rch

I tend to walk by there as part of my regular exercise routine, and was astonished to see one of the Wilmott Dixon managers, who I know, a couple of weeks ago... so, I stood 2 metres away and asked him when it was due to open. My understanding is that the building works were completed on April 20th and that the centre was scheduled to open on May 20th, but I'm not sure if this has been definitely confirmed due to the current situation. One of the security guards informed me that there was a formal inspection a couple of weeks ago, presumably to sign off the building works. I've also seen moving vans on site, so I'm guessing all the GP surgeries are furnished now and ready to go? Am curious to see when the Melbourne Grove Medical Centre moves across and then see what happens to that site... as it's owned outright by the NHS, I suspect the freehold will be sold to a developer to knock down and build housing (which will require Change of Use and planning permission), which will provide some much-needed funds to pay off part of the high-interest loan that funded the building of the Tessa Jowell Centre.

Yes, I actually agree with you both... I have also experienced all of this, and some even more bizarre issues! I didn't mean to single out joggers and cyclists per se, they only create an immediate problem which needs an instantaneous reaction. I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that these are behavioural issues, not logistical issues. So, I genuinely wonder if restricting parking and expanding the pavement space into the road (as Lambeth is doing) or even closing roads completely will solve this current problem? I'm not sure what the solution is... so, I'm curious to hear other peoples' ideas, as I'm a full-time pedestrian and can't get anywhere (including to buy food) unless I walk... which is a nightmare. But I also suspect that there is going to be a significant amount of antisocial behaviour once the lockdown measures are lifted...

It's intriguing watching two distinctive mindsets evolving in the community... one is very interactive, considerate and community spirited, but the other is extremely self-righteous. I'm getting used to walking in the road more often to avoid cyclists, joggers, and electric scooters on the pavement. Other pedestrians are developing eye contact and hand signals to decide how we considerately pass each other while evading pavement issues. There is a campaign to extend the pavement space into the road but, although it's useful in some locations, I suspect that this won't help in Lordship Lane as the problems will simply expand to fill the space. Ironically, I'm actually finding the parked cars very useful for jumping into the spaces to avoid the problems on the pavement. I'm finding most car drivers to be extremely courteous (often stopping to let me pass in the road if they can see the pavement being blocked), but the speeding Boy Racers have been a problem in the past... it would be useful to report this issue to the police, noting specific times and registration numbers if possible, so that they can add Lordship and EDG to their Covid car patrols. Our new local police team are being more proactive on foot, I've seen them patrolling Lordship several times, so more information about various activities and timings would be useful.

Hi, thanks... I don't usually cut through that area (I usually walk straight through Melbourne), but I'll go have a look during one of my daily walks. I seem to remember various tree issues being very contentious around there, but we've been experimenting with smaller trees that don't block the pavement or block the light. At minimum I can try to check with the tree officer what replacements are being considered.

I'm really pleased to see this thread revived, as I've also had a lot of issues to deal with and haven't been able to post... but I'm also getting concerned at the amount of disinformation that's being circulated, so I think more of us will need to stick together. Firstly, be aware that we had a very similar "Healthy Streets" consultation in around 2007/2008 when I was a DulVil ward councillor. The proposals to block off the streets were almost exactly the same as in this current "consultation", but council highways engineers had a much better plan, which was circumvented by political machinations (long story). There are multiple layers of complexity here, but my memory of the above cited traffic movement was to do with traffic cutting through the Village from the South Circular to continue into downtown London. Therefore, the proposal to block off Dulwich Village on the College Road side of the roundabout will only displace a great deal of traffic over to the Lordship Lane exit of the South Circular, which seriously won't be able to cope with the volume. Engineers did predict that the volume of through traffic in the Village would increase over the years, so they came up with an extremely productive strategy to increase the "fluidity" of traffic flow in the Village... some of their interactive proposals were brilliant, but later undermined, leading to the current deterioration of local traffic issues (for instance, the recent redesign of the Dulwich Village junction and also the EDG/Townley junction is seriously flawed). Also, bear in mind that local residents fought off the proposal to block off Melbourne Grove (which was also not recommended by council highways engineers) just four years ago (I think there's an EDF thread on this subject), but it's already being "reconsidered". Without going into a huge amount of detail in just one post, the main problem with these recent consultations is that no one understands the unusual dynamic of this area of geographical distances served by poor public transportation. Aside from technically improving all the junctions, the main solution that I campaigned for years ago was a local digital "Green Bus" service that regularly ran from Goose Green Roundabout, through Dulwich Village, then round to Half Moon Lane and back again. When I suggested this at one of the recent CPZ public meetings (which was also flawed), the officer was quite positive, noting that there was internal council funding for exactly this sort of solution... but then this idea disappeared off the radar, as I suspect that these funds will be directed to the north of the borough where the RV1 issues are quite contentious.

