This is an opportunity for public 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:
A public question was rejected under community council procedure rule 7.3.4 (f) because it raised a grievance for which there are other established processes for resolution.
The following questions were submitted at the community council meeting:
PQ 1:
Brayard Road road works have been going on for months. They have expanded pavements, dug and re-dug the pavements which has reduced parking or eliminated parking for residents. The work is so bad they have put tar as an after thought near pavements to cover their mistakes for pedestrians. Local complaints go unheard. No consultation took place prior to any works or during works etc?
PQ 2:
The question I would like asked is when Southwark occupational therapy work so hard to apply for grants for apparatus for disabled people that a lot of it gets ripped out by the housing associations or council properties when a new tenant moves in.
Would it not be better to put a new tenant in there that would need the same equipment i.e. hoist equipment or a lift rather than ripping it all out? This is a total waste of resources and funding. Could someone come to the meeting with a price list of how much it cost for disability equipment. Could housing associations and the council be more responsible to find the right tenants for homes already equipped?
PQ 3:
Is it right that given the difficulty in the past of obtaining access to viability studies that the council has decided to make all viability studies public?
PQ 4:
Some years ago we were assured the traffic problem along St Mary’s road would be looked into. A traffic survey was actually done. What was the outcome of this survey?
It would be appreciated if this problem could be revisited to avoid road rage incidents on St Mary’s Road?
PQ 5:
Artwork for walls: Rye Lane to Choumert Road car park
The artist appointed in June 2013 by Pocket Places (Sustrans) was given permission to spray paint body shapes on to the corridor walls from Rye Lane to Choumert Road, without first collecting the views from residents about which artist's design people actually preferred for this space. Pocket Places (Sustrans) is an organisation in receipt of public funds to work in Partnership with Peckham Platform, Southwark Culture and Arts team, to improve the space of the pedestrian route across Grove Park through the Corridor to Rye Lane. The said artwork has done nothing to improve this space for pedestrian users. It has been left in this poor state since June 2013 and is peeling off the walls. During this time, vandals have covered the walls in drawings, scribbles, foul offensive messages, tags and have written all over the walls and other surfaces making this space look worse than ever before and extra work and expense for the council to remove it. In April 2015 Pocket Places apologised for the outcome of this artist's trial work citing it was a result of limited funds.
Will this community council take this issue up with the relevant cabinet members who may share responsibility for the separate areas covered in my question, to do the following?
· Ensure public funds are being spent responsibly with a view to recoup any unspent funds from this organisation so the money can be used for local area food banks to buy food for families who need it, or in donation to the popular Peckham Lido Crowd funding Campaign to rebuild the Lido on Peckham Rye Common (Spacehive.com/Peckham-Lido).
· Give this community council a full break down of the expenditure on this project so residents can be given the opportunity to scrutinise it. Also publish the amount of council public funds that were awarded to Pocket Places and Sustrans from June 2013 to this present date to show exactly how public funds have been spent or unspent.
· To invite another public/private body to take over this project and to come and address this community council about how they can deliver the said project within agreed projected timescales.
· Given the significant delays to the delivery to date it is right it is now properly scrutinised at this community council by its members and residents before it is implemented this year 2016.
· Instruct the council’s relevant project management team to fully investigate whether Sustrans (Pocket Places) or any new organisation appointed to deliver the said project does have a proven track record of working with different communities, enough resources and a proven expertise in this area to do deliver it on time. Then report the investigation findings back to this community council for the relevant ward members and residents to review it.
PQ 6:
Is bulk rubbish being charged for example, sofas - £16 for council tenants if so why hasn’t this been advised because it’s causing a lot of confusion. There has been an increase of dumped items over the last couple of months. If charged how do you pay if you do not have a credit card?