James Barber

I highlighted the case. Southwark officers removed the debris. They agree it looks like vandalism and are investigating. They're considering what tree to replace it with in the new year.

Indeed XIX. They would exit that way going northwards as indeed would Playfield etc. Equally residents on Ashbourne and Chesterfield wouldn't exit northwards via Melbourne. You do currently have a surprising volume of vehicles using your and neighbouring streets. My hunch is that this would fall. but we'll have a better idea with the feasibility study.

Hi Dun, Have you tried Cedges advice/guidance?

Hi BNG, bels123, We support around 30-50 bids each years - many much smaller than this bid admittedly. But we don't consult on them all with every resident. We'd spend all the budget consulting! I suggested to them that they should start talking to residents on affected streets by their proposal. Hi EDAus, Weer will all the traffic go? Good question. Which is why we've agreed to fund a feasibility study to tell us. But of the 2,000+ vehicles IF we proceed and IF it passes public consultation I'd imagine 80% along Lordship Lane. That would increase it's flow from 16,000 today to around 18,000. Can it take that extra traffic? hi first mate, We support a feasibility study. Originally I support them having full speed humps. But then Cllr Charlie Smith suggested they be bolder. I think it might be a good idea. But until we've seen the feasibility study we just don't know. Hi P68, More voters on Ashbourne, Chesterfield individually than the section of Melbourne Grove proposed to have a closure. This isn't about votes. The next local elections are 3 years away and I might not even stand. It's purely about trying to do the best for the area and residents - not do the best for people who don't live in the area who want to get into central London quickly. Hi XIX, Why would anyone going along Lordship Lane keep going along Melbourne Grove if closed then Chesterfield or Ashbourne to re-emerge on Lordship Lane? If the traffic was so awful people were motivated to consider this- the stationary traffic wouldn't let them back out into Lordship Lane again. Hi first mate, Parking survey for the Harris ED Primary school suggests no parking issue. But I've not seen the detailed report just planning officer summary. The construction management plan for the building works has yet to be agreed but I expect it to minimise disruption as much as possible. The build will be undertaken I understand as much off site as possible - ensures better quality and quicker build. It needs to be ready to open September 2016. M&S yes it will generate more traffic and parking which is why we objected repeatedly to it going ahead as now planned. IF Melbourne Grove is closed I would expect a marginal decrease in traffic in other neighbouring roads such as Ashbourne and Chesterfield. Bigger parking picture. Car ownership is creeping down. Vest making Lordship Lane more attractive. I hope that the area area can avoid parking pressure and a CPZ. I really wouldn't want that debate again locally - although with further North Dulwich CPZ likely I expect further parking pressure around ED station. Hi Jenny1, I don't recollect and haven't kept a copy - lots of names and addresses so shredded my copy. Sorry. Hi speedbird, A former councillor. Rather unfortunate she misheard some of the deputation and heckled several times - which certainly raised the temperature!

Hi mockingbird, edhistory, How have we not followed the deputation rules at the Dulwich Community council? Hi Andrew1101, mockingbird, The poor chap who was born and brought up in Bermondsey but killed in Tunisia left Bermondsey a number of decades ago. it seems unfair to criticise local Dulwich version of Southwark News/South London Press for not leading with a non Dulwich story. Hi Andrew1101, Richard tudor, No laws around when people can become parliamentary candidates - but I should have edited my auto signature as I've not gone through the reapproval process and applied to be selected again - simple oversight not to amend my auto signatures. Hi BNG, Residents from Melbourne Grove had been contacting ward councillors for many months, held meetings with residents, newspaper stories, letters to newspapers. This follows on from previous campaigns before I became a councillors - so clearly an ongoing sore. This has not suddenly come out of the wood work. Your awareness of it may be sudden.

