Zak

Good news! According to the sign which has just appeared on the shop door, it?s re-opening on Monday 21st February.

As a matter of interest, there are also stretchers in use for fencing on Queen's Road. There were clearly a lot that needed putting to good use!

My understanding is that they were general WW2 surplus supplies and hadn?t been sourced for use specifically in relation to any possible event in the flats.

I think you?ll find that there are cameras in both directions on that stretch of road. Go and take a look.

Walked into the Day Lewis pharmacy next to the TJ health centre and got inoculated in a matter of minutes. No need to book.

I've just double checked the parking restrictions and discovered a couple further complications..... * Outside Gibbs & Dandy & Kwik Fit: I was correct in pointing out that there is no 30 minutes free outside Gibbs & Dandy, but a couple of yards away, just outside Kwik Fit, there's another small bay where there is a free 30 minutes! * Outside The Cherry Tree Pub & The Dulwich Design Kitchen Shop: Again, I was correct about there being 30 minutes free outside the Cherry Tree, but a few yards away in front of the Dulwich Design Kitchen shop, there's no free 30 minutes. It couldn't be more complicated! Again, anyone parking there needs to double check exactly which bay they are in. How Southwark can crow about supporting local businesses, when they create traps like this for their customers, is a joke.

I've just walked down Grove Vale to the shops and checked out the parking situation. It's pretty confusing. This is how it is: * Outside Gibbbs & Dandy wood yard and on the opposite side of the road: Just pay by phone for up to two hours. No mention of free first 30 minutes option. * Outside The Cherry Tree pub: Pay by phone for up to two hours, with an option to stay for 30 minutes for free, but you have to register. * Outside the shoemenders/cleaners on the opposite side of the road. Free for up to 30 minutes, no need to register (approx 4 spaces) No wonder there's so much confusion! The bottom line is that if you park on Grove Vale, then look carefully at the signs - don't assume anything!

Here?s the New Zealand approach.....

Wwe're in the saame road and our brown bin has been emptied each week. Could it be that you've mixed up garden waste with food waste and this is causing a problem. Although it all ends up in the same place, when Southwark started charging they specified that food waste had to be left in a seperate kitchen caddy and that the it could no longer be thrown in with the garden waste. Just a thought...........

If there really have been 22,000 fines issued in six weeks, then I think it suggests that there's something lacking in connection with the signage. For that many people to have driven through a prohibited road unknowlingly (one assumes),it must be the result of something more than simply their being inatttentive.

Came back from ED station this pm to find that the planters and bollards have been removed from the Grove Vale end of Melbourne Grove - see photo. Anyone know what's going on here?

For those of you concerned about the disappearance of the Queen from her pitch on the wall opposite the Lordship pub, on Lordship Lane.........good news! She's simply taking a break in Whistable - proof attached!

Yes, another example of Southwark introducing disproportionate measures, without due forethought. Ok keep buses moving when its busy, but why 24 hours? But then there will be that additional income from all those extra fines. Now I understand!

Just walked past the end of Elsie Road, where a couple of guys from Conways were on their phones to their HQ. Seems like Southwark have realised that the planters are a little over the top and one or two may need to be moved/re-positioned to allow the bin lorries to operate. Evidence of an ill thought out scheme? Let's see what happens to the planters .............................

Someone has been out on Grove Vale with their box of chalks and has provided a visual reminder for everyone,in several places,of what "keeping two metres distance apart from one another" actually means. Useful. Take a look.............

