Jump to content

Recommended Posts

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I cannot recall any occasion on which I have

> ever

> > heard a shopkeeper (including family members!)

> or

> > taxi driver say anything in favour of any

> proposed

> > change to traffic management. Not yellow lines,

> > not red routes, not the congestion charge, not

> > ULEZ, not CPZ, not school streets, and not

> LTNs.

> > Not in Dulwich, not anywhere else I've lived.

> > Perhaps this is a result of my own confirmation

> > bias.

>

>

> Definitely in favour of timed closures for school

> streets. So there you go, you have heard one.



Every day a new exciting experience!


How would you feel about Melbourne Grove being a school street?

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Spartacus Wrote:

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

> -----

> > There is a factor that the argument for road

> > closure fails to take into effect for

> businesses.

> >

> > I mentally call it the blues brother shopping

> mall

> > effect. In the original film they drove through

> a

> > shopping mall calling out the businesses in it.

> > Whilst it's not a shopping mall, cars

> traversing

> > through a shopping street can result in driver

> /

> > passenger spotting a business that they didn't

> > know existed there, thus encouraging them to

> stop

> > or return another day. This also has the

> opposite

> > effect of when cars don't pass the business it

> > becomes out of sight, out of mind !

> >

> > Don't get me wrong as pedestrians and cyclists

> > will have a similar effect however more often

> than

> > not car drivers that experience the phenomenon

> > will be from just outside of the area thus

> adding

> > to the trade a business will normal get.

> (Cyclist

> > and pedestrians are normally more local)

> >

> > Equally if an area is harder to get to or park

> in,

> > trade will naturally migrate to places that are

> > easier for drivers, it's the unintentional side

> > effect out of town shopping centres, retail

> parks

> > and large supermarkets had on business in town

> > centres from the 80s onwards.

> >

> > So before people say "but the road is

> accessible

> > from one end", think about what knock on effect

> it

> > has on businesses located on it from passing

> trade

> > and how it encourages people to shop elsewhere.

> >

> > As I said before, these closures need a proper

> > consultation and pre implementation study

> followed

> > by a full post implementation study rather than

> > the council rushing them in under the guise of

> > "the moneys there now but we will lose it if we

> > don't spend it" then spending more money when

> they

> > have to, like Wandsworth , do a u-turn !

>

>

> Thankyou Spartacus. So much of this is bang on.

> For the past weeks all the businesses have heard

> from customers is;

>

> 'It is too hard/takes too long to get to you' - -

> because of increased traffic on surrounding roads

> 'We can't park' --- as 1/3-1/2 parking spaces have

> gone at the same time to make room for road

> closure

> 'I would normally pop in on way back from

> Sainsburys (insert other shop) but too hard now' -

> as would have to go to Lordship Lane and turn

> right onto EDG and turn into MB Grove from the

> other end.

>

> All it takes is one very small barrier for people

> to not bother.

> It's why so many businesses have their doors open

> - it is well documented an open door is one less

> barrier to the customers and an invitation in.

>

>

> One business on Melbourne Grove says appointments

> are down 45% down in the past two weeks. They have

> been here for 24 years and never experienced such

> a sharp drop. This can't be purely coincidental.

>

> Yes, there is access from the other end of MG but

> what they are hearing is that those who do drive

> for very valid reasons, elderly, disabled, from

> further afield, or need car for a larger

> uncarryable load, multiple kids etc are not

> stopping any more.

>

> Customers are approaching the businesses of their

> own volition and saying, 'I am less likely to

> visit you'.

>

> We all agree car usage must go down, especially

> for short journeys but you need to make it easier

> for people to make the change - invest in an

> infrastructure that encourages active travel - put

> in some more cycle lanes, limit car owner ship,

> incentivise car share schemes, add in more useful

> bus routes, subsidise public transport further. If

> safety/speeding is the issue look at one ways,

> speed bumps, ANPR cameras, timed restrictions.

>

> Encourage people to use alternative methods with

> education and campaigning, but allow people the

> access they need when and where they need it, by

> car if they need to.

>

> Don't grab some money, block off some roads, cross

> your fingers and hope for the best.

>

> I am sure there will be some snippy replies 'Who

> cares about X cafe/restaurant/shop/hairdresser etc

> business', or more calls to boycott them by some

> kind residents but seriously, have a heart! Many

> have been operating here for over 15 years, and

> there are some brand new ones just trying to find

> their feet. They've all just seen their

> livelihoods take a battering with lockdown,

> probably another on its way.

>

> Let's not forget they have been totally sidelined

> when it comes to this scheme on these roads. No

> conversation whatsoever.

>

> Why should they have to wait 6 months to see if

> this 'beds in' and what if it doesn't? 6 months of

> watching their business die over key Christmas

> trading periods thanks to unconsulted road

> closures with lockdowns going on around them.

>

> Is now really the time to be experimenting with

> livelihoods in this way?

