first mate

James, I was wondering if there was any more news on this consultation?

It is amazing how all these little technical hitches surface just as a consultation is closing. I wonder do our local councillors support demolition if these cottages to make way for yet more overdevelopment? I'd love to hear from, Barber, Smith and, Shimell, do they support demolition or not?

James, yes great if the limit is adhered to but so much evidence it is. Go for a spin up Sydenham Hill, early or late, and see for yourself how safe and relaxing it feels to stick to 20 mph.

I have to say that my experience is the exact opposite where the behaviour of other drivers is concerned. I would say more people are overtaking in a reckless manner. This applies to the section nearing the Horniman, up Sydenham Hill and onwards. Many drivers getting frustrated, tooting and overtaking at speed. Note that few commercial vehicles, including buses, are adhering to 20mph.

Townleygreen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > first mate, you don't seem to have read James B's > post fully. He outlined there that London cannot > cope with as much motor traffic as its population > grows. Etcetera! > > So we need to focus on pedestrians, cycling and > public transport. So the council is being > realistic - one could argue. > > So it isn't a question of CHOICE, first mate. > Can't you see that? > > It will be futile and short sighted to try to > blame political parties for actually planning for > the future rather than just carrying on as if we > can live this way forever. Which is clearly > unsustainable. But TG this is not planning, it is pushing through an agenda without fair dialogue with the community it affects. There are major questions about the efficacy of proposed changes to TR junction let alone all the other proposals. The rationale for each is also presented in a very slippery way, for instance changes to unrestricted parking are presented as " creation of free parking, helping local shops" . This is utterly disingenuous. If the underpinning thinking is that this is all about making us a slimmer,leaner and healthier borough then let it be stated that way and cut out all the other BS. BTW if the current incumbents of Southwark Council are so very concerned about the burgeoning population then how on earth do you explain the Heygate scandal, where council housing and land has been sold off to developers to fashion property for overseas investment buyers? Still, I digress. I am not a great car user. I walk and cycle. but I want to be consulted in major changes around me nit simply told. all of these changes are being made with unseemly haste and it does smack of manifesto box ticking for election time. The irony is I think it could backfire, bigtime.

James, While I may agree that it would be great if more people could get on their bikes, this should be a matter of choice. It feels as though the decision making is being done for us, with an illusion of consultation. The forced changes to hitherto unrestricted parking and to various junctions, are making a lot of people very angry and I am not convinced that the Lib Dems object in any real way to these changes. As others have said, this high-handed approach will not be forgotten come election time.

I do not think you are being paranoid. There appears to be a deliberate agenda throughout ED and surrounding areas to make changes that place ever greater pressures on traffic flow and parking- both Labour and Lib Dems would like to see a massive reduction in cars and everyone out on bikes and they will use fair means or foul to achieve that. The sudden appearance of yellow lines everywhere, the imposition of restricted parking where there was none before and odd experimental junction changes, like Townley, all seem to point to one thing. Changes are also being made to Northcross Road and every time you ask why a different explanation is given ranging from 'safety' to making the junction 'nicer and more appealing for users'. What is not apparent is the evidence to support the need for all these exepnsive changes. I don't know where the Tories are on this. It seems though that no councillor of any party is prepared to stick their necks out on the issues above, we are simply being told what will happen. The process of consulation seems dodgy on a variety of issues and, in my view, is merely window dressing to meet certain statutory requirements.

Well there remains the question, as you say, of them seriously and legitimately considering all objections. If the method is flawed and inadequate how can that be done? You said you agreed the consultation for this was not fit for purpose. Those in charge have thus far resisted this notion. In the name of democracy I would have thought this issue alone would be worth a bit more fight...perhaps not lying down in the road but more than simply meeting the terms of your job contract.

James, is that another way of saying that there is little you or anyone else can do to stop proposed changes to unrestricted parking? I thought you objected to this change, is that not the case?

Hi James, not sure if you saw my question a few days ago, re the latest on changes to parking:- Will you be calling the decision in to O&S Committee within the required 5 days, as well as objecting at the issue of TMO's stage?

Well, just wait until all the new restricted parking is introduced on Lordship Lane and beyond. There'll be plenty more of this to come and what with the new school, new M&S and the new cinema, there'll be lots more visting cars too. Kerching.