We're currently trying to buy a parking permit on-line and it's turning out to be a bit of a nightmare. It's "the easiest way" according to Southwark's letter, but that's not our experience. First you're asked for all your credit card details - card no., name, security number. The system gobbles that up! But then you have to open an account............. Your user ID is your mobile phone number, but it takes a while to find out that they want the number without the "0" prefix, but with "44" instead" Your password is then required and it's not until you've tried a few times that you're told about the combination of letters and symbols required. Then there's the encrypted code that you need to enter (to demonstrate that you're not a robot) which you enter to the best of your ability, only to be told (repeatedly) that some or other of the details you've just entered are wrong! If you do get through that stage, but you're not the council tax payer (ie your name isn't actually on the bill), you're then told that you need to upload some personal identification and wait for an email back confirming you exist. We've yet to manage to get through to actually make a payment and buy a permit - but there's still three weeks to go! Oh yes.....there is a number that you can ring to buy one over the phone, but the recorded message recommends going to the website to buy it on-line - but perhaps we didn't hang on long enough! Anyone else having a problem, or is it just us?

When the East Dulwich sorting office closed and everyone had to start going to the Peckham one, I think the opening hours were extended to around 5.30pm on a daily basis. I've certainly been down there fairly recently at around 5.00pm to pick up a package. However, on receiving a card to notify us that there was a package waiting to be picked up, I noticed that it's now only open until 3.00pm on four weekdays - with just one extended opening day each week. Very unhelpful for anyone at work. So, it seems to have reverted to how things were before the improved service was introduced to sugar the closure of the ED sorting office. Looks like a bit of RM sleight of hand, or am I wrong?

Just a reminder that tomorrow is the deadline for submitting comments/objections in respect of the proposed Peckham West CPZ. Probably the simplest way to do it, is by email to traffic.orders@southwark.gov.uk But remember you must: * quote the reference no. ?TMO1920-026 Peckham W parking zone? * give your name and full address, and say if you are resident, business or visitor & * state the reasons for any objections you have. You will receive an automated acknowledgement The deadline is Thursday 17th October 2019. ----------------------------------------------

The Transport for London website is quite clear that it's not an offence to cross into a bus lane where there is a dotted line ( as opposed to a solid line) in order to follow a left turn arrow and turn left https://tfl.gov.uk/modes/driving/red-routes/rules-of-red-routes/bus-lanes Fight it!

Will Councillor Richard Livingstone and the Goose Green Councillors keep to their word, in relation to the CPZ decisions? Following the meeting of the Dulwich Community Council on 29th January I wrote to Councillor Livingstone asking for clarification as to how the decisions relating to the CPZs would be taken. I wrote: ?At the Dulwich Community Council meeting on 29th January, Councillor Andy Simmons (the chair) was asked about how a decision would be taken on whether to proceed with the CPZ after the consultation had taken place. In response, he assured the meeting that ?Southwark wouldn?t proceed to the next stage (i.e. of taking a CPZ forward to a Statutory Traffic Order Consultation) if the majority were to say ?no? to a CPZ ? This undertaking was endorsed by Councillor James McAsh in conversation at the end of the meeting. ?... I hope you?re willing to uphold the democratic principles, to which I know the Labour party adheres, by agreeing to a decision being taken on a majority view in respect of both consultations?. I went on to point out that last time there had been a CPZ Consultation in East Dulwich, in 2012, Councillor Peter John had written to residents in to reassure them that the result of the consultation would indeed be honoured (see attached). ?Be assured? he wrote ?if objections outweigh support, there will be no CPZ?. They did and there was no CPZ. . Richard Livingstone wrote back to me: ?Cllr John?s and Cllr Ward?s letter uses the word ?outweigh? rather than majority. Clearly, we would be unlikely to proceed with the CPZ if there was a groundswell of opposition to it from local residents". Regards Councillor Richard Livingstone Cabinet member for Environment, Transport Management and Air Quality Weasel words? If one body of opinion outweighs another, then it must surely represent the majority! If that was good enough for the Leader of the Council last time round, then it should be good enough for Richard Livingstone- especially since our local councillors have stated their support for accepting the majority view.

