James Barber

If you're upset with Cosmur you could submit an enquiry to then via [email protected] You can also email the Considerate Contractors Scheme via [email protected] I've done both but the more that contact them the higher the chance of action being taken. And please do copy me so I can collate our responses.

Hi Pat Lanips, I haven't been intimidated as you suggest. How absurd to suggest this. I understand the developers you refer to on the SE corner of this junction and also Lordship Lane are called Lightbox London - http://lightboxlondon.com/ They've undertaken all sorts of community work - Dog Kennel Hill Adventure Playground being one example. I have spoken to the owner and he has assured me his site will be better run and avoid the types of situations photos on this thread have demonstrated. Hi first mate, etc, Yes, the plans show the properties just 50cm back from the kerb. NE side of this junction. The north side of Upland road from Crystal Palace Road to Barry Road is in Peckham Rye ward. Despite this I did submit comments that I thought the application an over development of the site. I recall asking if PKR ward councillors were going to call this planning application in to be decided by a committee but they chose not to do this so council officers alone approved this scheme. Southwark Building Services being a partner of the developers. Building Control was de regulated years ago. So I think this just means they've chosen to use Southwark Building Services/Control. Nothing more, nothing less. Highway control is not under taken by Building Control officials.

Hi Nigello, All TfL buses have had CCTV since 2005. TfL have been very clear that they have agreed with Arriva that buses used in evening and nights be the quietest buses they have until 2017 when all buses replaced. Hi first mate, M&S - as long as the developer builds to the approved plans little we can do. The approved plans were agreed with the council transport expert about swept paths for vehicles. I can't imagine M&S would want a building shop they can't deliver produce to. Why would they do that? I thought I had already posted a reply from council officials. Upland Road. I have had numerous contacts with council officials and made a formal complaint. This is not as you suggest me keeping a careful distance. Short of leading a demo blocking the road to the builders - which would get moved on by the Police we're limited in what we can do. What would you suggest?

I would suggest that people that need a local branch presence in East Dulwich MOVE BANK to Barclays when HSBC closes. This would show HSBC that we're not all beans to be counted. The Barclays branch would then have a greater chance of staying open locally.

Hi First mate, The developer being allowed to block lots of pavement - this is beyond my comprehension as well. I've complained several times but officers seem completely happy with the arrangement. They have the powers to stop this and curtail the developer being so anti social but choose not to. If you and others email and complain to [email protected] about this and cc me we might collectively get this sorted. Hi first mate, M&S. The plans are what the developer should have but. Building control should ensure this. Have you checked those approved plans and are you saying they're not sticking to them. It looks like they are building to those plans to me. The same plans show juggernauts turning. I think wildly optimistic and requires land they don't own but the land owner is the person who needs to take action. The electric sub station application has been completely replaced with new proposals. Hi ianr, The minutes of the last DCC have now been published. If you need me to point you to them let me know. Night buses 176. The 176 buses are old and noisy and are particularly noticeable at night. They're due to be replaced by quieter buses in 2017. So another 2 years and then we should see quite and improvement - hopefully not with noisy polluting Boris Buses. In the mean time TfL have agreed with Arriva agreeing to whenever possible to put on their quietest buses in evenings and overnight.

Hi Abe_froeman, We're expecting to hear the term of refrence for the study at next DCC meeting early December. I've yet to see a draft ToR. We have roughly three weeks unti lthat meeting and will prod for them again.

Hi ITATM, I suspect you know the process. Every February at council budget setting time. Opposition groups suggest savings and different priorities. Such alternative budgets have to be checked that they would work - in case one ever gets passed. So we have an accredited budget that would have had much more street sweeping. WE would have had different priorities. Nothing snarky about this - legit differences of political priorities. Southwark Labour put lots more into reserves which are at record levels. Hi bobbsy, Claims against the council for trips and falls on the public highway are down. Largely through tougher claims handling.

Hi BNG, Sadly slitting up Southwark Council isn't on the cards. It is viewed that having large councils is more efficient. Not true in my experience or friends who work in local government. But it is the accepted wisdom. The ward review is likely to see either larger wards in southern SOuthwark or split wards with fewer councillors. MY hunch would be a mix. in this way new ward boundaries could reflect the geographic feel of areas. Nunhead ward for example is a particulalrly weird beast. East Dulwich ward beign larger could more accurately reflect how people consider the East Dulwich area. Southwark side of Herne Hill could be a seperate ward which would make it much easier to be coordinated with thE Lambeth side - rather than just another bit Village ward.

