James Barber

Hi wolfhound, I would have thought the Poynton approach with perhaps the Goose Green zebra crossing approach would work well. In 2006/7 we purchased a pedestrian audit through Living Street of Lordship Lane. One of the action points was putting a third zebra crossing on the only Goose Green roundabout arm without one. Broadly they work really well. Clearly the odd idiot ignore them. But you get that with traffic lights as well. Would we want 12 year old kids cycling through - tricky comparing schemes here with Dutch or other European schemes where they have different traffic laws and who is responsible for any crash. Either way, I'd encourage others to also donate to he crowfunding. we need to really kick the tyres and consider wider options for these key junctions/

Hi RobMiller, I think the suggestion matters might be taken into our own hands may have helped things. Cosmur have been totally discreditable. And council officers naive taking promises repeatedly from such an omnishambolic organisation. Many thanks for prodding things along as well. WE wont have to meet during night time to remove the fencing now...

What's weird is the leading freight train company has made redundant 1,200 drivers. You'd have thought Southern could poach a hundred of those to ensure they don't need overtime to run the service.

I've asked council officers whats the plan to replace.

Hi first mate, Planners have recently allowed the former HSBC bank site to be split. The building being sold let for a Vets and the car parking kept back by the owner for presumably a new building. when I challenged the planning officers explaining about parking stress and how terrible the loss of car park is they told me the area doesn't have a CPOZ so can;t be under parking stress!!!! Of course when the Dulwich Community Council used to decide such planing applications - and we'd be shown all the lans - we'd have spotted this a mile away and stopped it. But council officers in SE1 making decisions about areas they don't truly know you get this rubbish under delegated powers. first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If anything this reads like preparing the ground > for further applications.

The council seriously suggested cutting down very mature trees in such circumstances. Agree with Angelina. When trees become diseased and need to be replaced they should be placed a little out in the road to remark between parking spaces and ensure pavement kept free for use by all.

Hi RobMiller, I was assured on Friday of the following: " Good Afternoon Councillor Barber, I can confirm that the footway has been resurfaced as of today. Therefore the footway will be opened as soon as the contractor moves their fencing, that is expected to happen this evening. In this next phase of works they will be using some containers and a skip located in the carriageway. It is looking like works will be completed on site towards the middle of February. " But the developer didn't release the pavement. They appear to be taking the..... I've escalated this to council officers what fines will be imposed. Truly repeated mismanagement of a devious developer who doesn't care for the area is beyond frustrating. Sorry. RobMiller Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi James, just checking in re: the Old Police > Station. Are the Council officers lined up to > enforce the expiry of the licence on Tuesday? I'm > looking forward to the pavement being back in > public use next week... Long overdue. > > Rob > > James Barber Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Further update on the old Police station. Their > > current hoard licence ends 8 November. If not > > squared away then council officials will decide > > whether to fine them and reinstate the pavement. > > > They've check the register of utility street > works > > and no notices submitted - usually two weeks > > notices - so clearly no excuse of waiting for > > utilities to connect these new homes.

Hi Dan, Can I say how much I enjoyed the performers today. Well done for organising it all. Thank you.

They recommend average speed camera enforcement. If that was a real option allowed by government regulations and the London Camera Partnership I'm sure those would be suggested instead. Looking at the NICE evidence included as part of the NICE consultation no allowance for variations in legal frameworks appears to have been considered or crash stats impact.

WE still have free property marking SelectaDNA kits if anyone is interested. Email me a [email protected] to organise me delivering a kit to you. EDITED. To say three takers of SelectaDNA kits over the weekend. WE still have another 65 to distribute - email if you'd like one to reduce your chance of being burgled by around 80%.

Hi kiera, In case you've not heard all our objections seems to have born fruit. The council has decided under officer delegated powers to refuse the request to remove this section 106 condition that the current Dulwich Hamlet grounds can only be used for leisure purposes. So the fear that the developer could close the ground and build on it would appear to have evaporated. All that pressure from fans that the development be allowed to proceed is now clearly shown to have been misguided. That the people objecting have probably done more to save the club than the fans! kiera Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James. I think this may be outside your area, but > it's a very important issue. Did you know that a > planning application has been made to remove the > section 106 protection on.Dulwich Hamlet football > ground. 16/AP/4051 and > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5 > ,1657240,1755294#msg-1755294 posts from 17th Nov. > This protection ensures that the land retains its > community uses,but the greedy developers want to > be enabled to build on the football stadium > without constraint. Can you give any information > about this type of planning application, as it > doesn't seem to be being treated by the council as > a normal planning application. It has not > been.advertised at all. Is it right that such a > significant decision should be allocated to a > delegated officer. The website is accepting > comments, but does the council have to consider > them or is it a private matter between the council > and the developer? If so, the process is far from > transparent. This application was only discovered > by chance.