Hi Richard tudor, I hadn't spotted my signature needs updating - many thanks for kindly pointing it out. Hi ITATM, Yes do contact the reporter - local newspaper are always looking for stories- they have seen this thread and realise it is contentious - hence why they're reporting it. I've come across a spreadsheet of traffic count data - please see attached for those interested. Hi Andrew1101, At the Dulwich Community Council we were asked to close Melbourne Grove on a trial basis immediately. WE couldn't agree that but officers had indicated in advaince the costs range ?2,500-?10,000 for a study of the problem. So we decided to take that option. As the road is shared between East Dulwich and Village wards the cost is equally shared between those two wards devolved budget. I should point out that it appears 55% of residents already have signed up on that section of Melbourne Grove to support the deputation.

Apologies for not posting before. The latest ward panel on Wednesday 1 July Christchurch, 263 Barry Road my notes: The chair has resigned. A new chair was elected. Crime stats. Iceland, white stuff (3 in one month nought in other), Lloyds pharmacy NCR, experience lots of shop lifting. Police this crime could be designed out - it appears big chains accept loses but report crimes and provide CCTV. So a number of people arrested after the fact rather than making it a harder target. Will M&S be better replacing Iceland. It wont have car park entrance so it must at least be a little better. Patrolling hotspots - ED station, ED Grove, Lordship Lane White Stuff, Iceland, Barry Road, NCR Lloyds pharmacy - repeat! Overall crime per down over the last 12 months. Burglary - spread over time - but a lot 5/6am, around lunch time. No pattern for days. Breeze blocks - kids place these in obvious spot to see if anyone notices them. Wait an hour or two then if unmoved implies no ne around and they use them to smash single pane sash windows - very common to burglaries. If you can replace with double glazing which you can get as sash windows. Motor Vehicle crime - especially mobile phones and sat navs still being left. Even car doors left unlocked especially on drives! 1 robbery in the last month. A number of Police signs have been in the same place and not refreshed across East Dulwich, ad need to be put back into sensible positions on lamp posts. With our Police now based in Camberwell it is more complicated to get a ladder down to ED. So I've asked to use less ?200 from the ED Crime Prevention fund I established years ago to fund a telescopic ladder - they can be carried on buses, car boos, etc and the police will no longer have a reason to not keep these signs up to date and in position. Put derelict shop in touch with owner rep. Barry Road. Etc more road speed signage - would this help reduce speeds? Several years ago former councillors Richard Thomas, Joanthan Mitchell and myself provided speed cameras/guns to the local police. They're calibrated until November - we confirmed we'd pay for recalibration. Agreed Sunday 2 August first session - book via Charlie or me if interested to attend - using the Speed camera on Barry Road. Our Police sgt. will check if we could buy local average speed cameras.

Interesting idea to stem flight demand - http://www.1010uk.org/articles/heres-how-we-can-cut-flights-without-ruining-everyones-holiday

Hi first mate, The junction of Lordship Lane with North Cross Road is not reducing parking. The parking place just before the bus stop there - that meant buses couldn't get near the pavement reliably I'm told are being relocated by changing other lines. Not sure how that see's a dramatic reduction in parking across the shop? M&S will put significantly more pressure on the area. Not much we can do about that now - we objected to the planning permission on the basis of parking but they got their planning permission. Harris school would tend to put pressure on an area that I've never had casework about parking stress. Doesn't guarantee anything but it gives me hope abut that building not causing parking problems.

Hi peckham_rye, alternative flying patterns are indeed full practical - BA have been testing steeper descents. Aircraft manufacturers can make aircraft quieter. Night flights can be banned. None of these will happen without a motivation - campaigning for improvements.

