Although Town Hall Hustings do not officially start until Saturday (2pm-5pm at Ladywell Leisure Centre for anyone interested - something to do on perhaps a cold and wet afternoon?) it would appear that they are already up and running on this site.
Maybe it is time for Admin to start a Town Hustings site on the Forum as was done during the last General election?
Your wish is my command Muddy!
Admin
Town Hall Hustings
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Hello Ella
Just a note to say that I set up the Sydenham Community Regeneration Partnership meetings in 1997 to ensure that our high street remained vibrant and did not continue on the downward slide. Following consultation with local residents I have continued to chair these meetings on a quarterly basis - they take place at the Naborhood Centre. Over the years we discussed a range of topics and I secured the funding from Lewisham for the continuation of the Town Centre Manager post when the Crystal Palace Single Regeneration Budget came to an end. I have regular meetings with Julie Sutch, the TCM for the area and have taken up issues raised by individual traders. I have been pressing Lewisham officers to sort out the signage in Sydenham Road so that the parking bays have the same operational times from 7am to 7pm. I have continued to ensure that the Girton Road car park remains free - and have encouraged the local supermarkets to continue their contribution to the upkeep. Whilst I am not a frequent contributor to this Forum I do provide updates to the administrator on hot topics such as Sydenham Library, the budget, Forest Hill Pools and results of planning applications including the decision to refuse the House of Curtains change of use to a betting shop.
Just a note to say that I set up the Sydenham Community Regeneration Partnership meetings in 1997 to ensure that our high street remained vibrant and did not continue on the downward slide. Following consultation with local residents I have continued to chair these meetings on a quarterly basis - they take place at the Naborhood Centre. Over the years we discussed a range of topics and I secured the funding from Lewisham for the continuation of the Town Centre Manager post when the Crystal Palace Single Regeneration Budget came to an end. I have regular meetings with Julie Sutch, the TCM for the area and have taken up issues raised by individual traders. I have been pressing Lewisham officers to sort out the signage in Sydenham Road so that the parking bays have the same operational times from 7am to 7pm. I have continued to ensure that the Girton Road car park remains free - and have encouraged the local supermarkets to continue their contribution to the upkeep. Whilst I am not a frequent contributor to this Forum I do provide updates to the administrator on hot topics such as Sydenham Library, the budget, Forest Hill Pools and results of planning applications including the decision to refuse the House of Curtains change of use to a betting shop.
I went to the hustings at the pool which were quite lively. Things of note were;
The candidate Sinna Mani (who lives abroad and is still not in the country) had his representative on Earth present who answered many questions in the third person - which made curious listening.
Steve Bullock didn't shine - I think he was playing the I'm sensible card but this also meant any signs of conviction and desire were missing.
The candidate who's a plumber (John Hamilton) spoke well and always stood to make his sometimes overlong responses.
Lots of nutters there, one who obviously knows something we dont shouting at Bullock said "you're lower than vermin! You should be on trail for war crimes at the Haig!"
Quite a bit of unplesentness coming from some Labour Councilors present which wasn't necessary.
It was all videoed, and I think its to be posted on the Save the Pool campaing's web site.
Mark L
The candidate Sinna Mani (who lives abroad and is still not in the country) had his representative on Earth present who answered many questions in the third person - which made curious listening.
Steve Bullock didn't shine - I think he was playing the I'm sensible card but this also meant any signs of conviction and desire were missing.
The candidate who's a plumber (John Hamilton) spoke well and always stood to make his sometimes overlong responses.
Lots of nutters there, one who obviously knows something we dont shouting at Bullock said "you're lower than vermin! You should be on trail for war crimes at the Haig!"
Quite a bit of unplesentness coming from some Labour Councilors present which wasn't necessary.
It was all videoed, and I think its to be posted on the Save the Pool campaing's web site.
