rch

I regularly see people sitting on this bench now... it's nice to see, albeit it's not in the most picturesque/sociable location. There used to be quite a bit of anti-social behaviour around there, but it's calmed down a bit now that the nightclub has closed down, so maybe it's possible to think about more improvements... When the North Cross Road/Lordship buildout was created a couple years ago, we campaigned for planters with seating to be installed on the corner by the Londis, to work in tandem with the market concept across from the pub seating... this sort of thing:- https://www.marshalls.co.uk/commercial/street-furniture/products/flor-mobile-garden-webfa850170 But they rammed in the bike racks instead. So we then tried to get the bike racks offset so that the planter and seating could fit in and still have the bike racks, but this suggestion was ignored. The shame about East Dulwich is there is really no community space, no unity. But I guess it's progress to have one bench set up out of the way at the other end of the block in front of the pharmacist...

Also, I saw from the Southwark News article that you're aware of the Deliveroo issues at that end of Melbourne, as well? FYI, last May they applied for a licensing permit to sell off-premises alcohol from that location Mon to Sun 12.00-23.00... am not sure if it was granted, but it would be strange if a location without planning permission was licensed to sell alcohol...?

Hi James... my guess is that the school plans to move into the 3 buildings in the back to operate until the rest of the site is converted. From memory, they're currently in a temporary location in Walworth. If this happens, it will create access problems at that end of Melbourne Grove if staff, parents, and children enter via Jarvis Rd. From memory, there was a condition that only staff could enter via Jarvis Rd. The Keir builders are very considerate as far as I can tell, although I'm not close enough to be disturbed. They were clear that they are only temporarily using the front of the NHS site on East Dulwich Grove for parking and vehicle storage until this current phase is finished, so they must have temporary NHS permission for access as well?

Hi Peng... there is a yearly tree maintenance list spreadsheet produced which I have been trying repeatedly to get my hands on in an effort to address any mistakes before they happen. But I keep hitting dead ends. I had to really struggle to get copies of the planting lists for this year and correcting the mistakes is a serious effort, which is why some of the CGS planting funds will probably be rolled over again. I think all this used to be published on the Southwark website, so maybe we can campaign for this to happen again? Hi again smartie... let me have a think and see if I can get a coherent explanation from the tree dept. I'll stay in touch and let you know, but I suspect that you'll get the one ugly Kanzan this year. However, we'll see if we can do more next year with CGS. The key is having a planting theme for each road agreed in advance rather than throwing random trees into random pits across the ward, but achieving this is really difficult.

I'd been interested to hear what the schedule is as well... I've gotten friendly with the builders as I help to maintain the Physic Garden at the hosp site and they say that once the buildings in the back of the Jarvis Road part of the site are completed, then the demolition of the rest of the hospital (not the Chateau) should commence early next year. Then, once the site is completely cleared of redundant buildings, the current builders (Keir) will vacate and then the Medical Centre builders can move in and get started. I think the Med Centre is due to be finished in spring 2019, whereupon NHS staff will move out of the Chateau and into the new Med Centre and then the conversion of the Chateau into the school can begin. So, it will be interesting to see if there is an official schedule available... edited to attach a photo I took of the architect's illustration in one of the builders' entrances... the 3 red brick 4-storey buildings in the back of the site are what is being built at the moment

Hi Nigello... most of the pits with yellow markings are around dead tree stumps, so hopefully this also means that the stumps are due to be removed and replanted in this round. I tend to get a bit nervous after a perfectly healthy live tree was removed by accident from Lordship Lane one year because the wrong pit had been marked, so will be holding my breath...

Hi smartie1... I went round Worlingham and had a look. It looks like several Copper Beeches (?) have been removed, which is hearbreaking. There is a mishmash of trees that have been replanted along there over the years - looks like some hawthorns, pear trees and some not very exciting cherries, but it's hard to tell. Plus, the maintenance is awful, with loads of sprouts around the pits. There needs to be some kind of overall thought given to how to restore the character of the whole street with smaller trees, but I suspect the planting will continue to be hit and miss. I'll try saying something to the tree dept in tandem with residents and let's see what happens...