Southwark are about to make some more disabled parking places... LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK - DISABLED PERSONS PARKING PLACES Provide new ?at any time? unlimited stay disabled persons parking places, 6 metres in length, at the following locations: CRYSTAL PALACE ROAD, the east side outside No. 71 Crystal Palace Road CRYSTAL PALACE ROAD, the south-east side outside No. 127 Crystal Palace Road FOREST HILL ROAD, the north-east side outside No. 29 Forest Hill Road LANDELLS ROAD, the south-east side outside No. 64 Landells Road SILVESTER ROAD, the south-west side outside Nos. 1-3 Silvester Road TARBERT ROAD, the north-west side outside No. 12 Tarbert Road; Relocate existing disabled persons parking places as follows: HILLSBORO ROAD, the north-west side outside Nos. 5-7 Hillsboro Road ? to be relocated south-westward by 3.5 metres Further information may be obtained by contacting Michael Herd of the council's Public realm projects parking design team by telephone on 020 7525 2131. Copies of the proposed orders http://www.southwark.gov.uk/trafficorders

Hi Lazero, No, haven't found out yet but have asked our ED SNT sgt who is also an ex.traffic sgt. I've asked if we could install average speed cameras on Barry Road and she is finding out if this is possible.

Hi *Bob*, But HACAN have undertake all sorts of work showing Heathrow assertions to be wrong or at best muddled. for example Night flights were critical to the UK economy. Our economy couldn't survive without night flights. HACAN showed this to be wrong. The Davies report say they're no longer needed. HACAN 1 - Heathrow nil on the facts of that debate. So yes they do stunts to get noticed. But they're about providing cogent real arguments to refute Heathrow propaganda.

Don't you love the newspeak of that commission report and Heathrow people. Business travel is going down - so the answer build another runway. Passenger growth is solely confined to the wealthiest flying more - so lets use lots of public money to enable Heathrow to increase capacity for the wealthiest to do this. Subsidising the wealthiest to fly more. While Stansted sits with all the spare capacity London could need for the next 30 years. Cameron doesn't like doing U-turns. He stated categorically in 2009 Heathrow expansion shouldn't happen. This is likely to be a defining decision for the tories and their future. subsidise the wealthiest at the expense of the environment.

No I didn't say that. The petition clearly showed their addresses on Melbourne Grove. I haven't checked whether they're all on the electoral roll at those addresses. I haven't checked if you are richard.

Have been told the flooded road reopened and E&C now much better. Anyone been that way since lunch time?

Hi Richard tudor, The petition was organised by the campaign and obtained 138 signatures from Melbourne Grove - which checking is about 55% of the number of people registered to vote. I can't vouch for if they're all on the electoral roll. Hi hopskip, All East Dulwich and Village ward councillors have had numerous emails from residents about this for circa 4 month before the deputation and had a two page officer report of what our options would be. Hi lpool, IF the feasibility study suggests we proceed. If we decide to proceed and IF a public consultation suggests support then I would expect it to be implemented on a trial basis. The rules as I understand them are such a trial would be 6-24 months. Closing lots of other roads could significantly add cost to the proposal depending on how it is done. One-way streets tend to have far faster traffic - drivers don't have to think about anyone coming he other way. Part of the proposal is to reduce current speeding.

Hi MarkT, Sorry I haven't a clue. It does feel rather made up on the hoof to avoid embarrassment. I was more than puzzled when they introduced the original policy change in the first place. "To remove street clutter we'll no longer allow white H bars painted on the road but instead will have lots of double yellow lines". Truly bizarre.

Hi nigello, Street trees aren't covered by parks. Email [email protected] If you don't get a sensible response please feel free to escalate to me or my ward colleagues. Hi niksterboots, You should ask Rebecca what the plans are for the playground. Every year we have Cleaner, Greener, Safer devolved capital budgets - you could apply for funds to upgradeo r replace one or two items.

sadly the new northern E&C junction probably isn't worth it. TfL don't do any cost benefit analysis of the hold-ups during construction versus the results. I read a paper that did this for California and the payback was typically 20 years - no sane person would undertake works on that basis. The works will result in a large peninsular sticking out - solely due to the Faraday electric substation sculpture. I very much doubt this new area will be a vibrant new square for E&C as per the business case. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

Apologies for not explaining how to lead a deputation. You need to contact the committee clerk to organise one. Typically as a minimum one week in advance so it can be include in the committed papers. State what your deputation is about and ideally send some materials supporting your case in advance. Emailing about the subject in advance to all committee members/councillors can help persuade about your case/argument. A deputation with just one person wouldn't look so convincing. Ideally others present as well. Good to have a specific request of the committee which can then decide whether to act on that request or not. hope this helps. did you have a specific committee in mind?