Mark L
-
Nick Ingham
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 11 Apr 2006 14:53
- Location: Catford
It has been posted to the http://www.saveladywellpool.com website as a huge (53MB) audio file. There's also a version which we've broken down into smaller wma files (one per question each around 1MB) and posted them temporarily on John Hamiltons's website at http://www.johnhamilton.co.uk until we can find a new home for them.
Thought it was a quite a good event (despite the "nutters" and some unpleasantness). I'm supporting John's campaign so pleased you thought he came across well.
Nick Ingham
(Independent Candidate Rushey Green)
Thought it was a quite a good event (despite the "nutters" and some unpleasantness). I'm supporting John's campaign so pleased you thought he came across well.
Nick Ingham
(Independent Candidate Rushey Green)
False Political Information: Mani's residence
As one of the agents for Sinna Mani, it has come to our notice that false and scurrilous information about our candidate has appeared on this forum. To be exact, it has been written that Sinna Mani does not live in this country but abroad. Sinna Mani has been a resident of Sydenham for the last 26 years and still resides in Thorpewood Avenue, Upper Sydenham. The depths that some of his political opponents and their supporters will sink to can only bring disrepute to the political system. No wonder so many people are dissillusioned with politics if this sort of dis-information is spread about. Sinna Mani is considering taking legal action against the perpetrators of such false information. The least that he expects is an apology on this site by the perpetrator of the lies about him.
Dear Abeoppel,
Town Hustings is the place for robust political discussion. But there are limits. You did, in posting here, agree not to abuse other posters. If they post stuff which is not correct then you should properly correct it and, if you wish, question their motives. That is what it is here for.
But calling them liars in this Forum is abuse. Apparently threatening me with legal action as publisher of the comments in good faith is not helpful. This site is passionately non-party political and will resist intimidation from any party.
I hope you wrote your comments in the heat of the moment, and forgive me if there is too much heat in mine. On reflection do you not think you too owe an apology to the Forum?
Elections are about winning minds and hence votes. Lets get away from abuse and be positive. This is a free space for all to put their candidate's message forward. I, like many voters here, know very little of Sinna - I have not received any literature so far and Sinna is the only candidate we have been unable to find a website for ... Please do consider using this Forum and our election page for your candidate's benefit and helping Forum visitors make a more informed choice on May 4th.
Admin
Town Hustings is the place for robust political discussion. But there are limits. You did, in posting here, agree not to abuse other posters. If they post stuff which is not correct then you should properly correct it and, if you wish, question their motives. That is what it is here for.
But calling them liars in this Forum is abuse. Apparently threatening me with legal action as publisher of the comments in good faith is not helpful. This site is passionately non-party political and will resist intimidation from any party.
I hope you wrote your comments in the heat of the moment, and forgive me if there is too much heat in mine. On reflection do you not think you too owe an apology to the Forum?
Elections are about winning minds and hence votes. Lets get away from abuse and be positive. This is a free space for all to put their candidate's message forward. I, like many voters here, know very little of Sinna - I have not received any literature so far and Sinna is the only candidate we have been unable to find a website for ... Please do consider using this Forum and our election page for your candidate's benefit and helping Forum visitors make a more informed choice on May 4th.
Admin
-
Nick Ingham
- Posts: 10
- Joined: 11 Apr 2006 14:53
- Location: Catford
I'm going to tread very carefully into this conversation.
I was asked to speak at the Pensioners Forum today and made the point that if you vote for a leading political party you know pretty much what you are voting for. As independent candidates or candidates for small parties we have more of a responsibility to educate people on our policies.
I took the chance today to ask Sinna Mani why he doesn't have a website as Abeoppel hasn't responded to admin's posting and neither of us could find it.
Amazingly he actually does have a website but they haven't made much attempt to publicise it (e.g. on posters) or get it listed on google or other search engines. In fairness to all candidates I promised Sinna that I would get it publicised so here it is
www.mani4mayor.com
Let me stress this is a public service announcement and not a recommendation. I certainly won't be voting for him.
