spider69

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.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi ZT, > You've poo poo'd wulfhound. > So what do you think the answer it sot rising > obesity and the associated ill health epidemic, > global warming and need to reduce CO2 emissions by > 90%? > > Hi first mate, > We've heard that 43% of residents have access to a > car. So 57% don't. How do they get these figures? Do they ask people? If there is 1 car per family but all use it how does that work. Politicos will alway skew figures for the result that want

Just as confusing as Cllr Barbers please forgive me message.

Perhaps if people had used common sense as my generation would have done and used the road layout that was there this cock up would not have happened. The old system worked for us unfortunately this is not the case now. Common sense has gone out of the window.

Perhaps they know that nobody trusts their Cllrs anymore. They know it's not viable but will try any whoch way to impose their own views. 300 against how may more out there that do not know this is going on. E.g. Labours 20 mph imposition.

In an earlier post I asked Cllr Cllr Barber if he spoke at the meeting hoping to hear if he had stood up and said I am changing my mind on the question of a barrier. But in true libdem mode however you sense he could change it again if the wind changes. He replied on the forum "Hi spider69, I did. mostly reiterating that we'd agree a feasibility study that would cover all the local roads as far as Towny. That Chesterfield and Ashbourne Grove were given full speed bumps despite have less spending and traffic volume than Melbourne Grove via CGS funds several years ago. So CGS valid used of funds for helping fix such local problems that don't appear on Southwark wide priorities." But according to Grok "Barber arrived late but kept his tongue but his incredulous face pulling at anti barriers was childish in the extreme." Which in my mind confirms what Grok has said above that Cllrs have no backbone and feel they are so important they cannot admit when they have got it wrong to an open meeting. They are following a political agenda regarding traffic. Will the barrier question disappear, no they will find a way.

messageRe: Closure of Melbourne Grove to through traffic - new petition Posted by richard tudor Yesterday, 04:51PM I do hope that the remark made to RCH is recorded in the minutes as an accurate report of what went on and who said what. As is normal in minute taking. So not much hope this has been minuted.