James Barber

Hi Mockingbird, 15% of those cars are going at excessive - or at least that is the interpretation local police have given to local residents. Hi P68, Residents were asking originally for better traffic calming - initially full road width humps. When they met councillors - not me or Rosie - those councillors suggested a number of measures to achieve the main one being closing the road. So I do not think residents started with this idea. it has been suggested to them as the one likely to have the most desired effect. I personally think it's a good idea in theory but we haven't had a study report back whether it would work or not or a public consultation about it. 'Chief protagonist' at the Dulwich Community Council a number of people spoke for this with one main speaker. They explained that between them they had people who had lived in the area for a couple of years through to 40+ years. Hi rch, Any proposed change would involve emergency services who are statutory consultees. Hi Woodwarde, Melbourne Grove doesn't have 1200 properties. The study will go through all this and quite possibly will invove and orginigation and destination element to inform us.

With the change in tax relief rules for private landlords this seems a bit pointless as it is likely many private landlords will sell up.

Hi ITATM, Yes, a decision to fund a study of the issues reported has been taken. No more no less. Latest I've heard is that this study is now likely to get underway in October and report back to the Dulwich Community Council early 2016. My hunch would be the 27 January meeting. THe meeting papers would be issued a week to 10 days before hand. Recommendations may be do nothing, consult on closing or other options. IF consulting on something and the DCC agrees then that would take place the consultation late Spring for a decision around July 2016 time.

Also worth getting Manchester bars to protect the hinge side of doors. Many residents are away during August - please ensure neighbours houses are obviously giving the appearance of the residents being away. Push letters and leaflet completely through letterboxes for example. Please report ANY suspicious activities to the Police either 999 or 101 if not an emergency. The 5am door kicking would be a 999 call.

Hi ZT,FM, WRT Townley Road/EDG junction I promoted the issue widely, chased when things would come to DCC. Explained deputations and petitions to several groups and generally made a public and private fuss. I explained why I was doing this due to impacts on East Dulwich ward traffic. But the junction is relatively small well into a neighbouring ward. I felt morally limited as a councillor from getting truly 'stuck-in' as I would hope other councillors would when the same happens in East Dulwich ward.

This is useful to know. The letter bypassed councillors as indeed are the reported results. I hope that any final report will include the results of that letter and the feedback.

Hi Mustard, Apologies for the delay - just back from holiday and getting back to normal. Camberwell New and Old Cemeteries are in Peckham Rye ward - Siduhe has kindly stated the councillors for that ward and their email address are [email protected] etc. But these cemeteries are also across the road from College ward whose councillors I'm sure will also be interested - [email protected]@southwark.gov.uk and and also opposite Forest hill ward, Lewisham Council area. Nunhead Cenetery is in Nunhead ward whose councillors are: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],

Also worth noting that withdrawal mean it can be resubmitted without a new fee being paid.

Hi Jenny1, I don't recall any such consultation 5 years ago. I certainly recall conversations between several residents and then I had with then local Tories who were against speed bumps replacing speed cushions. I suspect if this change had proceeded then we wouldn't be having these discussions now.

I'm not aware of any funding for such studies in recent years? ie the last decade. A reputation was requested and net the requirements. They presented a document that also included a petition within it from a majority of Melbourne Grovd residents. This came after what must be 6 months + of residents recently raising such concerns. Ward councillors from both wards all agreed to fund a feasibility study to consider the problems related by the deputation. It now seems likely the study will report back early 2016.

Hi Sounds awful - and council housing budgets are ring fenced and separate to council general funds so absolutely no excuse for this. I'm on hiday until Sunday evening. Please contact my ward colleague Cllr Rosie Shimell ASAP [email protected]

Then contact the artist http://www.heatherburrell.co.uk

Please report ASAP via [email protected] if you don't get a prompt response please escalate to me. If some one does this once it's likely they'll do it again. It's our Council Tax to clear this up.

The junction works involve concrete which has to be left to set properly or it will have a shorter life span. Hi FM, Their U.S. No master plan of traffic planning for the area. You do sound increasingly a conspiracy theorist.

I've been told they start August but not holding my breath.

Completely understand why they've done this with 64% of respondents supporting this but I fear the lack of any compromise will make obtaining planning permission bumpier. Hope I'm wrong.

Another year and finally we have full planning permission for the permanent site. Fab new after 4 years of campaigning. Can't wait to cut a ribbon in 12 months time. Huge thank you to everyone who has supported this especially the current parents who submitted letters of support.

Last night Southwark Planning a omitted granted planning permission for the permanent school on the former EAt Dukwich Police station. Many parents submitted supporting comments. So the next step is demolition starting 5 August and then completing the build by the end of August 2016. Very exciting to see this project we started 4 years ago take another big step forward.

