richard tudor

Perhaps many people were not aware of it apart from the chosen few in the know

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If you want a boring predictable safe sterilised > high st try Lordship Lane, how can you have wasted > a whole life shopping in a 'shithole' when what > you were looking for is a mile away ?! lol I thought we were talking about the space around the station? And the improvement Perhaps you have a different perception of area. For your information the only interest for me in LL are the diy shops.

Says it all

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's been this way for decades and seems to > function well. Why assume that having a business > in the area obliges you to keep the white boy's > insecurities covered by changing your surroundings > to suit what he wants ? > Other peoples' perceptions, especially of those > not using the facilities as they stand, are what > seem to be the 'requirement' to sterilise the > area. If it ain't their style they should go > elsewhere, London's big enough innit. > Peckham ain't no city. If you want a 'city' > square, try Trafalgar. If you want a 'city' > market, try Portobello or Spitalfields. > There's a lot of people happy shopping in the > 'shithole', check it out - it's rammed 7 days !! > > A contended (and proud) 'shithole' shopper. I also use the shithole and have done for most of my life. I would like to see it improve.

The existing independents have not done much to improve the area. It is still a sh.thole. It they depend on rock bottom rates they are not viable. I thought the idea was to open I up the station area into a pleasant space. Most European cities have a market square but I suppose it would be to much to expect the same here.

Common sense so lacking in Southwark thinking and Cllr thinking also

What's happened to the original funny thread posted earlier?

bob Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes there was a restaurant there 80's and a very > good it had it's own bar were you could look at > the menu have pre dinner drink's and they would > come and fetch you when the meal was ready. > Bob S Different residents, appreciated what they had unlike the current crop of residents who complain if a flea farts. Remember downstairs bar in the garden very well as a child.

Why would UKIP stop cycling?

Most of us old local residents know if the save the planet tribe withdrew their heads from their anus they could see there is no need for anything to be done. This junction has worked for years although new imports are scared of heir own shadows, hence we must change something Grow up and use common sense.

They can spend ?75millon from reserves to buy Tooley Street to make them feel important and still tell they have to cut Services. More rubbish on the streets.

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I hear the 20 mph limit was in Labour's manifesto > for the Southwark election. As they got a clear > majority, then it looks like they have a clear > mandate to do this Correct. On page 7 /10 last para in small writing under healthy living views? Most people would not have got past tax tax frozen. Hence put in what you want.

I don't agree with a blanket 20 through the borough. Unfortunately Tooley Street seems to think blanket idea fits all. Should have asked local Housing offices for their local knowledge but many experienced officers have gone in the last reorganisation. Consultants is the thing now. My point is this 20 mph idea was on page 7 out of 10 of the manifesto in a small paragraph which I doubt many people even made it to let alone read to vote on. Real life experience on the ground is what is required not book theory. You have your view I have mine.

People who read and voted for Clegg on fees got shafted and call me Dave on inheritance tax got shafted. What they put in apart from the headline grabbing political policy is what they push through which is what was always intended Hence people cannot be asked now days. 30 mph on busy roads, 20 on residential roads and pedestrians on the pavement. Common sense

wulfhound Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > There where seven objection against the 20mph > blanket, which by the way slows down all traffic > flowing through the borough. All where rejected by > the council in favour of two supporters. > > > It was there in the Labour Party's election > manifesto for anyone to read. They won the > election. Seems democratic enough to me. > > > Bus journeys across the borough are now even > slower so that few cyclists/pedestrians can take > more risks on the road. > > > Every single last one of us is a pedestrian some > of the time. And while *you* may *think* that > "cyclist" is a word for a tribe of weird > death-wish fitness enthusiasts with a rubber > fetish, what it actually means is anybody, any > time they decide to pick up a bicycle and use it > to get from A to B. Which, for quite a lot of > journeys, is actually rather pratical. > > > Vote these imbeciles out > > > It's your right to try and do so. Me personally, > I'll be voting them back in. I would think not to many people read their manifesto in southwark as most people know no matter what party it is the manifesto is fairy story. Many people in Southwark would vote for the party gave them freebies as the turnout is always low it does not represent the true view. Hence a very small number of people can push a party into power. 7 Against 2 for democracy says not passed.

