Sporthuntor

To add further context - see attached the sort of thing that awaits based on the experience of Grove Park residents after a flawed CPZ scheme was implemented on a very low turnout. Please ensure you respond to the consultation! http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s72980/Appendix%203%20Pre%20Statutory%20Consultation%20representations%20Referred%20to%20in%20Record%20of%20Decision.pdf https://camberwellconservationsocietyorg.files.wordpress.com/2018/01/2019-01-10-website-letter-to-southwark-council.pdf

jamesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- By contrast, the proposed CPZ follows demands > from East Dulwich residents and is designed to > benefit primarily those in East Dulwich. So if it > does not win majority support it will not be > implemented. Demands from a vocal minority (98 households over 5 years out of 8,000 households)...and as you indicate, from around the Goose Green area. Making the scale of this proposal totally disproportionate, and on the face of it a pretty naked attempt to generate additional revenues / drive an anti-car agenda for which little or no benefit will accrue to the community. Indeed, if there is an impact on the local traders we will definitely be taking a step backward - and I know from the drop-in that no impact assessment on local businesses has been carried out. And from discussions with local traders that they are almost universally against the proposal. You might have noticed the posters against the proposal in virtually every shop window. The other thing that seemed not to have been done was a costing of the consultation process - or at least the poor council employees at the drop in had no idea of what the cost is. If you could share that information with us it would be interesting. The extreme bias in the consultation documents is pretty shameless too. People are not stupid - we have been here before with Southwark council. I don't think you know this community very well, and unless this process is super transparent and the decisions that follow can clearly be traced back to what the local community wants, I suspect your stay as a councillor will be brief.

I also attended the drop in session and echo the sentiments about the inadequacy of it, both in terms of the number of council staff available and the lack of proper information. I got some information/comment, as follows: The number of requests for parking controls was confirmed at 98 over 5 years (so not the same information as others received) - The launch of the process was a decision made by the council parking department despite the very low level of requests (1.2% of households over 5 years, or 0.24% per year) - There was no impact assessment carried out on the effects on local businesses - It was agreed that the other areas used as the basis for the potential positive effect on parking availability in the documentation accompanying the consultation did not share the attributes of the Lordship Lane area - none had a high street, for example. This would make the claims made in the documentation questionable at best. - There has been no assessment of the financial benefit to the council. I found this quite incredible but it was confirmed when I asked the question a second time. - It may be that the area covered is revisited following the consultation. - The cost of the consultation process was not known - reinforcing the fact that no proper economic analysis has been performed. My view following the drop in session is that no proper assessment of the economic impact of a CPZ has been performed, the claims made in terms of the potential positive impacts are over-exaggerated and the council parking department cannot be trusted to make an objective or balanced decision. On the latter point it strikes me that they either they are creating work to keep their budget, or have an ideological desire to punish individuals and businesses that use cars/vans. Or both. Until there is a fair and objective process backed up by a properly researched plan I can't support the proposal. But of course, everyone can make up their own mind - I appreciate that not everyone will see things as I do!

edlongterm Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Surely the MOST important issue is saving our high > street This.

...

Yep, spot on

Game tomorrow is off...no surprise really!

But what do they look like Renata? From your description (100% technical, 0% aesthetic) I don't hold out much hope of something that fits the environment... Would be delighted (no pun intended) to be wrong on this

Gutted... https://www.facebook.com/TheGowlettArms/

They are now saying power back 9.30-10.30 Fingers crossed

UK power networks aware, looks like LL area, no estimated time for restoration yet http://ukpower.ukpowernetworks.co.uk/mobile-power-cut-list/

Our power went out at around 7.15 this morning. Anyone else affected?

Sorry never tried to post a link to that site before - try this

If this is right someone at Southwark Council should be fired...what a waste of our money. My 7 year old could have done this!! https://www.linkedin.com/hp/update/6166625839527063552

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rictus & Bibo have applied for a music licence at > 377 Lordship Lane. Think it might be Victus & Bibo, mediterranean street food no less... https://www.yelp.co.uk/biz/victus-and-bibo-london

Cycle through here most days, can't see any real benefit here at all. When will the council stop messing around with these sort of cosmetic exercises at a time when money is tight? At least spend the money we do have on something meaningful!

Hmm not sure about this...I would pay NOT to live in Clapham! ED is lucky 13 though! http://www.timeout.com/london/blog/its-official-the-best-area-of-london-to-live-in-is-092115

Yep I was told no fix until Monday - bloody annoying...would have thought they could do better than a 3 day outage.

Anyone else having issues with BT broadband tonight? Not working for us in Hansler Rd...

Regarding DMC last post re appointments this Monday 23rd February, I can categorically state that their statement claiming callers got same day appointments is not true. My wife had to redial 83 times before getting through, starting at 8am when lines open, then waited 15 minutes to talk to someone, and was told that the first appointment available for a sick child was 5th March. Think we will have to go for the double of a complaint and leaving the practice in the face of such bare-faced dishonesty on top of the abysmal service. Thanks for the link James.

BT infinity looks to be back in action tonight (in our house at least)...power of posting!

Anyone else having problems with bt broadband? Ours is barely working...

The loss of a real ED landmark. To a dog shop. My kids will be gutted. Me too. Are they going to reopen locally?

Trollin' it up...nice try though...

Quick Wikipedia search does not throw up any root issues as far as I can see, however it seems to be an "alien invader" that damages biodiversity in the uk (bad) as well as an Top 3 tree for truffle cultivation whose acorns are a fundamental for pigs used to make jamon iberico (good!) The jury is still out for me! http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quercus_ilex