intexasatthe moment

James - these points from rahrahrah and first mate remain unanswered .Can you help us with them ? "What exactly is the issue you're trying to solve and what is it that makes Melbourne grove a special case compared to many other road in ED ?" "Seriously you cannot do studies on individual junctions/roads and use these as evidence to prop up funding requests. Where is the ED traffic overview, how will all these different things impact the area as a whole? Who is/has looked at that...anyone? "

Is it just me or is anyone else confused how it's possible for James to check the signatures on the shredded petition but not the subject matter ?

robin - do you need any help ,watering ,etc to look after tree ?

anyone ?

You could be right Tessmo . If it is a deliberately intentioned plot to make us feel we're loosing our minds it's definitely working on me !

Yes ,thanks Woodwarde . Waiting restrictions in Calton . Mmm .Distinctly remember Southwark chap at DCC answering a question about effect on Calton by saying that road was not included in the study . But what do I know .

Thanks both . I wonder what people do with such stuff ? Sure I'm not the only one to have a garden consisting of a thin layer of soil over old greenhouse bases ( + smashed glass ) and strange black stuff which I presume is some form of old degraded tarmac .

Thanks Sidhue for trying . It's probably easy to find the way of opening it but I have no experience .

To save me phoning does anyone know if I can get rid of some very stony soil at the Old Kent Rd dump ? It's broken up bits of brick ,small stones ,sort of large gravel that I'm digging out of my garden .Probably the base for a hardstanding . But there's a fair bit of soil mixed in with 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. -------------------- Regards [email protected] 07900 227366 Liberal Democrat Councillor for East Dulwich Ward Skype cllrjamesbarber [www.jamesbarber.org.uk] [twitter.com] Attachments: Traffic_Flow_Data.xlsx (178.4KB) I can't open the attached doc - anyone tell me what it says ?

mockingbird Yesterday, 11:38PM Southwark News like any other paper wants to report the full picture. Don't be put off - contact the journalist if you have a different view and some facts to relay. Point them to this thread. Get to the root of the signatories and the bigger perspective of the limited benefits to few and the need to be community minded? They will be interested.............. good point mockingbird

Has it been confirmed that Harris are banned from booking pitches ? I thought there was opposing views from posters on this ?

" current speeding " = " The total average speed measured in the two week exercise was 19mph Northbound and 18mph Southbound, which is under the 20mph Southwark limit. 85% of the traffic wasn't going any faster than 25mph, which is technically not high enough to issue a ticket. 15% of traffic was going at 26mph or higher " bet many of us would love to have vehicles doing such low speeds where we live . Southwark rightly doesn't consider these speeds warrant any priority when it comes to upgrading . But a bid can be made for money from the greener ,safer etc fund . Can we ask again whether funding in the ?5-?10,000 region is available to anyone wanting to bid for funding from this source ? How is it decided who can have feasibilty funding ?

Sidhue - maybe it's the effect of the counter terrorism exercise http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-33315691

It's ok James someone on the Melbourne Grove thread has posted a link to Southwark's webpage which explains the process very clearly . It was stupid of me not to look there .

Jenny1 - 'What is the process for allocating council funding (in this case a predicted ten thousand pounds) for a feasibility study to change a road system? " excellently put .I've been wondering exactly the same myself . " Since there's not enough funding to pay for numerous feasibility studies we therefore rely on you and your colleagues as councillors to stand back and take a 'global' view of the situation before allocating any council tax funding for such studies. If this does not happen then, at worst, we're in a situation where only those who shout loudest - "

." Not sure they've rejected any dropped kerbs with double yellow lines though. " - you need to read Renata's post again then . " could you help me do this during August and anyone else interested? " - I doubt we'd make a good combination . Posts by me on here ( in an effort to help you ) quoting specific policy items relating to this and attempts to try and get you to see that it wasn't a simple white H bar v. yellow lines issue met with you telling me that I was "overcomplicating" " the matter . And that the issue had been debated " near to death " on the EDF Also when I asked you to talk me through the process of leading a deputation you didn't respond . Why don't you team up with councillors from other persuasions who are also concerned about this ?