Best wishes
Nick Ingham
Independent Candidate Rushey Green
I was asked to speak at the Pensioners Forum today and made the point that if you vote for a leading political party you know pretty much what you are voting for. As independent candidates or candidates for small parties we have more of a responsibility to educate people on our policies.
I took the chance today to ask Sinna Mani why he doesn't have a website as Abeoppel hasn't responded to admin's posting and neither of us could find it.
Amazingly he actually does have a website but they haven't made much attempt to publicise it (e.g. on posters) or get it listed on google or other search engines. In fairness to all candidates I promised Sinna that I would get it publicised so here it is
www.mani4mayor.com
Let me stress this is a public service announcement and not a recommendation. I certainly won't be voting for him.
Best wishes
Nick Ingham
Independent Candidate Rushey Green
but you cannot be bothered to answer letters from your constituents.Chris Best wrote:Hello Ella
Just a note to say that I set up the Sydenham Community Regeneration Partnership meetings in 1997 to ensure that our high street remained vibrant and did not continue on the downward slide. Following consultation with local residents I have continued to chair these meetings on a quarterly basis - they take place at the Naborhood Centre. Over the years we discussed a range of topics and I secured the funding from Lewisham for the continuation of the Town Centre Manager post when the Crystal Palace Single Regeneration Budget came to an end. I have regular meetings with Julie Sutch, the TCM for the area and have taken up issues raised by individual traders. I have been pressing Lewisham officers to sort out the signage in Sydenham Road so that the parking bays have the same operational times from 7am to 7pm. I have continued to ensure that the Girton Road car park remains free - and have encouraged the local supermarkets to continue their contribution to the upkeep. Whilst I am not a frequent contributor to this Forum I do provide updates to the administrator on hot topics such as Sydenham Library, the budget, Forest Hill Pools and results of planning applications including the decision to refuse the House of Curtains change of use to a betting shop.
Only a councillor? There supposedly lies the responsibility.
Is Councillor Best best for Sydenham?
I've just seen Councillor Chris Best's posting of 30 March 2006 in which she says that she established the Sydenham Community Regeneration Partnership in 1997 "...to ensure that our high street remained vibrant and did not continue on the downward slide..."
I wonder how Councillor Best squares that statement with her open support for the developer's plans to create a giant retail park at the Bell Green site.
If the developer's plans are approved it will result (according to the developer's own figures) in an annual diversion of trade from Sydenham Road to the Bell Green site of about £500,000 and an increase in traffic on Sydenham Road (Saturday peak period) of 11%.
I can't for the life of me see how such changes would contribute to a vibrant Sydenham Road.
Here is what I said in a posting about Councillor Best after she told the Council's Planning Committee in June 2005 that she supported the developer's plans:
"The nearest Councillor Best came to addressing retail impact was when she referred to “doom and gloom” predictions made when the Savacentre was approved in 1995, which fears, she said, had never materialised. I wonder whether Councillor Best had spoken to Sydenham traders before making that remark, or whether she had noticed the virtual disappearance of the shopping parade at Bell Green, whose demise even the Council now acknowledge as resulting from the opening of the Savacentre.
I have no objection in principle to Councillor Best taking a view in favour of the Bell Green applications. There are arguments either side of the matter. What I do object to is Councillor Best’s apparent failure to equip herself with a proper understanding of the issues. She spoke in favour without displaying any grasp of the detail and without acknowledging or responding to the fears expressed by many local residents, especially about traffic. In my view Councillor Best failed her constituents, and badly so. Her stance in respect of the Bell Green proposals was superficial and did nothing to promote the aim of a “vibrant Sydenham Road” to which Councillor Best claims to be committed."
Readers of previous postings about the proposed development at Bell Green will know that the developer's application has now been taken out of the hands of Lewisham Council (who wished to approve it) and that the final decision will be taken by John Prescott, after a public inquiry.
