James Barber

More road works and closures coming... Turney Road (between Croxted and no's 47 & 100) 25->27 March Melford Road (10m south from junction with Woodvale to no.56) 17->18 March Any concerns or questions please call the relevant officer on 020 7525 2014.

Hi Kate, No I don't but I will ask for them by East Dulwich ward and SE22 post code. It will take a few weeks as officers are dealing with more worried parents than past years.

What a weird letter. Harris Federation have been clear - and to Southwark Council Overview & Scrutiny Committee in person as well - that if insufficient Nunhead parents aren't interested in seneding their kids to a new primary school at Dul.wich Hospital site then they wont deliver it there or likely anywhere as no other site has been found. My instinct is parents will say no thank you and it wont happen. I'm not sure it will increase the space available but we still need to sort this uncertainty out.

Hi Tessmo, I would suggest people email this request in as part of the consultation response and ask their local councillors to support this. At the Dulwich Community Council we can affirm our support for this. I will also suggest directly that it would be better to have an indie report presented AT the DCC meeting to avoid any time delays. I have asked for this. Hi villager, I'm at work - give me a break! Hi P68, Spot on - most private and public bodies don't do post project reviews. and rarely go back a year or two later to check. BUT if things really bad that can force a review - but none of us want that to happen.

I've suggested to the Labour administration who I would choose as an independent voice to review all the materials so far - John Dale of Urban Movement.

The Fusion contract doesn't have that long to run. I would anticipate extra responsiveness unless Fusion don't want to run Southwark's leisure centres. Any problems feel free to escalate to me or Cllr Rosie Shimell or for that matter Cllr Charlie Smith.

hi richard tudor, I like your simple definition with parenthesis impied - "30 mph on busy roads, 20 on residential roads and [roads with] pedestrians on the pavement" Hi mako, Across the Dulwich Community Council area - 3 wards- College 3 Lab cllrs, East Dulwuich 2 x Lib Dem + 1 Labour, Village ward 2 tories + 1 Labour. So even locally 5 Labour councillors vs 4 others. Hi richard tudor / rdyney bews - Clegg & tutuition fees. Didn't you notice Lib Dems are 8% of MPs and both Tories and Labour (who introduced tuition fees having promised not) are in favour of them. We managed to get a deal which is much more progressive than what went before vs. what the tories originally intended. 63% of children from the poorest back grounds in London are no going to universty - a higher proportion than any other social group across England & Wales. UCAS even noted a huge leap in the poorest now going to universities since the change. Hi Loz, They haven't included cyclsits - bicycles don't come with speedometers which is why you legally can't charge them for speeding.

That's a really good point Mrs TP. That makes areal difference and would put a lot of people out of their misery. It's a shame that Southwark Council dont liaise with the private schools for admissions. That would really move things along.

I've visited this school several times and been truly impressed with it and more importantly its pupils. I wish I'd been half as nurtured at the comp I attended. So I wasn't surprised but was chuffed to see the stunning 1st GCSE results they've achieved. Above the national average and some of the highest in Southwark. This is especially impressive when the first two years the school was off site at Langbourne some considerable way away and without all the facilities it now has. You could also ask to visit the school again before making a final decision.

Hi Tessmo, I would support a fresh pairs of eye reviewing 8A option. Looking at the percentage above capacity each option presents - and I would suggest that at the very peak hours the current junction is over capacity - 8A throughout the day has the lowest over capacity. But that may be the wrong way to assess these things. Hi Villager, I'm at work so don't have themto hand but Google Scholar throws up - http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/7/3/234.short http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/15/1/13.short Neither is the research I remembering reading. This might have been it - http://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=365831 / http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0001457594900914

How pointlessly mysterious. Perhap they're gonig to open 1 or two screans only to start with.

