jul 2013 14:16:50 +0000

RESIDENTS hugged Victorian-style lampposts in Mowbray Road to stop workmen replacing them with unwanted modern ones.

The workmen who had come to change the lampposts responded by calling in police and claiming harassment – sparking the London Evening Standard headline: “Send in the light brigade”.

Mowbray Road resident Mark Richardson, who raised the issue of the lampposts with News From Crystal Palace earlier this year, said: “The police officers were very confused at being told we were being aggressive to the builders.

“There were women and children, it was a spontaneous thing. “We were hugging the lamp posts and saying how nice they are. “But the builders said they were following orders and to speak to the council, who have failed to give us any proper answers.” Police left after finding no offences had been committed.
“I’m livid because we look after our neighbourhood, but the council are vandalising our street. “They have failed to reply to our emails. “The green option must be to upgrade the luminaries i.e. what they say they are going to do in the conservation zone.

“We pay council leader Cllr Mike Fisher’s £65,000 salary.”

One resident, Phil Kendall of Mowbray Road, recently wrote to Croydon council cabinet members Simon Hoar and Phil Thomas branding the changes ‘ tantamount to vandalism. He told them: .”I am writing with concern regarding the removal of the current Victorian style street lights in Mowbray Road

“Your contractors are currently in the process of replacing the existing lights with the new ones. “My view, and the view of many others, is that the works are completely unnecessary, and is tantamount to vandalism. “All that the existing street lights needed was a coat of paint and energy efficient heads/lanterns/bulbs.

“The existing street lights are in keeping with the Victorian nature of the street.

“Last night our old street light outside our property was not working (disconnected perhaps). “This part of the street in now dangerously dark. “The new street lights are too few, too high, and too spread out. They are very bright in one part of the street, whilst other parts of the street are in near darkness.”

And Fox Hill gardens resident Alexis Bleadsdale resident told News From Crystal Palace: “I have recently had some correspondence with Skanska (see below) as I have been informed that my road, Fox Hill Gardens, SE19 2XB, despite being in a conservation area, is not eligible for a street lighting upgrade that is sympathetic to its surroundings – we are being issued with the standard kit.

“Apparently this is because my road does not fall within the ‘street lighting conservation area.’

“If anyone can shed any light on what this area is, and what criteria were used to assess the roads that fall within the area, then I would be most grateful for the information.

“Skanska have not replied to my email queries requesting further information (of which the email below is just the most recent example.)

“We are within the heart of the actual conservation area, and I believe that we should be issued with Windsor lanterns, just like the roads that fall within this mythical ‘street lighting conservation area.’

In another letter Alexis adds: The residents of Fox Hill Gardens are only this weekend (June 29th / 30th) clubbing together to get new gravel delivered and gardening to keep the appearance of the Gardens at its best, and would appreciate the best efforts of the council to maintain the lighting in keeping with its architectural surroundings.
Skanska’s reply reads:

Dear Mr Bleasdale
I am sorry if there is any confusion surrounding conservation areas. The authority have agreed a list of “street lighting” conservation roads of which unfortunately Fox Hill Gardens has not been selected to have enhanced columns installed of which the same applies for Mowbray Road.
Sorry I cannot be of more help in this matter.
Regards
John Algar
PFI (Private Finance Initiative) Contract Manager
Croydon & Lewisham Street Lighting PFI Alexis told News From Crystal Palace: “By the way contrary to Skanska’s assumption I’m Miss not Mr.”

Alexis has since written to Croydon council and had a reply from a representative of Cllr Thomas. She sent several questions to Croydon – and got answers back.

What criteria were used to determine eligibility for this zone?

“The financing of the PFI contract does provide limited opportunity to vary the specification in certain specific circumstances (to) accommodate local character where it has been identified as either an historic asset or an area where an increased specification is justified.
“Fox Hill Gardens is not a designated conservation area and for the purposes of the PFI it is not identified as an area that justifies or requires an increased lighting specification.

“It is unlikely that the existing street lighting stock in Fox Hill Gardens pre-dates the 1940’s and is therefore not representative of the wider Victorian character of the area.”

Why were residents not consulted?
“Further additional dialogue via a public meeting to listen to the views of Fox Hill Gardens residents would not be able to exert any influence or alteration of the contractual arrangements and financial limitations of the street lighting PFI, would serve little purpose and may inadvertently raise expectations.
“The council’s street lighting PFI was agreed by cabinet members. “With regard to local character and historic assets, the council carried out a conservation area review in 2007-8 which underwent an extensive consultation process involving local residents associations leading to the designation of nine new conservation areas.

“Whilst the Church Road conservation area was extended as a part of this review it did not extend into the adjacent Fox Hill Gardens. “The 16 places of Croydon were developed as a part of the core strategy (Croydon Local Plan) and based on a detailed analysis of local and residential character of the borough. “This underwent extensive statutory public consultation during the period 2009-2012.”

What steps can be taken now to change or open up the decision to further consultation?

