tomdhu

hopskip Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The only difference between A and > B on each option is the provision of a protected > cycle lane on East Dulwich Grove westbound in A > which is omitted in B. Not quite true. The only option that will not result in disruption/delays to the vehicle transit is 10B as it is the only one that allows twin lane approaches to three of the four approaches. 10B gets my vote any time but the political maneuvering by Southwark ( i.e. Cllr Williams) rules out all the "B" options. Not having a dedicated left-turn lanes on Townley and west-bound EDG would cause significant delays. One possibility not in the options is to discontinue the right turn into Greendale because Greendale only gets minimal traffic. That way we could keep the twin lanes on EDG west bound with one going straight ahead only and the other going left into Townley. That aside , as it stands, it is evident that Southwark are pushing the least feasible option, so I guess we have to organise ourselves and man the barriers -figuratively speaking.

10B or 11B seem to be the the best of the bunch but as yet I can't see any difference between them. Tom

I understand that TFL have the right of veto over ANY proposed changes to roads on their routes. The consultations department at TFL can be contacted directly using this e-mail address:= [email protected] Those opposed to the NRT may wish to consider sending something like this.... Re Townley Road / East Dulwich Grove Junction Improvement Scheme The proposed No Right Turn from Townley into EDG will displace traffic that will seriously congest bus routes 37 and P4. There also will be increased traffic on Lordship Lane affecting services 185, 176, 40 and P13. As a regular bus user, I wish to express my concern over the affects of the "No Right Turn" Edited to correct the official name of this scheme

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi MarkT, > No, local councillors wont directly be making the > decision on this junction. But it would be very > surprising if the cabinet councillor for transport > went againt a community council making > recommendations. So de facto we as local > councillors are most likely to be taking the > decision. > great example of this was the proposed controlled > parking around East dulwich station. The decision > wasn;t for the Dulwich Community Council to take > but I requested we were fully consulted at the > DCC. The DCC recommended it not proceed. And > despite the cabinet councillor having put forward > the scheme they rejected it based on the two > community council's recommendations. I strongly suggest that all of us who want to keep the Right Turn should read what James Barber wrote above. The Labour bosses in Tooley Street are determined to force this through and so the only way to stop it is to get the Dulwich Community Council to oppose the proposals. However, the DCC comprises 5 labour, 2 LibDems and 2 Conservative members. There are two ways to do this:- 1. E-mail each Labour Councillor in your ward (with CC to James Barber) telling them that you will not vote for them at the next election. 2. Turn up 'en masse' and be vocal on Wednesday 28 January at 7pm in the Baptist Church, Half Moon Lane, SE24 9HU when the DCC meeting is held. Because the Tooley Street cadre is pulling the strings, it was evident during the meeting in St Barnabas Hall last Saturday that the Labour Councillors were uneasy and obviously in a difficult position. None of them voiced for keeping the right turn. So, it's up to us. If we want to keep the right turn we have to apply pressure. Are you up for it?

The Council propose spending ?220,000 to "improve the safety" of the Townley Rd/EDG junction. It has had 3 minor accidents there in the last 9 years. Compare this with the junction of E.D. Grove/Red Post hill/Village where there has been 19 accidents during the same period - several of which have been serious. And now they want to divert even more traffic through the E.D. Grove/Red Post hill/Village junction! Tom

As a regular cyclist and one of the earliest contributors to this thread, I have recently spent time studying the accident statistics and observing traffic at the junction. What I have found is:- 1. There are no records of accidents involving injury to pedestrians during the last nine years. 2. There have been only 2 minor accidents involving cyclists. 3. There was one minor accident involving a motorcyclist. 4. The peak cycling traffic, as expected, conforms to morning and evening rush hours. 5. Circa 15% of the morning cyclists cross EDG from Townley going over to Greendale. Most cyclists go straight through along EDG. 15% of the afternoon cyclists cross from Greendale into Townley. 6. Only cyclists coming from Greendale into Townley are at minor risk from traffic turning right out of Townley and the vast majority of cycle traffic in this direction only occurs in the late afternoon. 7. The junction is only busy on school days at Alleyns and Jags - about 175 days per year. Considering that there has been only 2 minor incidents involving cyclists in the last 9 years it just seems nonsensical to ban the right turn on a 24/7 basis for a miniscule risk that something might happen to limited number of cyclists during a period of about 1 hour every day on only 175 days out of 365. It just looks like over-reaction to a "problem" that actually doesn't exist. Tom Edited for additional data

