FairTgirl

Fashion-conscience Store East Dulwich are running a series of local designer pop-ups this April and May 2024. Featuring jewellery, ceramics, prints, plants and fashion, we will be supporting new designer makers from our store. We already have some in the pipeline but are looking for more brilliant creatives. It's a great opportunity to test out your products, market them, chat to customers and get feedback. We are primarily focused on eco, handmade, fair, organic products from local makers. Additionally if you have baked pastries/cakes & a mobile coffee offer, do also please get in touch. If you would like to be involved please DM us or email us on [email protected] to find out more.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Plus I think I saw (not sure where - possibly > twitter), that the hard copy leaflets went to > residents on Melbourne Grove but not the > businesses (who were missed out last time) - > similar for closures on Rye Lane. > > The One Dulwich FoI info is also on their website. > Not sure what the base data looked like / how > they extracted the positive info, but looks > interesting... > > https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/who-closed-dulwich- > village-junction This is correct, not a single business in the review area was sent the newsletter about the review, but flats above businesses and direct neighbours were.

Speaking on behalf of Grove Vale and MG North businesses - the figures I mentioned were for BAME owned businesses or managed business in a survey taken late last year - employees may well take it higher as many of us have BAME employees and in many instances the business and employees are entirely BAME. You can check the individual postcodes related to the relevant roads to get a picture of the census data for residents and social housing. It is great to see the crowdfunder has almost reached its target in 5 days.

If you look at census data it has 70% social housing residents on Grove Vale, 63% BAME residents. If you ask the businesses they are 60% BAME businesses on Grove Vale, 60% BAME businesses on Melbourne Grove. Lordship Lane estimate 50% BAME businesses. But isn't the crowdfunder about finding out what is happening with air quality in the area and if problems are being created that are currently not being monitored so they can be addressed? Which surely benefits everyone? Especially schools and nurseries.

Hi there, I am looking for a local seamstress skilled at making made to measure good quality sofa and chair cushions covers to cover existing cushions seat panels etc for a several pieces of furntiure. Please DM me with any links to work or pics. I will provide the fabric so just the skills needed! Would prefer to give work to locals who need than a larger company Thank you x

This is interesting too from a lifelong Labour member and A road dweller. https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-why-londons-road-wars-are-tearing-labour-apart/ If you have any objections to the ED LTN you can still officially object today, just go to the first post in this thread for all you need and who to send it to.

https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/dulwich-residents-are-furious-after-council-experiments-with-road-closures/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=dulwich-residents-are-furious-after-council-experiments-with-road-closures

Is 2 months after the closures went in, still immediately after? Some of the incidents LAS list relating to Dulwich Village were in September, the closures were 30 June. In a youtube Zoom with Southwark Env Scrutiny Committee on Nov 4 Southwark Fire Service say they were still 'trying to report' to an SC lead around problems. They were not sure if they had been on site at all road closures to advise on problems as SC were introducing them before telling LFB about them. LFB made it clear they had had minimal interaction with SC and LTNs and their usual process of being told about plans before hand so they could visit and identify problems before they arose was not happening. LFB says Nov 4 'depending on what the restrictions are, if it is static, a flower pot, or raised planter we *would* have issues getting through those'. This is after stating quite clearly to SC they did not support hard closures in a meeting 16 July 2020. So nothing had really changed between July 2020 and Nov 2020, some 4 months later.

For anyone interested, a piece in Telegraph about a dossier of emails sent to Southwark Council from London Ambulance Service outlining delays to reach critically ill and patients in life-threatening sitautions caused by the East Dulwich and Dulwich Village hard barriers and LAS continued appeals to remove or change barriers for alternatives. https://twitter.com/GroveReopen/status/1358358160734576642/photo/1

snowy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But one that?s not often recommended by traffic > planners eg > > https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/streets-and-hi > ghway-maintenance/road-safety/traffic-schemes/one- > way-streets > > ?Many streets suffer from rat-running or high > traffic volumes and may benefit from the > introduction of this type of control, but it is > likely that: > > Some traffic will simply be diverted onto other > less suitable streets > > The new one-way street may attract more traffic > albeit in the remaining direction > > Residents may have to access their street by an > alternative and less convenient route which may > involve the use of other neighbouring streets > > Traffic speeds may increase due to drivers' > perception that there is no opposing traffic > Without physical traffic calming there may be an > increase in accidents and their severity > Some, particularly short sections of one-way > street are likely to be contravened by drivers > thereby requiring police enforcement.? Much of this describes what is already occurring as a result of LTNs. One ways and cycle routes that could potentially link up public transport hubs and local schools would undoubtably be an improvement on what came before and will lessen the unfair displacement occurring as result of the LTNs.

Think East Dulwich Square may be the same or related to this CIL funding request from... Southwark Cyclists. https://goosegreenmapcil.commonplace.is/comments/5ed42e12df3b12cea3a5c766 - and attached. The space, even if you fill in the loading bay for M & S feels quite limited to create a square, although some tidying up would be good. Not sure if it got CIL funding and this is additional, or it didn't (although I thought I read it had got funding alongside the EDG/LL junction) but as they are both in the Devolved Highways funding requests I am not sure if they had funding or enough perhaps...

Hi there - it is 19 Feb - this Friday "Low traffic neighbourhoods (LTNs) are being introduced in wealthier streets at the expense of poorer neighbouring roads". [www.thetimes.co.uk]

Wasn't there also a discussion during the meeting of widening the review area to include Dulwich Hill? Perhas it will in relation to the ED LTN. Cllr Rose seemed to be in agreement with Cllr Hartley and Cllr Browning around this. Given they seem to have felt alot of displacement in their ward it should. But whether it does is another matter of course....

If you have an objection to the closures, please read the first post in this thread and email all your local and national representatives. A review process is underway and all objections legally need to be taken into account. It is worth noting that no elderly or disability groups were consulted in any of these schemes, and none sit on Southwark Council Walking or Cycling Steering Groups, who have both been instrumental in steering the path to LTNs. A borough wide exceptionally basic and insufficient EqIA was used, which has already come under heavy critisim from the High Court. Nothing was looked at on a scheme by scheme basis. The only consultees other than Emergency Services (who were roundly ignored as you may have already read from the minutes of meeting between Southwark and Emergency Services and repeated emails to Southwark), were Southwark Cyclists. One of the impacts of this scheme has been an increase in traffic on Underhill Road, where RNIB Bradbury Oak House is located. One of the staff spoke in the Dulwich Hill Zoom meeting on Low Traffic Southwark on Tuesday, outlining how the increased traffic on their road is causing problems for their group as the roads are now far more dangerous for themselves and their guide dogs to cross. This is why proper EqIA and inclusivity and diversity in steering groups on really impactful infrastructure changes are vital, 'experimental' or not.

The A road in question on this was A2216 which is Grove Vale/Lordship Lane, I think the lady lives on it and mentioned her child walks down it and down EDG to school, so relevant as both are boundary roads. It is possible that some people were afraid to say exactly where they lived for recriminations, some local pro-LTNers have been pretty nasty online, creating multiple fake accounts with fake names pretending to be real people who live on closed roads to troll residents and businesses, so can't say I blame her and others for being cautious.