LalKJ

Hi - I just wanted to make a few clarifications to this message thread. Firstly, Mea culpa - it was my 40th birthday party on Sat night on Melbourne Grove - but almost everything the OP writes above is incorrect. Secondly, it clearly did disturb the OP for which I apologise. 1. This was not an all night party. It started at 8Pm with the main party over by 1:30 and the last guests left about 2:15 when we switched off the music - clearly late enough to disturb people, again for any disturbance I am sorry - but not an all nighter. 2. Neither Southwark noise nor any other officials or authorities came round and we had no direct complaints. 3. We contacted all the neighbours we thought would be disturbed beforehand and took round bottles of wine. But in fact, it is a very close community on MG and most of our neighbours were at our party anyway! 4. This was a one off for a special occasion - we have lived in the house for over 8 years and not had a party before. Again, I apologise to anyone that was disturbed but this was a special one off, and we thought we had taken steps to Minimise noise and be as considerate as possible - a bit of local tolerance would be nice on some occasions instead of always thinking the worst - this wasn?t a bunch of irresponsible teenagers falling out onto the street at all hours - our guests left in a considerate manner.

Hi My nanny works for another family too and they have asked she be DBS checked - the enhanced check. She has tried to do this, and we are now looking at it together as it seems ridiculously complicated. It seems she has to go via an "umbrella body" and maybe go somewhere in person with her documents, but we can't even find a local branch. Can anyone help advise with some experience please - very very much appreciated. I am a lawyer and I am finding the whole thing baffling - but then maybe I have been on maternity leave to too long! Thanks for any help.

Just thought I'd add, in case your son is nursery or reception, there's no colour requirements for shoes - just closed toe shoes that don't flash - and plain white trainers for PE days.

sorry - I also don't know why that smiley face thing is there - not intentional and I don't even know how to put that in.

Sorry everyone - my post overlapped with that of James B's - but at least doesn't contradict it!

I am pleased that there are so many comments on this issue, as I think that's what the forum is for and the purpose of the public deputation to the council on this issue was hoping to achieve, however, I would just like to make sure that we are careful about the spread of misinformation. 1. what can't be disputed is that there are a number of speeding cars down Melbourne Grove and that there is a lot of traffic - over 15,000 in a week and categorised by the police as excessive for a residential road of its nature. 2. What I agree can be disputed is A) whether you this is an issue or not and B) if you do think it's an issue, the solution you favour. 3. I perfectly accept that many people may not see these issues as problems - however, it is wrong to say that this is being driven through by a minority of residents. All residents were approached (or attempted to be on multiple occasions) and a majority signed a petition to seek a barrier/traffic calming issues. To reiterate - a majority support his approach. 4. I don't think it is relevant that this is being headed by a newish resident (not me for clarity!) - how many years into someone's residency are they allowed to be involved with this? It does seem that many longer term residents don't approve of this - perfectly valid opinions - however, an equal number of long term residents do, including a lady who has lived on the road since 1979 and has been working on this for 12 years or so I believe. 5. Clearly, a number of dissenters, Bobby P in particular, make good points as to the potential downsides - all that was passed last night was that there be a feasibility study conducted to see whether these are real concerns or not - as I hope has been clear, no one on this road wants to establish something that then shifts the issue elsewhere - I think everyone involved wants it to be looked at as a community issue not a MG specific issue. It would be good to take the personal issues and the steam out of the argument - I would hope that both sides would support the feasibility study, which would then provide quantitive information for everyone to work with rather than just our own opinions. Personally, I can't believe that the two new schools were approved without an impact study on the local area and local traffic routes. If anyone knows if this was done and can share - that may help form some part of the new feasibility study.

We went with Dulwich Design Kitchens on Grove Vale - we were very happy and nice to have someone local who would just pop down all the time to check all was going well.

Otto - have PM'd you. A letter went through every door - may have been swept up in junk mail (they weren't in envelopes)? If you have a chance to reply to PM, I will get organiser to get you another copy

Sorry for the follow up - also to clarify the ?5-10k was not allocated for a trial of a barrier but for a feasibility study - which, from what I can gather, will focus on the effects of displacement of any traffic if a barrier were erected.

Hi Mockingbird Just to clarify - full speed checks were done by the police with the taping across the road, for over a week. What the residents did refuse to do is stand on the road themselves with speed cameras. This was discussed with a couple of the Councillors at the time it was mooted as there has been previous aggression towards people wielding speed cameras, and they advised that it might not be the best thing to do, or be necessary as the police had taken more accurate data over a wider period of time.

