Agenda and minutes
PDF 110 KBVenue: Docklands Settlement, 400 Salter Road, Rotherhithe, SE16 5LJ
Contact: Tim Murtagh, Constitutional Officer
| Note | No. | Item |
|---|---|---|
|
Introduction and welcome
Minutes: The chair welcomed residents, councillors and officers to the meeting. |
||
|
Apologies
Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Catherine Dale, Ben Johnson, Eliza Mann and James Okosun. |
||
|
Items of business that the Chair deems urgent
The chair to advise whether they have agreed to any item of urgent business being admitted to the agenda. Minutes: There were none. |
||
|
Disclosure of Members' interests and dispensations
Members to declare any interests and dispensation in respect of any item of business to be considered at this meeting. Minutes: Councillor Stephanie Cryan, declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 12, as she is a resident of Garter Way, which has a parking amendment decision for consideration. |
||
|
Minutes
To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2016. Supporting documents: Minutes: RESOLVED:
That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 March 2016 be agreed as a correct record of that meeting.
The chair explained that a cleaner, greener, safer project had been agreed twice in error at the meetings on 27 January 2016 and 15 March 2016 meetings. To correct that duplication, an amendment was required to the minutes of 27 January 2016 so that an award of £2,000 to Compass School should be amended to £2,000 to St John’s Primary School. The amendment would ensure that both schools receive £2,000 under the cleaner, greener, safer programme as was the intention of councillors at the time.
RESOLVED:
That the minutes of 27 January 2016 be amended so that under item 11, “£2,000 to Compass Secondary school and Bermondsey community kitchen vegetable gardening project” should be amended to “£2,000 to St John’s Primary School for its vegetable gardening project.” |
||
|
Deputations / Petitions
The chair to advise on any deputations or petitions received. Minutes: There were none. |
||
|
Canada Water Master Plan - Review of Feedback Report
1. Presentation from British Land and Soundings – Overview of consultation and feedback so far.
2. Themed discussions – reviewing the feedback from February 2016 consultation.
Attendees will split into 3 broadly equal groups to hear and discuss what’s been recorded from the recent consultation on the three key areas of feedback:
· Transport and movement · Heights and density · Use and community infrastructure
The groups will spend 15 minutes at each table and move to the next so everyone will have a chance to discuss each element. The review will check the findings back with the community to ensure it is representative and address any gaps. The results of the discussions will be recorded by Soundings. Minutes: Roger Madelin, head of Canada Water development at British Land, introduced the main theme item.
Christina Norton, from Soundings, presented a summary of the draft masterplan consultation feedback.
The meeting went into workshops to hear and discuss what had been recorded from the recent consultation on the three key areas, namely - Transport and movement - Heights and density - Use and community infrastructure.
At the end of the workshop session, Christina explained that the sheets of notes from the workshops had been put up on the walls of the meeting hall so residents could see what others had been saying. She added that the consultation report was available online. Residents were encouraged to provide contact details so that they could be added to the database and be automatically notified of future consultation events. For further information contact: Eleanor.Wright@britishland.com |
||
7.05pm |
Community Announcements
Sustrans - Study into a cycling and pedestrian bridge over the Thames between Canary Wharf and Rotherhithe. Minutes: Sustrans gave their apologies for non-attendance but had submitted the following statement that the chair read out:
Earlier this year, Sustrans completed a feasibility study into a walking and cycling bridge connecting Rotherhithe and Canary Wharf, which identified that a bridge would see over 13,000 journeys a day: effectively emptying 15 full trains or 160 full buses of passengers. The study demonstrated that a bridge was feasible, connecting the two sides of the river between Durand’s Wharf park and Westferry Circus. The bridge would open on average three times per day, but would otherwise provide 24 hours a day access for free. Sustrans are currently working to progress the project, and are exploring options around governance and procurement to ensure a transparent process which achieves the best value for money. If anyone would like more information about this project, please contact Cliff Matsuya (cliff.matsuya@sustrans.org.uk), or visit Sustrans.org.uk/bikebridge
Marian Farrugia, community council development officer, asked residents to complete the forms, circulated at the meeting, to suggest topics for the meeting themes for the municipal year ahead. Residents were asked to be specific on what topics they wanted discussed, e.g. rather than simply saying traffic, the particular road and issue should be written down. Contact: marian.farrugia@southwark.gov.uk or Tel. 020 7525 1780.
Councillors commented that the proposed new bridge, connecting Rotherhithe and Canary Wharf, had cross party support and that it was a better use of public money than the garden bridge proposed for elsewhere in London. Councillors asked that this view be made clear to the new Mayor of London. |
|
8.10 |
Safety for pedestrians around Southwark Park
Matt Wilson and Gemma Bradley from Transport for London in attendance. Minutes: Matt Wilson, from Transport for London (TfL), presented. In response to some recent accidents that had caused a lot of concern for councillors and residents, Matt explained that putting guard rails around the affected area would be for pedestrian containment rather than as a safety measure against cars leaving the road. The guard rails had virtually zero containment value for cars at all. He added that modern cars were designed in such a way that adding guard rails to an accident impact could cause more damage to pedestrians in the event of traffic accident. Guard rails could also give a false sense of security to pedestrians.
Councillors said that something had to be done to improve safety in the area, whether by installing bollards or a redesign of the roundabout or other measures. Councillors asked for a separate meeting with TfL to take place, to discuss the possibilities and improve safety in that area.
On a separate issue, councillors said that the planned closure of Tower Bridge seemed to have been done without consultation with local authorities. The closure would have a major impact on the surrounding roads which were already struggling with traffic levels. Matt responded that it was not a TfL planned closure. Tower Bridge was maintained by Historic Bridge (City of London) and the structure required urgent repairs.