Hi P68, 1. It doesn't mean the traffic levels don't cause people problems. With lower levels of car ownership perhaps people are less forgiving. 2. Manipulative is quite a pejorative way of expressing yourself. 3. I agree with you and hope to see this covered in the feasibility report. Hi first mate, I'm trying to help answer questions as and when I can in between job, family, main councillor duties. Hi ITATM, 1. I'm trying to help residents come to a solution to the problem they've raised. 2. It has far more traffic than almost all other ED residential roads. 3. The Southwark overview is undertaken by Southwark council working with TfL - they create a framework. But it means relatively little is spent in the Dulwich area so we use devolved budgets to try and fix local issues. 4. The feasibility report will tell us for this issue. 5. ditto Hi rahrahrah, Speeding is prevalent on Melbourne Grove and traffic levels are very high for an ED residential street. Why wouldn't we do something radical? Please don't answer the feasibility report will give us the context to properly debate this. I'm signing of from this topic until we have further developments on it.

Hi first mate, So you're a mind reader as well. Amazing. Hi P68, The traffic counts recently done and from 5/6 years ago show remarkably similar traffic number along Melbourne Grove. So the lordship Lane changes between don't seem to have had an impact OR the very slight reduction in car ownership is SE London has countered it. And if putting in pedestrian crossing where none existing is traffic manipulation then I plead guilty - and proud of it. Can anyone really imagine Lordship Lane without its crossings. I did originally want a zebra crossing which was blocked by TfL buses. And on reflection I think they were right to do that. I'm not clear the north bound bus lane is sufficiently valuable to be kept - I'd welcome others views on that. And I do use buses to get around the area, as well as walking, cycling and horror of horrors a car. Hi ITATM, I believe I have answered questions posed.

Hi first mate, I don't know - which is why we have a feasibility study. But I would make an observation. With Thames Water closing Underhill Road for a number of weeks I was expecting traffic chaos. Which is why I fought hard to see if it could be kept open. Underhill Road has something like close to 5,000 cars per day going north and south. But no one seems that bothered. It appears that as a compels system people adjust. it might be that closing Melbourne Grove is a step too far. But it seems more probable that people will adjust.

Hi first mate, It was only a very few years ago people were campaigning to allow cars on all roads in Dulwich Park and not just people with disabilities. This argument has only finally died down in the last year or so... My colleagues and have led on changes to add two crossings to Lordship Lane, raised entry treatments along most of Lordship Lane side roads, full width bumps on Chesterfield, Ashbourne, Hindmans, etc and 20mph on all other ED roads. I hope this all counts as making it better for all residents. I'd like to see better adherence to 20mph on residential roads. I'm not keen on more humps and bumps as they cause other problems. I am keen to explore average speed cameras for roads such as Barry Road. I do think we need to improve the pavements locally especially Lordship Lane and we've allocated some of our limited resources to this. We need to do more - tricky as pavement works can really damage businesses unless executed very quickly. I see no change in the number of parking spaces from these changes. We're currently exploring how we can released North Cross Road on Fridays for parking - currently it's restricted for a near non existent Friday market. This would build on our work ending the figment of officers imagination of the market operating Mon-Thurs and parking restrictions related to that we had removed about three years ago. Where we have road space not used by vehicles but pedestrian congestion I will seek moving it to extra pavement space where it will make walking more attractive. Certainly if people rely on using Melbourne Grove as a rat-run they may have longer journey times IF the feasibility study says closing that road would work AND the idea passes consultation. I'm not aware of any other proposals for our area that could affect journey times. I am aware of a proposal officers are working on of placing double yellow lines on junction corners across East Dulwich to make it clearer about what is considered dangerous parking. Apparently a number of complaints about this. When it comes through I expect to fight for less excessive double yellow lining. The Village ward councillors agreed this at the last Dulwich Community Council for the N.Dulwich triangle and looked a bit miffed when I pressed the point that it looked OTT. They still proceeded. Expectation that it will happen with the CPZ there and no one will really mind. If the CPZ doesn't proceed there it will add unnecessary mayhem.

Hi Jenny1, The noise issues from bumps is mostly from raised treatment - where the whole cross roads is raised e.g. junction of Melbourne Grove with East Dulwich Grove, Barry Road with Goodrich Road. But full bumps do sometimes cause problem especially if not precisely installed. I'm pretty sure the petition was about closing the road but good to double check.

Hi Robin, Because of those questions I'd a quick sample of the petition of 138 and all bar one of the 20 sample were on the electoral roll. Not sure if any one has posted the Police organised report on traffic levels and speeds - please see attached.

You've made my day first mate. I do feel a young 51 ! I'm not anti car - I use them often enough. I'm in favour of people before cars where we have to decide between the two. London's population is expected to increase by 25%. So ye, we are going to be under increasing pressure with many more people travelling through our patch. P68 response is poor grammar on my part. P68 suggested we would support Melbourne Grove residents closing their road as they have more voters than Chesterfield or Ashbourne. Ive not seen the Harris Construction mgmt. plan so I can't tell you what it will contain yet. North Cross Road/Lordship Lane build-outs are taking place where Lordship lane is two lanes wide but traffic can only flow in one lane. Dead road space which will be given over to pedestrians.