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > According to this > http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/1685800/1574294730/na > me/KickStands_July+1+2014+Briefing+note.doc, > southwark officers, after a two day briefing with > a cycling consultancy, now embrace the idea of > trialling things on a temporary basis (language a > bit unfortunate, it sounds as though some sort of > "thought reform" process has gone on).So before > committing lots of cash, why not trial the no > right turn ban using an experimental traffic > order? And then we can see what traffic chaos may > or may not ensue? So Southwark have to use Danish and Dutch cycling consultants to tell them how it's done. Whatever next? Tom

> > www.sdgdigital.co.uk/sites/southwarkquietways/ > > > Hope of interest This survey is ill-prepared as it only allows a "For" or "Against" vote relevant to the first person's comments.

I always seem to remember sparrows just loving having sand/dust baths on paths and unmade roads. I think it helped them get rid of parasites. Probably now that everything is concreted over it could mean they can no longer get rid of the parasites and are suffering accordingly?? Tom

How I would love to hear some chirpy sparrows on a sunnyy summer morning again! I grew up in the coutryside in the 50's and 60's when there were so many of them. Our garden backs on to Gilkes Crescent where the is quite a good sized area of mixed over-grown greenery so we have regular robins, blue tits, wrens and black birds also frequent Woodpigeons, jays, crows and the occasional woodpecker. On a rare occasion we might see a small raptor or even a heron as they seem to be inclined to perch when the cloud cover is extremely low and dense. To get things moving in the right direction, I am going to make a sparrow nesting box this week - to accomodate four pairs in the hope of attracting some to reside. I will post a message if I have success, meanwhie any other suggestions for attracting them would be welcome - audio tape?? Tom

slarti b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Cllr Barber > Happy New Year and thanks once again for being a > local politician who is engaging on this issue on > the forum. > Just why all the other councillors (who claim to represent us) have failed to get involved in this issue beats me - particularly those from Village Ward which will be most affected by the NRT aspect. I therefor name and shame all three of them:- Jane Lyons michael Mitchell Anne Kirby Tom

Look o the bright side - he used to have a pair of these dogs producing twice as much!

Jennys Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Did anyone receive any reply from the Village Ward > councillors? I emailed all three of them > separately about these proposals in mid November > but have heard nothing except an automated out of > the office reply from one. I also emailed the three councillors on this subject and did not get one response. I recall also one of the Village Ward councillors coming round canvassing 3 years ago and in the conversation we had he admitted that he hadn't even heard of the E.D.Forum! And these people represent us??

From my limited knowledge, it appears the club has got into financial difficulties but if these plans go through, the club is going to be even worse off as it looks as though the all the existing club buildings will be knocked down and not be replaced. All they get is a pitch in a different location. Just a pitch - no club house etc. Or have I got it wrong?

The competition to guess the budget cost of the proposed works is now closed. The winning guess was ?189,654.72 and the actual budget is ?200,000. This was from someone who is familiar with public sector finance. I guess that will surprise quite a few of us as the average of all the other bids was around ?35,000. The Council officer who advised the amount, was at pains to stress that only a small amount would be coming from the rate-payer's "money", as the bulk of the funding would be from central govt funds. My view is that, either way, a massive amount of tax-payer's money is being spent on projects which result in only a fairly marginal improvement in facilities/amenities. Tom