“The primary objective of the street lighting PFI project is to provide improvement to lighting within the borough from a technical performance (lighting level and distribution) and energy efficiency perspectives.
“When the scope and extent of opportunity contained within the PFI was investigated and developed in 2008, it was agreed that the borough’s statutory designated conservation areas, district centres and the metropolitan centre would be the only areas where a variation to the specification would be accommodated. “It was not possible to accommodate additional areas due to the financial limitations contained within the PFI contract. “Street Lighting does not require planning permission as its provision is covered under the Highways act

The post WORKMEN BLOW A FUSE OVER LAMPPOST HUGGERS – Police called to Mowbray Road amid ‘harassment’ claims appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.

PASSPORT TO PALACE? “Golden opportunity to form another London borough”

jerrygreen85 — Thu, 06 Jun 2013 11:00:20 +0000

A LONDON BOROUGH OF CRYSTAL PALACE – that’s the plan being proposed by the Upper Norwood Improvement Team.

In a move which partly reflects the plot of the 1940s Ealing Studios film classic ‘Passport to Pimlico’ – where residents of part of Pimlico declare independence after discovering their area is part of Burgundy - UNIT are now actively pursuing more information on the idea of independence with a difference.

The move comes against a background of increasing local hostility within Upper Norwood towards Croydon council’s ruling Conservative group over massive funding cuts to Upper Norwood joint library and the closure of the children’s centre behind Sainsbury’s on Westow Street.

Fiona Byers, representing Upper Norwood joint library, said that as a childrens’ librarian she dealt with a lot of families. “They are saying there’s far too many children in our schools, there’s far too many people around. “I’m wondering whether this is a golden opportunity to form another London borough.

“The Crystal Palace area would then become the central point. “We’ve got so many amazing people that make up our area being creamed off in little bits. “It would be nice to harness what we’ve got and go places.

“That might release some pressure on everyone around. “It would be much more helpful with getting stuff done – I use that in its loosest form.”

Fiona recalled there had been problems with the Victorian toilets on Crystal Palace Parade for two years or more because everyone was fighting over who owned the toilets because they were on the boundary of three boroughs.- but may not have been when they were first built. (The toilets have since turned into a ‘below stairs’ home)

“We’re in a unique position that five boroughs meet within a few hundred metres of each other and this is what causes so many problems. “There are places in London where three boroughs meet. “There’s nowhere where there’s four meet. “It’s hard enough dealing with one council but when you’ve got to deal with five it’s a nightmare.”

Southwark Cllr Andy Simmons explained that there were periodic reviews of boundaries by the Boundary Commission for England, an entirely independent body.

“But they do tend to focus on ward boundaries within a borough. “If people do want to go down that route then London boroughs are about 200,000 to 300,000 people in size. “Any change that people might suggest would have to fit in with the order of 250 to 300,000 people.”

Cllr Simmons (Lab. College ward) suggested “for the sake of debate” moving the boundaries of one borough to encompass the whole of the Triangle might be a more realistic proposition than trying to create a new borough.”

Mark Richardson replied: “That seems good to me – to get us away from Croydon. “They’ve taken away the town centre manager, the children’s centre. “We’re mortgaging the street lights for 25 years and our children are going to end up paying for them.” The £75,000 Croydon had given Upper Norwood library was “totally derisive” he added. And he recalled that, as a previous chairman of the (then) Upper Norwood Chamber of Commerce “I was repeatedly told we had no right to have a Chamber up here because they had one in Croydon! ”How about asking the Boundary Commission to come up and give us a talk?

Responding to Cllr Simmons suggestion of one borough encompassing the whole of the Triangle, UNIT chairman George Filbey said he’d personally prefer Southwark – “and possibly Southwark may not want us.”

Declaring his own independence – Mr Filbey, a former Croydon councillor for Upper Norwood ward – said he had now left the Conservative party. “This is the party I like – the Crystal Palace party.”

He said he would like to see the London borough of Crystal Palace run by a community group rather than a political party. “We should be considering the old system where we had ratepayers associations – that kind of thing..Fiona Byers said that if the area got down to just three boroughs it would help the situation.

UNIT’s next meeting is the annual meeting on Tuesday October 29th.

IF A LONDON borough of Crystal Palace was to be created one possible blueprint would be for it to embrace the following existing council wards (Figures in brackets are the numbers on the electoral register for that ward for the May 2010 borough council elections):

BROMLEY:

Crystal Palace 8,667

Penge and Cator: 12,060

Clock House 11,690

CROYDON:

South Norwood 11,027

Upper Norwood 11,171

Thornton Heath 11,050

Selhurst 11,295

Bensham Manor 11,235

West Thornton 11,547

LAMBETH

Gipsy Hill 9,808

Knights Hill 9,973

Tulse Hill 11,169

Thurlow Park 9,837

LEWISHAM

Sydenham 10,862

Forest Hill 10,255

SOUTHWARK

College 8,670

Village 8,843

East Dulwich 8,948

This would give a total figure of 188,137 – the 200,000 figure could be reached by including the Croydon wards of Norbury (11,682) and / or Addiscombe (11,748)

(Image courtesy of Cinema Museum)

The post PASSPORT TO PALACE? “Golden opportunity to form another London borough” appeared first on News from Crystal Palace - News & stories from the fresh air suburb - Crystal Palace, London SE19.