Hi Keane, The council these days only sweeps our streets and pavements once per month. Tricky as dry leaves a cinch to collect but once wet - hic they all are now - are much harder to clear away. My lot proposed different levels of street cleaning but we're in opposition. We're about to hopefully approve extra local funds from some devolved budget for street cleaning which would double the frequency for East Dulwich ward - so if you live on Lordship lane odd numbers Goose Green to UPland Road or even numbers Goose Gree nto Melbourne Grove from the New Year - assuming both other ward councillors agree it will get a bit better.

This is the email below all councillors was sent last week. This year feels much wetter than previous years and in my mind the leaf clearing needs to vary depending on how much risk the leaves present. So this years accentuated risk due to all the rain so more clearing and quicker should be taking place. It does bigger belief how little extra resource has been organised to cover 650 km of road. In the last we had significantly more street sweepers and we employed many more at leaf fall. But different political parties have different priorities: "Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2015 05:41 PM To: Councillors (Lib Dem); Councillors (Con); Councillors (Lab) Cc: Smith, Ian Subject: Information on Leaf clearing during Autumn Dear All On average each autumn the council?s cleaning service collect in the region of 1,200 tonnes of leaves from the borough?s streets and housing estates, in order to cope with the extra demands leafing places on the cleaning service we deploy additional resources in terms of staff and machinery for a six week period during the leafing season starting in early November and finishing in mid December, specifically these additional resources comprise of the following: 12 street cleaner operatives 1 refuse freighter 1 grab lorry 2 large mechanical brooms 1 small mechanical broom 1 leaf vacuum During the leaf fall period, street sweeping staff are switched from their normal duties to solely concentrate on leaf clearance however litter picking staff continue with their normal duties of litter picking and bin emptying during this period. Grounds maintenance staff who would normally be responsible for grass cutting are also switched to leafing activities as are some external estate cleaners on housing estates. The leaf clearance schedules allows for all roads in the borough to be visited by the clearance teams during the leafing period with those with a heavier leaf fall receiving more frequent visits. Unfortunately, we are unable to ensure that the borough?s pavements remain leaf free at all times as due to the nature of leaf fall, l a road that is cleared of leaves on one day can be completely covered in leaves within hours. Whilst we endeavour to do our very best to remove the leaf fall across the borough as quickly and efficiently as possible we would ask for all residents to bear with us during this very busy period. Thank you for your understanding Regards "

I wanted to be there but not well enough to attend. Which was disappointing as first year I've missed attending such a ceremony. P68, I think you've a made a useful point which will change how I approach these things. Thank you.

Hi PeckhamRose, Sadly councillors in those wards haven't set up such a fund - I did apply to do this in those wards after residents asked me to but a firm no. Hi steveo, Motorcycle theft costs the owner and our local community a lot of money. So if these anchors reduce bike theft it should be self funding releasing Police officer time as well for other harder to prevent crimes.

We've some spare ground anchors and free installation spare - so if anyone who lives in East Dulwich ward wants one installed in their front or back garden or side return please get in touch. These spare ground anchors are in stock and the contractor are raring to install them - this is part of the East Dulwich ward Crime Prevention fund 10th year and still running.

hi spider69, Of course we speak to each other. But we don't speak about every single piece of casework - I'd never be of the phone! when people contact us but don't tell us they've contacted all three East Dulwich ward councillors this will occasionally happen. NB. the Conway machinery left on Upland Road by Crystal Palace Road junction. Officers agree it was parked incorrectly. Conways have been told that even when they're working on private work in Southwark they have to apply by the same H&S rules as when working for Southwark Council. Which means this inconsiderate unsafe parking shouldn't occur again.

Lots more buses. Night time lorry bans wouldn't apply. Kids going to/from school. We will never have an ideal time and this overnight working is an attempt to minimise inconvenience which is little consolation for people on this road OR the diversionary route - North Cross Road, Crystal Palace Road who tonight will wonder the heck is going on.

What I find alarming is the statement saying the property has been siting empty since 2002. I once spotted a property in SE1, checked with HMLR, asked Southwark Council about it and they didn't know they even had it. They then sold it. So perhaps this piece of land is another one like that. I will find out. Asset management in such massive councils is an issue.

Hi bobs, I've tried getting anchors in the road and happy to try again. No guarantees that someone won't have parked over an anchor when they're not in use with a car or van. So you then can't rely upon them. How could we make this work?

Council officials organised the removal by Conway materials - it looks like Cllr Charlie Smith and I both asked for this. They've also removed the flytipped wood - quite possibly from people avoiding the new charges Cllr Charlie Smith and his team have started for bulk waste removal. Officers had also told me that they've made it clear to Conways that leaving materials for such lengths of time after completing works isn't acceptable - lets see it things improve.

