ED_moots

If you are this person or know them please ask them to come and turn off their alarm which has been going since 3am this morning. https://video.nest.com/clip/f9e73a79c325445e82e6bf1d197f7ee5.mp4 Obviously this is very disruptive since we can't even leave the house,

Only 7 matches in the vanarama national league have been postponed, dhfc is not one of them. https://www.thenationalleague.org.uk/match-info/fixtures The FA have advised it is up to each league to decide whether to cancel their own fixtures.

Update: Cabinet approves CPZ as proposed. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50021413&Opt=0 Received this email today: Good morning, I am writing in response to your representation, or request for project updates, to the East Dulwich Controlled Parking Zone. In accordance with Regulation 13 of The Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 the council has considered your representation and a decision has been taken by the relevant decision maker as set out in the Southwark Council?s constitution. Consideration of the representation Your representation was considered by The Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency on 23 December 2019. Summary of decision In consideration of any objections received, the council has: Determined each of the objections included in the correspondence, in line with the reasoning in Appendix 1 of the report Decided to make the traffic management order as originally proposed. Reasons for decision The reasons for the decision can be found here. Traffic Orders: In view of the above, the council will make the following orders and a notice of making will be published: The London Borough of Southwark (Parking places) (Parking zone 'ED') (No. *) Order 202* The London Borough of Southwark (Free parking places) (No. *) Order 202* The London Borough of Southwark (Free parking places) (Solo motor cycles) (No. *) Order 202* The London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) (Amendment No. *) Order 202* Further information For further details on the project including the latest programme information, please see the project webpage here. Should you require any further information, please contact us via email at [email protected]. Kind regards, Rebecca Barkham Project Manager Highways | Department Environment & Leisure London Borough of Southwark PO Box 64529, London SE1P 5LX Visitors: 160 Tooley Street, SE1 2QH

What a stitch up! Much reduced parking on MG as a result. Double yellows over all the dropped curbs and beyond, you couldn't park a mini on most of these 'driveways' so anyone that used to park over their frontage will now compete for residents bays. At the northern end over 30 properties are eligible for permits for about 5 spaces up to the middle of MG. And 125 quid charge for the privilege. I find it disgraceful that southwark have fudged this through with the support of a small vocal minority. Anyone else feel like not buying a permit or paying the fines? I don't see that any objections were given due consideration. Expect the zone to creep within a year.

I used this place before. Quick lead time and about 60 quid for a decorated, personalised cake (red velvet to be specific). I'd recommend them. https://www.thecakestore.co.uk/?utm_source=stamped&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=channel&utm_content=EmailSurvey

Johnnies is a favourite. Saw them in full riot gear a few weeks back for a pre XR kettling fry up.

Same story on Melbourne Grove.

wonderwoman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Re surgeries what time would that be? 7pm per James signature above.

Hi James Thanks for your responses. Until the data can be shared please can you answer a specific query about the responses from Melbourne Grove North. How many respondents who were for a CPZ came from the same address? I. E. How many distinct households are in favour? I am assuming that most properties own one car so the perceived parking issues are singular per household. Therefore it would be unfair to give undue weight to, say, a family of 8, who want a CPZ versus a single occupier who doesn't.

"ED_moots - the decision on where to implement a CPZ is based on the consultation responses. In that sense, the deputation had no weight. However, where it (and also the traders petition, presented at the same council assembly) does have weight is in helping the Councillors to understand the range of opinions on the issue. But no one assumes that those speaking in the deputation speak on behalf of everyone on those roads." Hi James, thanks for the reply answering part of my question. Could you confirm the substance of the deputation from VRA please? If this was minuted please steer me to a link. Furthermore, most of the hardstandings (which have dropped curbs) on MG North do not fit a normal family car and are not used. Even if the proposed double yellow lines are reduced to 1mtr the impact will be a loss of around 6 car spaces. If the council implements more mixed use bays then more residents parking will be lost. To whom should I submit an FOI request for all the data returned from the consultation?