55% of the residents along the lower section of Melbourne Grove have signed a petition saying they are experiencing problems. Getting that level of response is impressive. Hi DominickHide, Many vehicles can straddle speed cushions and effectively ignore them. Hence why we've converted nearly all of them into full road width sinusoidal humps. Hi ITATM, Obtaining 55% of residents signing a petition is a very high hurdle. They asked for an immediate temporary closure which we clearly couldn't support. We're funding a study of up to ?10,000 but hope comes in at the lowest end of the range quoted to us of ?2,500. Hi Jenny1, Oh, I've emailed you my response. Southwark carries out crash reduction work based on the number of crashes - well sort of. It doesn't spend any money reducing crashes on TfL roads which is where the highest proportion happen. Hence why works have taken place upgrading East Dulwich Grove. Tends to be area or route works. it will be many decades if ever before central southwark funds reach the likes of many of our ED crash hotspots. Exception is where strategic plan involved such as increasing numbers cycling or walking. Hence why we've used so much devolved Cleaner, Greener, Safer money over the years to install speed humps around East Dulwich that would never have happened otherwise. And many more residents would like them on their roads. Even with the study costs IF the closure proceeds it will be much cheaper than full road humps replacing the current speed cushions.

Hi MarkT, For non principal roads we've been assured policy changed so double yellow lines are no longer required. They also wont install white H bars. But we have several principal roads in the area such as Barry Road, Lordship Lane, Forest Hill Road, East Dulwich Road, East Dulwich Grove, Grove Vale, Half Moon Lane where officers still require double yellow lines. We're about to have our first example of a new crossover on Barry Road to test this out on.

Hi ITATM, Good to hear fellow councillors were also up in arms about this. Not sure they've rejected any dropped kerbs with double yellow lines though. The problem appears to have come from Southwark's adoption of the Southwark Street Design Manual. Within the various sections officers have produced these restrictions - still no replacement H bar. irony is remove H -bar was produced to reduce street clutter by putting double yellow lines instead. I believe the SSDM is a cabinet councillor decision. All such decision are advertised to all councillors. So you could say 62 of us missed the implications of this manual. I have asked the cabinet member to amend the manual - both for this and it's banning of cycle parking allowed everywhere else in London. I will try again and we need a proper review of this manual - could you help me do this during August and anyone else interested?

Hi ITATM, I don't believe I ever claim credit for anything I don't have a direct involvement with making happen. Yes, I am doing this more as some other political party literature has started to claim credit for projects me and my Lib Dem colleagues have achieved. In this particular example. At the Dulwich Community Council I persuaded at two previous meetings that we NOT approve half a dozen requests for new dropped kerbs because each included the requirement for 2.5m of double yellowness past the edge of the proposed dropped kerb and across the actual dropped kerb. I persuaded my fellow councillors that worst case we should recommend approval ONLY if council officials limited the double yellow lines to 0.5m. Otherwise we would pequirethose officials to appear before the committee ideally with their director to explain why 2 x 2.5m was so crucial and indeed double yellow lines. The third attempt to push these through council officials changed the policy. Without double yellow lines these decisions don't come to community council and the item was withdrawn after the papers had been issued to councillors. Usually these decisions had been rubber stamped by councillors. So I'm chuffed - and the debate on the forum helped - that we made a stand and that led it. And thanks to my fellow councillors of both other local parties for their crucial help in sorting this out. The job isn't done as the policy still applies to principal roads such as Barry Road. I'm just sorry we had to hold up several families new dropped kerbs to get the policy changed. You did ask ITATM.