Good news. Astonishingly, Councillor (Chameleon) Best also regards the call-in of the application as good news. Here is what she said in a recent edition of the Sydenham Society Newsletter:
"...I welcome the decision by John Prescott to call in the planning decision and to hold a public inquiry".
Call me old fashioned, but my view is that that statement, coming from a Councillor who firmly supported the developer's plan, reeks of hypocrisy.
Councillor Best may, somehow, be able to square the circle. I would certainly welcome her response to my comments.
My politics? A life-long supporter, and member, of the Labour Party - until about 6 months ago when the conduct of Labour Councillors in respect of Bell Green, and national issues, resulted in my resignation.
Bryan Leslie
I wonder how Councillor Best squares that statement with her open support for the developer's plans to create a giant retail park at the Bell Green site.
If the developer's plans are approved it will result (according to the developer's own figures) in an annual diversion of trade from Sydenham Road to the Bell Green site of about £500,000 and an increase in traffic on Sydenham Road (Saturday peak period) of 11%.
I can't for the life of me see how such changes would contribute to a vibrant Sydenham Road.
Here is what I said in a posting about Councillor Best after she told the Council's Planning Committee in June 2005 that she supported the developer's plans:
"The nearest Councillor Best came to addressing retail impact was when she referred to “doom and gloom” predictions made when the Savacentre was approved in 1995, which fears, she said, had never materialised. I wonder whether Councillor Best had spoken to Sydenham traders before making that remark, or whether she had noticed the virtual disappearance of the shopping parade at Bell Green, whose demise even the Council now acknowledge as resulting from the opening of the Savacentre.
I have no objection in principle to Councillor Best taking a view in favour of the Bell Green applications. There are arguments either side of the matter. What I do object to is Councillor Best’s apparent failure to equip herself with a proper understanding of the issues. She spoke in favour without displaying any grasp of the detail and without acknowledging or responding to the fears expressed by many local residents, especially about traffic. In my view Councillor Best failed her constituents, and badly so. Her stance in respect of the Bell Green proposals was superficial and did nothing to promote the aim of a “vibrant Sydenham Road” to which Councillor Best claims to be committed."
Readers of previous postings about the proposed development at Bell Green will know that the developer's application has now been taken out of the hands of Lewisham Council (who wished to approve it) and that the final decision will be taken by John Prescott, after a public inquiry.
Good news. Astonishingly, Councillor (Chameleon) Best also regards the call-in of the application as good news. Here is what she said in a recent edition of the Sydenham Society Newsletter:
"...I welcome the decision by John Prescott to call in the planning decision and to hold a public inquiry".
Call me old fashioned, but my view is that that statement, coming from a Councillor who firmly supported the developer's plan, reeks of hypocrisy.
Councillor Best may, somehow, be able to square the circle. I would certainly welcome her response to my comments.
My politics? A life-long supporter, and member, of the Labour Party - until about 6 months ago when the conduct of Labour Councillors in respect of Bell Green, and national issues, resulted in my resignation.
Bryan Leslie
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Bell Green
Hello Bryan - Yes we do hold different views on the development of the former gas works at Bell Green. I have supported a mixed use for the site and ten years ago there were concerns putting housing on the site of contaminated land. At the Planning meeting in June 2005 I spoke in favour of the application to provide 156 homes on Phase 111 and questioned officers on the lack of Social Housing Grant as the developer was subsidising the social housing element by over £1.5m.
Whilst I understand the concerns with the business, industrial or warehouse units, non food retail and associated garden centre the case from the developer is that there is an unmet need.
My comment before your quote was that "Given the strong views held by the Sydenham Society about Bell Green, I welcome the decision ...". As a member of the Sydenham Society I have attended the AGMs where this has been discussed and listened to the passionate views held by members.