In teresting to note that despite a steady stream of complaints for a number of year this practice has not not inspected by the Quality Care Commission http://www.cqc.org.uk/location/1-565650623/registration-info A quick google reveals this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063458/Family-doctors-firm-raking-1-8m-YEAR--patients-say-surgery-appalling.html Whatever one's reservations about the Mail, this article has the ring of truth about it. Odd, this is 2011- 4 years on no progress, no intervention from the powers that be, nationally or locally. The system is not working. Another snippet http://www.dmchealthcare.co.uk/team/helen-greengrass/ giving an insight into the wonderful future of healthcare by super GP's and their workmate- as you see a background in IT and finance is all you need.

I just wonder about the point of any kind of consultation if the response to objections is to state that in the eyes of the council there is no problem...as seems to be the case here. Thanks Woodwarde for keeping on with this. I hope others are also taking note as before we know it there will be big changes on the high street and it will be too late to change things.

Hi James, Will you be calling the decision in to O&S Committee within the required 5 days, as well as objecting at the issue of TMO's stage?

Hi James, Thank you. Since you are probably much more aware of process than are we, and of the most likely routes to get a change on these proposals, could you advise the likelihood of getting a 'result' by waiting for the next cycle and TMO's? Additionally, as per Woodwarde's email above, will you challenge the proposals after going as an IDM to the Cabinet Member, within the 5 day limit?

@Woodwarde, thanks. That last point is in itself ridiculous. Changes to unrestricted parking will affect everyone living in the area. It is not as though the only people using LL or Dulwich Village are those at a distance of 50m from the parking. The areas serve the local community. May I ask, once this decision goes to the Cabinet member for decision, who would be able to call it in? Also does 5 days means 5 working days?

hi James, has there been any movement/ response to objections to proposed changes in parking. Was there a response to the objection you lodged about proposed changes to unrestricted parking on Lordship Lane?

I was wondering if James Barber had hears anything more about this?

Ednewmy, which is exactly what certain powers want, because that urban look can be used to justify further urbanisation. This is a link to a great article explaining precisely how London is being sold up to developers and to what extent councils and politicians are in the pocket of developers, who hold the whip hand in the planning game. Note the bits about Peter John our own Labour Council leader, and the ongoing Heygate scandal. Read and weep. Remember that the likes of the Harris Federation, who are accruing schools and land faster than you can say primary, are arguably just another developer. http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2014/sep/17/truth-property-developers-builders-exploit-planning-cities

If you look at Southwark's forward plan for March here http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgListPlanItems.aspx?PlanId=316&RP=153 you'll see that a big meeting is coming up on management of Southwark Leisure. It is a closed meeting, reason given why. Click on link, then click on March and scroll down a few pages at page4. You'll see that that coming up too are meetings on primary school strategy and cycling strategy, amongst others Although the leisure meeting is closed perhaps a kind councillor can advise how dissatisfaction of locals can be made clear, especially at that meeting. Perhaps a selection if photos, or even a video, showing the scale of the problem? The reason the meeting us closed from the public is cited as Reason 3. Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

I 'm sure I noticed in one of the forward planning documents that Southwark leisure management is coming up. Perhaps James Barber could find out more, so at least you can have input. This link should take you to the Southwark Forward Plan for March 2015. You'll see that management of all borough leisure facilities is to be looked at....primary schools are also on the agenda for that month.http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgListPlanItems.aspx?PlanId=316&RP=153

@Woodwarde, many thanks. It is quite extraordinary the degree of effort that is required to try to get some movement in what is termed a consultation. There are so amny issues on here where people are feeling thwarted and viewing/experiencing the consultation exercise as a barrier, where neither structure or process are transparent or helpful. If each consultation was pursued and challenged, in a way that certainly seems necessary to get any kind of voice, there would not be enough hours in the day to do anything else. This cannot be right.

@woodwarde it is [email protected] or [email protected] Sorry cannot remember which right now, but one of those

Hi James, Has there been any further news/ movement on the one hour parking consultation? It would be disturbing if it just gets pushed through. For your information I tried to send an objection to parking services on the link you provided and it just kept getting sent back, so yet another seeming hurdle in the window dressing exercise the Council laughingly calls consultation.

Something like this should be held at the weekend when the bulk of the population might have a chance to attend. What earthly point i. Having it in e middle of the day mid week. That is a rhetorical question, of course.