If you look at all the current plans Southwark keeps bringing out for the roads and parking it certainly looks like it. Have we forgotten that we pay officers wages and should have a much greater say in what is required not their pet ideas I suspect most of these plans are just thought up for something to keep themselves busy before they are noticed doing not much at all. A 20mph is not required but it keeps lots of people busy.

Charles Notice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can we know where the 44 locations are and why > they have been selected. Council officers > choice,residents, cycle pressure groups or > expensive consultants. After the Townley Road who did what show I too would like to know the answers to the above. The answers are there as they made a decision based on them

Holymoly I suspect the articulate letter above will be destined for the waste bin. Southwark Officers have their own agenda.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Creating 'piecemeal' 20mph zones is (broadly) > unhelpful. There is an argument for properly > planned and consulted broad zones - so the drivers > in them can be (reasonably) sure of the relevant > limits - and these should be properly marked-up > with regular speed limit reminders (I have posted > elsewhere on the 'Rapel' system used in e.g. > France to remind people of the limits). I think > (and I live in it) that Underhill is all 20mph - > but it is not always clear - and I am regularly > hooted at, when going at or just below 20, by > drivers who either don't know, or don't care, and > wish me either to speed up or to let them > over-take. > > In many places weight of traffic and of parking > mean that 20mph or less is often the only safe > speed to go at (sometimes the only possible speed > to go at) outwith any formally set limits. > > I would be happy for the whole of Dulwich and ED > south of Goose Green and bounded by the S Circular > to be 20mph as a broad zone, properly marked-up, > but odd roads and half roads make no sense and > will simply confuse. > > I suspect, based on other posts, that Mr Barber is > mixing it with fellow councillors in another ward > and is using this 'genuine question' as a > political stalking horse. His right, of course, as > party political politician, ours, not to play the > games with him. Have to say I agree with this sentiment regarding the political side not the 20 mph broad zone.

Please find panel members below: Cllrs that were at community meeting regarding 20 mph discussion Councillor Helen Hayes - College Ward - Labour Councillor Lewis Robinson - College Ward - Conservative ? Councillor Andy Simmons - College Ward ? Labour Councillor Robin Crookshank Hilton - Village Ward - Liberal Democrat ? Councillor Toby Eckersley - Village Ward ? Conservative Councillor Michael Mitchell - Village Ward - Leader of the Conservative Group Councillor James Barber - East Dulwich Ward - Liberal Democrat ? Councillor Jonathan Mitchell - East Dulwich Ward - Liberal Democrat ? Councillor Rosie Shimell - East Dulwich Ward - Liberal Democrat

Twirly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I assumed it was the other end of Melbourne Grove > - it comes out on Lordship Lane quite far south, > near Whateley Road. The end near Kwikfit actually > comes out on Grove Vale, not Lordship Lane. James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The new 20mph speed limit goes from goose green > roundabout to Melbourne grove.

Dear Cllr Barber Have just read this 20mph posting and am confused. Just walked from Melbourne Grove past Kwikfit and can see no markings or signs that indicate it is now a 20mph stretch. Yet from Goose Green roundabout towards the Plough 20mph markings are on the ground. Coming down to the Goose Green roundabout from the plough there is a sign that says 30 mph ends. Always thought this bit of LL from the plough was 30mph What is the correct explanation. Or have the signs been painted wrongly? DulwichFox said the signs and road markings went up last week Look forward to hearing

Being nosy, what happened

Would this extraordinary rise in traffic volumes over the past 6-12 months have anything to do with the ongoing water.gas electric works that seem to have closed off many roads for the past 6-12 months? forcing traffic to find others routes. Which is still going on this morning in the Bellenden area

The current system works and has stood the test of time. Spend the money else where where it would be appreciated.