Hi first mate... I believe 'civil enforcement officers' refers to the existing Traffic Wardens who are already giving out parking tickets. These are already contracted out, albeit overseen by council officers, so this new legislation will simply enable them to enforce the double yellows at junctions while they're already out patrolling in various areas. Hi Abe... I'm genuinely curious to see what will happen after the humps are installed on Melbourne. The head of Highways' briefing (posted ages ago on another thread) stated that converting the cushions to humps will only affect the speeds by approx 1mph, so it will be interesting to see if campaigners' expectations are met. On the other hand, two of the main sets of humps are right outside the main campaigners' homes so they may feel that they benefit... unless the vibrations shake their houses. In any case, it will be interesting to see if anything will be done to solve the actual problems after the humps are implemented... or, whether we'll all have to start from scratch again.

Most of the double yellows in the Melbourne Grove area are "delayed", but some of the Dulwich ones are going ahead. If you click on this link below and download the full report PDF there's a detailed list of what's happening in all the Dulwich streets at the bottom of the report:- http://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/road-junction-safety FYI, the pointless Melbourne Grove speedhumps are being implemented in mid-November... my guess is that highways are going to assess what the actual impact of the speedhumps is and then decide whether to implement the double yellows along here or not. Since the main traffic problems in Melbourne Grove are actually passing problems due to the narrowness of the road, my money is on the double yellows going in after the May council election...

Hi again Cella... I can only look at CGS funded tree planting proposals in East Dulwich ward, so if you're trying to save a tree, then I would recommend contacting your local councillor for an update and then discuss replacements with them. As it happens, you're in The Lane ward and one of your councillors is actually the Chair of the Planning Committee, so I would strongly recommend you contact Nick Dolezal. His contact details can be found in this link:- http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=899 Let me know what happens! p.s. It's possible that we may end up in the same ward (to be called Goose Green ward) after the boundaries change next May 2018, but I can't find the new documentation offhand.

Hi Cella... usually pear trees and certain cherry trees (i.e. Yedoensis) are planted precisely because they don't have large root systems and tend not to cause subsidence, but everything depends on the circumstances. I've seen cases of architects positioning a modern new-build house right up against the pavement next to a Victorian chestnut tree, which has been there longer than most of the houses around here (ED used to be farmland), and then apply to have the ancient tree removed, claiming subsidence. But now I'm working with tree officers to look at even smaller trees than the pears and cherries for narrow pavements, so that residents can experience a bit of greenery along more narrow 20th century pavement layouts. Where is your road? I'll have a look when I'm out walking one day... If there was genuine subsidence due to the tree roots, it's best not to replant anything in the same location, but it's sometimes possible to relocate a set of smaller trees in another position and get a positive visual effect.

Hi worldwiser, sorry about the delay in replying, life got insane again. The best thing to do is stress that the tarmac pavement has been disintegrating for some time and is causing trips hazards and needs to be renewed from scratch. It might have to be done in sections starting from the corner of Lordship, depending on budget availability. I seem to remember when the section in the middle of the road in front of the flats was done ages ago... I think it was decided to do that section first because of the number of residents in the flats (i.e. higher footfall) of which some were disabled. Also, FYI, I talked to a Crawthew resident on the bus home from Sainsbury's one day and she said they would still like trees along there... I remember being told that the pavement was too narrow for trees, but I'm working on finding a smaller species for narrower pavement widths. Have you put the bid in yet? I'm starting to work on my bids over the next week before the Oct 23rd deadline hits, so I'll be checking in more frequently...