devin... I'm still trying to lobby for tree planting in Goose Green ward, but it's difficult due to time constraints. I'm aware of the 2 trees on Lordship Lane, which I've repeatedly lobbied to have replaced... I was told that this would happen this spring, but I suspect that the Covid-19 issues have reduced capacity during this planting season. Can you also tell me roughly where the 4 trees on the way to ED station are, as I'm also working on replacing some of those, but I can't tell which road you are referring to in your above post. Tree maintenance and replacements are happening bit by bit, when funds are available... I recently applied for CGS funding and some specialist maintenance work in Goose Green ward, but none of the tree bids appear to have been approved by councillors. So, I'm going to try to find another way of accessing funds. Also... if anyone lives near a newly planted tree, then it would be really useful to water it in this dry weather. Unfortunately, the blasted green bags around the tree make it more difficult to water, but try to persevere!

It's a shame that this pollarding is happening again so late in the spring... I sorted this out ages ago, but I don't have the same influence now that I'm not a councillor anymore. I understand that there are longterm tree maintenance issues due to budget cuts over the years, which are now being addressed, but we have a whole new tree team which isn't familiar with the area, so I suspect they are simply repeating past maintenance programs. I would suggest calling the council's 020 7525 5000 number and making an Environmental complaint by phone (be sure to get a reference number) and request that a tree officer contact you (request an email). The council's new website complaints system appears to be dysfunctional, so try the phone first. If you see distressed birds, then call the RSPB for advice and report the council. Can you update us as things progress?

Firstly... thanks again, Janet. I've now seen the photos and understand the location and the problem. It was great that you took the photos and that the lorry stopped and left a note, so hopefully the damage can now be repaired with an insurance claim. Macutd... the difference between Melbourne Grove and other roads is that it's too narrow here for some cars to pass when cars are parked on both sides of the road. There needs to be passing spaces inserted at the junctions at minimum, which would help enormously. The council proposed doing this with extended double yellow lines but it was blocked by councillors. Instead, a small fortune was spent on dysfunctional consultations and up-grading the existing speed cushions to speed humps. But, not only is this not addressing the actual problems, but it's causing other problems. We've been saying for YEARS that the car damage isn't caused by speeding (which has regularly been measured at an average speed of 19mph), but by the narrowness of the roads. Jamming, there's one specific location where special Thames Water sewer flood control pump mechanisms in the road along a specific terrace could be damaged by implementing speed humps, thereby causing intense internal flooding, so we have been discussing other legal methods of speed control works which could also accommodate some of the passing problems. FYI, there are three legal ways to control speeding in a 20mph zone... 1)speed humps, 2) buildouts on a junction corner, and 3) pedestrian islands. Speed humps are the most problematic. Yes, creditwheredue... residents voted in a highways consultation for the double yellow lines at the Colwell junction, but councillors objected. As much as I hate ugly double yellow lines, it's even more distressing watching regular road rage damage incidents outside my house, which other local residents are also witnessing. Slowly but surely, me and other residents are uniting to try to get Highways and councillors to understand the problems, which will inevitably cost more council funds to address. This has been going on for DECADES...

Hi, thanks for your reply, was just wondering if it was at the train station end or the Lordship Lane side... but both sides have weird problems, albeit different causes. I see accidents outside my house at the junction of Melbourne and Colwell Road (at the Lordship end) regularly.

It would be useful to know where on Melbourne this accident happened, as I am beginning to work with local residents and councillors on addressing the narrow road issues causing accidents on the south side of Melbourne. There are also some historical issues that can be addressed, so any information on accident locations can be useful illustrations. There are a multitude of different solutions for the traffic problems on the north side of Melbourne, but there are different criteria on that side.

Glad to hear that you're reporting this. It's really useful if residents report all types of crime, even if the police can't do anything directly, as intel and statistics affect how police resources are deployed and targeted. If a particular pattern evolves, the local police can request that the borough patrol cars are diverted down here. Some police community meetings are frustrating because it looks like crime levels are low in East Dulwich, precisely because residents are too frustrated to report, so our stats appear low.

I was one of the original Community Roadwatch coordinators in the East Dulwich area, but the political machinations got so frustrating that I gave up approx a year ago. There are ways of contacting the appointed Roadwatch police teams directly but, according to the TfL website, the best way to start from scratch again is to email CommunityRoadwatch@met.police.uk

It might be useful to have a little walk around. Sometimes they don't actually tow away cars blocking roadwork areas, but they'll move them to another empty parking space nearby.

Hi James... can you find out if this development is subject to CIL charges and, if so, how much? Gerry... you may be interested in some intriguing background to this development, which I'll try to type out when I have more time...

You're welcome, Andystar, let me know what happens. I may pop up there and have a look... as I said earlier, I have a vague memory of this, so I'm curious.