Hi ITATM, Broadly that is the councils position - if residents are bothered about parking then CPZ is the answer. We're more fortunate now that the variety of CPZ is greater than the past. But clearly that's quite a hammer for many to crack such a parking nut. I've had some casework on Upland Road where this was rolled out in defence to do nothing about a private business operating on the road.

Hi rupert james, Was Camberwell Grove a major through route when originally constructed what 200-300+ years ago? Car ownership then was zero. Possibly predates bicycles. Horse and cart ownership was also extremely low. It has never been a tram or bus route. So for the life of me I can't see how Camberwell Grove has always been a major road? Half the traffic in Southwark starts and ends it journey outside the borough. WOuldn't it be fab if that traffic didn't use such residential roads as cut -throughs/rat-runs but stuck to the actual main roads. And indeed vice versa when Southwark residents drive across other boroughs. At a public meeting their was recently talk of trying something like this for Dulwich Village at school run hours.

Hi spider69, Traffic counts occur at regular intervals - have done for what must now be decades. They occur in areas with controlled parking and areas without out. So I don't believe they're being done to achieve some nefarious aim. Else why both in the CPZ areas. The Dulwich Hotel was orignal terraced houses. Reverting it back to terrace house, and delighted we managed to get a better version than originally planned (Cllr Rosie Shimell and I had asked for a councillor call-in of the decision if it proceeded as originally planned), but allowing street parking is the only solution. Broadly each home will be slightly wider than the length of a car.

Hi Mrspushkin, Sorry I don't - let me check the Southwark website of street works - http://streetworks.southwark.gov.uk/search.asp?searchtype=road&usrn=22500202 This shows the following works: Cherry Garden School Bellenden Road SE16 16/05/2016 15/11/2016 LB Southwark (Licensing - Hoarding) View street r/o 34b Peckham High Street Bellenden Road London SE15 5DP 07/09/2016 01/09/2017 LB Southwark (Licensing - Street Furniture) View street 24 30/09/2016 28/10/2016 LB Southwark (Licensing - Skips) View street J/W MAXTED ROAD. f\w. 06/10/2016 19/10/2016 London Power Networks plc View Works S/O 79 to J/O Hollygrove 13/10/2016 20/10/2016 LB Southwark (Conway Aecom) View street O/S 67-O/S 79 Bellenden Road 26/10/2016 31/10/2016 LB Southwark (Conway Aecom) View street From Opp 60 Bellenden Road to O/S 61 Bellenden Road 07/11/2016 11/11/2016 LB Southwark (Conway Aecom) View street 256 09/12/2016 22/12/2016 Lanes Group PLC - Waste View Works O/S 60 to O/S 115 Bellenden Road 26/12/2016 16/01/2017 LB Southwark (Conway Aecom) View street S/O 38 Holly Grove on Bellenden Road 17/01/2017 12/01/2017 LB Southwark (Conway Aecom) View street Bridge (Rail over Road) No: 1188A 07/05/2018 26/06/2018 NR-SE PM CIVILS CONSTRUCTION PARTNERSHIP Any related to what caused you traffic delays?

Hi gaby1st, I've replied to your email and taking up your case. Fingers crossed we can get to a helpful conclusion.

Just had confirmation that the Green Dale path spurs lighting x 4 columns has been fixed. Sadly muggung occurred during the period lights not working - well never know if this was a contributing factor. But it did take ages to get fixed.

hi CHLOE781, It is appalling that I had to escalate this to the councils Director of Environment and Leisure and only then was prompt action taken. IF anyone experiences ANYTHING out of the ordinary along any of these lines I hope they contact me immediately IF the centre manager doesn't instantly respond to your complaint.

Update on the road lane closure outside Caffe Nero. " SGN had a valid emergency permit for the works for the date applied for but the permit details did not up-load to the Southwark web site although it did up-load to the TfL web site. We are currently looking nto why the permit failed to up-load. " Hence why these works gave every appearance of being unauthorised.

I've provided the contact details for the Schools Police Liaison constable - please use them t report things like this cazzyr. While adding to this thread may be cathartic it wont necessarily change anything. email the Pc asking people to report to him problems.