So, what have I done to promote the aim of a vibrant Sydenham Road? I have supported the appointment of a Town Centre Manager in 2000 for Sydenham and Forest Hill. Jennifer Taylor worked closely with the Sydenham Traders and the Sydenham Society to champion the town centre. Jennifer and laterly Julie has worked with the Sydenham Traders, Sydenham Society, local Police to promote Sydenham town centre and address isssues relating to business development, improvements to the high street as well as shop front grants. I have worked hard to ensure that Girton Road remains a free car park as well as pressing officers to complete the parking bay and signage review. We now have more free parking bays as well as clarity on times of parking.
Clearly there is more to do and the opportunities of Sydenham Gateway and the transport links will be discussed over the coming months. As a resident I want to be able to support quality local shops and we have some fantastic independent businesses in Kirkdale Books, Wellbeing, Candessa and new arrivals such as Snappy Snaps. Bryan - you are right in that I am committed to a vibrant Sydenham and will continue to support the high street whatever development takes place at Bell Green.
Whilst I understand the concerns with the business, industrial or warehouse units, non food retail and associated garden centre the case from the developer is that there is an unmet need.
My comment before your quote was that "Given the strong views held by the Sydenham Society about Bell Green, I welcome the decision ...". As a member of the Sydenham Society I have attended the AGMs where this has been discussed and listened to the passionate views held by members.
So, what have I done to promote the aim of a vibrant Sydenham Road? I have supported the appointment of a Town Centre Manager in 2000 for Sydenham and Forest Hill. Jennifer Taylor worked closely with the Sydenham Traders and the Sydenham Society to champion the town centre. Jennifer and laterly Julie has worked with the Sydenham Traders, Sydenham Society, local Police to promote Sydenham town centre and address isssues relating to business development, improvements to the high street as well as shop front grants. I have worked hard to ensure that Girton Road remains a free car park as well as pressing officers to complete the parking bay and signage review. We now have more free parking bays as well as clarity on times of parking.
Clearly there is more to do and the opportunities of Sydenham Gateway and the transport links will be discussed over the coming months. As a resident I want to be able to support quality local shops and we have some fantastic independent businesses in Kirkdale Books, Wellbeing, Candessa and new arrivals such as Snappy Snaps. Bryan - you are right in that I am committed to a vibrant Sydenham and will continue to support the high street whatever development takes place at Bell Green.
but that work did not, it seems, involve canvassing , or being in any way visible, for the forthcoming election nor did it involve seeking the opinions of the residents of Sydenham as opposed to the unelected cliques mentioned above.
When a certain firm obtained planning consent for phase 1 at Bell Green donations were made to a number of "projects" in LB Lewisham. Clearly those projects did not include the widening of Southend Lane. At the last minute a requirement for a second entrance to the site was dropped. Was this decision connected with the donations made?
Did those projects benefit Sydenham or were the benefits for other parts of the borough?
Was consideration given to an alternative exit point rather than the congestion creating junction immediately alongside the narrow bridge over Southend Lane?
When it comes to questions concerning donations.... the next question will involve cable TV.
The Borough's own officers tried to persuade BR.... presumably it would now be TFL, to move Lower Sydenham station away from its mugger's paradise location to a position adjacent to Savacentre. As a second option they tried to persuade the railways to create a separate additional station. Were you aware of that and did you support the proposals?
When a certain firm obtained planning consent for phase 1 at Bell Green donations were made to a number of "projects" in LB Lewisham. Clearly those projects did not include the widening of Southend Lane. At the last minute a requirement for a second entrance to the site was dropped. Was this decision connected with the donations made?
Did those projects benefit Sydenham or were the benefits for other parts of the borough?
Was consideration given to an alternative exit point rather than the congestion creating junction immediately alongside the narrow bridge over Southend Lane?
When it comes to questions concerning donations.... the next question will involve cable TV.
The Borough's own officers tried to persuade BR.... presumably it would now be TFL, to move Lower Sydenham station away from its mugger's paradise location to a position adjacent to Savacentre. As a second option they tried to persuade the railways to create a separate additional station. Were you aware of that and did you support the proposals?
