easytiger

Chair Lewis said as both community councils voted no cpz then Hargrove cannot implement this cpz. Chair Lewis Robinson said this tonight. Buddug, agreed, James spins and lies and should resign.

The majority of people in attendance were against the CPZ proposals this evening and 2 hours were spent on this. One lady (one of the only pro cpz on here?) fought passionately for it, she lives on Derwent. James Barber voted for option 4 ( CPZ on several streets) Jonathon Mitchell followed him with option 4. Rose Shimmel copied them with option 4 then jokingly voted for option 2. The 5 other councillors couldn't see how CPZ will not be detrimental to the rest of the area and voted option 2, no cpz but make improvements to roads. A CPZ cannot work was the outcome. James Barber and his 2 pals have committed political suicide and have lost many votes. ETA: A big hand to Gsirett and buddug for their brilliant presentations and to all others too.

If memory serves correctly only 100 businesses signed a petition against the crossing, out of 300 businesses. that makes it a minority. Which means they cannot have their say. One crossing is a better idea, i think. Two crossings at the same time, not so sure. The CPZ results, james, have shown the majority against this. The leader of the council and his friends said no this this. If you want to improve parking in certain roads then seek an alternative measure and don't pee so many people off as it will affect others. Why can't you just understand this?

apologies if i copy what i post on the councillors thread, cpz discussion should really be kept here. Some of you need to go back to school and learn math, don't go to the primary school on Grove Vale as you may not be able to park near it. This is a flawed consultation, on many levels and Milk you can go pages back and read all about it. I love the way James Barber tried to wriggle his way out of the issue RE ?20000 given by the developer building flats on the garden centre by the station, the money going towards this and any future CPZ. Didn't go down well when this was found out and his excuse was lame. Once again, this consultation was performed within a zone, where the majority of folks say no thanks. There is much figure spinning going on here. The leader of the council and colleagues went through these figures with Paul Gellard and Tim Walker two weeks ago and they voted option 2, no cpz but make improvements in the streets around the station. This should be done.

Some of you need to go back to school and learn math, don't go to the primary school on Grove Vale as you may not be able to park near it. This is a flawed consultation, on many levels and Milk you can go pages back and read all about it. I love the way James Barber tried to wriggle his way out of the issue RE ?20000 given by the developer building flats on the garden centre by the station, the money going towards this and any future CPZ. Didn't go down well when this was found out and his excuse was lame. Once again, this consultation was performed within a zone, where the majority of folks say no thanks. There is much figure spinning going on here. The leader of the council and colleagues went through these figures with Paul Gellard and Tim Walker two weeks ago and they voted option 2, no cpz but make improvements in the streets around the station. This should be done.

Wrong Straferjack. The bus lane proposal was 24 hours both ways ( which would have made a different shopping experience compared to now and many more chains would be in). it was fought and it is as it is now, which works. Part time bus lane in peak hours. The adjustments on Grove Vale works, giving a 30 minute shopping window. Camberwell Community council meet 2 weeks ago- The leader of the council and colleagues voted as a majority option 2, No cpz but make adjustments to roads. This clearly should be the step to follow.

milk76 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > He is probably the kind of person who is putting > up posters saying that if you love East Dulwich > you will oppose a CPZ. > > Also that it will drop your house price and close > all the shops down. > > But it is the pro CPZ posters who are spinning > things! Now who is spinning things? You are, a resident on derwent rd. The majority of RESIDENTS say NO to this cpz, whether you like it or not. Do your own consultation. Residents and SSBA have been putting up posters that you can find in windows, on lamp posts and community notice boards (not any more because Fazer has taken them down). SSBA care for their customers and their community and the residents have, in a majority said no to this cpz. Some residents also care for their community. Milk, you do not want the school staff parking in front of your house do you? Tell them to carry their gear on the bus then will you?

fazer71 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can someone post a link to the consultation > results pls...? Fazer/James, you are having a friggin laff, you have been all pro CPZ recommending it being installed all over the city yet you have not even seen the results on this one. HAH!

milk76 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Two thirds of Derwent want this. > > If you spent any time on this street you would see > that it is hell caused by people who park here > first thing and leave in the evening. They will be > gone. That simple. > > The council should respect that clear democratic > fact. The council did not consult only on derwent rd, they consulted on a wide area. The results are in and the majority voted against. If you want CPZ on your rd then ask James barber to get a consultation done on your road only.