EDITED to add London stats. 68% first choice across London. So Southwark not doing well at 60%. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31698086 Today is secondary school admissions being announcement day - from 5pm online and letters overnight. GOOD LUCK. 2,637 on time secondary scghool place applications, 42 higher than last year. Slight reduction in people being offered their first preference 59.6% (61.4% in 2014), first three preference 86.5% (88.5% in 2014), 93.2% first 6 preferences (94.4% in 2014), 6.8% none of their choices (5.7% 2014). So 179 children not allocated any school their parents and they wished for and 355 families didn't get one of their first three choices. I've attached the official Q&A, stats results and details of where you can go to ask for support and advice - apart from your local councillors. If anyone needs help please get in touch. It is amazing how much of s shake down happens and families ultimately getting acceptable school places. all going well the following year families will have an extra local secondary school to choose from.

I've received an email pointing out that NICE recommends 20mph to reduce early deaths (children under 15 years of age: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ph31/resources/new-nice-guidance-to-reduce-number-of-child-injuries-and-deaths

Hi Slarti b, No, that was perception using the junction on foot, bicycle and car. I was posed the following question which I guess all local councillors are being set: "Do you think that spending ?220,000 is justified when historic data proves that there is not a safety problem with this junction and that recent modelling commissioned by Southwark shows that there will be increased delays to the traffic?" My response for transparency: Yes I think TfL should spend such sums on improving child safety walking and cycling to local schools. The trouble with solely basing highway safety improvements on reported crashes is significant number of crashes that involve injury are not reported. They're treated by hospitals and that's it. We learn nothing. For slight injuries from memory I've seen peer reviewed papers suggesting only a fifth are actually reported. With random probability waiting until some is killed or seriously injured often would mean fixing a location making safer when its unlikely to have a crash for some considerable time even decades. The research even found under reporting of death on highways. I don't know the maths but it feels right to review junctions,especially ones with high usage levels such as this one, assessing if it is inherently unsafe and address issues before a death or serious injury. My understanding is that such an assessment has been made hence why TfL are willing to fund changes. What I would be interested in seeing is the maths related to all junctions having been assessed and prioritised for upgrades so we know that this was the best possible choice in Dulwich for a junction to be improved. For example Townley Road junction with Lordship Lane and Heber Road has many more crashes and is also a busy route to school and a real barrier to cycling. How does that junction compare and others. I'm sorry my answer isn't a binary yes or no but I do feel strongly that resources should be allocated but the allocation method needs to be made more transparent. ----- Looking at the options 8A looks to have the least impact overall. But clearly any of the options will have impact. The two-stage right turns for cyclists is interesting. I'd welcome knowing how these work in Denmark. I'm not keen on the cycle gate results in a drastic narrowing of Greendale eastern footpath. It looks like the signal gates are causing the lack of signal time for all the other required manoeuvres. It also makes it look complicated. The eastbound East Dulwich Grove cycle stop line looks unnecessarily far back from the pedestrian marked crossing area. Even 1/2m would increase capacity going in that direction. It looks like a smaller tweak on the westbound facing traffic on the east side of the junction on East Dulwich Grove. Again tiny improvement in capacity could be squeezed out. The big open new pavement expanses would need new tree pits or other planting. I think red light cameras should be included. I think that's one of the biggest issues of this junction - people driving across when just turned red. Countdown would be useful to aid pedestrians. But I don't support the do nothing suggestion.

Sadly from a planning perspective objectors and supporters normally carry most weight if they live within 100m of the development site. Certainly at planning committees supporters and objectors can only speak if living within 100m of the planning application site. But certainly councillors can't help but be influenced even if sub consciously if they receive lots of emails. But the councillors to influence will be those on any planning sub committee that will decide this planning application. But it can only be refused on planning grounds else any successful appeal could see Southwark be charged the applicants costs. So worth checking the applicant versus the Southwark Plan and highlighting if it's an overdevelopment - we're suburban here, design, parking pressure - http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/856/planning_policy/1241/the_southwark_plan

Hi slarti b, Happy to ask those questions. Hi goose green, Apologies for types and being sensitive.