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Knighton - you have been making some interesting points on the Forum so I will reply to a couple of other postings first. As a former member of the Labour Party you will know that I am politically accountable to the Sydenham Branch as well as the Chief Whip of the Labour Group. My casework is processed through a Members Casework System that is regularly monitored and if there are any unanswered letters then I can assure you that is because I haven't received them. Councillors are elected to represent all their constituents and to have influence on local matters as well decision making at full Council meetings. I currently hold the Cabinet portfolio for Social Inclusion and produce quarterly Newsletters - please visit my web site - http://www.chrisbest.labour.co.uk- for more information.
I recently consulted residents on the use of the £5k Locality Fund and the priority was large street planters (now on order) for Sydenham Road.
In response to the Section 106 planning gain for Bell Green. We currently have £1m earmarked for improvements to transportation. Officers have been in discussion with Network Rail who are responsible for the infrastructure - including safety, Southend Lane bridge, signals, tracks etc. The management of Lower Sydenham Station is down to the operating company - South Eastern Railway. I fully support the proposal to create a walkway to link Lower Sydenham Station with Bell Green to provide a fully integrated public transport system with the local bus routes. We have already had the benefit of the original Section 106 to develop the very attractive linear park along the river Pool linking Southend Lane with Catford Hill. This was to mitigate the loss of nature conservation on the gas works. As I have stated above I fully support housing on Phase 111 and this has been included following comments from residents and the Sydenham Society. The planning gain will be the 35% for affordable housing which, I am sure, will be of benefit to the residents of Sydenham.
I recently consulted residents on the use of the £5k Locality Fund and the priority was large street planters (now on order) for Sydenham Road.
In response to the Section 106 planning gain for Bell Green. We currently have £1m earmarked for improvements to transportation. Officers have been in discussion with Network Rail who are responsible for the infrastructure - including safety, Southend Lane bridge, signals, tracks etc. The management of Lower Sydenham Station is down to the operating company - South Eastern Railway. I fully support the proposal to create a walkway to link Lower Sydenham Station with Bell Green to provide a fully integrated public transport system with the local bus routes. We have already had the benefit of the original Section 106 to develop the very attractive linear park along the river Pool linking Southend Lane with Catford Hill. This was to mitigate the loss of nature conservation on the gas works. As I have stated above I fully support housing on Phase 111 and this has been included following comments from residents and the Sydenham Society. The planning gain will be the 35% for affordable housing which, I am sure, will be of benefit to the residents of Sydenham.
Thank you Chris for responding. I presume e-mails sent to you are also monitored although they should not be intercepted... which is why I am surprised they frequently go unanswered.
I do know you are more energetic than many local councillors but I should be interested to know how the consultation you mentioned in your response was carried out.
I am disappointed to hear you support the cheap option for the station at Lower Sydenham rather than an effective one. I wonder if you are aware how intimidating that particular station is at night and especially the alleyways leading to it. "Walkways" generally prove to be unsafe places. I am sure you would not wish to use them at night.
Would housing development so close to gasometers prove attractive or even marketable?
NB I am pretty certain the distance between Lwr Sydenham Station and Bell Green disqualifies them from being incorporated into what might be defined as a "Transport interchange". I cannot remember the details but I do know a far shorter distance in another such interchange was ruled far too great.
I do know you are more energetic than many local councillors but I should be interested to know how the consultation you mentioned in your response was carried out.
I am disappointed to hear you support the cheap option for the station at Lower Sydenham rather than an effective one. I wonder if you are aware how intimidating that particular station is at night and especially the alleyways leading to it. "Walkways" generally prove to be unsafe places. I am sure you would not wish to use them at night.
Would housing development so close to gasometers prove attractive or even marketable?
NB I am pretty certain the distance between Lwr Sydenham Station and Bell Green disqualifies them from being incorporated into what might be defined as a "Transport interchange". I cannot remember the details but I do know a far shorter distance in another such interchange was ruled far too great.
