northernmonkey

Hope that the council haven't allowed Amigos trees to sell from Goose Green again this year!

I'm still interested in how this could work. There is already the 37 bus that people constantly complain about not being reliable / frequent enough but it does an east west route. Unless there were a fleet of green busses surely at best this would be one per hour so how would it make any discernable difference. Would also be interested as to how would it be long term viable, would it need to be community funded forever?

Also interested in the green bus initiative - how would it work? Would the plan be that there was a single vehicle looping between east dulwich and dulwich village- eg circular route or more than one vehicle. One issue that is often discussed is multiple school drops - eg jags and the prep, so was this envisaged to address this or more of a general shopper route? Would also be interested in hearing more about the digital element. Alternative public transport options are interesting, do you have indicative costs that you know could be funded?

I don't think thats still accurate - its very old. Was my understanding that Jarvis Road will still be used even once the main entrance is more 'open' Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > https://www.southwarkccg.nhs.uk/our-plans/improvin > g-services-in-dulwich-and-the-surrounding-areas/de > veloping-our-plans/Documents/East%20Dulwich%20Hosp > ital%20Site%20-%20Public%20Consultation%20Boards%2 > 0combined%20160607%20low%20res.pdf > > So the Southwark planning indicates the main > entrance is on edg, I think I saw this at the time > of the original consultation. However this may > have changed but I couldn?t find anything updated, > and I don?t have children attending so may not be > up to date.

Where did you hear that the ED Charter school entrance for all pupils will move to East Dulwich Grove? That directly contradicts what I'd heard so would be interesting to understand which is accurate.

this is brilliant news - delighted for them. Hope they can make it work in their tiny shop - but hopefully their garden design work will be enough and also that with more working from home the demand can be spread throughout the week. We still have the very lovely Forest too but i enjoyed shopping at both!

No idea why no letters from the council on that - doesn't sound right that comms only come from Alleyns, but hopefully its all self explanatory now and working well? I for one absolutely love it being a school street, its transformed cycling over there and provides a safer alternative to East Dulwich Grove for us.

Might be a good time to remind people who makes decisions locally. Southwark council has responsibility for non tfl / non dulwich estate roads. Therefore it is the council who plan and make road changes. Residents elect councillors Our healthy streets was a council run project to address the streets in Dulwich. It?s not a body that proposes anything. Then you have residents associations and other groups including ones like clean air for dulwich / Southwark cyclists etc who will depending on the scheme either look to support via their group or push for more change. Neither group makes decisions, that is the role of Southwark Council. The Dulwich Society is also informed of measures as another means of accessing local views / community engagement. Since the Dulwich changes have gone in ?one dulwich? have also had multiple meetings with the councillors and Southwark traffic planners as per their website updates. Juno70 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All the Townley Road coaches will be able to go > through the new lights . I think Clean Air Dulwich > and Our Healthy Streets got this all nicely sewn > up.

I think this is the key thing isn't it - removing the bins except for those who pay doesn't promote people feeling community minded on leaf sweeping! We need some means of getting rid of the swept up leaves.

This one is a good idea - there is a Southwark estate just off the A2 where this has been done and its brilliant - stops there just being unused grass with a 'no ball game' sign - now has allotments and beehives and looks great too.

I don't think thats fair at all - this was a 'goose green councillors thread' - Goose Green ward being a ward almost entirely in East Dulwich so therefore very relevant for the forum and for many people. Rather than attacking James for not being able to spend all his time dealing with questions from someone who lives in a different ward, which feels a fair position to take in a representative democracy (when emailing Helen Hayes as our elected MP you have to provide your address to get a response to ensure she is only dealing with constituents matters), to the extent that you think there should be a thread for the Dulwich Hill councillors too then thats surely something to bring up with them, though given how people speak to each other on such an anonymous forum I really don't understand why they would do. Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James if you really only want to deal with Goose > Green Ward then this whole thread should be in the > Lounge. > > You've posted this on the East Dulwich Forum in > the ED issues thread. If you want to restrict > discussion to a local part of ED for local people > then you should be doing that in the Lounge!