Apologies for not providing the below response from the Director of Environment and Leisure at the start of the week. Huge thanks to the originator highlighting this serious issue: " Dear James, Apologies for the delay in getting back to you about this. The General Manager (GM) has already taken steps to address the concerns in the following ways: ? The faulty door to the female wet change is now repaired and fully functioning which helps to ensure privacy for users ? The male cleaner who has entered the changing room whilst females were inside has been warned that that behaviour is not acceptable and is aware of the appropriate course of action which is: when a male requires entry into the ladies changing rooms during opening hours (maintenance, cleaning etc) we send a female colleague into the area to check it is clear first, they then give the go ahead to the male to enter or ask him to wait, they are never left unattended as the female will stay by the door to notify customers entering that there is a male in the area completing a task. . The male lifeguards accused of inappropriate behaviour towards a female swimmer have been spoken to and advised to think before they act and communicate with each other on poolside as this may be misinterpreted. They denied the accusations against them and the GM is satisfied with their explanation ? The male lifeguards have offered to apologise to the user who thought they behaved inappropriately ? I will ask the GM to arrange this and for her to be there to provide re-assurance Please be assured that the GM will not condone any bad behaviour from her team, and takes matters such as sexual harassment very seriously. She has committed to continuing to monitor the conduct of staff to ensure a high quality, safe and appropriate service is provided to all users. I hope that this sufficiently responds to the concerns raised but please let me know if not or if you have any further questions or comments related to this matter. Best wishes

This is my understanding of this issue - from the School Safer School Police Officer: " In relation to Nigel Road and surrounding areas re: students gathering, it?s purely that, students gathering, and not causing any criminality whatsoever (maybe on minor occasions low level ASB i.e littering), but due to the large numbers of students gathering, this, of course, looks and can be perceived to be intimidating by members of the public. The Senior Leadership Team (SLT) at Harris Boys? Academy are extremely proactive, the most proactive SLT on Southwark borough; they always respond to incidents immediately and are always willing to meet with members of the public to resolve any issues/concerns. In relation to this particular concern, the SLT and I have been working in partnership and have undertaken the following: 1. Regular partnership patrols with Senior Leadership Team and Police 2. Working in partnership with Southwark ASB Unit, where they have issued ABC?s and presented workshops at the Academy 3. 1-2-1?s with identified students 4. ASB presentations to all students 5. A joint letter from the Principal and I to all parents/carers re: acceptable behaviour in the community 6. ASB flyers handed out to students when patrolling 7. Shopkeepers and local residents have my mobile number should issues arise; they can call and I will respond immediately. Of course, depending on the urgency, members of the public are always advised to call 101 or 999 should a concern arise and Police is sought. When calls are received direct to the Academy the reception staff always e-mail the SLT and I so that we can respond and deal accordingly, with the advice to contact 101 or 999 should they have an immediate concern. I am always available Mon ? Fri, 7am ? 5pm - Should any members of the public wish to raise any concerns then of course they can contact me at [email protected] or 07917 210932 and I will duly respond immediately and I?m also more than willing meet/discuss. Harris Boys? Academy and I have a very close working relationship with the local community and we will of course respond and deal with any issue/concern accordingly and, if required, students sanctioned accordingly. "

As long as we still get our new Grove Vale library twice the size of the current sized Grove Vale library! It would be an amazing location for any such M&S or similar business. I was surprised Morrisons back out but I guess as a macro level they haven't a c loo about East Dulwich.

Hi pop9970, I thought I was clear that no new tax is being proposed. What is being implemented is removal of the ability to deduct buy to let mortgage interest payments from buy to let businesses tax bills as it has been for a number of other such exemptions. The general idea of this type of interested tax deduction has been used resulting in other unintended consequences such as Thames Water being bought by private equity, they borrowed huge sums resulting in higher water bills to pay this avoidable interest - and huge dividends extracted from TW. Number of others have done this including Boots for example. The actual idea for the ability to reduce tax bills by the amount of interest a business pays was aimed at encouraging businesses to invest to boost productivity of businesses and to grow businesses. If this concept is going to continue it needs to be honed to truly support productive businesses only. As a society we need dramatically lower property prices. But continuing to subsidise buy to let mortgages isn't a method to get there.

Lets be clear. This isn't a new tax. It is about removing an exemption from paying as much tax. Tax payers have been subsidising the income of people who buy properties to rent them out. The interest payments for buy to let mortgages for such rented properties were tax deductible. It encouraged buy to let businesses to maximise loans because the tax payer paid the interest. This perverse incentive resulted in much more demand for properties to buy forcing up prices. WE need to see less demand for properties to buy and more supply to see average homes prices down to the long-term historic trend of 3.5 times average income. Sadly I don't see sufficient policies from this government (or any over the last 30 years) to rectify this huge imbalance.