-
Chris Best
- Posts: 439
- Joined: 6 May 2005 11:37
- Location: Sydenham
Hello Knighton - you need to look back on previous topics under the Town Hall Index to Sydenham Regeneration. Pat posted up a reminder for the Sydenham Community Regeneration Parternship (SCRP) meeting on the 15 September and I asked for views on spending the £5,000. You can see some of suggestions and the meeting provided a few more. The next meeting of SCRP took place on the 1 December and again Pat posted a reminder on the 30 November mentioning the Locality Fund. I attended several meetings with Residents Associations as well as consultation at the regular Saturday morning surgeries. On the 1 December the majority were in favour of the Greening Sydenham bid and this was submitted to meet the deadline of mid December.
I do not have the costings for the walkway but Lewisham's Safer Station Survey did support your view that residents want improved safety when travelling on trains. We have asked the train operators and station managers to review safety and provide visible staff as well as improved lighting. The idea was to provide another entrance/exit to Lower Sydenham and have the bus stops close to Southend Lane. This is still under discussion and I am sure there will an opportunity to comment on any plans.
The developers have put forward the plans for the housing and have designed a spiral effect - one might think to complement the gasometers.
I do not have the costings for the walkway but Lewisham's Safer Station Survey did support your view that residents want improved safety when travelling on trains. We have asked the train operators and station managers to review safety and provide visible staff as well as improved lighting. The idea was to provide another entrance/exit to Lower Sydenham and have the bus stops close to Southend Lane. This is still under discussion and I am sure there will an opportunity to comment on any plans.
The developers have put forward the plans for the housing and have designed a spiral effect - one might think to complement the gasometers.
I am reminded of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.Chris Best wrote:Hello Knighton - you need to look back on previous topics under the Town Hall Index to Sydenham Regeneration. Pat posted up a reminder for the Sydenham Community Regeneration Parternship (SCRP) meeting on the 15 September and I asked for views on spending the £5,000. You can see some of suggestions and the meeting provided a few more. The next meeting of SCRP took place on the 1 December and again Pat posted a reminder on the 30 November mentioning the Locality Fund. I attended several meetings with Residents Associations as well as consultation at the regular Saturday morning surgeries. On the 1 December the majority were in favour of the Greening Sydenham bid and this was submitted to meet the deadline of mid December.
That is hardly a public consultation. Public consultation means a notification to every resident in the area and a means of communicating opinions back... Hardly cost-effective for £5,000 I know and to be honest £5,000 is not a sum worth arguing over on the scale of things but I have heard some very scathing comments about the proposed plantpots on lamp posts. Talking about lamp posts: recent proposals for yellow lines were posted on these. Perhaps the same approach could be applied to non-statutory matters relevant to a location. Not everyone has internet and not everyone has managed to locate this site.
Mention in an obscure corner of the maze which now presents itself as a website (with searches that do not work etc) is hardly bringing an issue to the attention of the public.
I think admin has some comments to make on LBL's current website. It is certainly not a gripping read.
Thanks for that Chris. I am not optimistic given the (now departed) LBL officer responsible for such issues was entirely pessimistic. (Cannot for the life of me remember his name or job title). Quite honestly I cannot understand why this branch (being a dead end) is not included in the ELL proposal.Chris Best wrote: I do not have the costings for the walkway but Lewisham's Safer Station Survey did support your view that residents want improved safety when travelling on trains. We have asked the train operators and station managers to review safety and provide visible staff as well as improved lighting. The idea was to provide another entrance/exit to Lower Sydenham and have the bus stops close to Southend Lane. This is still under discussion and I am sure there will an opportunity to comment on any plans.
I hope they have worked out a way to eliminate the smell of gas. Spiral sounds like a way to cram extra housing density into a cul-de-sac.Chris Best wrote:The developers have put forward the plans for the housing and have designed a spiral effect - one might think to complement the gasometers.
Thank you for responding