Metallic

march46 Wrote: --------------- > > Presumably this is what the Conservative > candidates for Dulwich Village will be promising > also, given their close ties with ?the alliance?. > > > > Metallic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ?1.472 million in fines paid from the Townley > Road > > Camera since it was put in. Even more > apparently > > from Dulwich Village camera looking north. What > a > > sin to punish decent working people with these > > restrictions. > > Figure sent to me by friends who received it on > > the grapevine. The tories are campaigning to open the junction at Calton/Court. Which would be a lot better than leaving it for a few residents to have a quiet life in my opinion. I think One Dulwich and the Alliance have evolved what they want but I'm only going on leaflets.

?1.472 million in fines paid from the Townley Road Camera since it was put in. Even more apparently from Dulwich Village camera looking north. What a sin to punish decent working people with these restrictions. Figure sent to me by friends who received it on the grapevine.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The thing is, though, that the ward councillors > have little real power - even if they do choose to > use it to represent their constituents rather than > promote the party policy line. > > So getting a couple of opposition councillors on > DV ward for example won?t make a difference in > terms of changing policy if Labour still have an > overall majority. > > I?m going to vote for someone other than Labour > this time to register my disappointment in the > current ward councillors. Haven?t decided who I > will vote for yet, whoever seems the most locally > based / not a career politician / acknowledges > that there are at least two sides to any argument, > life is complicated, and that policy Puritanism is > unhelpful. No but an able councillor from another party, can disrupt a council full of one party councillors. Greens and LDs have the same LTN/Climate policy as Labour so it has to be Conservatives. This was explained to me by a friend from Croxted who has almost had the full set of door knocking. Haven't had anyone at my door yet. On the leaflet I have seen from LDs they are promising everything to everyone.

I'm not a conservative but I will vote for the two candidates. Labour has lost my vote locally because of the way they have ridden roughshod over a large majority of residents. The Tory candidates at least divorce themselves from the national behaviour and I would never dismiss messing up a dictatorship, which is what we have in Southwark, by having a few people brave enough to take it on. I don't like the LTNs or living on the edge of one which makes my road too quiet as people use another route as they think they can't get through. I don't like the way the present councillors talk over and ignore what we residents feel. Neither deserve our support.

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How would they know the parcel was "unexpected"? > > That seems a bit strange! Because it has a return address on it not recognised. Or is opened and then you don't know what it is and where it has come from, and then there is the knock at the door. High value things, we were told expensive items.

Also the neighbourhood watch police area I live (DV ward) in sent a newsletter before Christmas that there is a scam locally with DPD delivering an unexpected parcel, correctly addressed and then another DPD driver coming later on and saying it was delivered by mistake, and trying to get it back. Mystery how they do it and no one has been caught yet. The newsletter said to phone police if this is the case and then hopefully they will catch the person doing it. I suppose they are masquerading as DPD couriers.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What I?d like to know is whether LD village ward > candidate Richard Wingfield is related to long > term Labour councillor Ian Wingfield. Just because > the LD pamphlet says he is frustrated with the > Labour council?s lack of responsiveness etc. I?m > guessing not. > > For the record, the LD pamphlet says they want to > ?Make Southwark the greenest borough in London by > protecting our green spaces, reviewing the impact > of the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods in Dulwich, > investing in green transport and tackling > congestion...? > > The Conservative one says they?ll campaign to > reopen closed roads (and is just about the closure > thing although it does talk about democracy, > representation and accountability as key issues). Wingfield posts this morning from his canvassing in --------Herne Hill Market. Does he know where Lambeth is, because he is in it. Additionally wanting to bring Santander bikes in to the ward. Good luck with that.

Rockets asks:Does anyone with a sharp legal or political brain know why the council would be filibustering over making the closure permanent? Or have they hit a legal issue with their implementation - we know the emergency services have voice their opinion and been ignored about the DV closures? They don't want time for big rows even lawyer-rows, with the May elections looming. I'm really disappointed in Southwark Labour councillors - some of them - at least McCash comes on here and puts his case. East Dulwich Forum covers where I live and think I can therefore say this. But people in Melbourne Grove and those other closed roads have no idea what the ripples from the junction closure means to all of us in the old (OHS) Area B. Why should we suffer for them?