This is useful... I'm still trying to work my way through all the layers of obstacles under the radar, so I'll go round to Worlingham over the weekend and have a look. Do you know what species of trees are diseased and being removed?? We may need to agree a smaller species based on the pavement width. At the moment there are only 5 replacement trees planned for East Dulwich ward in this season, so I'm trying to get this extended (although we may have to roll some of the plantings over into the next CGS round). I'm identifying ways around the new planting protocols, but getting appropriate trees added to the planting list via several layers of management is exhausting. There's one tree on the list for Worlingham, but it's a Prunus kanzan which is possibly one of the most awful species on the planet, so I'll see if I can get that changed. I was going to update all the councillors (and Gary Meadowcroft) once I got a better idea of what was going on, so let's all campaign in unison. Also, let me know if there are any other roads that need trees (or where new trees were previously requested and rejected) so that we can start another list from scratch again. Street Tree planting is a really specific technical exercise, but the amount of public money wasted on mistakes and poor maintenance is mind-boggling.

I'm actually agreeing with you, fruityloops... there's no problem at all with the stadium noise from the football matches or probably even sports games on the astroturf. The problem is with amplified music at open air events - sports events and musical events are two completely different definitions with completely different decibel levels. So, this problem with the amplified music on Sunday illustrates why this venue should only be used as a sports venue.

Yeah, I think you're right, Blah, the venue manager should have realised that an application for a TEN would need to be made. From memory, I think the astroturf was allocated permission for sports events only, specifically to protect residents' amenity, but all this could have changed over the years. It sounds like it really needs for Licensing Enforcement to investigate the whole sequence of events... I do feel sympathy for the Football Committee, which appears to be separate from the site owners... but the basic geographical acoustical issues that affected all of us on Sunday also demonstrate why the stadium shouldn't be moved to the astroturf location, it should stay where it is. So, I think the developers have shot themselves in the foot. Sorry, happy2, I missed your comment above... I could hear every word the DJ was saying in my bedroom as well, so even his amplification was over the limit. It sounded like everything was turned down at specific times and then turned up again after about 10-15 minutes, possibly to circumvent the dB monitoring.

Ah, that's interesting. Maybe it didn't need a specific license? It's not public space per se. Maybe DHFC have an overall entertainment license that enables them to rent out the premises? I'm sure there were health and safety issues that needed to be addressed, though? Toilets, sound, number of people. I wonder how many people attended?

I could hear it very clearly in my bedroom at the Lordship end of Melbourne Grove. As I wasn't feeling very well, I called the 020 7525 5777 number around 5pm to find out what was being done to enforce noise restrictions and ask how long the license confirmed the event would be going on for. The 5777 customer service operator told me that they had already got 15 calls that afternoon (so I'm guessing there must have been a total of 25-30 overall?) but she wasn't sure about the specifics. All she could do was register a complaint, but she couldn't take a complaint from me unless I could positively indicate where the noise was coming from. As I didn't feel like walking the three quarters of a mile up to the football ground and then back again, I didn't lodge a formal complaint. As I used to be a sound engineer, I am relatively familiar with the legislation... the average volume at an outdoor event shouldn't be more than 107 decibels (140dB for one off loud bangs), although this was clearly louder than that and therefore in breach of Health & Safety. Here's the link to the H&S website:- http://www.hse.gov.uk/event-safety/noise.htm From memory, the volume should be regularly monitored with a decibel meter and volumes recorded for the record, so I'm guessing that this is why the sound levels dropped on a regular basis throughout the afternoon. Either the DJ could see that they were being measured or else the dB measurement times were agreed in advance and the sound dropped so that they didn't exceed 107dB.

Hi again Mick Mac... Okay, ignore everything I said above, as I walked by Jade/Oddono's again this morning and saw exactly what you were talking about! I've attached a new photo. I have now written to [email protected] myself with the photo, asking if this can be escalated as an urgent repair, as the ponding is actually blocking the whole pavement and this small section should be easy to address... I think it would help if you emailed them too, noting that you actually witnessed a child almost falling into the water. The more, the merrier. I'm curious to see what will happen and how long it will take to get a repair done... In the meantime, I'll keep putting together a Lordship list for a Devolved Highway Funding bid, but will try to escalate the more serious issues in the interim. If nothing else, our complaints should increase our algorithm calculations.