EDITED to add copy of Traffic Management Order Just a heads-up that St.Aidan's Road will be closed for Thames Water works 9 March - 6 June. If anyone would like further information they can call 020 7525 2014.

Hi slarti b, That is useful. Thank you. Do you want me to ask these questions of council officers or have you or will you on Saturday? Hi Goose Green, Do you really expect 9 councillors to hang around for at this public exhibition for several hours probably ohgging the officer time asking questions that will be documented in the report that comes to us anyway? This exhibition si about residents having a chance to ask questions. I pesnally think a publci meeting would have been better where everyone hears the answers to other questions. But the council administration prefer lots of 121 conversations. This weekend I'll take a look at all the documentation.

Hi Wulfhound, The E&C cycle bypass keeps being messed around with. Curerently the Chruchyard Row section has what in my view is an illegal diversion through a park. The New Kent Road toucan crossing was donw graded by Ken Livingstone to a pelican crossing and under Boris moved 200m out of alignment. Southwark Council have also closed Elephant Road cycle contraflow. So frankly the council and TfL are doing as much as they can to remove the cycle bypass by stealth - that's why so many use the main roads. They don't have the time be messed around. @Woodwarde, Whether you think a diagonal crossing is a good or bad idea - that is how the majority of chilren are already using the crossing. Either you cater for it or the junction remains dangerous. The officer advice is that this junction is dangerous and should be changed before we have serious injuries. I can think of other locatinos where a diagonal crossing would be particualrly useful e.g. East Dulwich Raod with Crystal Palace Raod and Adys Road.

Hi jimbo1964, Yes, I believe they do. As with just about all GP practices they are and have always been private businesses. So the NHS will have termination clauses in the contract. The contract presumably is prettyy standard and agreed with the BMA - http://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/gms-contract-04-14.pdf I've only briefly scanned clause 26. Anyone game to read al 126 pages and share their views?

Anyone who finds they've been removed from the list please complain.

Hi Tessmo, 2 stage right turns - isn't that a chicken and egg situation. You don't support it because no evidence (in the UK) so it shouldnt be tried here. I took a look at lunch time and will contemplate the proposals tonight.

It was mentioned earlier about Thames Water and drains. I've never seen a planning application rejected due to drains or utility connection concerns. The site could be linked into drains directly on Melbourne Grove and would imagine Thames Water would insist upon this. If Southwark rejects this planning application without what is legally considered a valid planning concern - it breachs Southwark policies and strategies - then the applicant can appeal the decision and a Planning Inspector will re consider the application. I've appeared at planning appeals to defend East Dulwich but the applicant often wins. The applicant can then be awarded costs from the council so the council will be certain they can refuse if that is what is proposed. Cllr Rosie Shimell and I are planning to call the decision in - but with 5 clear objections that may not be necessary.

Hi first mate, On the first consultation I thoguht I was crystal clear in objecting and telling people how they could object or support the first proposals. I haven't yet had a chance to look at the new proposals but will this weekend. It is true I think a bigger proportion of us need to walk and cycle more - three reasons. With plans to grow London by 1.5 million people (which I personally don't like or agree with but can;t see how to avoid them) but no plans for urban motorways, etc the only way the current roads will cope is more people walking and cycling. Any new public transport will just be maintaining the current proportions using public transport. Then their is the huge health time bomb of obesity, heart disease and mental health which more active life styles assist coping with them. Without this the NHS will sink. And as important as the others is the need to reduce CO2 emissions. We could see a drastic reduction by using better technology but more walking and cycling is the moe efficient way of doing this.

Hi Bicknell, I haven't had a chance to look at it yet but plan to over the weekend. Will comment then on specifics. Factors that would play into these proposals. More lanes mean more green time for people to cross the road. But keeping the Townley right hant turn needs more green time for that phase than they'd planned. So I suspect these factors are resulting in the suggested lane reduction - but as I said I've not studied the details and hope to do so over the weekend.