James Barber

Hi Odyssey, They cost ?10,000. The money came from a devolved capital Cleaner Greener Safer annual budget decided by ward. yes it is a aste of money in the sense that the original CGS scheme should have been better run/spent by prior councillors to Jonathan, Rosie and I. But we were where we were and decided the station is an important entrance point and needed fixing and cheering up. the cycle lockers are the next problem there....unless you have any better ideas. As for libraries. We're in the process of getting a new Grove Vale library for free as part of a Section 106 agreement I've spent a lot of time since 2005 trying ot make happen. It's due to delivery late 2014.Dulwic library is having a refit. So I'm not sure why you think they need more mone unless it's to fulfil my long term goal of expanding Dulwich libratry but ?10,000 wouldnt go very far towards that.

Hi ianr, I've an outstanding query of what if any planning conditions this shop unit has. As you say nothing on the web so outdated the web. Suspect officers have to recall files from archive hence delay. As soon as I have any update I'll post it hear. Hi sue, I fish out that post and correct it. Apologies for missing that. Regards james

Hi Coops46, Yes. They cost around ?50,000 a pair. Can be added onto strong lamp posts. O they can be funded by 3 or 4 1st time caught speeders being spent on a spend awareness course. That requires Police cooperation. As this can only be achieved by the Labour administration running the council I've passed all the tails onto them. Hopefully they'll take up this idea. Ideal at the entrances to Southwark at the borders. Half of all traffic just passes through and most likely to speed.

No, the graffiti on the cycle lockers is tacky.

One project that would help is theremoval of one-ways streets around Bellenden. A consultation to this is currently taking place: http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3334/bellenden-chadwick_c

Hi Townley Green, The northern section they're adding a cambridge kerb. Officers have agreed the path their is substandard and not wide enough. Especially as its hard up against a hedge and has lamp posts in the path. DEspite this they've decided to put a kerb to deter people straying across the white line. Instead I asked that the money be spent on bringing that section up to the official London Cycle Network standard. But officers supported by the administration decided to spend a great deal on money making this section less useable and potentially dangerous. The middle section a building site planning officers, despite my request, decided not to place a condition on thedevelope called a Construction Management Plan. This would reduce the conflict between lorries, etc and cyclists and ensure the timings of works occur away from the busiest cycling and school run times. The southern section junction with Sainsbury's and Bessemer paths. Both those paths need widening. The junction has a kink introduced to slow speeding cyclists. Instead lorries have turned the surrounding grass into a mud bath. They should remove the kink but ensure sight lines are sensible. But a smidgen of land from St.Olave's school that isnt used would solve most of these issues. The southern section from that junction to Green Dale road. The footpath is so narrow many walks in the wider cycle path. Some years ago a child was run over by a cyclist and suffered a broken leg. Nasty. Speed humps were introduced because of this. Widening the footpath is the obvious solution to make it more useful reducing the conflict between cyclsits and pedestrians. This also isnt what's planned. But we do have some nice planting at the very southern end. Should make it more appealing to local 6th formers to have a fag! You did ask!

Hi shareofhouse, I've not heard that. I've pinged a query in asking. Worst case I'm seeing the head of community safety next week 20 March.

hi rahrahrah, Southwakr Council is not considering making Lordship Lane. East Dulwich councillors are and have allocated money to bring about this speed limit. Its taken us so far 12 months to get two trafic counts and acceptance by council officials that it can be done. They next line of defence officers have moved to - very Yes Minster - is that it shouldnt be considered in isolation, its needs to be in a report covering the whole borough of SOuthwark, in the fullness of time minister. The Cabnet member for Transport Cllr Barrie Hargrove had appeared to fall for this. But kindly called me and let me rant for a few minutes and promised to consider whether he really needed to be involved in a borough wide report/project later this year. I promised he could cut a ribbon if he helped! Hi Lowlander, Tory councillors in Dulwich Village ward have consitently been against 20mph speed limits and zones. Its why the section of Melbourne Grove between East dulwichb Grove and Lordship Lane has speed cushions but not 20mph speed limit or zone. Lordship Lane from Melbourne Grove southwards forms the border between East Dulwich ward and Dulwich Village ward. Also the argument for 20mph speed limit is about reducing craches and making it a better shopping experience. Most crashes are between Whateley Road and Goose Green proportionally. Hi edhistory, Walworth Road A215 is an A road and 20mph. Hi ennivive, Thank you. Hi henryb, DDJK, The two traffic counts I arranged with officers are a LOT of nagging show that the mean average speed is below 20mph but that the 85th percentil is much higher. The research suggests this happens when a minority are not clear what speed is correct. The recommendation under such circumstances is to have a 20mph speed limit with appropriate signing to make it crystal clear. I would be surprised if TfL didnt want to follow DfT guidance. Such limits increase capacity under such circumstances because the flow is more regular smothing out excessive speeding. This should mean buses are more regular. As for craches Lordship Lane has a high number as most such roads do. They are ribbon of crashes infiulled with 20mph zones with much fewer craches.But it hasnt yet had a recent fatility. If we do nothing it will at some point. Even if we do something we will at some point - but it would be hugely less likely. Take a look at www.crashmap.co.uk Its shows 2005-2011 reported craches - 4 serious crashes and 70 minor crashes. with another 20 or so crashes close to the border which I'd expect to reduce with 20mph being introduced. DfT costs such crashes at http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/expert/pdf/u3_4_1-accidents-120817.pdf ?215,683 per serious crash and ?22,758 per minor crash involving injury. So society at large is currently incuring costs of around ?0.4M pa just from this section of Lordship Lane.