>

> We should be supportive and rally around local

> businesses with initiatives like the brilliant

> raffle scheme not tear into any that say, quite

> rightly, 'This is not OK'.



I really don't think this council cares about the shops in East Dulwich. They have displayed a totally apathetic view to them during all consultations and have consistently tried to sideline their concerns.


I am still very interested to hear from Cllr McAsh about whether he is concerned about what is currently going on within his ward. His re-appearance on this forum seems to be have been short-lived - he has been too busy penning articles for Novaramedia.

Speaking only for self here - there are many businesses on the road - who may have own specific opinions - but I would be very amenable to the school closing the road for short periods as it needed for pupil safety at school arrival/departure as an alternative to the current planters.

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Speaking only for self here - there are many

> businesses on the road - who may have own

> specific opinions - but I would be very amenable

> to the school closing the road for short periods

> as it needed for pupil safety at school

> arrival/departure as an alternative to the current

> planters.


Interesting that you say there?s a range of views, as that?s what I?ve found speaking to the businesses along Melbourne Grove. Some are clearly worried by the change, some confidently say less traffic will be better for their business, some are indifferent and don?t see it will impact either way.


Important to note that both schools are very supportive of the current schemes.


The petition asking Southwark to reverse the closures in Dulwich Village and East Dulwich now has over 500 signatures. Linking again http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049


I?m with FairTgirl, in that school streets are to be supported. Arguably, this should include Melbourne North

and Whateley Road (in the case of Whateley, they could have a gate keeper similar to Elsie Road, which would allow buses through). However the closures in their current state are not proportionate, and seem to benefit certain streets, whilst causing significantly increased levels of pollution on others. This is not equitable, nor is it improving air quality.

Alice - It is, but if you were to apply the Elsie Road school street logic (whereby the entry and exit from Goose Green is on Tintagel Crescent), to Harris then you would put a gate keeper on Wheatley as well.


Ultimately, the current status quo which involves planters and the closure of a number of very affluent streets which don?t even have schools on them (and where student footfall is almost invariably lower than on EDG) definitely isn?t working, as it is causing huge volumes of congestion and therefore increased air pollution on the roads that house the majority of the area?s schools; whilst also (almost invariably) slowing down buses and emergency vehicles. Whilst we await the ULEZ, I suspect school streets which discourage driving to school, and make it safer for children to cross the road in the vicinity of their schools are a good middle ground.

Serena2012 Wrote:

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

> Alice - It is, but if you were to apply the Elsie

> Road school street logic (whereby the entry and

> exit from Goose Green is on Tintagel Crescent), to

> Harris then you would put a gate keeper on

> Wheatley as well.

>

> Ultimately, the current status quo which involves

> planters and the closure of a number of very

> affluent streets which don?t even have schools on

> them (and where student footfall is almost

> invariably lower than on EDG) definitely isn?t

> working, as it is causing huge volumes of

> congestion and therefore increased air pollution

> on the roads that house the majority of the area?s

> schools; whilst also (almost invariably) slowing

> down buses and emergency vehicles. Whilst we await

> the ULEZ, I suspect school streets which

> discourage driving to school, and make it safer

> for children to cross the road in the vicinity of

> their schools are a good middle ground.



Indeed they are as they target specific issues at specific times of the day and yet allow free flow of movement at other times.


Interesting to read some of the comments to the school twitter posts. Once again, whilst some are happy others are not.

Serena2012 Wrote:

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

> The petition asking Southwark to reverse the

> closures in Dulwich Village and East Dulwich now

> has over 500 signatures. Linking again

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDispl

> ay.aspx?id=500000049

>

> I?m with FairTgirl, in that school streets are to

> be supported. Arguably, this should include

> Melbourne South and Whateley Road (in the case of

> Whateley, they could have a gate keeper similar to

> Elsie Road, which would allow buses through).

> However the closures in their current state are

> not proportionate, and seem to benefit certain

> streets, whilst causing significantly increased

> levels of pollution on others. This is not

> equitable, nor is it improving air quality.


http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049



Now over 700 signatures.

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Interested to hear how the conspiracy theorists

> are going to reconcile "LTNs are driven by

> outsiders" with pushing the petition out to taxi

> drivers and groups from other areas on Twitter!


Maybe , shock horror, it's because taxi drivers not only live here but also need to drop residents off in the area.


Possibly no conspiracy at all but simple transfer of information via cab-witter 🤔

So will all the stuff about "local residents should decide, not outsiders" be binned now that London tax drivers are bulking out the petition? It was quite a strong OneDulwich talking point before.
Well, hitherto, consultations in favour of CPZ have been bulked out by cyclists well out of the area. Southwark cyclists and LCC actively encourage their members to participate in CPZ consultations much further afield.

march46 Wrote:

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

> FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Speaking only for self here - there are many

> > businesses on the road - who may have own

> > specific opinions - but I would be very

> amenable

> > to the school closing the road for short

> periods

> > as it needed for pupil safety at school

> > arrival/departure as an alternative to the

> current

> > planters.

