Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Metallic Wrote:

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

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Metallic Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Balham Post Office has stopped receiving

> > parcels

> > > from customers because the new road system

> > means

> > > the collection van can't get near it.

> > > Now we have a gorgeous yellow box in the

> > Village

> > > (is there to be a camera??) right up to the

> > > planters, the collection of parcels may be a

> > > problem here too. Ditto delivery of

> essentials

> > to

> > > the pharmacy. Once the double yellow lines

> are

> > in

> > > and there is nowhere to park for these

> > essential

> > > services, can someone with a cargo bike do

> the

> > > deliveries for the PO and pharmacy?

> >

> >

> > The post office van pulls up and double parks

> to

> > pick up and drop off post at the post office at

> > the same time every day, as it has done ever

> since

> > the closure was put in. This is not much

> different

> > from what happened before when they stopped

> > illegally on the corner almost every day as

> there

> > was never an available parking space in front

> of

> > the shops.

> >

> > Of course, this could be easily fixed by making

> > 1-2 parking spots in of the shops delivery

> only.

>

> The point I'm making is he can't even double park

> now because of the yellow box. Keep up.


The point is that the guy just pulls in front of the planters and stops, as he has done every day since they went in. Keep up.

"The idea that only those with qualifications in traffic management can ?understand? sounds a bit desperate."


The public is sick of experts. Where did the idea that you need to understand a subject in order to criticise methodology come from? Stuff and nonsense. All we need is the blitz spirit, common sense and pints of warm beer. We didn't fight Galtieri so that I had to walk to the shops, you know.



irst mate Wrote:

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

> It does seem likely the council have justified

> certain interventions with misleading stats and

> you are quite right to question and pursue this.

> The idea that only those with qualifications in

> traffic management can ?understand? sounds a bit

> desperate.

>

> slarti b Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > What I like is the prospect of OneDulwich -

> > entirely unqualified in traffic management and

> > > environmental monitoring - bickering over

> > pollution measurement methodologies.

> >

> > The OHS agenda and the subsequent so called

> > "Covid" measures have been driven by the local

> > councillors. Do they have any qualifications

> in

> > traffic management, or indeed related

> disciplines

> > such as engineering? From linkedin they seem

> to

> > be a Digital Content consultant (whatever?) and

> a

> > sugar trader.

> >

> > AS for the council officer who has been key in

> the

> > helping the councillors with OHS and the

> so-called

> > Covid changes: he has based the justification

> for

> > teh closures on a 47% increase in traffic

> through

> > the DV junction. This figure is totally

> > misleading, with base figures taken during

> > re-building work on the DV junction in Sep 2017.

>

> > He has also defended the strange traffic stats

> for

> > Calton Avenue, used to support the DV junction

> > closure, whilst unable to explain the

> > discrepancies with the earlier TfL survey. If

> he

> > is qualified in traffic management why is he

> > behaving in this way?

> >

> > I do find it odd that his email signature has

> no

> > details of his professional qualifications but

> I

> > will be happy to hear what they are.

> >

> > Onedulwich has supporters who are engineers and

> > professionals used to assessing figures (eg I

> > studied Maths and Statistics and have worked

> > analysing numbers for many years) and we also

> have

> > an experienced traffic engineer for advice. We

> may

> > not all be qualified in traffic management but

> we

> > are able to recognize when people are trying to

> > pull the wool over our eyes.

While cycling into work this morning I noticed a team spray-cleaning the painted flowers off the DV junction. In these days of reduced budgets it is a shame teh council is having to use scarce funds in this way.


I hope they send the bill to the "Friends of Margy Plaza" group.

Seems to be putting both sides


https://www.onlondon.co.uk/low-traffic-neighbourhoods-class-politics-and-people-power/



Seems set for Farage to jump on this (the anger is just what he thrives on) - he's sniffing around twitter looking for a cause and another new political party.


?You poke the hornet?s nest of democracy, they come out and sting you in the bum. You need people to step forward and make sure democracy is looked after for the next generation.?


Could have come straight from the Brexit Party literature.

A quote from that article - does it sound familiar....find and replace Hackney with Dulwich....?


Former Liberal Democrat London Assembly and 2019 general election candidate Ben Mathis spent last Sunday removing anti-LTN graffiti from roads in Clapton. ?While I personally think that feeling is being channelled against the wrong measures, I totally get it,? he says. ?People in Hackney are so used to being ignored ? scrutiny of the council from within is all but non-existent, consultations are routinely ignored."

Dogkennelhillbilly

>

> The point I'm making is he can't even double park

> now because of the yellow box. Keep up.