Hi Sue, Today I've corrected the opening post and apologised. I've PM'd everyone who had posted anything apologising and correcting what the application is for. What you've posted above is not what the opening thread now says. Please tell me how I can be clearer and correct the wrong start? NB. The Coop is still seeking to open close to 24/7. Openin gat 6am and closing 5am the following day.

Hi Alan Medic, I've just gone in detail through the applications. 840448 - http://app.southwark.gov.uk/licensing/LicPremisesAppliedDetails.asp?systemkey=840448 is applying to vary the existing hours from 07:00-23:00 to become 06:00-23:00 serving "Late night refreshments - indoors". Going through my emails I've had three emails with oblique titles weird codees or something each with an attachment detailing the application. These attachments appear to state two applications but one is a correction to state one was an error. So it now appears one application. That overall The Coop will operate close to 24/7 as a shop but not selling alocohol. I'll correct the other thread and PM each poster correcting the impression I wrongly gave.

Where do you start... 20mph goes some way. Only Lordship Lane, Melbourne Grove, East Dulwich Grove, Grove Vale, East Dulwich Road are not 20mph. We're working on Lordship Lane from Melbourne/Whateley to Goose Green being made 20mph - uphill struggle though. The bits we share with Village ward councillors is tricky as theyre generally anti 20mph. Ensuring cyclists can cycle along all our roads - one-way strests becoming two-way or have cycle contraflows. You'll see the Spurling Road cycle contraflow is being 'improved'. Crawthew, Zenoria and Oxanian are about to get cycle contraflows. Better cycle parking. Research shows cyclists don't visit places as much when cycle parking is close or over 20m away from the destination. Things like the northern end of Friern Road - filtered permeability - can helps. In Hackney theyve done this and seen big rise in cycling but also commensurate decrease in crashes involving other road users with filtered permeability. Nice routes like Greendale could be made more bike friendly. Current changes are decraisng its bikeability. Rather sad disfuncitonal use of limited cycle budgets. Better public transport is useful - gets people out of cars making the roads safer for everyone. Trams being lost from East Dulwich and train line closures Lordship Lane station havent been successfully replaced with buses. So conversations between the coalition and Boris about extending Bakerloo line raise hope. A tub stop Peckham Rye/East Dulwich Road could help with lots of cycle parking. Any other local ideas?

Hi Rhinestone Cowboy, Many thanks for the feedback. If it was made permanent the permanent signs would be larger and clearer. Regards james.

The Experimental Traffic Order to close Friern Road at its northern end is coming up for a decision. Attached is the officer thoughts. If anyone has anything they'd like to say good or bad about the experiment before I meet with other local councillors and officers to recommend whether to make the experiment permanent or not please email me at [email protected]

Hi Sue, I didn't spot your comment before now and it's late. So I'll check it out tomorrow and come back to you.

Hi first Mae, Thanks for this. While I was on holiday officers contacted me to say they were planning to refuse the application. The website states it expects a decision to be taken 11/3 at planning sub committee. But I know that meeting has been cancelled a sit has no decisions to take. I can't see any documents with recent dates submitted by the applicant.

You have to be careful with te police burglary stats to ensure you're just looking at residential burglary - which I think is te thrust of this tread. Eitherway, take sensible precautions and you dramatically reduce your chance of being burgled.

The meeting with officials appeared to go really well yesterday. We hear in May whether we get a new free school in East Dulwich or even two we're all hoping for. Thank you for all the supporters who encouraged others and got behind this campaign.

Hi Worker, Thank you. Yes, the portion of footpath nearest the road is Southwarks full responsibility. The section nearer shops is usually owned by the shop. The shop want to avoid spending money but equaly look attractive and not incur personal injury cliams. If you want to make a list of those that you think particualryl pose a risk that owuld be useful and we can ask the owners how they plan to emeloriate the risk.

Hi worldwiser, The Co op have appleid to extend existing licence from 6am-10pm to 5am-11pm and late night refreshment 11pm to 5am. Effectively they can sell 23/7. Any review of licences could include cnditions around deliveries. So if I were you I'd contact the licensing officers and state that deliveries are an issues and ask for conditions aorund times of deliveries. I've not been able to track down any planning conditions about times of opening or deliveries. I've asked officers if they have any recorded. hope this helps. Regards james.

They were switched on last Wednesday and operate from dusk to midnight every day. I was given a sneak preview Wednesday morning. They've replaced the original white up lighters installed around 2005 that previous councillors organised but which weren't maintainable and broke down quite quickly - 2006/7 from memory. I've been assured these ones will be maintained and should last some time. If any artists have idea about pattern etc they can be reprogrammed for variety. Hope people like them.

I asked to be copied because it inform me should my original stance feel wrong. So far people copying me it about 3 to 2 for the Co op being open and selling alcohol. Equally the number of emails we receive helps us decide priorities. We only have so many hours.

This feedback has been surprising. If supports could make tell me if they live within a few hundred metres of the Ccop that would be useful. If most people do then perhaps I've got it wrong.

Despite the many who use this forum many don't. So it's a useful sounding board but in the end I have to act in what I consider the best interests of the area. But I've highlighted how to comment for or against These applications. For this decision a licensing sub committee of three councillors will decide on these two interconnected applications. I won't be one of them nor will my ward colleagues.

Hi Neilson99, I don't think it's fair to say people living in areas that were quiet when they moved there, and if pre Tessa Jowell licensing 2003 law it wasnt legally possible to have late night bars and pub let alone 24/7 alcolhol sale, should move if they're unhappy rather than objecting. We want a stable long term community if we're to solve many of our local problems.

Hi Lynne, Self service can be used to reduce staff, extend hours or improve customer service. Apparently the large ground floor staff area will be much reduced releasing space for other library uses - hope fully more books.