Metallic

It seems to be the most common thing you hear about these days. If they have been at your house to steal it they know where it is after it is repaired. There is nothing anyone can do about these chancers except hoope they are caught in the act.

> > Those of you who want to end low traffic > neighbourhoods and allow cars to use side streets > to save time cutting between main roads - Do you > have anything that you would like to see replace > them? One way streets with half the road a cycle lane and half for motor traffic. Create a good one way system and this nonsense would be unnecessary.

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------- > > This myth of "only benefits wealthy areas" is a > similar class war to a lot of other populist war > cries of taking back control from unelected > elites. Still, it's fascinating how society's > concern for the poor, disabled and marginalised > can lie dormant for so long, only requiring the > installation of a few bollards and planters before > it can be expressed... You are incredibly patronising to write this. You have no idea who you are talking about, or what anyone supports or works for outside the subject of trying to get rid of LTNs.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So - Twitter. Reporting Elm Lodge surgery no > longer supporting Dulwich Alliance as it?s > possible to get there outside the closure hours. > Fine. But then this comment about how everyone in > Dulwich can afford a taxi anyway (see attached). I suspect Elm Lodge has been got at by the lovely twitter trolls that make life so difficult if you dare to say what you think and believe. You all know who you are and now we have one or two new ones on twitter just to make life more difficult. And why is my councillor liking the fact the Elm Lodge Surgery has withdrawn its name? He is the councillor for all of his constituents whether or not they voted for him, isn't he? Maybe he should be neutral in these twitter comments? editing this as I've just seen our other councillor has liked this too. How inappropriate of them to behave in this way. Presumably their constituents don't matter in the bigger scheme of things they have planned for Village Ward. If this was my surgery I would be saying a good deal about this basic bullying behaviour by people who should know better.

Sadiq Khan wastes tax payer money on an appeal to the High Court. Sounds about right. Wouldn't think of using the hundreds of thousands of pounds in fees he will pay to barristers, on air quality monitoring over his whole fiefdom so that he could see for himself these rubbish policies affecting the health of Londoners he is supposed to be looking after.

I didn't watch the second meeting but I was told informally there was a more fair choice of speakers, not just one side.

northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The East Dulwich meeting I was on wasn't only > residents at all. I seem to recall that there was > a process of one person from the streets with > measures, then one person from the streets without > measures for quite a large section of it - there > was someone from Hansler Road who spoke at length > and that woman who stood out by virtue of > repeatedly referring to her address by the 'A road > number' designation (which turned out to be > neither on a directly affected street, nor one > that would be remotely impacted by the ED changes, > nor even in East Dulwich! Well I watched the ED access meeting led by Cllr Rose and I remember distinctly the morning meeting being crammed out with people who I know don't live in the area being discussed. And as she had the host lead she managed to get in many people praising the scheme without a mention for a long time of people living on these clogged up roads. Northernmonkey tell us which road you live on, or the postcode, to authenticate all your comments. Oh go on! No one will be able to work out who you are from just that.

northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I love how everyone has internet access to post a > conspiracy theory, but apparently no one has > access to google to easily find out the answers to > their questions: > > http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/uuCoverPage.asp > x?bcr=1 > > Questions, petitions and deputations are different > processes with the way they are done (eg > individually or collectively) being described in > the link above. Members of the public doing one > option don?t get a ?come back? on the other > sections of the others, otherwise it would be more > chaotic than Handforth Parish Council! Yeah that's true there is no come back. So the people allowed on after any other presentation by people they disagree with, can just spout untruths? Oh I get it now. The second group presenting can have a comeback on what was said and agreed by over 700 people, but three set-up women can run free with untruths and exaggerations.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As Julie demonstrated as part of her > council-sponsored/encouraged deputation the goal > appears to be to turn Dulwich Village into some > sort of inner city rural idyll for the benefit of > a few of Southwark's wealthiest residents but at > the expense of everyone else. How dare we stand in > the way of this noble quest!!!! Poetry readings in "Dulwich Square": There was a young woman named Greer, who wanted life for cyclists to be freer............. But getting back to reality, our area is all joined together and what hits Dulwich Village hits all of East Dulwich and Croxted Road, so the answer is to make sure these closures of any type or timing, are not made permanent. It may be the elections next year will be the only chance, but in the meantime sign your objections to the East Dulwich road closures and think about your children walking down those polluted streets full of traffic whilst one or two skip and scoot with their Instagram mummies down quiet unpolluted streets.

