rch

Yes, we'd need an engineer to advise... maybe something lower like troughs would work. It would just be really nice to recreate the concept of a community of human beings again, instead of all the barriers, tarmac, and Chinese granite...

I'm trying to find the photo of the bus diversion down Melbourne that I took a couple of years ago, it was quite amusing. I think it would mostly be the 37 that would be diverted, the only other route for the 37 would be Townley but that would cut out several bus stops. I think emergency services would object as well (we're in the process of liaising with police) and officer advice is clear:- "Officers would not recommend any form of restricted entry or closure on the public highway unless the there were special circumstances. Any such proposal needs detailed consideration given the likely impact on the wider highway network." I'm glad to hear that you're reconsidering, James, as it would make our lives a nightmare. We did a consultation on a Master Plan in Village ward back in 2008, which had major support and would have helped the flow of traffic while creating calming measures, but that got undermined by political manoeuvres at the time. Everything is just so fragmented in local government... which causes so much money to be wasted.

To be fair, this junction was originally flagged during an extensive Living Streets community walkabout back in 2006, but it's taken so long for the East Dulwich cllrs to pursue the elusive funding that it looks like the original concept got toned down by the Tooley Street Dictatorship. The original idea was to build an extended raised crossing with a view towards creating a "piazza" outside the pub in tandem with the street market, while acting as a traffic calming measure when the road was open. It's now more of a standard-issue build out with a normal raised crossing, but it's not looking too bad from what I can see emerging. Hopefully we'll be able to install some nice street containers with planting to soften it a bit, but I'm guessing that this will be against some new highways policy...

The officers' briefing to councillors also gives a clear indication regarding the almost certain outcome of a barrier feasibility study:- "Officers would not recommend any form of restricted entry or closure on the public highway unless the there were special circumstances. Any such proposal needs detailed consideration given the likely impact on the wider highway network." So, considering that a barrier won't actually solve the actual problems observed by residents and eyewitnesses and would almost certainly displace local traffic, then one really has to question the decision of allocating ?10K to regurgitate what is already in the existing officers' report...

It's useful to see local residents and even an eye witness confirming the genuine problem (as opposed to "perceived") at the junction of Ashbourne and Melbourne. Build-outs on the corners of Ashbourne would increase visibility without opening the road to speeding, while making the crossing easier for pedestrians without obstructing cyclists (build-outs are usually aligned with the line of parked cars) at a cost of approx ?15K as opposed to ?30K for a barrier (not including the already ?10K allocated for someone to think about it), and approx ?45K if all cushions are upgraded to humps. The current cushions are positioned in line with APCO and highway technical policies, so even an upgrade to full width humps wouldn't change much of anything (and wouldn't even address the actual problems). Officers briefing to ward councillors clearly states that:- "Officers' view is that replacement of sets of cushions with new full width humps is not likely to have a significant impact on vehicle speeds." The officers' briefing also states the new TfL policy on implementing road humps... in this case, TfL would almost certainly refuse permission as full width humps would affect the only practical bus diversion route:- "It also should be noted that TfL issued this guidance in respect to the use of funding: ?Road humps: given the Mayor?s position on these, boroughs should exhaust all other options before considering the use of vertical deflections such as road humps and speed cushions. If a borough considers such measures to be the only viable option then a further discussion may be needed with TfL on their acceptability.?

The builders told me a couple weeks ago that the hold-up was kerb stones from China, as well, so it's reassuring that management is giving the same story. Bear in mind that they are using the same kerbstone for the Townley project, so that's using up stock as well. I remember we tried getting stone from Ireland a couple years ago, but that ran out as well... Anyway, the underlay on the pavement area in front of Londis is compacted and the gravel is laid, it looks like they are going to lay the paving stones from the corner by Londis up to the pedestrian crossing any minute, so I suspect that that section will be open first, hopefully by the weekend?

