Dogkennelhillbilly

> First sort out the 5000 empty council properties. Not true. heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes that is entirely true, although nearly 900 > empty council houses as shown in the FOI and > documented by Southwark Council themselves is > nothing to be proud of. Most of those "empty" council properties are actually being redeveloped. It's just not true that the council is sitting around with huge parts of its estate empty for no good reason. https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/southwark-council-plan-to-bring-almost-4000-empty-homes-back-into-use/ The right to buy is madness. Second homes should be more heavily taxed.

Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If only there was another route available, > something like a way through the village, which > would allow traffic to flow around this problem. > 🤔 Some kind of permeable barrier, that emergency vehicles and traffic could cross when directed by a police officer, you mean?

> the local authority need to be on top of things like this How? How would Southwark councillors get Southern to train more drivers and stop them having to isolate because of COVID? I think you're really overestimating the powers the council and individual councillors have. Have a look into how railways are run and regulated in this country, for a start. It's odd how on this forum there is a Southwark Derangement Syndrome (led by a few "usual suspects") where everything under the sun is somehow the fault of the council. England didn't win the World Cup? Bloody Southwark! Rained on my morning walk? Stupid councillors! Train drivers getting COVID? Lazy bleeding Southwark again!

"DKHB just looks from their ivory tower" It's not an ivory tower. Do you think I just magically float around London in a flying chariot powered by unicorn farts? It is a complete delusion to think that public transport (and specifically for Dulwich, buses) can be significantly improved without getting rid of a significant proportion of private cars and delivery vans. There is a limited amount of road space - that's not going to change in a 2000 year old city. Equally, whoever thinks that only other people will have to give up some convenience ("why can't local people have special passes?") and pay more to fix the problem is loopy. We are all in this situation - we are all going to have to eat a bit of the shit sandwich to get out of it or we will all die in it.

>Good public transport is the answer and waiting longer for the miracle of evaporation is like wishing for unicorns. The 37 and P4 will never be good as long as so many cars are in their way. Reducing the number of private cars and vans is a precondition for improving public transport. There will never be an effortless shift for drivers from their private cars to public transport

Huggers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------ > What do our councillors have to say about this? Southwark doesn't run the trains. What exactly do you expect a Southwark councillor to do about a shortage of train drivers aggravated by COVID?

Enigmatic 1990s music producer Nellee Hooper, examining extending ladders in Dulwich DIY.

Jules-and-Boo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The same CPZ that people want reversed? "People" want lots of things. If the neighbourhood is going to fall apart because of a nursery if it doesn't have a CPZ...then it really needs a CPZ.

EDulwich_4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It seems that most of the objections to this > planning application stem from the existing > nursery next door, which seems to have managed to > successfully galvanise the parents into posting > objections. Is this true or is it just neighbourhood gossip?

I used to live in a converted block of flats in North London where residents were not permitted to get parking permits. I expect many new builds and conversions will be like that in the future. fwiw I think in a few years with more electric engines Lordship Lane will be much quieter and the air cleaner. Being a couple of floors up will help. " I doubt there is a shortage of expensive flats for sale in East Dulwich" Flats in East Dulwich aren't going to get cheaper if we don't allow any more of them to be built!

Dean Baquet, editor of the New York Times, examining ice cream options at the van in Dulwich Park.

Puppa smurf Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >FYI cannabis maybe illegal but you are allowed > to have certain amount in your possession without > recourse This isn't true in England but in any case it's beside the point.

Don't turn another thread into another personalised fight about these bloody road closures.

Two new coffee shops and a deli all next door to each other in Dulwich Village! They'll be a few doors down from the existing deli/coffee shop, and around the corner from the existing coffee shop, and down the street from the deli/coffee shop that's next to the barber/coffee shop, opposite the restaurant that does coffee and the bakery/coffee shop... I do like coffee, and it would be great if Amy of these places opened early or did more caff style food, but I wish the Dulwich Estate was more considered about which tenants it chooses so that there is a balance. Other big landlords are... https://www.dulwichsociety.com/

"Roads were built for Traffic. Open them all up to traffic and everything will balance out." This is just silly, and classic "pub bore knows more than entire highway engineering and urban planning professions" waffle. Dulwich and Peckham have a late 19th century/early 20th century road layout. The current volume of traffic was literally never imagined when the roads were built. You could abolish every speed limit and restriction and nothing is going to "balance out" to remove congestion. Demand for road space is always going to exceed supply in London. You just can't fit a quart into a pint pot... ...especially when someone is adding more to the pint pot already. There has been huge growth in traffic in the last few years with Uber, UberEats, Amazon and their imitators. The population of London is growing long term and so is the demand for transport.