Hi peckhamside, the works are proposed at this time due to how busy and critical to the overall road infrastructure. Such hours were undertaken in the past for Lordship lane and East Dulwich Grove. it isn't nice for residents and contractors are clear they will be much quieter from midnight onwards - but they can;t turn of the reversing warning noise. And yes Sue the road is open 5am to 8pm.

Hi bels123, The last I heard and talking to planning officers. The developer due to steeply rising build costs wanted to change some aspects of the development - squaring things rather than odd shapes - the planners alledgely vasilated from expecting to approve changes to finally saying withdraw the request or they'd reject the proposed changes. It now over 3 years since the last full planning permission and the planners are saying they want a new economic appraisal for the scheme. So we could be looking at another extended delay. Sorry. I wished they'd all get on with it. And yes John the site boundary is surprisingly far out into the pavement.

Hi first mate, No, I didn't object as plenty of evidence to me a real problem exists, how majority clearly felt at public meeting and the consultation results means people living there were clear they wanted CPZ. I tried to mitigate its effect as much as possible with various thoughts and ideas. 11am-noon. Last debate about CPZ on the EDForum. I've lived in CPZ. It worked we had no problems parking. That particular zone didn't suffer domino onto neighbouring streets - we were on the border. Perhaps we were lucky. This could well change.

Hi first mate, No, very few off street parking options in the proposed area. Many streets agreeing to this are council properties with no gardens. We have limited options for reducing parking. Carrot approach. Making public transport so good you'd be an idiot to drive - I don't find it that good crushed on local trains, and buses are just not reliable enough. Making cycling is so good most people are relaxed about doing it. We're a long way from reaching that point. Reducing demand for parking via car sharing. This can be effective but Southwark Council in its wisdom charge a very high annual rental for each parking space dedicated to these vehicles - reducing the number. It's support but at a price to minimise their growth. also if you reduce resident demand for parking it can be used by non residents commuter parking. Stick approach. Charging for car use such that people give up using them - the cost of motoring is at an all time low and no political party is going to risk the wrath of 'a war on motoring' hence the lowest price for motoring ever in real terms. Rationing parking via CPZ is one of the only options left. If you have an alternate solution I'd be delighted to hear it. CPZ timing. Exactly matching the Herne Hill CPZ timings for the new CPZ mean that instead of using the HH parking enforcement people to enforce the new zone, by choosing a different time period, more officers will need to be employed or less enforcement of the HH CPZ. The idea is to limit commuter parking. A one hour period in the middle of the day before the noon-2pm period would limit commuter parking, minimise the impact on residents and their visitors, if outside noon-2pm enabled the same officers to be used for enforcement the costs of running enforcement would be lower helping in theory to keep parking permit pricing lower. Although parking permits on council estates are ?25/year and public highway ?125/year. So they're clearly not related to the cost of providing them.

Council Officers are happy - as per emails I've received. And will not make the old Police station builders there release the road or pavement. I've raised my complaint to the next stage to try and get some sense into this dangerous and damaging situation.

The Dulwich Community council was asked for its view of these proposals. I had heard from many in the North Dulwich area about how stressful parking is for them there. I attended a public meeting on Half Moon Lane where circa 200 attended and it was crystal clear vast majority wanted controlled parking. I think they've chosen the wrong option of noon-2pm for the restrictions. But the public consultation came clearly in favour of those timings. I did at that DCC meeting and previous one repeatedly ask them to reconsidered the new double yellow lines 10m from the corners of each junction. 10m although Highway Code suggests this is clearly OTT for 20mph area. But all three Village ward councillors were crystal clear they agree with the 10m. hi P68, I'm not pro CPZ. I wouldn't have put so much effort into car sharing schemes to reduce parking pressures if I was. But I am pro residents and businesses being able to use their vehicles in preference to people who are not residents. Sometimes CPZ can help - especially reduced hours. It is curious how the past ED station CPZ crystallised so much opposition versus the North Dulwich station CPZ going through without a murmur of opposition.

The North Dulwich & Denmark Hill new controlled parking zone has been decided upon by the cabinet councillor: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgDecisionDetails.aspx?IId=50005998&Opt=1 " 1. That the implementation of a new parking zone in the North Dulwich and Denmark Hill area, operating Monday to Friday, noon to 2pm be approved, subject to the outcome of any necessary statutory procedures at an estimated cost of ?70,000 comprising ?50,000 for implementation works and ?20,000 staff costs. 2. That approval not be given for the implementation of a parking zone in the Champion Hill area. 3. That the position and type of parking bays and restrictions for the new parking zone and surrounding streets (Champion Hill area and Village Way) as shown in the detailed design (Appendix 2 of the report) be approved. " Last time I spoke with council officers they said this would be operating from January. WE may well see increased pressure on local East Dulwich parking as a result.