Hi @Woodwarde - you are right, much less transport issues with state schools purely because due to their catchment area nature most people are within a 1000m of their state school, so most pupils do walk. Things are marginally better in the holidays here, although to be honest, we don't have much school traffic at the moment (expected to change when the two new schools open). One of the significant changes in recent times has been the speed and quantity of heavy goods vehicles. Sat NAVs do seem to be directing traffic down MG, and this includes a vast number of vans, lorries and articulated trucks, and for some reason, we are the one of the few roads in the area with no reminder 20mph signs around. I would just make a few points to the comments above, 1. The process that has been followed is that advised by the local councillors. E.g. Petition of MG residents first and then if requisite majority agree leaflet all connected roads - letters have gone round to all properties on Tell, Ashbourne, Chesterfield, Bassano, Blackwater, Playfield, Colwell - if you live on a connected road and think you have been missed, please join this thread and I will speak with the organiser. 2. The proposal of a barrier is the solution suggested as most workable by the councillors. 3. I would reiterate that just because someone is newish to a road this has any relevance on the matter in question. The main guy's previous house (still local) was a cul-de-sac I believe but not due to a traffic barrier! Again, there have been a number of discussions between the council and MG residents for at least 6 years on traffic calming measures. 4. Finally, this is just a consultation, there is a petition where the majority of MG residents agree to a barrier, but the forum tonight is to hear all concerns. It is a nice road to live, so I don't think anyone wants to create unnecessary animosity between neighbours.

Hi Bobby P I am surprised to hear you haven't been consulted on this matter. In a pm if you prefer, please send me your house number, as I know the main guy behind this proposal has put three notices through all the doors and door knocked at least 2 times at each address to discuss and seek signatures of support for this proposal. You may be thinking, which is right of course, that this doesn't constitute a formal consultation, but that is what the we are seeking - the meeting is to get the funding to do the necessary consultation ahead of any actual steps, as there is sufficient support along the South side of Melbourne Grove to support at least a consultation on this point. I live near the Ashbourne Grove junction too and fully support this. Evidence from other road blocks is that cutting off the road will not (after a period of readjustment whilst people get used to the new set up) increase traffic along neighboring roads as the traffic will go along the routes more designed to take it, i.e Lordship Lane. We are just trying to open on the forum on this issue, and you are of course at liberty to oppose it with your justifications, but the majority, as per the petition, of properties along the street are in support.

NewWave and Keekybreeks Thanks so much for your delightful comments here about the Evening Standard article. Totally unnecessary, and again an example of why I think a lot of people are tiring of this forum. The reason a lot of people in the ES are from ED is that a lot of the journalists are from this area and basically trawl the EDF for case studies for their story. In this case I was contacted by the journalist at 11pm the night before that story came out after she'd seen a post of mine on here responding to another mother's question about nurseries, as she was desperate for a case study - she, like I, have a boss to answer to and was just trying to do her job, so I did her a favour (although did not know at the start she wanted a photo too). I must say, I'm so pleased you thought I'd nailed the harridan look, just the image I was going for. As often on this forum, you have got the wrong idea, people round here mostly don't try to get their kids into the "right" nursery, they try to get the into any nursery that gives them the right cover and support to go back to work, and yes, whether we like it or not, it is often necessary to register your child at a nursery early to get a space to enable you to go back to work at the end of maternity leave, it's got nothing to do with getting one up on other mothers and giving a better start to your children, and absolutely nothing to do with private education - the state does not provide nurseries for small children with the hours to assist working parents. I hope your posts below made you feel much better, your nastyness however has made me rethink any contribution to this supposed community board. ewWave Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > keekybreeks Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Every time i pick up the Eveving standard ( > urgh) > > there is some i dont know how she does it > pinched > > faced ex lawyer harriden, balding ex public > school > > rugger playing mid level city manager sans tie > or > > bearded creative shitbag banging on about > schools/ > > nannies/ nurseries / street art. and 50% of the > > time, they are from ED. > Yes I've noticed that...Made me want to vomit...a > woman put her kids name down at 3 months for a > nursery and was afraid another mother more > organised would beat her to it and therefore her > kids would have a better start in life...Phleeze. > I know plenty of folk who went to avarage state > schools and because of their sheer determination > not due to their pushy over ambitious parents > ended up with MA's PHD's etc and wonderful careers > and lives. > I went to a supposedly superb school and half the > girls ended up smack heads or groupies.

Agree on Legoland. We went with my 2 and 4 year old in October, and there was lots to entertain both. Just to say, I don't think most rides have an age cut-off, it is mainly done on height restrictions - I think for some it's a metre but many are 90 cm. It's worth checking your 2 year old is within heights stipulated before going otherwise you will have to be split with one child able to do one thing and one another - may not work if there's just one adult!

Many thanks Nunheadfamily and njc97 - very helpful.