Moovart

All seems to be progressing pretty smoothly really. Let's hope it heralds an East Dulwich pavement improvement programme all the way up the shopping part of Lordship Lane where the pavements are being lifted and sunk by the very young (less than 25yrs in most cases) but already massive Plane trees. ☹️

We do now! ☺️

I'm confused....why is this now being posted by Belair House?? 🤔🧐

It really doesn't

Just for accuracy, he's Acting Deputy Political Editor at the moment. The excellent Pippa Crerar is the current Political Editor. 👍

This thread is totally pointless.

In my view the worst part about it is the parking spaces placed on each side of the S shaped bend just before (or after) the pedestrian crossing by the Dulwich wood house. I have seen a few near misses there when a car is parked. I guess it's another strategy to slow down traffic but I think it's a risky way to do it. Luckily the bays aren't used very often.

You cannot be serious!!! Not a snowball's chance that that will happen. It's really dangerous turning right out of Underhill Road onto the A205 although some people do still do it. Wood vale even worse.

Can I ask how they proved it? Structural engineer's report? Insurance claim? Other?

A good neighbour would discuss the problem with you, take heed of your concern and do something about their tree causing or potentially causing damage to your property. Unfortunately Southwark seems to behave like a "bad neighbour" in this situation, not wanting to respond to concerns unless forced to by a third party claim. The only alternative is to keep badgering them to take seriously their responsibility for council owned trees in relation to neighbouring properties in the hope they will eventually act. In the end the residents bear the cost either way ☹️

They don't accurately ascertain. They ask if you are on a street within the zone, resident, business etc but there is no verification of that information and you don't give an address.

If you report this to Southwark they'll probably advise you to make a Third party claim or contact your insurance company. Obviously if your building is not yet affected you may be reluctant to contact your insurance company because it can lead to problems in future when you go to renew even if you don't make a claim. If it's just the pavement and garden wall etc you could start the conversation about removing/replacing the tree with the tree officer at Southwark, copying in your councillor if you get no reply. The claim advice is in the link if you want to go down that route or ring them for advice https://www.southwark.gov.uk/housing/homeowners/leaseholders/building-insurance/make-claim

This comment is illuminating 🫤... "It is the industry that has driven the demand through huge marketing and advertising campaigns in recent years," said Dudley Curtis, the communications manager at the European Transport Safety Council. "SUVs offered the industry a simple way of charging more for a vehicle that does the same thing [as others]," he said.

Another interesting article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c778ekg64mjo.amp Small electric cars were said to be the future – but SUVs now rule the road

I don't feel sorry, it's more that if people need to use a car to get here at 6 or 7am or whatever reason they need to use a car (some people really do need to) and they are not eligible for permits as they are in businesses in LL rather than in the CPZ then maybe they'll move the business. Didn't the butchers move to ED when a red route was introduced outside their shop in Vauxhall? There will only be limited pay as you go parking so you won't be able to pay and park your car all day. That won't be an option so it's not about just charging non residents.

Ironically I think the restrictions will most benefit those residents with the largest cars, as these require the most space, and those that have no financial worries about paying the permit price. At the moment, if you have a small car you can usually find enough space during the day and the CPZ is all about day time parking ie aiming to deter people that need to drive into the area like those running shops and businesses in LL, teachers, other workers. I really feel for some of the businesses that start work at 6 or 7am or finish late. Presumably they won't even be entitled to apply for permits as LL and East side streets are not in the proposed zone In the evening and overnight there is usually quite a lot of space to park so that won't change except it will have to be paid for if a CPZ comes in.

Did anyone go to any if the meetings? Did anything informative come up?

I once watched a colleague write off a car in a car park with their big SUV cos they were short and couldn't see very well over the front. As they swung round between two cars they dented and scraped all four side panels of a parked car with the corner of the SUV without noticing they had hit it 😱

I wonder if an unintended consequence of a CPZ will be more SUVs seen in ED. I see a fair few massive SUVs driving round looking for a big enough parking space and struggling to find one. Parking pressure is a reason to keep a smaller car or no car but with all that parking space created by a CPZ (albeit paid for), the big SUVs will have plenty of space to park. That would be an interesting study between CPZ and non CPZ areas.

I just tried to do that and it said I had already participated so if my first survey attempt is discarded as incomplete then my input will not be counted at all. Seems unfair if true. I found this paragraph interesting in the "options to consider" section : Nearby CPZ schemes operate Monday to Friday, 8.30am to 6.30pm (zone ED) or Monday to Friday, 9am to 11am (zone PW). If similar parking times to neighbouring CPZs are implemented for the proposed zone, this may help prevent vehicles from other CPZs parking in your zone. Basically it's encouraging people to vote for 8.30-6.30 restrictions because that's what the parking restriction times are in the adjacent Melbourne Grove North. Seems like trying to influence the survey result in the instructions!!! So residents would need visitors' permits all day if anyone comes to visit. What a pain. So Southwark is concerned about people in adjacent parking zones parking in your new zone if you don't opt for all day restrictions but they're not concerned about displacement to the east side of lordship lane and are not even seeking the views of the rest of us in east East Dulwich even though we will all be affected. All feels a bit 1984, pick us off one section at a time.

Has anyone on Lordship lane or on the streets to the east of lordship lane received the notification of the cpz consultation? as these are the streets that will experience increased parking pressure if the Melbourne grove cpz is implemented. So far I haven't heard that those residents are being informed so they can respond to the survey. Same for businesses on lordship lane who also should be encouraged to respond.

Sydenham Hill is under Southwark, rather than Lewisham, all the way to the roundabout at Crystal Palace parade.

Can you kindly list the dates and times of the meetings. Thanks.

Consider taking it to tribunal. In my experience, Southwark seems to reject appeals against PCNs even when the PCN has been incorrectly issued. But when you tell them you are taking it to tribunal and start the process, they then cancel the PCN. You have to be sure that the PCN was incorrectly issued.

Malumbu, I think you need to watch Peter Kay's Car Share dogging episode where you can get an explanation as I think you are confused and could get yourself in trouble if you start speaking to doggers in UpDub!!!