James Barber

Hi grisset, I could play opposition politics as an opposition councillor and say I'm really concerned that the big bad Labour council will increase parking permits by 25% every year as that's what they've just done. But I really don't believe they will. A 25% increase now was bad enough. But Labour have no plans to review these charges until 2013 and I don't think they'll increase them again this side of the 2014 local elections. I do find it bizarre that you mis trust me for not trying to play politics on these charges. as for data. I've been asked questions, found the answers and passed them on. I think it's clear that around 100 commuters/ non residents drive into the area every mon-fri. That controlled parking will cause relief from that if that's what people choose but any controlled parking would cost permit fees and any visitor permit fees with the risk of tickets. People will take different views on the respective balance of these based on their perceptions. My main concern is maximising respondents so the best possible decision/s are taken.

I'm amazed. It's clear from the evidence that controlled parking will resolve the parking pressures for residents in the proposed streets but it would be at the expense of free parking. I think denying the parking pressures problem is wrong. Accepting the hassle of controlled parking And any knock on affects is a serious issue.

Hi bobby, grosser, The advice I've given to people is call on your neighbours, ask them whether they agree or disagree with controlled parking on their street, if they do whether the heavy or lite versions, and whether if a neighbouring street they'd want controlled parking on their street. By capturing those for and against you make such a petition look more credible. This is exactly the same advice I've given to those in favour who've asked. Hi landellsrd, I'm married to a women who does most of the families driving and she's much better at it than me. I'm not sure why this makes me sexist? Equally if I had a civil partner and they could so park and were better then me I'd have said e same thing.

Hi the-e-dealer, Homeless don't have to pay to board the bendy buses and I suspect ticket inspectors let them of any fine as pointless to try imposing it. Whereas double deckers homeless probably don't get past the bus drivers.

Hi TheRoses, Why on earth do you think Councillors like antagonising people? The latest CPZ's are confirmed in north Peckham/Camberwell. I really don't believe any councillor thinks 'ooh let's have a CPZ because any profits will then get spent across all of Southwark'. Will East Dulwich end up with CPZ's everywhere? I doubt it while so many households don't own cars. But I do hear a lot of people near the station having problems. I also hear from people around Nutfield with parking stress - that appears to e from shop owners/employees/Market traders/estate agents commuting in and parking. And yes the residents the tolerance isn't inexhaustible.

The chaos that is the current parking ban on Melbourne Grove (near that station) and Grove Vale, I'm sure the resurfacing works are finished. I've tried contacting council officers to find out what is going on. The total lack of any clarity means I think you can park of o these streets while we await council officials to get this fixed an remove all those bollards saying don't park. I'm really sorry the council has been cr*p on thris.

Last weekend i was talking to no.12 bus drivers. They were lamenting them turning back from bendy buses to double dekcers as bendy bus drivers are paid more. But one reason they felt sad was where would the homeless go. Apparently a aprinkling of homeless people ride each bus backwards and forwards all day. The snits of Etherow and Friern will be delighted.

TheRoses, I honestly don't think the Labour run council will increase parking permit fees this side of the 2014 local elections.

Hi Loz, I think the surplus actually comes from parking fines - but if I've made you happy then I'm delighted. Do take a look at that account as the more people that take a look the better.

The Dept of Education school meal standards which are what Southwark universal free healthy school meals will be delivered against allow chips 3 time a week and other such surprising 'healthy' options. Cashless card and other such systems can allow parents to know what their kids are choosing remotely. Then at least parents would have a genuine idea if their kids are eating healthily.

Hi Loz, The parking revenue account is publicly available - the surplus as mentioned previously is used for road safety in Southwark such as lollipop patrols. Increasing it from ?99.30 to ?125 recently is excessive but my political hunch is it wont go up again until 2014 - but that's my cynical side coming out. They're free on council estates for the 1st permit for a household. But if they were made free we'd see dramatically less road safety measures or potentially more draconian parking enforcement. Hi grisett, Good I'll see you there around 11am? Hi Loz, With only 450 cars registered to the 1100 homes in the proposed streets encouraing more sustainable transport use is crucial - can you imagine what the area would be like if more people decided to buy and run cars on these streets? Hi ed_pete, Jarvis Road residents are not keen for that gate to used for anything new at the hospital. Building a car park would cost money. The minimum size would be much large than 30 spaces to have an attendant. The land values are so high that it wouldn't be free so why would people pay to park there rather than for free on neighbouring streets?

Hi chener books, My wife runs the family car and she can park it within 5m. Amazing parker. Hi Loz, TfL funding is for research, consultation and set-up costs and not revenue running costs. This is how almost. All CPZ's have been funded across Southwark. The last big batch was funded to off set the issues of the Central Congestion Charging Zone. Hi gsirett, We're back to perceptions of people reality. You perceive parking on your street to be fine. Many people near the station perceive parking stress. The consultation results will inform us all how many people have each of these perceptions. I'd encourage as many interested people as possible to visit the public exhibition tomorrow at Grove Vale library starting at 10am. Council officers are bringing wadges of materials and evidence so should be able to answer very detailed questions.

For those that live in Norcroft Gardens today you should see new street name plates - one on the post to replace the missing one and one on an end wall of a house to which hopefully will make it much harder to vanish. If any one else has missing street name plates please do let me know and i'll get it sorted for you....and your visitors.