Hi James, please confirm what weight was given to the signed letter with 62 signatories and the deputation made by Vale Residents Association? Were the 62 signatures verified and what was the substance of the deputation? The nucleus of the VRA are pro CPZ and had prepared a letter of support from all roads it represents without any valid data from us. This was later amended to give a neutral stance but I know they also leafletted and wanted to know what they presented at the DCC meeting. Since they canvassed very hard on these streets, so presumably captured as many signatures as they could muster, is it fair to assume that the council is imposing this CPZ on us with the support of just 62 residents/families? The hours of operation also seem totally unrelated to commuter parking and will harm local business. By 'externatilities' I presume you mean our neighbours for whom a CPZ has not been proposed but will definitely be impacted. I live on Melbourne Grove (North) and am totally unconvinced that CPZ will improve parking for residents - except the small number who like to pop out in their cars during the day and would prefer to return and park very close to their home. This, again, is a tiny minority in Ed.

Whoever wrote that letter could walk to Denmark Hill Station go one stop to Peckham Rye then take a Southern train direct to Tulse Hill. I bet it's quicker than driving in rush hour.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ED_moots - you are right this is very much like > Brexit: > > - "locals" worried about parking immigration and > "outsiders" taking their parking spaces > - a campaign group (the council) pushing > inaccurate and misleading information to help fool > the electorate into voting for it > - an electorate who could end up voting for > something that they live to regret and can't undo > which ultimately benefits no-one other than the > people who dreamt up the idea..... > > sorry I couldn't resist ;-) No problem Rockets. That is exactly what I meant.

Just to clarify, I didn't have a hand in the original draft from Vale Residents Association. I do live on one of the VRA streets so I am just trying to get some real data from those streets so that the VRA can represent us as accurately as possible. The redrafted letter takes a neutral stance on CPZ but I still think the data would be a valuable steer for the VRA if responded to by the residents in adequate number.

Please can we leave the interrogation for the other threads. I am just trying to get some data from these specific roads so they can be represented by their residents association. I'm sure there are many reasons why people may or may not want a CPZ. Everyone should be able to say what they want. This like ED's brexit.

Thanks Galileo, I'll look out for the final version and will replace the draft attached to the OP. I still think some up to date data from residents would be useful to the VRA. Would you mind forwarding the survey link to any VRA contact list you might have?

UPDATE. The letter has been updated as Galileo said. I will reattach in due course. If those residents on these streets could still do the survey, that would be great. I have prepared this very short (1 question plus some info to check varacity of respondents) so we can gather better data. PLEASE ONLY RESPOND IF YOU LIVE ON THE ROADS IN THE SUBJECT LINE. https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/VY9GWQ6 Ps. I realise not everyone reads EDF but I can't think of a better way to circulate without printing and posting flyers (which pro CPZ groups have done) Is there an EDF twitter account?

Tima Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Suspect charged for this murder. > > https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/east-dulwich > -stabbing-man-24-charged-with-murder-following-fat > al-knife-attack-a4067531.html Other reports including met police say the man charged lives on Lordship Lane. Seems like this 24 Yr old adult stabbed and killed someone on his own street, by himself (not trying to impress his mates), for a cigarette. Given these circumstances I would question his mental health (and I bet it will form part of his defense). If found to be sane and guilty, I hope he receives a full life term. I don't see how we can blame society for this; poverty or lack of opportunity is not an excuse for this disgusting disregard for human life.

An arrest has been made. http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-arrest-in-connection-with-east-dulwich-murder-358618

Page 29 of Se22 magazine, article re: CPZ. To me the councils proposal comes across as a done deal. Haven't click on the link though. Although I live in one of the acknowledged hotpots for parking pressure, I don't think the proposed CPZ will help at all. It will reduce parking on my street (double yellows), the street is mainly residents parked up all day while they're at work with a few places left for the dreaded commuters, shop visitors and some of the 100 staff at the new school where there is barely any parking on site. In my view it will benefit only those who want to use their car in the middle of the day and come back to park near their home - to the detriment of everyone else.

Best thread of 2019 so far...

Worth remembering (as James B has clarified to me on pm, thank you James) that there are 2 consultations going on. West Peckham AND East Dulwich and that residents can respond to BOTH. I feel the fancy information pack isn't clear on this point but it's important whichever way you're swinging.