And yes ,I do ask . I've repeatedly asked this " How did this policy come into being with no one > seemingly aware of it ? My reading is that there > should be consultation which at a very early stage > involves Community Councils . Did this happen ?" intexasatthe moment March 18, 11:25AM James what I don't understand is how this policy came about with out councillors ( or anyone else it seems ) being aware of it or having the opportunity to object or suggest modifications . Doesn't Southwark have decision making process about such traffic issues which involves community councils fairly early on in the process ? What's your view on this James ? but I don't get answers .

James this won't do . Back in August 2014 the issue of double yellow lines was raised .You confirmed that you were unaware of any new ruling ( 27 August, 2014 10:46 ). In November despite many posts from concerned individuals you were still diverting the talk to the issue of Southwark not re painting white lines and missing the point about the 2 metre extension .Finally ,you get the issue James Barber 25 November, 2014 13:08 " But you make a good point about the 2m. This is clearly excessive so I will add that into my request " Prior to this Renata confirmed in October that she was aware of the policy ,that councillors on the P&NCC were unanimous in their objection to it and that she was raising the matter . : Dropped kerb application Posted by Renata Hamvas 09 October, 2014 13:17 It does seem to be a new policy, we had several come up at the recent Peckham and Nunhead Community Council. Almost all were deferred in a unanimous decision by Councillors. One on St Dunstan's Road was approved but only with the stipulation from Councillors that it can't extend outside the dropped kerb to a neighbouring property which doesn't have a dropped kerb. I have communicated my concerns about this new policy. I still haven't had the official response from officers about this. Renata Another poster confirmed that Charlie Smith was also opposing the new policy and taking action - lesalden 09 October, 2014 17:14 . I asked you -18 October, 2014 08:42- whether you and Renata would be co operating on this but you did not respond to the query . It seems to me that posters on the EDF had to fight hard to get your attention on this and that there is little evidence that you had to lead any kind of action in getting other councillors to agree with you .

James - thank you for your update on double yellow lines and dropped kerbs . You always seem to be claiming credit for things and I'm prompted to ask what actions you took that were different from other councillors in this issue . I attend DCC mtgs and when this was raised noted that all councillors were in agreement that this policy should reviewed .There was no dissent to lead . And could you respond to this part of my earlier post " How did this policy come into being with no one > seemingly aware of it ? My reading is that there > should be consultation which at a very early stage > involves Community Councils . Did this happen "

Unfortunately we do have an existing set of streets struggling to cope with traffic .We don't have an area set to be developed with new build and a pedestrianised environment created . I don't think " retro fitting " is a viable option and I don't think closing off a few streets here and there will reduce pressure on the overall system. If part of Melbourne Grove is blocked off some of it's residents will have a " nicer place to live " because traffic will be limited in their immediate vicinity .I can't see any benefit to the wider community ,rather the opposite . I don't want to support making life nicer for one group of individuals when that action disadvantages others .

Thank you for granting my request Penguin ,it was bugging me and I lack the skills to attempt the manoeuvre myself .

" And now I get to find out that someone's saying they've "contacted me" 4 or 5 times by reading the forum. And apparently the emergency services no longer serve the area." ? Is this a reference to another thread ?

Yes ,sorry bad choice of words on my part . I guess sticking to the letter of the law ,covering their backs might have been more appropriate . "If you are trying to keep it to time, design and budget, you would project manage this effectively by doing all the statutory requests together" - good point . " We were told right from the beginning that there would be a formal statutory consultation on the whole scheme. There were design changes made to the scheme in March that no one has even seen. They haven't been made public. Who knows what the final design looks like?" there's no way that's ok . I presume that work won't start on the yellow lines and bike lane before a TMO application made and consultation carried out ...

Thanks rch for posting and giving the link to the SLP . It seems odd that when Darren Merrill is stating so clearly that "as we are recording average speeds of around 20 mph this wouldn?t be a road that meets our criteria for priority investment to upgrade the cushions that are already there" that the DCC recommended a costly feasibilty study . I guess any group wanting to submit bids for a project to be funded under Cleaner ,Greener,Safer funding would also be granted thousands of pounds to carry out pre bid studies ?