march46 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When was traffic on East Dulwich Grove at 8am ever > not bad Heartblock? You paint a picture that it > was so much better before, but I remember very > clearly it always being bad. > > You have your view, I have mine - they differ but > thankfully we have evidence in the form of traffic > data - which shows traffic is significantly > reduced for the largest section, between Melbourne > Grove and Townley (where the Charter school, > health centre and Dutch Estate is). On EDG between those two roads - where has the traffic from either end disappeared to? Simple question as I fully expect my road to get closed at some point instead of being the turning circle for people who don't believe the road signs. No traffic most of the day now even though Townley becomes open at some point. This is such a rubbish future.

northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What policies do they have that show they?re > ?centrist? @heartblock? > > The only policies they suggested were fighting to > remove LTNs and fixing the postal service > (something that they had no remit over). > > There is nothing to suggest that they are ?Tory > light? so let?s not pretend that in voting for > them you won?t be voting for Conservative > councillors - they are part of the local > association with all that entails Maybe you should keep out of Dulwich Village Ward politics as I don't believe you live in it?

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At last! He should have done this ages ago instead > of wasting millions on ludicrous schemes like the > LTNs that just make the problems worse. I hope the > scheme is means tested so everyone pays the > "same". > > It does look like a bit of a kite-flying exercise > and the real story is the clean-air charge - which > also is very welcome. Looks like the Clean Air > Charge will also prompt a discussion about what > councils are doing to encourage and embrace > clean-air vehicles and infrastructure as such a > move will be the catalyst to get people to look at > electric. Two words: Silvertown Tunnel. One cost assessed at ?2.2 BILLION. Sometimes Twitter is useful for tracking down Khan's plans.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't spend a lot of time on Twitter, but thanks > for posting, made me smile. Do join me for a bad > taste Maggie Maggie Maggie, Out Out Out, by the > posh estate in West Dulwich on the South Circ. > > Elsewhere others have suffered from a sense of > humour failure. But it isn't funny is it? Neither is the Williams response. Let's see how they react when they get called out for a few of their data analysis attempts.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree its not 'wise' but lets stop the hand > wringing about him being a primary school teacher. > He didn't tweet it from the school account, its > his personal account. Twitter has an age limit of > 13 so his pupils shouldn't be seeing it. > > Its not exactly a secret that James is hugely anti > Tory, so not sure why its coming as a huge > surprise to anyone. I completely disagree. And anyway it shows the make of a "man" when that sort of message is exposed. Presumably he has a few parents following him on twitter?

Looking at twitter over the holidays. (I rarely tweet having less followers than I have fingers and toes.) But caught sight of one of the esteemed Labour councillors from Goose Green Ward wearing a "F*** the Tories" Christmas jumper and the tweet was liked by our esteemed (yes again) leader of the Council, Kieron Williams. These are the people running a demolition derby bicycle through YOUR businesses and YOUR home roads. Does Councillor McCash teach your children? Do you respect these two for their attitude which I'm pretty certain doesn't uphold the Nolan principles which I am happy to share: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership. As for the Councillors in my Ward, they have politically motivated me to hold them to account and again on twitter, I see one of them calling out people as liars without any proof as there probably isn't any in view of the FOI clearly visible on a tweet, and one who has no resilience to being challenged and uses the old verbals. Not in writing of course, that would be stupid even for that person. Happy New Year everyone, gird yourself ready for a rollercoaster leading up to May 5th. Yes, I'm proper cross and I'm not going to sit quietly in my LTN and not call people to account. The LTNs are an abomination against the elderly and disabled, against anyone waiting for emergency services, against small businesses trying to carry out their work up against traffic jams caused by displaced traffic, against able bodied but who do not want to cycle having to spend half their day walking to the shops in Lordship Lane, shopping, then dragging their bags back home. I'm sure Southwark will claim traffic is down due to their LTNs, but actually it is down as we are working from home yet again. It wasn't down in September either due to their LTNs, it was down because no one could get petrol. And so on. I don't believe a word they say, they have no integrity and no objectivity, they have no accountability because there is no opposition, they are not honest and their leadership thinks a "F*** the Tories" Christmas jumper is worthy of a like.

Meanwhile our roads are super quiet and a bit lonely at night.