I understand that there's going to be some coverage of the proposed East Dulwich CPZ and it's impact on the local economy on the 6.30pm Regional News on BBC 1. Several of local traders from Lordship Lane are expected to be interviewed. I wonder if there will be anyone from Southwark Council there to explain how committed they are to supporting local businesses! Interestingly, earlier today, the House of Commons Housing Communities & Local Government Committee published a report about the future of high streets. One of their Recommendations is; "We recommend that action is taken at local level to create visionary strategies for high streets and town centres which have the backing of the local community, to support local traders,to facilitate parking and to develop the role of place partnerships" Is Southwark listening?

Hi James, Reading the previous post prompts me to ask you some questions about how the current opaque consultation and decision making process which is being carried out, in contrast to the previous democratic East Dulwich CPZ Consultation in 2011/12 Judging by what appears in the consultation documentation, the decision making process which Southwark are adopting, following the end of the consultation, is barely, if at all,open to public scrutiny: - The Officers analyse the consultation results - They present a internal report to the responsible Cabinet Member - Richard Livingstone - with their recommendations and - The cabinet member makes a decision about what should happen in terms of proceeding with the CPZ. Compare this with what happened last time, in 2011/12, when Southwark carried a CPZ consultation in East Dulwich: - The officers analysed the results - They produced a report which was a public document (see attached), for everyone to see and discuss & - The results in the report were formally discussed and debated at the relevant Community Council meetings with councillors before any decision was taken. Councillor Peter John even wrote a letter pledging not to implement a CPZ unless there was a majority in favour of it (see attached). There wasn't a majority in 2011/2 and the CPZ wasn't implemented. In view of this departure from a democratic decision making process: - Can you tell us, why a similarly transparent/democratic decision making process has not been adopted this time? - Will you undertake to raise the matter with the Leader ( Peter John) and press for the results of the consultation to be made public and properly discussed through the relevant Community Councils before, any decisions about implementing CPZs are made?

Yes, the drop-in was rather shambolic. Furthermore, the decision making process which Southwark have adopted, following the end of the consultation, is now not at all transparent: - The Officers analyse the consultation results - They present a report to the responsible Cabinet Member - Richard Livingstone - with their recommendations and - The cabinet member makes a decision about what should happen in terms of the CPZ. Compare this with what happened last time, in 2011/12, when Southwark carried a CPZ consultation in East Dulwich: - The officers analysed the results - They produced a report which was a public document, for everyone to see and discuss & - The results in the report were formally discussed and debated the relevant Community Council meetings with councillors Councillor Peter John even wrote a letter pledging not to implement a CPZ unless there was a majority in favour of it (see attached). There wasn't a majority in 2011/2 and the CPZ wasn't implemented. Southwark Council obviously learnt a lesson from that rather democratic approach!

Many of us rely on the people working in various local services (eg: schools, health services) and local businesses (shop workers) to run the Peckham West/East Dulwich local economy - which makes it such a good place to live. Some of them may have no alternative but to travel by car to work, in order to service our community. Public transport has its limits. However, there seems to be no recognition of their contribution, or their needs, in Southwark?s proposals for granting permits ? which nevertheless allow for up to three permits per domestic household. How will that discourage car usage? Businesses can only buy permits ?for vehicles essential to their business? (at ?577, which is almost x 4 the cost of residential permits) and there?s no provision for staff needing to commute. A local councillor at the public meeting on 12th January convened by the Dulwich Society said ? Southwark are absolutely committed to making things better for both residents and the local economy.? Will that happen? If you share any of these concerns then you might like to raise these issues with Southwark, when you reply to the Consultation. If they?re really committed to looking after residents, then they should take positive steps to enable the local economy to thrive rather than marginalising it. It would be terrible if the price of protecting parking for residents and improving the environment were to result in undermining our local services and vibrant local businesses.

Lobsters.............. Actually, if anyone is really concerned about animal cruelty on Lordship Lane, then they should think about challenging Moxoms about the lobsters they hold captive on their counter and challenge anyone who buys one, intending to kill it by immersing it in boiling water!