Charles Notice

Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "taper Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > See previous post. The closed bridge makes > > Lyndhurst Grove, Lyndhurst Way and Bellenden a > lot > > more treacherous for cyclists using those roads. > > > Camberwell Grove is fine with the bridge half > > open." > > Hi Taper, sorry for the delay. > > Our suggested response to the consultation says: > > "It is unsafe, and arguably unfair, for > improvements to Camberwell Grove, Grove Hill Road, > Dog Kennel Hill and Champion Hill to mean pushing > traffic to the diversion route along Lyndhurst > Grove, Lyndhurst Way, Bellenden Road and Chadwick > Road. A permanent bridge closure should be > combined with improvements to all the residential > roads between Camberwell Grove and Rye Lane. These > should ensure through-traffic stays on the main > roads and cannot take short-cuts down residential > streets. The result will be improved road safety > and lowered air pollution across the whole area." > > So we have your needs well in mind. It's all > here: > > https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/camberwell-grove- > bridge-re-opening-draft-consultation-response/ If you are a resident on the above streets how do the authorities decide if you are resident traffic or though traffic, to use your words, to be able to use these roads to reach home? If I live in Linwood Close for example I have to be through traffic using Grove Park and Chadwick Road to reach it not including all the other roads I have to pass through. Barriers at every end of the streets with fob entry, no doubt costing residents more. All roads are through roads going somewhere.

It seems that people have forgotten actually what Camberwell Grove is. It is a public highway for all. There should be no consultation. It should be repaired and opened with either a full road or as it was before with a one way system. Cannot see why this is taking place. Public highway for all people. How difficult is that to understand.

I got a crumpled notice stuffed through my letter box which would have gone straight into the junk bin if my wife had not for some reason smoothed it out. How many others like this? Southwark and Camberwell Grove I suspect are hoping for a lack of a response from the area. I too suffer from vast amounts of traffic on my road since the closure. For some reason this morning it resembled the M1. Has anyone noticed any signs on lamp posts, notice boards etc advertising this? I have not. Remember Southwark/Camberwell Grove want a lack of response. The last meeting at the church was rammed because people knew about it and it was firmly rejected out of hand. This is not the case this time. If people are not aware how can they respond. No doubt Camberwell Grove has already been in touch with the Cabinet Member who will make the decision. Camberwell Grove is a main road, always has been, and should reopen on a one way basis as before. This road did not appear over night as some people would have you believe.

I think this is the Dulwich Forum at its best. The opening post was to say goodbye and to bring to peoples attention the closure to a long and valued shop. Closure was due to an unaffordable rent increase. An upgrade of an area does this unfortunately. Hence the title. Not many posts saying how sad this is for the owners but it does offer the opportunity to go off on a tangent which I suspect the OP never realised would happen but is par for the course for the forum. I certainly remember how accommodating this shop has been over the years probably to their detriment when you find you do not have enough in your pocket. Mr Patel, many thanks for the past years and I am very sorry you have to close.

You are I suspect in the toast rack. That I think we can all understand.

With regard to your comment on majority decision the DKH result has just been set out. 2471 letters sent out 365 replies overall. 15% Unfortunately as Southwark look for a response rate of 10% overall that have declared that they will push for full implementation of the CPZ based on yes percentages. However when one looks closely at the figures it is a joke. For our road. 98 houses in total, 14 replies, 9 for, 5 against. The against vote does not count those responses that were received outside of the consultation. I know people who only found out late and emailed and had their vote rejected which would have pushed the against vote up. If a decision to implement is carried on 3 or 4 votes it does not reflect what is correct from such a small response based on the total properties involved.. People should have voted but I only came across the consultation by accident how many other were in the same boat but my no vote was rejected. Many of the residents are only passing through by renting so have no interest. No matter how small the yes vote is if it means they have one vote majority in favour on very small turnouts they will take it as a yes vote. If people would like to take the time to look at PDF1 report for the DKH CPZ or get Southwark to send it to you you will see what aa farce this has been. Before the usual response is posted "you should have voted" perhaps Southwark should have looked at the returns and said this decision on these numbers covering such a large area is wrong. But they want a CPZ's all over the Borough. Permit fees, parking fines, tow away fines etc etc. Looking at plans the number of double yellow lines, meter parking cutting down existing parking makes your head spin. This will be coming to an area near you very soon.

"Camberwell Grove, for example, has been great since the railway bridge was closed". Traffic still flows up and down Camberwell Grove as it always has flowed. The only thing that has changed is cars cannot go over the bridge. The traffic amount has not changed coming down from DKH or up from Camberwell Green. Please do not hint traffic does not use the road because the bridge is closed as some Camberwell Grove residents would like the world to believe. Camberwell Grove is and always has been safe for bike users.

Perhaps you should read the original post before making a comment

If you had looked at the post by Duvaller you would have realised who wrote this. I have amended the post to show this so you will not get confused.

Duvaller wrote abaove "This is a problem that Dulwich DIY have made for themselves. It has hints of New Delhi where shop building extensions encroach on the pavement" Suspect a complaint has been put in. Cannot have ED brought down to this level

Why not chip people at birth?

As is with the road restriction is perfect. Unfortunately common sense always seems lacking when they have their own agendas. Yesterday walking through Grove Park via Chadwick Road the traffic was horrendous and having the refuse collection taking place traffic came to a standstill till they reached the bottom.