Matil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That's fine. Kinda expected but these guys can > throw weight around council's decision on planning > permission, so better to get to know them even at > a distance. We'd rather not passively let this > thing slide so any channel that is relevant to our > survival, we're interested (though they might not > be!). But thanks for the heads up bruv. It'll be a > less of disappointment if your saying is turned > out to be true. > > > > You are joking - of course! The Society won't > > take any notice of you, the only people it > takes > > notice of are the people on their little cosy > > committees. Not including some committees by > the > > way, just the ones with certain people meddling > > and so I doubt the planning lot or the grand > > committee will take any notice. Sorry bro. Sadly many members and ex members have tried to get the council and the Estate to see sense but the Society has no sway with either in reality, it is always about money. It is a valuable site and they are chugging up its value with every day that passes.

Matil Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Thanks for the Dulwich Society's link! I might > join the society so that I can gauge views on the > skatepark & have a dialogue with the local people > directly. I'll look around their articles first. > > The skatepark is still in limbo in terms of > survival but even so / because of it, we're > determined to make the spot as good as it can be. > An Olympian & his crew visiting the Grove on their > own accord is a testimony to what we've been > trying - a skate spot built by the skaters with > love & passion ;) > > Glad to hear the vid is enjoyable to watch! > > > Glemham Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Here's a link to an excellent account of the > Grove > > Tavern Saga which in 2022 will ?celebrate? its > > 10th anniversary. This Saga has it all: a > brewery > > owned by a hedge fund, incompetent landlords, a > > toothless local authority, and an amenity > society > > so enamoured of Dulwich's past that it has > > seemingly little interest in its future. > > Meanwhile the Grove DIY skateboarders put them > all > > to shame. > > > > > https://www.dulwichsociety.com/journal-archive/130 > > > > -spring-2020/1872-the-grove-tavern-saga-by-mike-fo > > > ster You are joking - of course! The Society won't take any notice of you, the only people it takes notice of are the people on their little cosy committees. Not including some committees by the way, just the ones with certain people meddling and so I doubt the planning lot or the grand committee will take any notice. Sorry bro.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is great - I hope this stays and gets some > funding from the Council. But sadly the land belongs to the dreadful, uncharitable, look-after-themselves Dulwich Estate. They have been coining rents from that derelict site for years, from the former Grove Tavern landlords who just retained their lease without doing anything to the property. Something fishy? Surely not? It is a scandal.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It says it?s being paid out of parking revenue I > think. And boy is there alot of that!!!

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Is it possible for someone to answer this > question. > > I have a blue badge and need to up my walking rate > due to illness. My question is > > Can I turn right out of Dulwich Park passing > through the village towards Redpost Hill or do I > have to abide by the timings that could produce a > fine. > > Not sure of the exact times perhaps someone could > help with this. > > Many thanks If you are a Southwark resident i believe the Council has given all blue badge holders the right to pass through the cameras. But ask your councillor to check in case legalalien is right - I thought this permission had been granted.

I think Dulwich Village residents are in another one. A friend who lives on there was telling me as I asked why our book club zoom failed. Her download speed is less than 7 quite often. Not sure what Openreach are doing about it all though.

Meanwhile, Southwark officers release massaged data when what everyone wants is the real thing.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This bit of that order speaks volumes: > > Overall the response from the consultation > regarding the measures on > Melbourne Grove North, Derwent Grove, Elsie Road > and Tintagel Crescent > showed a preference for the measures to be > removed. However, the > measures were popular with those who were > residents of the filtered streets. > > I wonder how much pressure was exerted by those > same residents on the filtered streets to not move > forward with the revised measures? Is the > Melbourne Grove Resident's Association now > rivalling Southwark Cyclists for airtime and > influence with the council? > > How much longer can they use the cover of Covid > for the experimental/temporary TOs - it seems > ludicrous they can still invoke them two years on > - will this ability to avoid talking to residents > continue forever - is this not a classic example > of a council abusing the powers given to them in a > time of emergency? Monkey business, I read the numbers and a few rule the many. Anything to help old James hang on to his ward, so what will happen in Dulwich Village Ward to help Councillors Newens and Leeming? We are SICK of this in my road. Minority views rule. Until the elections maybe?

The stats are bent. That is why there is such a difference of opinion in here. I will never believe anything Southwark Council says about their work on this matter, ever again.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just again for the people at the back. > > Traffic on East Dulwich Grove fell on the section > between Melbourne Grove and Townley Road by up to > 20% when compared to before the measures were put > in. > > Your road is not busier, it is quieter. So people used Thorncombe rd or Glengarry to get to the Alleyn's drop off? Someone suggested that route the other day, I distinctly recall seeing it. Meanwhile, in the real world, a hell of a lot of traffic is driving down EDG apart from that miracle piece.