>The point is that the guy just pulls in front of the planters and stops, as he has done every day since they went in. >Keep up.


Yes but before the drivers were not blocking the twixt planter route. Now they encroach on the yellow box and therefore commit an offence under the RTA.

Shaggy Wrote:

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

> No need to crowdfund. I?ve had one of these for

> two years, and it?s great and inexpensive. It is

> perfect for attaching to bicycle handlebars or a

> rear view mirror, if you are that way inclined.

>

>

>

> https://plumelabs.com/en/flow/


Thanks very helpful.

Metallic Wrote:

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

> Dogkennelhillbilly

> >

> > The point I'm making is he can't even double

> park

> > now because of the yellow box. Keep up.

>

> >The point is that the guy just pulls in front of

> the planters and stops, as he has done every day

> since they went in. >Keep up.

>

> Yes but before the drivers were not blocking the

> twixt planter route. Now they encroach on the

> yellow box and therefore commit an offence under

> the RTA.


The Royal Mail van wasn't allowed to double park or drive across the pavement, as happened previously. Nothing has changed, apart from your desire to find another problem with the closure.

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

>

> The Royal Mail van wasn't allowed to double park

> or drive across the pavement, as happened

> previously. Nothing has changed, apart from your

> desire to find another problem with the closure.


Did you see how busy the post office got last Christmas? Clearly not. And as for it being your local pharmacy? Maybe not. But drugs are delivered twice a day and if these delivery/collection drivers have to drive the long way round to find a legal spot to park - bear in mind double yellows will soon be there - the PO will say they cannot collect the parcels or make drugs deliveries.

Didn't think it was particularly controversial to be honest - so couldn't imagine why you wouldn't - but in terms of the lamenting about the problems for the post office, seems like theres been an obvious easier fix for years than them driving across the pavement.

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Didn't think it was particularly controversial to

> be honest - so couldn't imagine why you wouldn't -

> but in terms of the lamenting about the problems

> for the post office, seems like theres been an

> obvious easier fix for years than them driving

> across the pavement.

I don't think I have seen the van drive over the pavement but maybe someone will see this exchange and arrange for a loading bay as of course the whole set of shops is in need of a delivery space, apart from all the estate agents of course.

To me it sounds like the part time cyclists of court lane with their double driveways and garages are moaning about being oppressed and why should anyone be allowed on their road, whilst those living, cycling, working on the roads to where the traffic is displaced have to deal with the extra pollution. the issue isnt about 5 minutes extra driving (guess most journeys that would have used court lane junction are now much more than 5 minutes extra), but about the social injustice of the high car owning areas having the benefits.
Exactly Mako.... the cars on my road at school delivery of children time, are the cars that belong to the ?gated? communities delivering their children to Alleyn?s and JAGs, many getting annoyed at the traffic and trying to U turn in front of cyclists, beeping at pedestrians trying to cross the road. The extra traffic makes it hard for cyclists, pedestrians and people trying to use the 37 bus. Meanwhile the ?square? is having dancing parties and string quartets. All roads need to have more access for pedestrians and cyclists. The encouragement of less car use needs to be borough wide not just for the lucky few. It?s always the poorer and more polluted areas that get shat on in Southwark.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> Exactly Mako.... the cars on my road at school

> delivery of children time, are the cars that

> belong to the ?gated? communities delivering their

> children to Alleyn?s and JAGs, many getting

> annoyed at the traffic and trying to U turn in

> front of cyclists, beeping at pedestrians trying

> to cross the road. The extra traffic makes it hard

> for cyclists, pedestrians and people trying to use

> the 37 bus. Meanwhile the ?square? is having

> dancing parties and string quartets. All roads

> need to have more access for pedestrians and

> cyclists. The encouragement of less car use needs

> to be borough wide not just for the lucky few.

> It?s always the poorer and more polluted areas

> that get shat on in Southwark.


Yes because they know that no matter what they do in Southwark they will still vote the lot of them in!

Please don?t jump to the conclusion that everyone in Court Lane and other blocked roads are all delighted by the closures. This is really not the case. I have elderly relatives in Court Lane who do not drive, and are unhappy about the closures. Their carers are finding it difficult to reach them (and their other vulnerable clients) on time as their journeys are taking considerably longer because of the traffic jams. My relatives also don?t think it?s fair that others on busier roads are now suffering from greater pollution. The people on the blocked roads had as little say in the road blocks as anyone else and it seems rather unfair to make sweeping generalisations and assumptions.

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

    • 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.
    • Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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