Why does a person who lives in Singapore continually antogonizes people on this forum on different subjects? Let the people that live in the area to discuss with emotion. Or start your own thread on issues in your city. Zimples.

Read above again otta. JB has taken them down before and is A keyholder of the board. He did not put up the SSBA's notice to public about the cpz.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've have not taken down any notices telling > people about any community councils. I'm usually > the one placing them. > I did originally take down notices about the CPZ > making wild assertions about Southwark Council - > but it is a Southwark COuncil notice board and I > don't want all material controlled by the press > office if it ever discovered what had been put > up. > > Throughout I have suggested people make their view > known and attend the community councils - it was > my request to cabinet cllr Barrie Hargrove that he > allow community councils to review the officer > papers and make their recommendations to him - > which he kindly agreed to. Otherwise this would > have been all decided by him in December. > > I get sent community council poster/notices by the > committee chair and I place them when next passing > notice boards. > I also get frustrated at them being removed. I > don't know who has the keys for them near Grove > Vale. Also the locks on Melbourne Grove notice > board appears to have been changed so I've not > been able to place a community council poster > their for some time. I am quoting James's post so there is a record directly on here, should he decide to delete or edit posts as he has done so. James has admitted to taking down public notices placed by residents and SSBA members which were there to alert the public of this CPZ. He took them down. The posters have never made wild assertions about Southwark council but have been designed to make people aware about what is going down and who to contact. The one on Northcross rd has been removed and JB is the keyholder.

Nice to see a comical side developing here. What i do not find comical is james barber taking down the notices in the community notice boards, AGAIN. This is the third time he has taken down a notice that is informing people of the up and coming meetings to discuss the CPZ in ED. James, you really are a piece of work and selfish. Readers, i am not making this personal. But he is.

I just cannot believe this man James Barber. He is now claiming to be bullied. He has gone into the zone promoting this CPZ scheme going from house to house. A handful of people that listened to him say yes to CPZ. The MAJORITY of residents have said no to this. People that are in the zone say NO. YET, he still carries on with his bullish way in bringing in this CPZ. Every business person within the zone that i have spoken to said no CPZ, bar one who is unsure. At the last meeting there were no residents saying yes to CPZ. A Derwent Rd resident spoke and clearly was against this. As others have said, we the community are being bullied by James Barber and Southwark Council. James, where are your supporters for CPZ? Are they on this thread? Have they been campaigning for CPZ? No they have not. Vote as you please, please do it so we can have shot of you. Don't feel bullied will you.

Fazer, to answer your question i think you are being thick, with respect. The councillors voted for option2, which is no cpz but makes changes to roads and improvements. One chap asked Paul Gellard in the question time where the residents who voted for cpz live on Derwent road, he answered that they mostly live close to the main rd Grove Vale. The improvements they have made already on GV are good, i think. @hare, thanks for rattling my cage :))

Hare, almost every seat was filled in the end or were you too busy messing about on your pad. Barrie sat in the crowd with his bodyguard?. The residents spoke and presented and were applauded. Leader of the council agreed no cpz option 2, minor changes to roads. The majority of councillors voted no cpz,option 2. Not over yet though as james is still on the scene. If you want a cpz on Derwent rd then do a consultation in that road and stop wasting money and resources on flawed consultations.

Please do not rely on others to attend for you. Members of the chamber of commerce and SSBA shall be there who are against this massively flawed consultation. Councillors should not be allowed to show support towards the CPZ. Barber has said from the outset that he wants CPZ on 3 streets around the station and said he will stand firm on this. More complaints should be made against him and not just on this forum. Don't think he will be at tonights meeting. Barber has lost the respect of many people. This consultation has been shown to be flawed on the way it has been presented and without transparency. The locals have said no to this CPZ. The leader of the council writes that if a majority is against a CPZ then he will not allow it. He must honor his word.

See, the ?CPZ scheme ends up being hassle. The lady (on the bbc programme Inside Out) wanted the scheme in the end due to the domino effect but is she happy now? The winner ends up being the council so that they have cash to spend on other projects. Will be interesting to see if musicians will continue to perform in the Westminster area after they extend the hours up til midnight, musicians relying on their vehicles to carry in the equipment.? Where are the PRO CPZ people on this thread? Have you changed your minds? You can bet your bottom $ that you will regret this if and when it comes into Dulwich. Don't forget that LIbDems are supporting the scheme. Keep it in your memorys for the next two years, so you can vote them out, if you wish to.