As someone who is geographically just as aligned to East Dulwich and Dulwich Village, it is very important to support all the traders suffering under these road closures. Nowhere to park if you arrive by car from anywhere, and anyone can see the traffic build up on East Dulwich Grove, which was never so bad during the day. We and all the schoolchildren have to walk through this to get to our destinations - no air quality monitoring - of course! I know this isn't very charitable or humane, but I bet you anything the pro-closure residents of the closed roads may well change their minds if they needed an ambulance or fire engine and they were delayed by having to pass through extra traffic or drive the long way round. I heard in my road of an ambulance actually leaving it and turning the wrong way and having to do a three point turn. It is really for all of us to support the people fighting to get the closed roads re-opened. If the councillors were shop owners or lived in areas affected by the closures, you would probably see a different reaction to this 100%, for a system that is doing nothing but harm all round. And just imagine when the schools go back by the way and Charter ED is finished. Thousands of pairs of young lungs walking along the road taking displaced traffic from the four closed roads, idyllic Calton Avenue and Court Lane. It just isn't right.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The deputation part was an absolute joke and the > questions from the councillors as predictable as > they were weak and insipid. What struck me was the > complete disregard for anyone outside of the > Village and the impact to them and the pro-closure > lobby diatribe regurgitated by Julie. She > highlights Dulwich having the highest car > ownership in the borough but omits the fact that > Dulwich has some of the worst PTAL scores in > Southwark. > > Look how the council are trying to manipulate and > control the process - no wonder Clive is getting > frustrated. The same thing happened on the > Melbourne Grove virtual meeting where the > supporters of the closures were given > disproportionately more air time then anyone > opposing the closures. Apparently that was just > coincidence. Yet on this last cabinet meeting we > see the true colours of our council and I laughed > at the irony of the painting of One Dulwich and > the Dulwich Alliance as groups that are unwilling > to engage in dialogue. > > Honestly, it's all getting a bit Comical Ali from > the council but you can tell from the desperate > nature of the impassioned defence by the pro-lovby > that you know the pressure refuses to diminish. I reckon it was a set up pure and simple.

northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Petitions can be presented to cabinet assembly and > it is the presenter of the petition who gets to > speak. Follow up questions were addressed to > Bridget - you can't just decide to speak over > people because you feel you haven't been given a > chance to present your views! The petition was > given and follow up questions were asked. Bridget > did get a chance to speak about the petition > calculations - perhaps she shouldn't have been the > one to present the petition if Clive didn't think > she did a good enough job? Anyway - he was told > to write in with details so its not actually like > he wasn't heard - just more that interrupting in > that way wasn't appropriate. > > Rockets Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > legalalien Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > I completely agree with your comments on the > > > inadequacy of commonplace as a measure (in > fact > > I > > > filled in a feedback form to that effect) - > but > > if > > > the council is going to hold it out as its > > means > > > of collecting data, and in the absence of > > ?proper? > > > data, you can hardly blame people for trying > to > > do > > > something with it. > > > > > > I?m not quite sure what I think the role of > > > residents? associations should be in all of > this > > - > > > I?d say to be conduits for communication > rather > > > than any of them coming out ?for? or > ?against? > > > based on their (probably) unscientific > > perception > > > of their residents? views. Our local one > forgot > > to > > > include us for many years after we moved in. > > Out > > > of interest do residents associations have > any > > > formal standing with the council? > > > > Am I imagining it but didn't the council say > that > > they will be using Commonplace to assess the > local > > sentiment towards LTNs? I interpreted Dulwich > > Alliance's publishing of the stats as a very > > clever move to put the council on the back > foot. > > By the looks of the council's response (or lack > of > > it) it looks like it has been successful. > > > > Just watched the YouTube video and I thought > the > > representation from Hazel and Bridget was very > > well done. Cllr Rose really needs to stop > turning > > to her right, it looks like she is reading her > > responses from a pre-prepared script! THe > points > > Cllr Rose's made about the use of Commonplace > > don't really stand much scrutiny as the stats > > speak for themselves. > > > > Why was Clive Rates shut down so quickly by > Cllr > > Williams If you hear a person present something on behalf of over 700 people signing in their own free will, including me may I say, why on earth should three disparate people be allowed even longer for their discussion? When I watched it I could see that in fact there was not going to be any chance for the two presenters to answer the load of old cobblers from Ms Greer - she knew she wouldn't be able to be challenged so steamed ahead. It makes a travesty of the access. If you are going to allow anyone to address a council meeting in response to something said immediately beforehand, surely those two presentations are interconnected? And therefore a come back should be allowable.