>

> Interesting that you say there?s a range of views,

> as that?s what I?ve found speaking to the

> businesses along Melbourne Grove. Some are clearly

> worried by the change, some confidently say less

> traffic will be better for their business, some

> are indifferent and don?t see it will impact

> either way.

>


That's not a correct interpretation I am afraid. I was asked directly by Dogkennelhillbilly specificially about how I would feel about school streets, to which I said I did not want to speak for other businesses opinions on school streets as I don't know what they all are.


I don't want to presume everyones opinions on that although I may be in favour.


However, when it comes to the planters business owners on both Melbourne Grove and Grove Vale are overwhemingly against them.


Even if they are unsure of what impact they may have on their business - eg their business location and accessibility is not necessarily a large factor on their business success - eg a solicitors - they are gravely concerned about the manner in which is has been done and the impacts for the surrounding roads, schools and nurseries.


I fear Rockets may be correct and Southwark do not care much about business. Perhaps they assume the business owners are not locals and don't vote? But we are and do. I seriously hope the new council leadership and team are committed to paying more attention to everyones concerns and greater equality in all forms.

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

    • OOOOooooOOOooohhhHHHHHH 👜 👜 👜 
    • That's actually why the Sherlock Holmes stories were so popular. There was so little crime people found it exciting to imagine robberies and murders happening in London.
    • Yes, because of course there were no violent robberies in the olden days. Pretty much no crime happened at all I believe through the entire Victorian era.
    • Hi all, Im a Southwark council leaseholder and live downstairs in a ground floor flat, there is one flat above me, it's a house with individual front doors leading from the street into the shared pathway. My neighbour told me he has had a ring doorbell installed, no discussion as to how I would feel being on camera everytime I go in and out or in my front garden. I was told it's only for deliveries and doesn't record and only activates when pressed, however I don't know this and I feel really uncomfortable everytime I'm out in garden or on doorstep talking to people. Everytime I walk in/out, it lights up and in the eve it has a  infra red  light. Now I've read up that as he said its only for deliveries, he could set it so it only activates when pressed, however it activates with its motion sensor. Had he said to me about getting it installed, I could have had the opportunity to ask about it recording etc but nothing except it's being installed and when I arrived home it was there. I don't like being horrible to people however I feel I have not been considered in his decision and I feel very uncomfortable as, some times I have to stand on doorstep to get signal for my mobile and I really don't like the idea of being watched and listened to. Has anyone got any advice as I'm beginning to get angry as I've asked about it once and was told it only activates when pressed. I believe this is not true. I know southwark council say you need to ask permission to make sure the neighbours are OK with it, I don't really want to go down that road but I don't know how to approach the subject again. They also put a shed approx 3 foot from my back room window, these places are built so my window faces their rear garden and there upstairs window  faces mine. They said it's there temporarily, that was over a year ago and it does affect the light, plus I'm hoping to sell up soon and the view from window is mainly a dark brown shed. When I've mentioned this, I was told they have no where else to put it, whereas originally they said its only temporary, Also the floorboards above are bare and I get woke early morning and at night, the thudding is so bad my light shakes and window rattles, so I mentioned this and asked if they have rugs, I was told when they get the boards re sanded they will get rugs, I should have asked if they could get rugs and just take them up when boards being done, which I would have done had it been me living above someone, their attitude was I can just put up with it until they are ready. so they had the floor boards done, and the workmen was hammering screws, yes screws, in the floorboards, I spoke to workmen to ask how much longer and they said yes, are using screws to make less noise! I could hear the cordless screwdriver, not an issue but for every screw there were at least 8 whacks, the owners had gone out to avoid the noise  so I  spoke to workmen as the noise was unbearable, the sanding, not an issue at all, people need to get things done to their home and I'm fine that on occasions there will be temporary noise. now I have a nice crack on my bedroom ceiling, I mentioned this to owner but no response, he said there were alot of loose floorboards and it will be much better now, not so noisy, as though I don't know the difference between squeaking floor boards and thudding, and nothing was mentioned re the crack or that they now have rugs, which if it were me, I'd be trying to resolve the issue so we can get on with feeling happy in our homes. so I'm feeling it's a total lack of consideration. these places are old and Edwardian and I've lived here over 40 years, had 4 different neighbours and it's only now the noise of thudding is really bad and the people before had floorboards but nothing like this. As you can probably tell I'm really wound up and I don't want to end up exploding at them, I've always got on with neighbours and always said if there's a problem with my dog, pls let me know, always tell me, however I feel it's got to the point where I say something and I'm fobbed off. I know I should tell them but I'm angry, perhaps I should write them a letter. Any suggestions greatly appreciated and thank you for reading my rant. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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