I am on another forum and there was a report of another incident on Peckham Rye at around 0130 last weekend. If anyone has experienced any incidents - please do try to report them to police independently of anything you read online. It would be awful if your memory/recollection of what happened got confused by someone else's account. Even worse would be thinking "oh, it looks like the assailant has been arrested" and in fact it's someone completely different! I am totally cognisant that reporting sexual assaults and harassment must be very difficult and can be very traumatic.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It is rather insulting to the Melbourne Grove > businesses. Free parking spaces for customers There's no such thing as free parking.

Why not? Lots of facilities for kids are still closed because of COVID and lots of parents have lost jobs and money because of COVID. Peckham Rye playpark is somewhere healthy and free that parents can take kids for a couple of hours...but there is little shade there and without the water it's oppressively hot.

It was definitely on the summer before last... If that's the reason, it's outrageous. I'll email the council and ask.

The water features at the kids playground in Peckham Rye Park aren't turned on today. It's 26 degrees! 🥵 Is this COVID, malfunction or still too early in the year? Does anyone know before I email the parks department?

That is awful and totally unacceptable that cops had to be called 4 times. I understand there's a huge number of cops in Cornwall standing around protecting Joe Biden and ensuring protestors only exercise their free speech rights many miles from anyone powerful.

You want to concentrate all the private school traffic within 100m of the two state schools on Dulwich that are already choking on illegal levels of pollution?

Chunx Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I have said many times in many places... I am fed up driving along at 20MPH Waaah Average speed in outer London is 19.3mph. You're moaning about being kept to a speed limit in densely populated areas that's higher than the real average speed of traffic anyway. London has 8 million people and 2.6 million cars in it. You could remove every speed bump in the city and you're still not gonna be getting anywhere at 30mph.

Droid Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dale Foden ( Head of Highways, no less) should > take a trip to Birmingham where the council > implemented their ANPR scheme today. Maybe if > Southwark used some of the funding they received > for this rather than expensive benches (?1,000 a > pop) and the planters then we wouldnt be having > all this grief over displaced pollution and > congestion. > This is from > https://airqualitynews.com/2021/01/27/new-cameras- > installed-in-birmingham-ahead-of-caz/ > > Siemens Mobility has installed 67 automatic number > plate recognition cameras (ANPR) in Birmingham > ahead of the new Clean Air Zone (CAZ). > > The ANPR cameras will identify and register every > vehicle that enters the CAZ in order to identify > which vehicles are exempt from charges. > > The Class D CAZ has been designed to deter drivers > of the most polluting vehicles from entering the > zone, drivers of all vehicles will be charged, > including cars, if they do not meet the latest > emissions standards. > > The ANPR cameras at the heart of the scheme. This is the same technology that has already been installed for the ULEZ. It works because it's accessing information already held on the computer at Swansea: the emissions of each vehicle. The OneDulwich fantasy is of a scheme which inconveniences everyone except them, administered by a computer system that already magically knows whether a car benefits from all the specific exemptions that OneDulwich wants, and without having a Controlled Parking Zone. It is not a good faith request: they know it is not practical. Like the totally bonkers suggestion that HGVs could turn around in the area covered by flowerpots at the end of Calton Ave, the point is not to propose solutions that would actually reduce congestion or emissions. It's to gum up the process and spread confusion. Meanwhile, someone in the militant wing of the anti-LTN lobby has been ripping up plants from the plant pots and scattering them across the tarmac, and spraying yellow paint across "Road closed" signs. That includes the one at the top of Gilkes Crescent - when Gilkes Crescent has been a dead end for years and unrelated to the LTN scheme. What is wrong with these people?

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Meanwhile real school roads like ED Grove... So the two schools on Dulwich Village aren't real schools? And the kids there aren't breathing in the air from the roads with "illegal levels of pollution"? Is this like the gun nuts in the US that just deny school shootings happen and there aren't any victims, just crisis actors? When the people with multimillion houses on Dulwich Village want rid of LTNs so they can drive their cars whenever they want, where does that score on the class warfare scale?