| Topic: | Re:Re:In reality there is nobody on the case. | |
| Posted by: | Sarah Felstead | |
| Date/Time: | 16/04/09 20:30:00 |
| Adam - I have touched on the subject of building work with you but you did not come on any of the tours with me so have not the opportunity to have a direct conversation about building/pavement issues. You do have your expertise, training, your own witness plus you have seen many photos from me and I was pleased with your information in support of the stories about boundary issues because of building work and how you used to receive many desperate calls on the subject each day. Information on issues which leave neighbours so upset or desperate, whilst LBH quietly ignores their plight because the issues do not meet the criteria for one Department or another, can be written down in list form before building work starts. I do not see why public information and Council requirements for work in the Borough cannot be used as an integral part of the building, planning and application process to support people employing builders and delivery lorries, and very importantly, for neighbours who are often subjected to bullying as the building work progresses. The argument which keeps rearing its head about money is a bit strange after all this time as money and saving the public purse and maintaining the public pathway for pedestrians does not appear to be a priority. I made a number of money saving suggestions directly to officials (as do many people calling in to the council with information), many of which were repeated to Councillors with Councillor Dakers arranging a meeting with officials and my husband to discuss vehicle crossovers. Nothing further appears to have been done, and no other measures have been suggested, so the situation has not changed since my Mother in laws fall – even the tarmac laid after her fall is now dangerous from skip and delivery lorry damage! If you don’t mind I reserve the right to say that I think that the way these things operate seem a bit screwy, and the management of pavements must be called into question which might be interesting in a legal sense. I have been shown the details of one recent annual inspection of the pavements around here, as sent to a solicitor, to be forwarded to a barrister, from LBH. The pages were photocopied from red paper – which does not photocopy. After being put through a scanner and enlarged you could see one sheet in the middle of the pack was blank (a blank accounting sheet?) and several didn’t even relate to the area of enquiry (Northumberland Avenue) but were for Hall Road. None of the sheets had accounting details on them as should be required by a Council department. A "solicitor" asks for information which should be at the fingertips of the department and it comes forth in a mess which cannot be read let alone challenged? I asked Cllr Reid for some information regarding a later annual check and the information she received could not be deciphered even by her – with her experience of figures! She had to return it to ask for it to be re prepared. A "Councillor" asks for information which should be at the fingertips of the department and it comes forth in a mess which cannot be read let alone challenged? If I asked a Cllr to enquire what expectations are of the annual check – what would they be told? Managing is linked to maintenance? Is that true? Why are the pavements being damaged all the time? Is not the use of the streets by delivery lorries a part of managing maintenance? I have repeatedly asked for time plus a fine if anyone is caught out – and there is that very strange skip policy which is never applied. I understood the skip policy and skip company registration to be an acknowledgement by LBH that these lorries can cause great damage to the pavements - should LBH not work with the skip and delivery companies in order to protect pedestrians from injuries? A Cllr or solicitor asking about the annual checks would possibly be told that the pavements are checked and marked up efficiently to agreed legal standards for intervention – so what would you say if I said the annual pavement check took place a week BEFORE weed killer was applied to the pavement weeds which hid some pretty dangerous slabs? Is that management of maintenance? I took a look around after ‘the inspection’ and there were many obvious issues with the quality of the inspection and subsequent work – some of which I have photos of. 1. To answer your questions – unless there is an environment survey attached to each application to survey and advise people on environmental issues and suggestions of introduction of boxes nest boxes in eves and planting of trees, how do you know the house has swift/bird nests? This area has many swifts - has anyone asked for information about sites of nests? My neighbour says the swifts arrive from Africa on around the same date each year (8th – 10th May) and remember where their nests have been since they made them in the houses donkeys years ago – isn’t that incredible, or a nuisance? What about other garden birds when the back garden is cleared of all shrubs and bushes and lawns? What about trees in back gardens and insects to sustain them? What other advice would your environmental people like to give to people given the chance at a planning consultation? How serious are we really about the environment in our Borough or are we relying on a wind farm off Scotland or a pop star to save a tree in the rain forest whilst we chop down several here? 2. I didn’t realise there might be a flood risk, so I cannot add to what you have said. 3. I grew up on an open building site – the builders just went home so we all played with the tools and ladders they left out. My sister was always faster than me at running up the three story ladders to the top levels of the scaffolding on the town houses being built. : - ) On this site and these days it is an open invitation for burglars to pop over neighbours fences and the broken pavements could lead to a trip into a foundation hole beside the unfenced footpath. The fencing they have used closes off the footpath and the concrete feet stick out on to the remaining footpath and could easily be tripped over. I think this type of fencing is meant to go on the developers land, not on a public footpath. There is only one street light so there is no light at night to show the obstacle course a pedestrian would have to climb along. 4. Would come under environment considerations. I don’t think I have ever suggested refusal on the grounds of damage to public property – just measures to make sure the Council enforce their ownership of the land and demonstrate being serious about protecting it by working with developers and delivery companies. Hope this reads okay, cheers. |