Hi rjsmall, I basically agree with you, although Barry is a bus route as well and therefore subject to different parameters. But I'm in touch with residents on Barry Road with a view towards setting up a Community Roadwatch traffic monitoring program with local police... plus, I'm happy to drop off some of the paper petitions with the Barrys if you guys want to join in our campaign. Although Barry Road probably won't be affected by a Melbourne Barrier, the petition calls for highways to look at the bigger picture across the area, so we should probably start getting Barry on the map. As far as the Whateley/Lordship junction, we have funding in place to have officers look at proposed solutions, as James says... I've just been waiting until after the holidays and the school building schedule to progress before I chased officers up on this project (which is now ironically falling into the "joined-up thinking" category).

There are also paper petitions - with exactly the same wording - available for those who would prefer not to sign on the internet. Residents from the roads connecting onto Melbourne are beginning to come forward with a view towards joining forces.

For completeness, here is the wording of the alternative petition... it's not just anti-barrier, but it calls instead for an overview study of the whole "East Dulwich Triangle" area:- "We the undersigned don't want Melbourne Grove South blocked off by a barrier. We want joined-up thinking to make all our roads safer for everyone. We want the whole community - young and old, drivers, pedestrians and cyclists - to be able to use our streets easily and safely. As residents we want the emergency services to have rapid access to our roads when we need their help. We believe the best way to get safer shared streets for everyone is to call on Southwark Council to produce a comprehensive traffic management study to include all roads in the Grove Vale/Lordship Lane, East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road Triangle."

The main root of the car issues in East Dulwich is lack of public transportation, especially considering that we've got 20 schools in the area. So, there's no point comparing schemes in Clapham or Brixton, as other locations have a far better transport infrastructure which enables residents to get out of their cars. We had a major (i.e. expensive) consultation just a few years ago which rejected a CPZ, so there's no point in going round that circle again. I totally understand the frustration that the North Melbournians have with parking in their area, but one creative way to address this may be to begin to negotiate with the NHS/CCG to provide a public car park behind the East Dulwich Station as part of the upcoming redevelopment of the site? Another solution that has been discussed is an interconnecting local "green" bus service that specifically cycles around the ED/Village/Herne Hill high streets, schools, and train stations. If TfL aren't going to provide a service that addresses local needs, then we might as well start our own... These solutions may not be financially possible, but I strongly believe that we need to start looking at more creative solutions rather than going around the same circles.

Furthermore, the interpretation of the speed stats in the police report isn't a matter of "opinion", it's a matter of ACPO speed enforcement policy guidance...

The police traffic count does NOT show a significant proportion of speeding along Melbourne Grove...! And the idea of closing Melbourne Grove is NOT appealing to all the people who live around here, which is why an alternative petition is being launched.

I don't think any gun has been jumped. I think that residents need to be clear that they don't want a barrier on Melbourne Grove and a No Barrier petition is the best way to do this. And I agree with Abe that the subject of the feasibility study is so vague that we can only assume that the wording of the deputation is going to determine the study, in which case we don't believe that public money should be wasted on something that officers have advised against and that the community doesn't want.

So, James, if it's not the same document that the DCC clerk sent Jenny then what statement was at the top of the document of signatures that the councillors received?? No one in the council seems to know what the collection of signatures are asking for... the one submitted to the DCC has no statement of purpose and no one knows what the DCC underspend funding is allocated for?! Or, if they know, they're not telling the public...

I wish I could! They actually choose the busiest times of the year to measure traffic flow, as it gives a worst case scenario picture. But it really is intriguing watching how the flow alters so dramatically. It looks to me like most of the users are locals... the post from Upland Road (?) recently was very telling, showing how locals manoeuvre around the area. Yes, there are some lorries and builders vans, and a surprising number of transport ambulances, but they are serving the local community. There are around 100 residences on this side of Melbourne, plus five or six side roads that feed into it... how on earth does someone decide who should be able to drive along this route??