Can you please forward me that email.

hi chenner Books, I'm really not sure what your point is. The council follows recommendations to calcualte the average car length as 5m and you've given a variety of car length that would be part of the 5m calculation. council officers have calculated the length of parking available and divided by 5m. Hi Gmackenney, Sorry, I thought you had alternatives to suggest. Lots of people have been dismissive of any parking pressure problem existing - and I can see spot anecdotal surveys such as Peckhamgatecrashers support this. So if no problem exists and residents decide they want CPZ then no problems could possibly be displaced. If parking pressures do exist then we should try and help solve them. No one has suggested anything other than controlled parking. Hence why residents are being consulted about controlled parking. I'm not clear what people will indicate they want.

Hi bonaoame, Yes, I'm saying Cllr Barrie Hargrove did not make that connection. I'd put money on this.

Hi Chener Books, Why is 5m wrong? Have you measured the average gaps to show 5m is wrong? Hi gmackenney, One way streets typically see speeding traffic as they don't have to consider vehicles coming the other way. It would be a long detour for cyclists so you'd need to allow space for cycle contraflow. The staggered method is designed to slow traffic down. Changing it all would cost money. You could apply for Cleaner, Greener, Safer funding to do that. Pop along to your next communirty council for details abotu that scheme or check out Southwark website. But what solutions do you propose for all the other streets apart from East Dulwich Road that claim and the parking surveys concur have parking pressures that you don't think should have controleld parking?

Hi gmackenney, I agree shifting a problem isn't satisfactory. If an shifting occurred it would at least be spread over a much wider area. But still not satisfactory. We've also seen arguments on this thread that no problem exists - so perhaps no shift would occur! What would you propose instead of a CPZ if the consultation comes out against? In fact a credible alternatve would very likely encourage a no response from the proposed streets. And I'd be delighted for an alternative solution. The only thing I could think of was ensuring we have as many car club cars as possible to reduce second and primary cars for people living here. But that appeasr so far to have only a marginal difference and any released spaces are liekly to be filled by commuters.

But their is no evidence that school meals encourage healthy eating. Southwark is not taking part in any academic study to suggest some new approach and no study has shown such a link. Plenty of evidence that eating habits are established pre 4 years of age. School Meal have to meet a dept of Education standard. Southwark is not planning a healthier standard than the DfE so the "free healthy school meals" is an attempt to claim a higher moral ground but sadly means nothing - and politicians wonder why we get a bad name. When head teachers were told about universal FSM's in Southwark they had a fit. They say they could make more difference using the extra annual ?4.5M differently. If we realy want to make a difference to kids in Southwark free breakfasts have been shown to make a measurable difference to attainment as many Southwark kids go to school on nothing or a bag of crisps, it would ensure they all turn up on time for the free breakfast and not be late for the actual school start. Sadly breakfast clubs are closing not opening. As for FSM's Southwark has the highest rate of take up at 2/3rds of those entitled. This could be boosted via things like cashless systems, linking thoroughly with benefits teams. And the Pupil Premium an extra ?480 for every child from deprived backgrounds is related to those who claim FSM so it is critical that everyone one entitled to FSM is identified.

Derwent Grove residents - your road will be closed on Monday 14 November from 8am until no later than 5pm while the massively overgrown treet at the SW corner in the grounds of the block of flats (facing onto 56 East Dulwich Grove) is cut back. Long overdue and I'm deligthted this work is taking place after a number of residents complained to me but it will see a little disruption on the 14 November.

Hi northlondoner, Sadly, I'm under the impression that the cycle aspects for this junction will be consulted on soon ie any changes will have to take place after these phyiscal changes so potentially throwing money to undo things.

Hi josephs, Yes. Does it have a valid tax disc or not? How do you know it abandoned?

Hi first mate, In an ideal world lots of streets near to the proposed streets would be consulted. Hi Bobby p, Peterstorm1985, I wish Southwark Council were even half as coordinated as you suggest. It would save bundles of money being so joined up and connected and I wouldn't discover so many daft things going on. But frankly the left hand of Southwark rarely knows what the right hand is doing. If you pop along to Grove Vale library to meet the officers leading the CPZ public consultation you'll discover they didn't know about any road closures. And if you do pop along be nice to them they are only doing their jobs. Hi gmckenney, I keep getting answers to peoples questions. Those answers don't seem to fit their argument so they ask for more answers. The evidence seems clear that a CPZ would help BUT is the price in money etc worth paying? I encourage as many people as possible to answer this question by responding to the consultation - https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=698

PLEASE GET IN TOUCH WITH ME. THIS IS PARTLY WHAT COUNCILLORS ARE FOR.

Some days ago four questions were asked of me and I've just received the answers from council officers. Please see attached. I'll try and summarise here as well: Q1.how many resident only parking spaces will be available in the zone after implementation? A1. approx 558 assuming 5m average length per vehicles - 530 for permit holders and 28 shared use bays (pay and display and permit holders). Q2. how many cars belong to households within the zone? A2. survey showed average of 475 parked vehicles at 6am over a non school holiday Thurs, Sat and Sun. DVLA figures suggest 450 vehicles owned by people in the proposed streets. Q3. what is the cost to the council (I seem to recall an earlier comment that TfL were funding this? A3. Funded by TfL, parking enforcement costs would be within the existing contract. Q4. what is the forecast annual income from the zone? A4. Permit take up across Southwark CPZ's is 11% which would suggest ?16,000pa from resident permits. If 100% of car owners bought a permit then ?56,250.