Jenijenjen

Wouldn?t data protection regulations preclude this?

You may want to go down the adjudication route https://www.rics.org/uk/products/dispute-resolution-service/drs-services/adjudication-services/

? I try to avoid posting letters and parcels with royal mail as much as possible because it is just not reliable.? And ordering goods online that use Royal Mail to deliver

..

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pots and kettles. Not at all, I don?t use emotive, diversionary rhetoric

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I suppose that depends on which side of the fence > you stand on doesn't it? ;-) > > On one side you have a small group of people > lobbying for closures who got listened to and on > the other side a larger group who didn't want the > closures who didn't get listened to. > > If smaller groups of people are able to sway and > influence the democratic process is that a good > thing or a bad thing? Look at what happened in > Melbourne Grove, the council suggested changes and > did a U-turn following lobbying by people from > Melbourne Grove. > > Is that fair, especially when so many local > residents have had their views and input roundly > ignored by the council and have been treated as > some sort of annoyance? Here we go again, in a bit of a tight spot so pose an emotive question to divert attention. Fairness has nothing to do with yours and others? claims that Southwark have ignored the democratic process.

That is exactly what?s happened.

ed_pete Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rockets Wrote: > > > > They consulted, got a response they didn't want > to > > hear and then made the decision they wanted > from > > the beginning by ignoring the majority. That's > why > > so many people are upset with them - that's not > > the democratic process they claimed they would > > follow at the outset of this. > > > Which democratic process was that ? > I don't ever recall the council saying here is a > vote for or against the LTN's and we will abide by > the result ? Exactly, to repeat, a consultation is not a referendum. And it?s posters who know that full well who keep bleating on about ?the democratic process? for political purposes. Anyway, I think Admin should give us all a Christmas present and send this thread to the Lounge.

Yes, it?s a barbers, advertises cuts for men and women. No use of smelly chemicals

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > East Dulwich Grove - exactly Rockets > > "The September 2021 figures have been set against > 2019 figures from ?a comparable location? (it?s > not stated where this is), and seem to have had an > enormous influence on Southwark?s thinking" and > "apparently this shows that traffic in the middle > of the road went down between 2019 and 2021, even > though traffic at either end (the Dulwich Village > end and the Goose Green end) went up" > > How does traffic in the middle of a road with > closed roads all around go down 20% when it is up > 26% at both ends with nowhere to go - this 20% > also being calculated by dubious pre-lockdown > figure. > > It would be good if this could be explained. It would also be good if you could answer the critique levelled at your views rather than change the subject.

dougiefreeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @rahx3 > You?re really not in any position to demand > apologies when you yourself refused point blank to > apologise for publicly insulting a group of > predominantly elderly and disabled folk? > #idiotsgate Can you point us in the direction of the post where he did this. Or did he just disagree with them.

I passed by a long queue outside Tessa Jowell this morning that extended round to Melbourne Grove

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People scouring the data for anything that backs > up their view, whilst completely ignoring the big > picture. It's an example of confirmation bias in > the extreme. The facts are that traffic is down. > Active travel is up. Not just inside the LTNs but > across the wider area. This absolutely. Thank you

Here we go again, the implication that anyone who criticises the arguments put forward by those opposed to LTNs are elitist and/or living within one of the closed roads. Speaking personally, walking and public transport, including buses, is my only means of travel

Data would have been collected in the same way before installation of LTNs so I don?t see what difference that would make.

I repeat, they are not moving in an upward trajectory. Let readers of the forum decide for themselves https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/77415/Bus-Journey-Times_Dulwich-Streetspace_Sept-2021.pdf BTW your snideness and mythologising is not doing you any favours.

No most are not on an upward trend. Whilst some showed a steep upward trend in July which could have occurred for all manner of reasons, with the exception of Croxted Road northbound they had normalised by August/September. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/77415/Bus-Journey-Times_Dulwich-Streetspace_Sept-2021.pdf

Deleted as Goldilocks responded far more knowledgeably than me

In very simple terms: Before LTNs 100 cars travel east from Townley Road 20 of these cars turn into Melbourne Grove 80 cars travel along eastern end EDG to LL After LTNs 100 cars travel east from Townley Road None of these cars can turn into Melbourne Grove so 100 cars travel on eastern section of EDG There has been no increase in number of cars Townley Road to Melbourne Grove But an increase of 20 cars I.e. 20% for the section of road from Melbourne to LL Which explains an increase in only one section of the road

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This - but also that as well as traffic not > turning off EDG down those streets, it is also not > joining it from them! > > Jenijenjen Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > ?Traffic doesn't disappear from ED Grove > > halfway..that if it is 25% up on one section it > > doesn't just disappear in the middle section - > it > > might slow down and idle. This is why the count > is > > so dubious. Explain - where do those extra 1000 > > cars go?? > > > > Given that previously a lot of EDG traffic > would > > turn into Melbourne, Derwent etc, now those > > options are not available it?s perfectly > logical > > that just the section leading into LL would see > a > > higher increase. Cross edit!

?Traffic doesn't disappear from ED Grove halfway..that if it is 25% up on one section it doesn't just disappear in the middle section - it might slow down and idle. This is why the count is so dubious. Explain - where do those extra 1000 cars go?? Given that previously a lot of EDG traffic would turn into Melbourne, Derwent etc, or join EDG from these roads, now those options are not available it?s perfectly logical that just the section leading into LL would see a higher increase. Far from pointing to the count being dubious, it indicates trends that might be expected.

As Penguin has explained, the rise in value of a property itself is irrelevant when setting council tax as it is the comparison and differential between different types of property that determines which council tax band a property falls into. So it means a five bedroom property with a garden, garage etc will fall into a higher council tax band than a one bedroom flat on the second floor with sliding scales for properties in between. The increased value of a property within the last 30 years is immaterial as it is the differential between different types of property that is taken into account. I fully agree that the council needs more money for all kinds of things which are being neglected currently (which in my view should come from central government) but your suggestion of raising council tax in line with increased property valuations would mean implementing a totally different system of setting council tax than the one we have now and far from straight forward.

Device

?The area has been a centre of gentrification, yet the council services have not kept pace, and in many cases declined. IMO, if councils want to deliver quality services and residents want improvements, we have to reasses property values to the current values in 2021. How is it fair otherwise for anyone to complain about services?? Any increased revenue raised by Southwark by these means will not be ringfenced to be spent on keeping the streets of Dulwich clean. It will be used to meet the needs of the more vulnerable in the Borough.

Thanks Monica. Good for you and good for East Dulwich