Pierre Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I did wonder that about the pile of fly-tipped > rubbish next to the Peckham Rye guys - it looked > like a tipper truck had just up-ended and dumped > all that stuff, and all the travellers only had > Transit-like vans, some with extra seats and child > seats in the back. I know fly-tippers are scum, I > wonder if they saw the traveller caravans and > thought "great, we don't have to go to all the > bother of driving to some scenic country lane, we > can just leave this load here and everyone will > blame the travellers." > > I feel a bit guilty that I didn't have the balls > to ask "so did you dump all that rubbish there?" > > The site on Peckham Rye is now completely clear - > I have to say, Southwark Council's guys did an > amazing job of cleaning it all up very very > quickly. If they knew they would be blamed for this pile of rubbish why did they not go and put a stop to who was dumping it?

I am sure if they checked the vehicles for mot, road tax and insurance they would have lots of powers.

Should be able to find that illegal tipper truck easily then

Perhaps Cllr Barber could put us out of our misery and furnish the answer. How long has a camera been there? Or is it a new revenue exercise by Southwark?

Why have these fines and seems like cameras suddenly appeared. There was never a problem before as common sense seemed to rule not revenue generation. Would have thought it dangerous to turn left from the right hand lane rather then just let the traffic use the bus lane to make these left hand turns. Southwark love traffic statistics, how many vehicles have used the bus lane to turn into Sainsburys or Champion Hill? Southwark Council I feel have a hidden agenda in all of this regarding traffic flows.

Believe there was some incident at Peckham Rye/station or lines there about that might be the reason. Not sure what it was but very few trains passing my window

malleymoo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/fire-ravaged-peckha > m-site-had-no-watchman/6507756.article > There were concerns back in 2009 about Greenacre > sites around the time the current flats were being > built. Please see the link above. There had been > two major fires on their sites I a shirt period. > This article all edges they had not followed the > correct fire procedures re fire safety on their > sites. > > > Greenacre is down in many of the news reports as > the developer but the original scheme had been > developed by St Aidan's group. They were > challenged in the planning process about the fact > that they were planning to build the social > housing at a more lower specification than the > earlier privatly owned development.Southwark was > very much aware of this issue and chose to ignore > the concerns. In my mind this makes them just as > much to blame as Wandle Greenacre and St Aidan's. Has Renata Hamvas found out more about the above comments and whether building to a much lower specification would have raised issues with building control to monitor that more closely. I would be interested in hearing more from the Cllr on this sad affair and not seeing it drop of the radar.

I do find this thread quite depressing. There are 3943 views and very very few comments, 54 in total. Which represents a few outside posters and residents who find themselves caught up in this disaster. There is complete silence from those who should be commenting, Wandle, Eleanor Kelly,Chief Executive, Leader Peter John and Harriet Harman. Renata Hamvas was asked to confirm the position regarding Building Control and whether Southwark Council had a responsibility to sign all building works off. What did they do? Silence. If I say nothing it will go away. Having spent time in senior management with local Councils if a Cllrs enquiry or Members enquiry is sent in it is replied to in days. Why this delay? Now Cllr Barber has made comment which is no more than I have said something, not any offer of help. Lets hope that Southwark News can do a full in depth investigation but as it does not seem to be of much local interest I will not hold my breath. I hope I am wrong. It does seem that petty and trivial matters are of more importance and garner greater a response including marching in the street, M & S than around 85 flats to be destroyed and many many peoples lives destroyed. Even prolific posters on this forum are keeping their heads down regarding this matter. Says a lot about the neighbourhood. If a greater written response was shown this would not be swept under the carpet hoping it will die a death. As I said very very depressing.

I have been trying for most of the morning to get the direct number for the arboreal department and the name of the person. I recall reading it on the forum but cannot find it. I have been shunted around to all department including children's services. As this is important I would appreciate hearing if anyone has the number Many thanks

Why have this mornings posts on 3 Railway Rise all been deleted?

My fiance and I have now been subject to awful verbal abuse from the lady (if you can call her that) at 3 Railway Rise. We both very rarely catch the train into london but on two recent occasions where i have turned around in the road to pick up my fiance she has come out shouting and taking pictures of my car with no permission. I have not once stopped my engine as i have been there but a minute although am advised 'You cannot park here' which i clearly was not. She was fine with me when I pulled up to wait for a new tyre. I explained I was waiting to see the tyre fitters. She didn't appear to have a problem with this. Nothing like a good mystery on a Monday morning.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I love the idea that people take part in a > consultation in order to say "I don't know". > > Genuinely don't understand why people would want a > CPZ. it's not like there will be any fewer cars. > You don't get guaranteed parking outside your > house - it just makes travelling anywhere more > difficult, having guests more difficult and > parking more expensive. > > personally, I don't think 23% response rate is > good enough. Bear in mind that those pushing for a > CPZ will all have taken part in the consultation, > where as many of those happy with the status quo > won't even have been aware of it, sot he results > are almost certainly skewed in favour of the > 'fors'. At last someone who understands how the system works. In the loop. Sorted.

With Trio closing down and the chocolate shop being relegated to the boondocks the new Bellenden Residents must have a pointless and expensive victory. A complete and pointless exercise must agree I too never heard a word from any Labour Cllrs. The previous Cllrs at least had an interest in all residents views. Agree % votes over real responses. What next?