Spent a while watching the youtube Southwark link to the meeting yesterday. Talk about ticking boxes from the council. It all means very little because the consultation promised (aka steamroller) will just ignore what people think anyway - unless they agree with the councillors. That's an hour I won't get back.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As a pedestrian I spend half my time having to > walk in the road. There is so little room for > those on foot or on bike. You look up and down > most streets and can see how much space is given > over to car storage and car lanes. Cars are > literally everywhere. I can?t understand who > thinks that too much space is being allocated to > cycling and walking and not enough to motor > vehicles. Your post doesn't make any sense! Only pedestrians should be on the pavement and if a little deference was given to each other, as happened in the first lockdown, there wouldn't be a problem for you.

The hated name, Dulwich Square, has had photos of snow and children playing in it, do people not realise this is still an open junction? I'm surprised there haven't been any cycle/pedestrian accidents, or maybe they are being unpublicised to help the LTN supporters create an idyllic vision?

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's a shame that as so many of you have lots of > free time you cannot use your time more > productively in improving the world rather than > use all your energy on a very parochial matter. > Feedback is not a scientific survey of attitudes. > Most just go with the flow. Sorry but the MP and councillors directed everyone to that site to record what they thought about the scheme, so it isn't any use now moaning that it isn't worthy of looking at. Congratulations to the Dulwich Alliance on the report.

Covid is a great excuse for virtually everything being delayed. And yet, it is not.

So now we see court cases to come on the legality of the LTNs and bus gates. Southwark have been a bit quiet on something that has taken up 111 pages of the Forum, not a peep on any social media links. I want to know what happens to all the penalty charges so far handed out - wouldn't you think that pending the appeal TfL and the Mayor may or may not get, they would let residents of the whole area know the system is postponed, for the moment or forever, whatever. Including the planter roads. Yet I haven't seen any comment from the usually verbose Messrs McCash, Newens and Leeming in our wards on this subject.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have signed that petition because I agree with > all of it. > > However, it's pretty laughable that a > representative of the Dulwich village business and > shops is party to the alliance given how much > publicity and support they gave to the "Dulwich > Square" nonsense last summer. > > I guess chickens are coming home to roost. I think you will find only one or two in favour and stood to gain the most. You will not find anyone else happy with this ridiculous "square".

What an abysmal idea which will ruin the lovely nursery next door. This one is posh and expensive apparently. There is already so much traffic and queues in the area and this will add to the rush hour problems as parents arrive for drop off and collection. Hope all those NIMBY people in the roads closed off opposite will enjoy a constant stream of quick parking then u-turning drivers who will use your gorgeous quiet roads. Serves you right if you don't like it. Your road systems have created the queues and pollution we and all the schoolchildren have to endure, time to re-open all the side roads currently closed off, and look at the possibilities properly.

Anyone had the leaflet from Dulwich Alliance through their door?

I do not think Tessa Jowell Centre is fit for purpose. The website they use is "not secure", a friend with a very ill husband needed an urgent chat with the doctor yesterday and was offered a phone call on Monday, and a request to speak to the practice manager was messaged to the person a while back and remains unanswered. Frankly when a phone call takes two minutes I do not see why the doctor on phone duty cannot oblige - please don't start on the files updates and referrals needed excuses for a patient - just do the job. My practice has never ever not phoned my family members back on the same day if a call is requested. To cap it all their phone line has been down again and the website doesn't even offer an emergency mobile number.

lilithangel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I live opposite the Harvester and it is an > eyesore. Every day I walk around the park and I?ve > been monitoring the skaters. To begin with I was > angry at the damage they did but as the months > have gone by I?ve seen how they are caring for the > space. Tidying up and clearly have a set of rules > regarding what happens there. Yesterday 2 parents > were there with their young daughter who had a > skateboard for Christmas. They were watching her > closely whilst others were teaching her tricks > etc. I have no issues with the skaters. They are > making excellent use of a derelict space, and > making it work for them. As long as they keep it > clean and tidy I don't see the issue. People would > be moaning if they were skating or hanging around > the street. This way they have somewhere safe to > go and they clearly look out for each other. If > the council or estate want to remove them they > should do something constructive with the land > instead of letting it rot away. "hanging round in the street". like the ones using the closed junction by the shops in Dulwich Village.

It is good to share public information I think, so thank you bob.

Cameras work 5 hours a day, five days a week, including I think Bank Holidays. Southwark is coining it. 8-10 and 3-6.