Ironically, my end of Melbourne goes blissfully quiet in July and especially August... I suspect a significant proportion of the cut=through traffic is local residents doing the school run. It would interesting to do a year long measurement to observe the ebb and flow patterns.

Hi XIX... thank you so much for your support, I sincerely appreciate your confidence in me! I particularly didn't want to lead an alternative campaign, as I was concerned that my ward councillor background would inadvertently be seen as a political manoeuvre, which might be used to undermine the community voice. Also, I genuinely prefer to work as part of a team... I would describe my style of leadership as more "catalytic". So, while I've been responding to questions about council logistics and constitutional policies, we've developed a network of interested residents with very specific, but complementary, skills which has organically formed the core of a campaign committee. It's taken about six weeks (!) to extract all the information we need out of Southwark council but we've now got the wording to a proper community petition agreed, which we look forward to the rest of you guys in the affected areas joining in with in due course. Specific details to follow...

Actually, of the five signatures included in support of the deputation request, one name actually doesn't include a signature, just a printed name and address, so technically it doesn't qualify. Also, I believe that another of the five names listed has actually moved out of London now. This process has been very useful in that we've learned a lot about the legal and constitutional aspects of petitions, which is one reason why we have delayed until we are sure of all the parameters.

Hi James, the police traffic survey that I have does NOT show that a quarter of the cars are speeding down the road. Neither do the extra monitoring sessions by the Village SNT. This is why I've asked the police to make an official statement about the speeding issues in Melbourne Grove to counter the inaccurate "facts" that are repeatedly being quoted. I've also seen a copy of the "petition" now, as well, and I think there are some serious questions to be asked about what it is that the residents are saying that they want... As far as build outs and ped islands vs a barrier, the APCO directives are very clear on effective methods of affecting speeds levels. I'm beginning to agree with P68... don't forget that there are going to be TWO schools in the future, so why not TWO barriers, one at either end??

Thanks, Peng! Am not having a go, just trying to avoid getting shot at... ed_pete... I've actually tried this. I spoke to the chair of the deputation about the past consultations, the technicalities, the legislation, and the impact for a length of time, twice, when he knocked on my door. I tried speaking to one of my neighbours after the deputation, but she wouldn't speak to me, but I've had discussions in the road with other pro-barrier residents as well as anti-barrier res. The pro-barrier residents are entitled to their opinions at the end of the day. But so are the rest of us. What they have done is to unite publicly and speak out formally, so that's what we need to do... otherwise, the only opinion on record will be the pro-barrier, which is what will influence the authorities.

Thanks for clarifying... I get into enough trouble shooting my mouth off without being misattributed! I agree the system stinks in general, but I'm becoming clearer these days of how we all need to stick together to fight it.

Just to be clear, I didn't make the above quoted statement... and, for the avoidance of doubt, I hate all politics! I'll work with anyone who cares about the community...

heartblock and ianr, the TfL route is probably the next logical step. Go back to Michael Mitchell and ask him to step you through this, plus put in a CGS bid in tandem. Yes, your insurance company is another route... if the insurance company identifies that the ramp vibrations are causing damage to your home then they can require the council to address this... this is what happens with tree roots damaging foundations. But it's a long process, as it requires building evidence over time and can be quite expensive. If there are several of you then it would be best to stick together and take group action, otherwise you'll just be told that no one else is having problems and therefore your problem doesn't exist.

BTW, I don't own a car, I walk everywhere or a friend gives me a lift (which is how I'm aware of the car routes)... which is how I know that the only way to get residents in the area out of their cars is to improve the local bus services. The reason I'm so vehemently against a barrier or full width humps is that I don't want my quality of life destroyed, which I genuinely believe that the displacement from a barrier will do.

To be honest, my genuine opinion is that none of the councillors live anywhere near here and don't understand the dynamics of the neighbourhood, and therefore were swayed by the claims of the deputation, even though there are layers of inaccuracies. Even the Melbourne residents I've spoken to who are in favour of the barrier don't understand what the consequences will be, they think that the traffic will simply disappear...