The SSBA have 3 petitions, one to ensure that the council inform the SSBA on all future consultations that affect the area and local businesses as we were not informed about this CPZ consultation despite you saying that you had informed us and you did NOT. Hence the rush of 4 days of petitioning when we found out thanks to JOOB who started this thread. Second petition on behalf of all of the local businesses and shops (apart from one business) within the CPZ and outside the CPZ area . The third petition is from local residents and shoppers. Others by different pockets of residents. All opposing the CPZ around the station. The fact remains that the documents shows ?20k from the developer towards this CPZ consultation and you did not divulge this information at any point. Don't you think this is unfair, James? TFL did end up discussing the CPZ at the last meeting only to be told by the chair that no more questions would be taken as it was not on the agenda, and the decision will be taken in January. All very sneaky and unfair.

The CPZ consultations is flawed, unlawful and unethical as sooooo many people have mentioned this to you James. At the Dulwich Community Council meeting TFL had spoken and CPZ was not on their annual programme as they had left it off ( what a joke). TFL said they are funding the CPZ and only to the roads as per the consultation pack because funds would not allow them to go further, another untruth. Now it comes to light that the developer is also funding the CPZ consultation which was NOT mentioned at the meeting which shows lack of transparency. And James Barber,you took down the posters, from the community notice boards, that were making people aware of the CPZ consultation around the station, and you were asked NOT to remove them, but you did. Another untruth from James as Copleston Rd did not even get a poster but he says it remained. You play a very unfair and sneaky game and by using your consistent online presence. People will not forget these matters and as i have said before LibDems will be losing votes. The South Southwark Business Association submitted another circa 250 signatures with names and addresses on behalf of local residents opposing this CPZ around the station and have been accepted by Paul Gellard. The SSBA have around 2000 people voting against this and obtained in only 4 days as many local people were unaware of this consultation. Other local residents inside and outside the proposed CPZ have also been petitoning against this and have been submitting petitions. The council officers confirm a big response from inside and outside the proposed CPZ area. You can write to paul.gellard@southwark.gov.uk copy in parkingreview@southwark.gov.uk barrie.hargrove@southwark.gov.uk toby.eckersley@southwark.gov.uk robin.crookshank.hilton@southwark.gov.uk southsouthwarkbusinesses@yahoo.co.uk

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Gill, mention what? James, you are still playing the fool when it suits you. The fact that the developer is contributing to the CPZ consultation was not mentioned at the last Dulwich Community Meeting which shows the lack of transparency this consultation has and how flawed it is on every level. See my post in the CPZ thread.

The trader's associations petition that have been sent around the whole of the Grove Vale area and affected areas by the SSBA team clearly states GROVE VALE CONTROLLED PARKING ZONE and NOT the whole of ED.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Talking to some of the businesses they said they > were told controlled parking was proposed for all > of East Dulwich and they had not been told that > for the roads it is proposed that two options - > 'lite' 10-12 mon-fri and 'heavy' > 8.30-6.30mon-fri. > So it's hard to know if they're against what is > actually proposed if they're responding to > something different. See James, once again you shoot yourself in the foot with this flawed consultation. The Southwark traders association were NOT informed of this consultation and they found out only through this forum. You were AGAIN economic with the truth by saying you had informed them when you did NOT and the chair Mr Franklin from Franklins was even present at the September community council meeting to discuss the new crossings. You are only RECENTLY in discussions with SSBA regarding the CPZ. You and yours will be losing many many votes for this.

sirett, i have petitioned each shop around Grove vale and included areas and each of them have signed against the GV CPZ proposal, i am also liasing with our legal team for a court injunction if this will be needed for reasons i have posted earlier. SSBA (South Southwark Business Association) LL section. B)

Other councillors do use the edf but james barber is like a mad dog with a bone that will not let go and is on here even when in community council meetings as i have discovered. This consultation is unfair and flawed and we shall be seeking a court injunction to stop this as we were not allowed to discuss this at the meeting the other night and the CPZ was accidentally?? left off TFLs programme, and guess what the consultation ends on Friday, convenient for them eh?......