Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I am not aware of MG as an accident hotspot at all. It does seem an utter waste of resources.


To what extent is the path to be widened? By hook or by crook the aim is to close this road off to traffic and the latest excuse is that peopel with buggies cannot get by. I cannot help but note Councillor Barber's comment that any path widening is to aid people walking with buggies. There is no mention of the elderly or disabled. For me this indicates whose interests are paramount for our local rep. Survival of the fittest and loudest.

Widening the pavements around the trees on Melbourne Grove will also mean losing a few parking spaces, putting pressure on parking and possibly leading to calls for a CPZ, something I know Southwark are loathe to implement.
There are two trees that cause difficulty for buggies, wheelchairs, people pulling suitcases to the station etc. They are both on the same side of the road. It's really not that hard to cross the road if getting past is a problem for you.

Hi Abe-froeman,

Yes generally - but still a significant number speed.

The alternative to kerb buildouts was copping these mature trees down. We wanted to avoid this.

This stretch of road is the busiest section or road in SE22 without traffic effective traffic calming. Residents in lots of other roads have had this with less speeding and less volume of traffic.


Hi d.b.,

TO make such a crossing we'd need to put extra dropped kerbs. We'd need to ensure people didn't park in front of such dropped kerbs with double yellow lines. Same amount of parking would be lost and we'd inconvenience people walking along the road.


Hi first mate,

You've watched too many dodgy movies. No councillor is talking about closing this road. This idea was floated early on but we've all listened to resident feedback and it is not on the agenda.

I and 5 other councillors agreed we needed to respond to residents requests as we have for all other such roads in the area - and agreed to upgrade the poor out of date traffic calming. Not sure why we should penalise these residents for being on the last section of such road.


The next step is to find a way to clam the northern section of Melbourne Grove.

The northern section already is calm, thanks to parking both sides which does not allow two lanes of traffic to flow. Hence queues building up in EDG. It's hard to think that only recently this was a bus route with no complaints. Please don't spend any money on it.

Indeed Reg.

First priority is to ensure the new schools entrance is on East Dulwich gRove OR only temporarily via Jarvis Road/Melbourne Grove until the school building is complete.

Then we need to sort out Melbourne Grove 9north) rush hour congestion.

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

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

> Indeed. Just shows what noisy people can get.

> Ridiculous.


Tt may not have been clear, but this was my point (not that Melbourne Grove was a hotspot, quite the opposite). My hope is that in future, there will be a more strategic approach to prioritising road changes, which will target hotspots, rather than simply responding to 'he who shouts loudest'.

James Barber Wrote:

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

>

>

> Hi first mate,

> You've watched too many dodgy movies. No

> councillor is talking about closing this road.

> This idea was floated early on but we've all

> listened to resident feedback and it is not on the

> agenda.

> I and 5 other councillors agreed we needed to

> respond to residents requests as we have for all

> other such roads in the area - and agreed to

> upgrade the poor out of date traffic calming. Not

> sure why we should penalise these residents for

> being on the last section of such road.

>

> The next step is to find a way to clam the

> northern section of Melbourne Grove.


James, I'm slightly concerned that you would even pretend to know anything about my viewing habits...... Also, I don't know of any movies, dodgy or otherwise, that star a local councillor intent on closing a residential street.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Then we need to sort out Melbourne Grove 9north)

> rush hour congestion.


Wait a minute, one minute you want to calm it, now you want to 'sort out' the congestion? Which one is it? This is a recipe for spending money on every road that doesn't have some notional ideal speed. Madness. Let's not spend the shrinking council cashpile on stuff that doesn't need doing.

  • 4 months later...

So, it turns out these speed humps probably won't reduce the top speed of vehicles as they accelerate in between them but they will generate a lot more pollution in Melbourne Grove and it seems that such pollution causes a significant number of deaths.

Oh dear.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/01/speed-bumps-could-removed-cut-traffic-pollution-save-lives/


"The Imperial study found that in one north London street with a speed limit of 20mph and fitted with road humps, a petrol driven car produced 64 per cent more Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) than in a similar 20mph street fitted with road cushions. It also produced 47 per cent more Particulate Matter (PM) and nearly 60 per cent more Carbon Monoxide (CO2) emissions."

They recommend average speed camera enforcement.

If that was a real option allowed by government regulations and the London Camera Partnership I'm sure those would be suggested instead.

Looking at the NICE evidence included as part of the NICE consultation no allowance for variations in legal frameworks appears to have been considered or crash stats impact.

The contrast was even more pronounced when it came to a car using diesel.

"This produced 98 per cent more NO2 when driven over humps rather than cushions, along with 64 per cent more CO2 and 47 per cent more PM.".

  • 3 years later...

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

    • Thanks for the good discussion, this should be re-titled as a general thread about feeding the birds. @Penguin not really sure why you posted, most are aware that virtually all land in this country is managed, and has been for 100s of years, but there are many organisations, local and national government, that manage large areas of land that create appropriate habitats for British nature, including rewilding and reintroductions.  We can all do our bit even if this is not cutting your lawn, and certainly by not concreting over it.  (or plastic grass, urgh).   I have simply been stating that garden birds are semi domesticated, as perhaps the deer herds in Richmond Park, New Forest ponies, and even some foxes where we feed them.  Whoever it was who tried to get a cheap jibe in about Southwark and the Gala festival.  Why?  There is a whole thread on Gala for you to moan on.  Lots going on in Southwark https://www.southwark.gov.uk/culture-and-sport/parks-and-open-spaces/ecology-and-wildlife I've talked about green sqwaky things before, if it was legal I'd happily use an air riffle, and I don't eat meat.  And grey squirrels too where I am encourage to dispatch them. Once a small group of starlings also got into the garden I constructed my own cage using starling proof netting, it worked for a year although I had to make a gap for the great spotted woodpecker to get in.  The squirrels got at it in the summer but sqwaky things still haven't come back, starlings recently returned.  I have a large batch of rubbish suet pellets so will let them eat them before reordering and replacing the netting. Didn't find an appropriately sized cage, the gaps in the mesh have to be large enough for finches etc, and the commercial ones were £££ The issue with bird feeders isn't just dirty ones, and I try to keep mine clean, but that sick birds congregate in close proximity with healthy birds.  The cataclysmic obliteration of the greenfinch population was mainly due to dirty feeders and birds feeding close to each other.  
    • Another recommendation for Niko - fitted me in the next day, simple fix rather than trying to upsell and a nice guy as well. Will use again
    • Looks great! but could it be possible to pinch the frames a bit tighter with some long nose pliers and add more struts to stop the tree rats getting inside? Also, the only issue with a mesh base is that it could attract rats towards your property.
    • I struggled with the parakeets literally decimating the bird feeders within an hour.  I tried squirrel proof ones to see if they helped, but they jammed their claws in the mechanism to stop it closing.  Then the pigeons managed to do the same.  I spent a long time researching the best ideas and came across something on Pinterest.  Someone had used a metal dog cage and attached it to a wooden platform.  So that's what I did!  Once set up, you just hang the feeders inside.  Large birds like pigeons and parakeets cannot get inside.  I get all the small birds, plus starlings.  Not many thrushes or blackbirds around, so have no idea if they could get in.  The squirrels do!  It's amazing watching them slide through narrow gaps.  I also covered the roof of the cage with a piece of plastic to keep the rain off, plus I am just about to replace the cage plastic base with something more mesh like.  It can get a bit gooey after a while, so with mesh, all the dropped seed from the messy goldfinches, will go on to the ground where the pigeons can clear up.  I even added a birdcam.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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