Getting quite a lot of interesting bids.Keep them coming! Tom

There's been a thread running for the last week about proposed works on E.D.G./Townley Rd. Here is the thread:- http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1426742,1428972,page=2#msg-1428972 Several of us have been wondering just how much this proposal would cost, if implemented. I am familiar with the official figure. So, this is a good opportunity to give everyone the opportunity to guess the amount. To keep it totally fair, I would ask that the estimates be sent to me by PM. No Council employees may enter. The prize is a bottle of wine and it will go to the bidder that is nearest - to the last penny. There is one prize and to avoid any possible duplicates, your bid should be in pounds AND MUST ALSO HAVE PENCE. There should be no zeros in the digits of the pounds value in your bid. I will keep the competition open for, say, 48 hours and then I will post the actual amount and the name of the winner. Good luck Tom

Several of us have been wondering just how much this proposal would cost, if implemented fully. I now know the official figure. So, this is a good opportunity to give each person, who has contributed to this topic, the opportunity to guess the amount and to keep it totally fair, I would ask that the estimates be sent to me by PM. I repeat, by PM only. Others might just want to make a bid also just to see how much these "improvements" cost us all -the tax payers. No Council employees may enter. The prize is a bottle of wine and it will go to the nearest bidder. There is only one prize and to avoid any possible duplicates, your bid should be in pounds AND MUST also have PENCE. There should be no zeros in the last 3 digits of the pounds in your bid. I will keep the competition open for say 48 hours and then I will post the actual amount and the name of the winner. Good luck Tom

Zebedee Tring Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > tomdhu, like you I think that the proposals are a > complete dog's dinner, especially the proposed > banning of right turning traffic from Townley Road > into ED Grove. However, unless I've misunderstood > what you're saying, it seems from the plan of the > proposed "improvements" that traffic coming from > the Red Post Hill junction along ED Grove WILL be > able to travel straight across the Townley > junction towards LL without being impeded by > traffic turning right into Townley Road, since > there are two traffic lanes shown at the junction. > In other words, as far as I am aware there will be > no change from the current situation, at least in > this respect. The two traffic lanes will come down to one only because they are planning a dedicated cycling lane. This, plus the build-outs, means there's only room for one lane. Hence eastbound traffic on EDG will be impeded by vehicles turning right. The implications are enormous as the tailbacks in both directions will be horrendous. They are bad enough between 8:00-9:30 and again from 3:15-17:30. Just imagine! Tom

Crikes! This will affect the 37 bus route severely. This proposal is a complete dog's dinner. Tom

The "No right turn" will impact massively on the following three junctions - which are already congested much of the day:- 1. EDG/Red Post Hill/Dulwich Village/Village Way junction. 2. Dulwich Village/Calton Av/Turney Rd. 3. Gilkes Crescent/Dulwich Village. Whoever drafted this proposal obviously us not familiar with the local traffic patterns.

Sadly, yet another proposal for nugatory works by the Council and their favoured contractors, Conway. Yet another proposal without any cost information, time scale or impact study e.g. traffic disruption.. When will this Council stop wasting taxpayer's money? Maybe when they stop benefiting from Conway hospitality??? Are they putting this work out to open tender.Don't bank on it.

James, Your posts are much appreciated and regularly you take a sensible stance on most issues but you appear to be reticent about the proposed modifications to the East Dulwich Grove/Townley Road/ Green Dale junction. Please see the relevant thread and let's have your views:- http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1426742 Also please tell us why the Council does not inform the public of the cost of such proposals. Tom

Countrlass22 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 3 lots of road works,issues on route hence long > delays then 3 buses at once often in opposite > direction to way you wish to travel,does say on > tfl allow upto 30 minutes extra for journey. And such problems will be ongoing as long as the Council keep on doing unnecessary works along the route. Just look at what they have done with speed bumps, traffic calming measures, pavement widening etc along East Dulwich Grove alone. And now they want to do even more with their latest - Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale. They are spending tax payer's like a drunken sailor.

edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > tomdhu Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > I sometimes wonder who comes up with these > ideas > > at Southwark. Could it be the Conway?s > > representative who is embedded at the Council > > offices? > > > > Is this true? Yes, there is a Conway representative with a permanent office provided by the Council within the Council building - supposedly for "liason" purposes. And some of us have always wondered why Conway get virtually all the Council work. Go figure!