Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Thank you James unfortunately you have confirmed my fears - the Locals who voice very real concerns about the LTNs will continue to be ignored. The council is working with the select few who follow the mantra.

Such a shame really that we are now experiencing shocking levels of pollution due to blind refusal to acknowledge what is happening to our area. So disappointing that the council are not working with or listening to.

Human activity produces pollution not councillors on their own. But rightly or wrongly councillors are trying to do something about it. I'm not even sure what this shocking level of pollution is. If you want back 30 years you would have had lead from petrol, 70 years smog from coal burning and even before the industrial revolution South London was pretty disgusting for example leather tanning.

That?s hardly fair, James set up this thread to engage with Goose Green residents and it seems to have been successful given the 40 pages! He?s the most responsive of the local councillors. Imagine he does more case work than most.


sspringer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Councillors getting involved in the forum again!

> Must be an election coming coming soon.

bels123 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That?s hardly fair, James set up this thread to

> engage with Goose Green residents and it seems to

> have been successful given the 40 pages! He?s the

> most responsive of the local councillors. Imagine

> he does more case work than most.

>

>


I completely agree. James is very proactive, far more so than other local councillors, as far as I can see


Edited to make it clear which post I was agreeing with!

We need to stop providing huge amounts of free (publicly subsidised) space for car storage. I know any attempts to tackle the problem of car dominance meets with stiff opposition, but we are in a climate emergency and it requires leadership.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> We need to stop providing huge amounts of free

> (publicly subsidised) space for car storage. I

> know any attempts to tackle the problem of car

> dominance meets with stiff opposition, but we are

> in a climate emergency and it requires leadership.



Getting rid of the EV charging spaces on East Dulwich Grove for example is such a great idea in a climate emergency.

Have they been removed though? - or just moved elsewhere? They were too close to the junction and caused conflict for the 37/42 bus




Bic Basher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > We need to stop providing huge amounts of free

> > (publicly subsidised) space for car storage. I

> > know any attempts to tackle the problem of car

> > dominance meets with stiff opposition, but we

> are

> > in a climate emergency and it requires

> leadership.

>

>

> Getting rid of the EV charging spaces on East

> Dulwich Grove for example is such a great idea in

> a climate emergency.

I think the stationary traffic every morning is the 'conflict' for the 37 bus...I liked the days it went down Melbourne Grove - a perfect transport link. Maybe Melbourne should be a bus route again - take out all street parking and divert the bus down there to avoid the congested traffic on ED Grove. School route served also.

heartblock Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the stationary traffic every morning is

> the 'conflict' for the 37 bus...I liked the days

> it went down Melbourne Grove - a perfect transport

> link. Maybe Melbourne should be a bus route again

> - take out all street parking and divert the bus

> down there to avoid the congested traffic on ED

> Grove. School route served also.


It was a controversial issue back then and Melbourne Grove traders were losing revenue from the lack of passing bus passengers on the 37.


I doubt they'd re-route it back again as the 42 connects East and North Dulwich stations.

  • 3 months later...

heartblock Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the stationary traffic every morning is

> the 'conflict' for the 37 bus...I liked the days

> it went down Melbourne Grove - a perfect transport

> link. Maybe Melbourne should be a bus route again

> - take out all street parking and divert the bus

> down there to avoid the congested traffic on ED

> Grove. School route served also.


It was a controversial issue back then and Melbourne Grove traders were losing revenue from the lack of passing bus passengers on the 37.


I doubt they'd re-route it back again as the 42 connects East and North Dulwich stations.

 

I'm sure I must have missed something here, but why is it necessary to have a bus connection between East and North Dulwich stations?


They are on the same train line, aren't they?

heartblock Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the stationary traffic every morning is

> the 'conflict' for the 37 bus...I liked the days

> it went down Melbourne Grove - a perfect transport

> link. Maybe Melbourne should be a bus route again

> - take out all street parking and divert the bus

> down there to avoid the congested traffic on ED

> Grove. School route served also.


It was a controversial issue back then and Melbourne Grove traders were losing revenue from the lack of passing bus passengers on the 37.


I doubt they'd re-route it back again as the 42 connects East and North Dulwich stations.

 

I'm sure I must have missed something here, but why is it necessary to have a bus connection between East and North Dulwich stations?


They are on the same train line, aren't they?

 

The 42 bus link is more about giving a direct bus connection to Sainsbury's from Red Post Hill and East Dulwich Grove.

I am very concerned about the number 40 and other key bus routes disappearing due to TFL cuts (thanks essentially to the Conservative government squeezing the budget and holding Mayor Khan to ransom). Is there anything we can do other than fill in the consultation and sign petitions (numerous seem to be doing the rounds)? Thanks for all you do in the area

I am very concerned about the number 40 and other key bus routes disappearing due to TFL cuts (thanks essentially to the Conservative government squeezing the budget and holding Mayor Khan to ransom). Is there anything we can do other than fill in the consultation and sign petitions (numerous seem to be doing the rounds)? Thanks for all you do in the area

 

Like Jellybean I am very anxious about the cutting of Local bus routes.

In my case its specific to the 12 and 176 which are the only busses I can use to get my job in Central London.

I've filled in the consultation forms and petitions but I feel that will be ignored by the powers that be...

What are our Councillors doing to make TFL realise that we deserve better, and many locals do need to commute for work.

  • 2 weeks later...

James - there was a serious car crash on East Dulwich Grove on Sunday (28th) morning, so serious that it required the fire service cut open one of the vehicles to remove the driver and the to road to be closed for several hours. In addition to the two cars involved I saw damage to two others that were parked nearby. I've no idea of the cause but I live fairly close by and I did hear a loud bang so imagine speed was involved.

One of the cars ended up on the pavement which could have seriously injured or worse any pedestrians that had been there at the time.

As a person that frequently cycles and walks along this road I am often concerned about the speed that a small minority of car drivers travel, in spite of the raised platforms that are present.

Are you aware of any plans to look at schemes to force traffic to travel more slowly and/or penalise those that don't ?

The new pavements tend to pond after a heavyish amount of rainfall; the dipped kerbs all pond after rain. Conway can’t be relied upon to do a good job on paving - too many examples of poor results within a 1 mile radius - yet they still have a contract.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Its a few years ago now, but I organised my end of year prom (for year 13) at Off the Cuff in Herne Hill - was on the cheaper side to rent and at that age, felt very cool and clubby. I had my own 18th at Whirled Cinema in Loughborough Junction but I'm not sure if they take event bookings like that anymore 
    • You are right . It isn't going to change him for the better. Sending such a negative message is potentially counter-productive. Trump is narcissistic, arrogant, unpredictable, spiteful, divisive, and dishonest, with a penchant for a total a disregard for democratic norms.  He is one who bears a grudge so there's a case to be made for not offending him as he could react with a bunch of  adverse actions  such as  deciding to increase import tariffs on UK exports to the US.      
    • Unless we don't fly I don't think we can be too critical of the authorities.  
    • In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River). When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...