Cargo bikes are very very expensive - though no where near as expensive as you've outlined here. I'd love an urban arrow cargo bike but a) they're about 4.5k (for the e assist family model, and b) i don't really need one day to day - but they're kind of the top end of pricing so unless you're getting something bespoke or for a business then around 4k is the most people would spend. I think though that if you were looking for a family car or a small second car then a cargo bike is comparable. Also worth flagging that Southwark council is one of the councils who have partnered with the amazing Peddle My Wheels and you can rent a cargo bike with e assist (good for dealing with local hills) for about ?100 per month and if you keep it long enough to pay off the purchase cost, its yours! There is undoubtedly an issue re storage. For those with small front gardens perhaps ground anchors are an option, but none of it is ideal. We need much more secure cycle parking - so more cycle hoops with better security and some options for non standard bikes too - including cargo or those with child seats. Not sure where the info of the 'council aren't getting any more 'bike stores came from. The target is to double the current number on street but this is no where near enough and hopefully something that can be addressed. The waiting lists are very long currently and all new hangers are oversubscribed. Finally Rockets - i know it makes for a good story - but 45 mins? What were you doing, wheeling the bikes through the west wing? walking them round the lake and through the formal gardens? I don't doubt that its not so convenient having bikes stored around the back of the house - its why sometimes people take the trade off at the front if possible - ie worries about security vs massively increased convenience, but think you're possibly overplaying it! Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is incredibly complex. Much of the criticism I > have of the pro-closure lobby is that they start > from a position of "well everyone can cycle so why > don't they". I consider my family to be very lucky > that we have a nice house with a small garden and > we fully appreciate that not everyone is as lucky > as we are. > > At the weekend we went for a family cycle and I > spent 45 minutes levering myself and various kids > bikes into various yoga-like positions to get the > bikes out of the garden, up the stairs into our > kitchen and through our house to get out (we, like > a lot of people do not have a side-return). We had > a lovely cycle through Dulwich Village and whilst > on this cycle it occurred to me that much of the > pro-closure noise is coming from people who live > in the biggest houses in the area, who have side > returns or bike storage boxes in their > front-gardens, many of whom can spend ?6,000 on a > family cargo bike to transport the kids to school > each day. This is just not the reality of most > people's lives. Dulwich is an outlier - it is not > at all reflective of life in London and many of > the bike lobby forget that not everyone lives the > privileged existence many of them do. Yet they > speak as if everyone can go and jump on a bike. > > Cycling remains dominated by white, middle-class > men and whilst efforts are being made to make it > much more inclusive I can't help but think that > moving it out of the middle-class demographic is > going to be the biggest challenge of all as so > much about cycling is about accessibility - i.e. > your ability to store your own bikes. The large > majority of people do not have that option. > > At the beginning of the last lockdown all of the > residents on our street registered to try and get > one of those bike rack things but we hear the > council won't be installing anymore and there are > years of waiting lists for the others - so at a > time when the council is telling people don't use > your cars - they are doing little to help people > to make the transition. > > Yes they are closing roads but what happens if > only 1% of the population in the area are able to > store bikes - it doesn't solve the problem it > makes it worse. > > I see a lot of #modalshift pictures from the > pro-closure lobby but they are of predominantly > white middle class families pottering around some > of the poshest streets in London - there was one > last week of two families on electric cargo bikes > and I looked online and was completely shocked at > how expensive they are - (you won't get much > change from ?5000 for the most basic one). > > And this is where it is complicated and where the > pro-closure lobby do nothing to help their cause > as they fail to acknowledge the challenges most > people face in making a shift to other means of > transport. Ironically these lockdowns do more to > get people out on their bikes than any road > closures - the reason, because people are living > their lives in a 2 mile bubble from their house - > they are not having to go to work etc. But, as we > have seen in a normal world people's bubbles are > much wider than that and the moment lockdown ends > people start venturing further afield and can't do > those journeys on bike or foot.

This ties in with what i'd seen posted on here before, that at least on side roads the schedule is now 6 weekly leaf clearing to save costs. It means that in times where the leaf fall is at its highest that there is significant build up. Not sure that there is an answer though other than clear the bit outside your house and help out neighbours who can't? The council isn't going to suddenly find more cash for this. Stopping the free garden waste collection doesn't help with people feeling publicly spirited on this though.

they'll be great for the school run (ie beyond that point) though - but nothing more as the timing is very limited.

Hopefully this will provide a safe alternative route to cycling along east dulwich grove at school times and a link through to the closure in the village from the filtered streets in east dulwich - great news!