Councillors asked that in future, neighbouring authorities be consulted, where possible, in future whenever similar changes with impacts on local traffic, were being planned by TfL. |
|
8.40pm |
Community Safety Update
Local Police Team to present and take questions. Minutes: Sergeant Dean Willis, from the local police team gave a summary of recent activities.
Sgt Willis was asked for a written update on Livesey ward for the next community council meeting. |
|
8.50pm |
Public question time
This is an opportunity for questions to be addressed to the chair.
Residents or persons working in the borough may ask questions on any matter in relation to which the council has powers or duties. Responses may be supplied in writing following the meeting. Minutes: The following public questions were raised at the meeting:
Q1 In response to a question about the high costs of affordable housing, Councillor Mark Williams, cabinet member for regeneration and new homes, responded that shared ownership was an increasingly broken model and not an affordable way for people to get on the housing ladder. He added that the council was looking at alternative options to shared ownership, such as shared equity, community land trusts and discounted market rent for those who did not qualify for social housing.
Councillor Anood Al-Samerai added that there needed to be more genuinely affordable housing in the borough.
Q2 A resident complained that parking amendment consultation was not fairly consulting interested parties. The resident explained that they recently discovered a consultation was taking place in their area when they spotted a sign facing away from the road attached to a post, instead of leafleting of individual homes affected by proposals. Leah Coburn, group manager in highways, explained that the issue of an effective consultation process was being looked at by the highways team.
Q3 A resident asked about a lack of consultation with Pumphouse Close regarding the regeneration in Albion Street, which involved the school, the library, the car park and Mayflower hall. A number of new housing units were planned and residents were concerned about the impact on the area. In response, Councillor Mark Williams said there were local meetings scheduled at which residents could give their views on these developments.
Q4 A resident asked about a recent increase in the amount of food litter visible. She explained that bins were overflowing and more bins were needed along with a strategy to tackle the problem. Councillor Stephanie Cryan agreed to follow up with the resident on this point.
Q5 In response to a question about the analysis that led to a local 33-metre swimming pool being replaced by a 25-metre pool, councillors explained that 25 metre pools (or 50 metre pools) according to Sport England were the recommended distance for swimming pools and competitions. |
|
9.00pm |
Local Traffic and Parking Amendments
Note: This is an executive function for decision by the community council.
Members to approve for implementation the local traffic and parking amendments, detailed in the appendices to the report, subject to the outcome of any necessary statutory consultation and procedures. Supporting documents: Minutes: Note: This is an executive function for decision by the community council.
Leah Coburn, group manager in highways, was available to take questions on issues related to the report.
Councillors considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
1. That the following local traffic and parking amendments be approved for implementation, as detailed in the appendices to the report, subject to the outcome of any necessary statutory procedures:
· Snowsfields – To install new contraflow cycle infrastructure at the eastern end of Snowsfields (Bermondsey Street junction), and remove existing permit parking bays.
· Surrey Quays Road – To install double yellow lines on the southeast side to improve traffic flow and to prevent obstructive parking at any time.
· Elephant Lane – To install a single yellow line on the east side adjacent to The Ship public house to provide a loading facility.
· Varcoe Road – To install double yellow lines adjacent to No.2 Varcoe Road to provide access at any time.
· Bermondsey Street – To convert existing single yellow lines to double yellow lines from No.176 to White Cube Gallery to maintain traffic flow and access at any time.
· Garter Way – To install double yellow lines to prevent dangerous parking and maintain traffic flow and access at any time.
· Canada Water / Surrey Quays Road – To install a taxi rank in a loading bay on Surrey Quays Road on the southbound approach to Canada Water station. The taxi rank would operate outside of the permitted loading times.
· Linsey Street / Alexis Street – To install new ‘no stopping on entrance markings’ on Linsey Street and to remove and install new no stopping on entrance markings in Alexis Street adjacent to St James’ CE Primary School.
2. That the following local traffic and parking amendments be deferred for further discussions to take place prior to a decision:
· Rotherhithe Street – reject objections and proceed to install double yellow lines to provide unrestricted access to the entrance of No.135.
· Rotherhithe Street – reject objections and proceed to install double yellow lines to provide unrestricted access to the garages at Columbus Court and along Rotherhithe Street between Brunel Road and Clarence Mews.
· Snowsfields – reject objections and proceed to convert Snowsfields to one-way working (eastbound) with a cycling contraflow and to formalise the two zebra crossings at the western end of Snowsfields and the northern end of Crosby Row. |
|
|
Rotherhithe Controlled Parking Zone Study
Councillors to comment on the recommendations contained in the report. Supporting documents: Minutes: Councillors considered the information contained in the report.
RESOLVED:
Councillors noted and approved the recommendations in the report regarding the consultation boundary and methods to review parking arrangements within a network of streets bounded by Elephant Lane, the B205 Brunel Road, Surrey Water and the River Thames adjacent to the existing CPZs ‘H’ and ‘G’. |
||
|
Community Council Question to Council Assembly
Each community council may submit one question to a council assembly meeting that has previously been considered and noted by the community council.
Any question to be submitted from a community council to council assembly should first be the subject of discussion at a community council meeting. The subject matter and question should be clearly noted in the community council’s minutes and thereafter the agreed question can be referred to the constitutional team.
The community council is invited to consider if it wishes to submit a question to the ordinary meeting of council assembly in 13 July 2016. Minutes: The community council considered whether to submit a question to the next council assembly meeting.
RESOLVED:
“How can we improve the consultation process, the notifications system for that process and demonstrate how the council acts upon the information received. Further, will the cabinet member for communities and safety, consider a one-stop-shop opportunity for better consultation.”
Councillors requested that an update on community council questions, previously submitted to council assembly, be given at the next meeting on 13 September 2016. |