And worldwiser... I made it down to Crawthew, as well. I've attached a photo of the south section starting from Lordship... you can definitely see how the multiple patches have sunk. They're only about a quarter to half an inch deep, which isn't technically a trip hazard (thereby not qualifying for replacement just yet), but you can see how the multiple patches retain the water and would freeze. The good thing is that it's tarmac, which won't be too expensive to replace a whole section of. I definitely think a bid should be put in for the whole section to be redone with the Devolved Highways Funding, but I suspect that it would be more likely to be approved if local Crawthew residents applied instead of me (I apply for so much stuff that my bids tend to get fobbed off). Do you want to have a go at applying? Go to the link below and follow the instructions to bid... give the location and stress that the multiple patches freeze up, which aren't getting addressed. You might want to ask if it's better to replace the tarmac or even upgrade to paving slabs so that engineers could investigate and make an assessment. What do you think? Do you want to give it a go applying yourself?? The deadline is Oct 23rd. Here's the link:- http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/info/200256/cleaner_greener_safer Let me know... I can try to help talk you through it if necessary. It would be really good if you could also get three or four other residents to back you up. Power to the People!

Hi Mick Mac... is this the dropped pavement that formed the puddle that you were talking about?

Yes, Abe... maybe you can now understand the frustration of having my CGS bid to repair sections of Lordship pavements refused in favour of cycle hangars. I even have more photos of other locations of sunken pavements... it's usually only the rocking paving stones that get "repaired". Hi worldwiser... I keep meaning to go down and look at Crawthew, so yes, will add it to the list to flag, if nothing else. From memory (someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), repairs to utility service bodges are the responsibility of the utility service, but it gets so patchy and time consuming for our highway engineers to re-re-re-enforce this in sections where there are multiple services that it tends to drop off the list. Conversely, it costs a lot of money for the council to go in and address the multiple utility service bodges in one section. So, let's see if the Devolved Highway Budget can be used in this way so that internal funds don't have to be used for something that the utility companies should be responsible for.

It was usually the mothers that used to come to the meetings I attended, so they're the ones I talked to. It's not the state of the roads that worried the mothers... it's the risk of phone and pocket money theft. But I did recently speak to a father who was really upset that his son was robbed.

Here's a photo I took of the awful state of Lordship a couple weeks ago... this "puddle" runs between Bassano and Dudrich Mews on Lordship, where it's been impossible to walk down the pavement for years now. You can see where the council has tarmacked a section of it, but even the new tarmac has dropped. It's tempting to blame the ponding on the trees, but there is a street light in the middle of it and even the road on the other side of the street light is flooded. Yes, I'm sad... I'll shut up now!

Thanks Mick, I think I know where you mean... will try to photograph. FYI, my understanding of the highways repair "algorithm" is that the number of resident complaints are taken into account in the calculations, so we all need to formally whinge more frequently!

Hi Wulf... actually, the reason the plans were truncated at Barry Rd/Lordship is because, according to a previous police sergeant, this is one of the worst/most dangerous junctions in the Dulwich area and funding to reconfigure it kept getting diverted out of the area. Having said that, there is currently a highway review of various Lordship issues going on at the moment, and the junction is part of it (as well as a Quietway factor). So, I'm guessing that a major logic behind both Quietways routes is to get City Hall funding incorporated into the upgrading of two major junctions in the area. Otherwise, I can't figure out what the Quietways are for, either... I'm not a cyclist, but the routes just seem wrong. Calton is very narrow and so is Friern. I actually tried making Calton into a cycle route years ago, but the technical aspects are mindboggling... unless all the trees are cut down and the pavement narrowed. Also, because of the Heritage status, it really would be incredibly expensive to let Dulwich Park remain unlocked (even locked, repairing the vandalism used to cost a small fortune) and installing lighting would be a nightmare on multiple levels. Lastly, having sat on a multitude of school transport committees, a common theme is that mothers simply don't feel that it's safe enough letting their children walk or cycle to school on their own... some mothers won't even let their children ride a bus. So, if they have more than one child and a job, mothers say that it's actually easier to drive them all to school in one round, hence the extreme number of cars in the area... as Dulwich has more schools than anywhere in London. So, balancing everything is a real conundrum.