no

The 'even now' is confusing in this post like even now there are wands on that bit of cycle lane the cyclists still go to the ASL. That tiny cycle lane is to allow access to the ASL. With a few exceptions (eg the one in Dulwich Village by the school) thats how ASLs are designed - there is a tiny cycle lane leading in. See ED Grove at Townley Road or Red Post Hill going south into Dulwich Village! Its not the case that cyclists would use one or the other! Also Rockets: "I am in favour of segregated cycle barriers where they make sense - and I talk as someone who is a cyclist and has done long commutes across London on a daily basis. It makes no sense having cycle barrier for that short section of road - unless, of course, they are purposefully designed to throttle traffic flow through the junction. I do wonder whether the council got wind that the cameras weren't going to go in at the DV roundabout so decided to create a bottleneck" assume this particular conspiracy theory has been dropped now? Maybe when the Dulwich Village restrictions go in the cycle lane wands on the north side won't be an issue then! Metallic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > redpost Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > There was a cycle lane before the barriers were > > put in, however being frequently blocked by > > drivers selfishness so it was necessary to put > a > > barrier in. > > > > > > n dulwich northerner Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > march46 Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > Interesting how you blame the council, when > > > there > > > > was always traffic there > > > > > > Of course, and because their attempts to > > improve > > > things have been misconceived. While the N > > Dulwich > > > traffic lights' new right filter may have > > > mitigated the tailback the council caused by > > the > > > Calton/Court Lane closure, they coupled the > > filter > > > with limiting the left lane to cyclists (see > > any > > > in the photos?) which means that vehicles > > heading > > > for Village Way or Red Post Hill are stuck in > > the > > > tailback. > > There has always been a cyclist area at the front > of the lights too. Most make their way to it, > even now. I yesterday watched three do this while > I was waiting to cross east Dulwich Grove.

I had a look at that tweet too - it was pretty much everywhere and thought the same thing - that 34% increase in congestion doesn't necessarily equate to 34% more cars - but what was interesting was that the congestion was up in other cities too and even those where there haven't been traffic measures introduced in any meaningful way. So whilst its not a one for one correlation there does seem to have been a spike in traffic on the evening before lockdown kicked in. I don't think that its too much of a stretch either to think that's likely as people will have done last minute shopping in stores that would be closing the next day or travelled to other locations if they're planning to spend lockdown in them, before they're not legally allowed to move!

There was a leak there and Thames water fixed it but need to come back to finish off the road repair apparently - but have done nothing all week.

I think that the ambulances point is rather more about why are our emergency services trying to work using outdated satnav systems when free options like waze exist. I know its not as good a story but it is a very valid question.

Thats not what i heard at all - amazing how take aways can be so different really! She said that as Dulwich was one of the first, had the way that comms happens with LFB changed since then and is there best practice developing. I think what was interesting was that the LFB were clear that there had been consultation on all areas. They flagged the Tooley St scheme as having some confusion so explained how they had addressed this by talking to the teams on the ground and doing site visits. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wtaf. Just had fire guy say they would have liked > to be involved a bit more In the LTN thing and > Margy has said she realised that the emergency > services have not perhaps been involved as much as > desirable in the dulwich thing and how could this > be improved. It?s a statutory requirement for gods > sake! May have misheard (confirmation bias), will > listen again in the morning. > > They?ve just asked fire guys whether they have > been consulted on everything - they say maybe on > majority but some have been quite fluid.

I was just correcting the idea that it was a new cycle lane - it isn't Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes but that protection with wands means the > junction no longer functions properly and is > creating massive congestion and pollution > problems. Do you not think in light of this the > council should review the use of the wands? > > BTW has the A205 or Lordship Lane been shut - > complete gridlock on the eastern side of Lordship > Lane tonight?

Rockets- that bike lane has always been there! its just been protected with wands Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are the council now saying they have created a > school drop-off problem by closing Melbourne Grove > at one end i.e. it has actually encouraged parents > to drive their children to school? > > Is it a problem at school times? Adding a school > street to an already closed road seems ludicrous > and seems completely counter to their > protestations that they care about the shops on > Melbourne Grove - I can't imagine this is going to > help those shops one bit and likely drive more > custom away. > > Does anyone get the sense the council hasn't got > the first clue that they are doing? > > Peckham Rye closures get binned, the DV/EDG > junction is made even worse with the huge bike > lane (was this at the behest of Southwark cyclists > per chance - they moaned that the cycle lane in > the Peckham Rye recommendations was not wide > enough and the council bowed down to their cycle > paymasters....!!! ;-)) - all adds up to a comedy > of errors and instills very little confidence in > anyone that the council should be given these > powers.

Oh come on - surely its all a massive conspiracy and not just google! NoahLxn - where are you moving to in ED? If its a street that has a CPZ then you need one and are eligible - if its not you might not need one and might not be eligible. There are some adjacent roads who are not covered by the CPZ but eligible to buy permits. This is all publicly available and not part of any special info I have ;-) Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I googled southwark resident parking. The top > result is the link I posted.

I went for a walk round - compared to any other streets in the area Melbourne Grove was fantastic and I?ve never seen so many people walking round the area. Residents have made a massive effort, they didn?t have to and have chosen to do something nice for the wider community. It was a shame only il mirto was open though - would have thought Big Belly?s could have done some good trade, though maybe it?s not open on Saturdays?