The easiest thing to do in the first instance is to call the council's 7525 2000 complaints line and ask if a council tree officer can contact you and inspect. If they confirm that this is on private property, then I can recommend that Hamish from Cut Above tree management can probably prune the canopy in the first instance, but you would have to pay for it. I used to know Pickwick Estates ages ago but can't remember who manages it now... is it private management or Dulwich Estate property? I seem to remember lots of weird problems with trees in the back which we addressed years ago, but I can't remember who owns what...

Yes, well done, worldwiser. One of the regular topics of discussion with the police is that people in the ED area tend not to report issues, so this keeps our statistics low and therefore our police resources are low because it appears that nothing is happening down here. Plus, information can be extremely useful to officers investigating other crimes.

I agree with Countrlass22, at least phone the police 101 number and report it as information. The 101 voice menu is a bit of a pain, but if you call before the evening you'll get through faster.

FYI, J&B, I dropped in on the parks manager yesterday and told him about the polystyrene in Goose Green. Ironically, he did his last inspection on the 20th Sept, but your post didn't note the problem until the 25th. So, they have logged the issue and will try to get it resolved asap (depending on rainfall). It also turns out that my 7525-2000 complaints line recorded reference never got passed onto the Parks team, so that avenue of communication is a red herring. So, it sounds like the best way to report problems at Goose Green is definitely to email parks@southwark.gov.uk

Lordship Lane has been a mess for YEARS, with "improvements" being bodged. When I was a cllr in Village Ward, I arranged supplemental funding for shop forecourts on Half Moon Lane and East Dulwich Grove to have their forecourts upgraded in tandem with the public footpath repairs. But they can't even get the public footpaths repaired properly on Lordship Lane... and now funds are being diverted onto a "Healthy Streets" agenda, which doesn't properly accommodate pedestrians. Pugwash... I would encourage you name and shame shops that are causing problems. There's one cafe on Lordship whose built-out forecourt wall slightly overlaps the pavement, and then they block the rest of the narrowed pavement with an A-board. The council won't take action against them because it will cost too much for just a couple of inches, but I tend to fold up the A-board by hand whenever I walk by there. Lastly, the council used to invite residents to public highways inspections on Lordship Lane, so that these issues could be logged in situ and action taken, but I got dropped off the mailing list and haven't heard anything for ages.

I know you were being ironic, Humdinger, but you set me off on a really productive train of thought... The reason why a pint of beer is so expensive is because Lordship Lane has been designated a "Destination Area" as the variety of shops has grown over the years. This means that more people come from out of the area to shop in addition to the local residents, which increases footfall. The increase in footfall in turn has a effect on the increasing annual shop rental amounts, which in turn increases the business rates, whereupon the council benefits from the increased amount of business rate income. So, the price of a pint inevitably goes up to cover the increase in rental costs and business rates. HOWEVER... In other parts of the borough, the council allocates funds to improve the local high street, but we don't get very much support down here in Lordship Lane. There are measures that the council can take to address crime in Lordship and even make simple improvements such as upgrading the pavements and street lights. There is also a council fee on property developments, known as CIL or Section 106, which is collected in the Dulwich area, but redirected to make improvements in the middle and the north of the borough. There used to be a local Dulwich CIL priority list, which listed a new local police office on Lordship Lane as a top community priority request, but I'm sure this is now buried. Therefore, since you're now having to pay higher prices for a pint of beer, I have decided to lobby the council to allocate a proportion of the Lordship Lane business rate income and CIL payments to contribute to the creation of a local SNT Police Office within the new 20 Lordship Lane meeting room redevelopment. I therefore request that you drink as much beer as possible on Lordship Lane...!

Look forward to meeting you, seenbeen! Am slowly working my way through all the forum pseudonyms... Out of curiosity, what do you think are the three biggest crime issues in the ward? You don't need to give personal information, am just curious about residents' general observations...

Hi... apologies for being vague above, have been running around. FYI, I called the council's 020 7525 2000 complaints line and logged the issue with them. They can't deal with it directly, but they can pass it on to the Parks team. A quicker way to report it directly is to email:- parks@southwark.gov.uk The more people who log complaints will help to speed up the response, so if you contact Parks in addition to my log at the 2000 number, then that's two of us! The above email address is also the best way to report dog poo in Goose Green, as discussed on a previous thread. Goose Green is inspected regularly, but sometimes issues are missed unless the locations are specifically logged. Let me know what happens!

Better to contact the council's parks department... the contact details are on the noticeboard by the Christmas Tree on the East Dulwich Road side of the park. I saw white stuff on the grass as I was passing by, but couldn't stop, so it's useful to know what it is...

Just saying hi to DulwichFox and singalto... it's great to actually be able to talk to everyone in person! FYI, I made a special request to the local police to patrol on Lordship Lane more visibly, as per the discussion above. So can someone post on this thread when they see our officers out and about? Also, I was intrigued by Cora's comments above... so now I'm curious as to what the EDF users think are causing the most problems in Goose Green ward?