spider69

A statue of JB maybe?

Why do they have to be in front of the traffic? Why not behind each other in an orderly line? When traffic moves they move off in a sensible fashion. Still if you have spent lots of dosh on butt enhancing Lycra I guess you would want all to see

Perhaps these people need to drive these short distances because of a medical problem?

Have you asked all Southwark Residents if they want the 20 mph. Nobody that I know thinks it is warranted. Side residential streets yes, busy major roads no. I quess it would be embarrassing to back track to actually show some sort of common sense rather than pure political dogma. Page 7 put of 10 in the manifesto regarding this was a little sneaky.

Why did I know that some one would put a comment up like this. All it takes is common sense to equate to the surroundings. Raise the speed limit to 100 mph from Goose Green to Townley Road. Could you achieve it, no Common sense

The solution is very simple. Return to the 30 mph limit which never seemed to present any problems until now. Remember. People walk on pavements not roads. When you need to cross use a crossing or as your mother would have told you, "look left, look right and left again" and if all clear cross. Result less accidents on the road. Why can today's people not practice this. It is called living in the real world. As someone mentioned earlier they have not experienced anything much over 20 mph which I find very scary. Again it all comes down to one thing "common sense and awareness"

When did this Champion Hill thing rear its ugly head? Again absolute no need. What has this Council got against motorist? Is this all to do with the not needed quietway and the crazy idea of making Champion Hill one way. One of the idea put up by Sustrans which will mean it going through because Southwark will claim we took advice just to cover their baks

Renata Hamvas Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The old speed cameras are gradually being changed > over to digital ones (eg Brenchley Gardens etc > will be changed too). The pair on Linden Grove in > Nunhead are new digital ones (replaced an old > bulky one, ie they are set for the 20mph zone). > Linden Grove was part of the South Nunhead 20mph > zone (Ivydale Road etc) instigated prior to the > Southwark general 20mph. The old camera was > installed many years ago, prior to the 20mph zone > and like the others of this type within the > Borough could not be set low enough for the 20mph > limit (it was one designed for 30mph). The new > cameras can! Southwark does not gain financially > from these cameras, the 20mph limit is definitely > for safety rather than revenue reasons. > > Renata Out of interest, who owns the cameras, who decides where they go and who pays for their installation. Can who ever owns them decide at what level they can be set at

And why not?

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Huggers, > > Afraid so. First offence is ?100 and 3 points. > > I have got a suspicion that S'wark, whilst stating > 20 mph is self enforcing, may sneak in the odd > camera with a view to maximising revenue > opportunities. Obviously, if they said it was > going to be enforced everyone would be a lot more > careful, but I suspect by deliberately creating > confusion they hope to fine more people. > > I wonder if it would be possible to get info on > what cameras are operating and where? It seems > unfair to me to state it is self enforcing if they > plan to then enforce but without telling people. I > have said before if safety really is the motive > then tell us where it is being enforced. At least > in those areas everyone will drive more carefully. The council does not receive the income from traffic speed cameras; we understand that the income from them goes to Transport for London/Metropolitan police and then on to HM Treasury. Yours sincerely, John Williamson Business Manager Southwark Council If the cameras are put up and money's earned go to TFL and others surely it is them not Southwark who decide what speed and 30mph seems to be the accepted speed they should be set up for Perhaps Cllr Barber could explain how this is worked. Seems too cozy for my liking

Why not?

I am told that the Divisional Manager of Homeownership/Leasehold Management has parted company with Southwark and the combined parts that made the department an integrated one stop shop has had its services and management farmed out to other departments. So instead of a dedicated department for leasehold matters they will now I expect have to take on other duties. I.e.If Service Charges come under the remit of an income collections department it is likely that something like rent collection will be one of their functions. How Service Charges and rents are like for like remains to be seen. All other services Major Works for example have been put under the management of other departments. I wish you luck in trying to sort things out. It can only get more frustrating. Perhaps Cllr Barber could explain more

The Greendale route is already a quietway and can be used without problem by children, older folks and women at the moment and this has always been the case. What gets up my nose is the idea to make Champion Hill one way. Why? it does not represent any danger regarding road users and never has. I moved there is 1958 with my family and cannot recall any traffic problems or accidents over the years to now. Traffic has not grown in such volume that things needs to be done. All that is happening is this is today!s idea which is taken up by certain sections of the community like a holy quest. I am all for change for the better but not for no good reason and a one way system is not required to alter a safe stretch of road to achieve a glow of sainthood. The last time Southwark did anything was to put in traffic islands down to Denmark Hill which only made the road narrower. They were not ever needed. So please do not keep flogging a dead horse over the Greendale quietway and how nice it is, it has always existed, always been nice, always been used by all and has been blocked off to cars for many many years. In fact many children learnt to cycle on this bit dirt road which it was in my day and was open to all traffic. Champion Hill is used by all manner of pedestrian and wheeled transport without any problems and does not have a great volume of traffic that would cause a problem to anybody. As I mentioned before if people cannot use the short stretch of road that is Champion Hill they should not be on the road.

It is already a pretty nice cycle route as it is, with pedestrians using the pavement, cars and cycles co-existing on the road together. They have always existed together and traffic flows work well. I have used this route for almost 69 years and it has never been a problem. Both as a car user, cyclist and pedestrian. Perhaps the new breed of biker should grow up and and take a bit of responsibility for their own safety and not keep passing it on to others. If you or they cannot manage a very short piece of road when you come from Greendale to Champion hill you or they should not be on the road. Why this great need to change things just because you ride a bike.

Perhaps not having learned from the NX Road fiasco

What does partial closure actually mean. Where to where. Explanation anyone.

gingerchris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't really understand how you can think this > is not necessary. Rye Lane is disgusting due to > the fly tipping and business waste that lines the > pavements. It makes sense to me that someone > should be appointed to take charge of stopping it. don't we pay Council Tax to the Council to enforce this? Perhaps the rubbish adds to Peckhams trendy charms Where are the Council Officers?

Are you not there to represent what the residents think not what you think? You are supposed to be impartial. MG to an extent proves you are not

Think your last para sums things up. You could send your city bonus to help them out. FOK in city palance

Most companies I have been with have a tea club or a machine you put your own money in why is asking why we have to pay ?169.000.00 showing contempt. Heating? Think you have lost the plot

As someone has remarked they can cut this scheme out but can still pay ?169.000.00 on staff refreshments for 2014 . Why do we have to pay for their tea and coffees?

Plus expenses. Full breakdown in last weeks Southwark News I believe

Lesson learnt. If anyone feels the DDC has taken a daft decision prod me and I will get the minutes for that item expedited as draft minutes so we're all clear about what we're discussing. I apologise for any information I failed to relate. Being a councillor is an extremely busy voluntary role for most of us as I'm sure Robin will attest to - hence the South Camberwell councillor just resigning - and sometimes I need to take a deep breath before commenting. Sorry. -------------------- Regards [email protected] 07900 227366 Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Dulwich Ward Skype cllrjamesbarber [www.jamesbarber.org.uk] [twitter.com] All ready laying the ground.

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Charles ... if I lived on a street I would want a > barrier... The way things are going many a true word spoken in jest

2011 census. Worthless. Who tells the truth.