Roadworks in Lordship Lane at end of North Cross Road

[MissusF]

Just to make a point already made: these roadworks are really really dangerous.

I saw a little girl yesterday almost get hit by a car coming around the corner too fast. Was pretty frightening. A tragedy narrowly missed.

[Sue]

MissusF Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Just to make a point already made: these roadworks

> are really really dangerous.

>

> I saw a little girl yesterday almost get hit by a

> car coming around the corner too fast. Was pretty

> frightening. A tragedy narrowly missed.

I'm not sure this is due to the roadworks, though they probably don't help.

I have been noticing driving round here recently - most lately whilst waiting for a bus outside the old police station.

Cars just take the most incredibly stupid risks, driving from side roads onto Lordship Lane really fast without waiting for a proper gap in the traffic, and scarcely missing vehicles on the main road.

I'm amazed there haven't been more accidents.

[first mate]

Sue, I agree, though multiple roadworks in the area is surely contributing to driver frustration?

If we total all the money being spent on works, studies, redesign, allocation of funds from CGS- wouldn't that money be better spent funding a few cops to stop speeding cars and issue tickets? Word tends to get around that proper penalties are on the cards.

Have you looked at the quality of workmanship on Nx? Badly laid and stone cut to go around existing lights looks like jigsaw- perhaps measurements were also miscalculated, along with everything else.

[James Barber]

We definitely need more traffic Police - they've been drastically cut over the last 20 years.

But each Police officers costs around ?60k. So all the road works, studies etc. in East Dulwich ward would pay for one officer without a car for one year.

We have provided the tools to measure speed etc. for our local Police officers.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I would love to see more traffic police targeting speeding and dangerous drivers. Instead we just get humps and road closures.

[Siduhe]

I would love to see more traffic police targeting speeding and dangerous drivers. Instead we just get humps and road closures.

Couldn't agree more. It's a vicious circle. The more traffic calming measures there are, the more frustrated a certain type of driver gets and it's those drivers who aim to drive in a responsible way who take the brunt of that. I'm not saying we shouldn't have traffic calming, but there really needs to be some focus on the other aspects which make our roads unsafe as well.

[first mate]

One police officer could manage and oversee a number of community wardens who might be tasked with monitoring speed and car regs. this might be a better use of wardens who whizz around on scooters and lurk in camera cars for hours on end with the sole aim to catch out cars with a bumper one inch over double yellows.

What is the cost of the parking wardens and the camera cars?

BTW James, on the issue of double yellows you still have not come back to me about whether you supported increasing double yellow on Chesterfield Grove, April 10th 2014?!!!!!

[bob]

No one no equipment on site since Friday come on Conway get your finger out.

Bob S

[James Barber]

Hi first Mate,

But we didn't have any Dulwich Community Council meeting 10 April 2014. If I ever agree to any double yellow lines I would have insisted on at least an equal removal of parking restrictions somewhere else. That's been my colleague and my policy for eons. But we only get to agree things such as double yellow lines at a community council as as their wasn't one I'm mystified what you're trying to get at.

Parking wardens are more than self funding. The parking enforcement service runs a large surplus.

I'm not clear what Community Wardens an extra police officer would manage? The current limited number of community wardens the council has are almost exclusively limited to crime hot spots in the Peckham, Camberwell and close to London Bridge.

[first mate]

James,

re the double yellows on Chesterfield, I am quoting the date you were consulted on this, that is the 10th April 2014. We know you were consulted on that date because that information is given in an email addressed to you from Southwark Council, that you chose to publish on this forum. It matters not if it was a DCC or some other means, all we know for sure is that you were consulted on that date.

So, again, and I will keep asking, all I want to know is did you say "yes" to extended doubles on Chesterfield or did you say "no"?

I am interested in your assertion about the busy wardens. I often see them around, parked up for lengthy periods in and around Lordhsip, monitoring life from the camera car, and others out on their scooters are never, it seems, too busy to miss dropping in on the carwash on the corner of LL for a "friendly" chat with the guys there.

Yes, all that money from parking funds the good labours of the wardens but, a surplus you say? How about putting some of that money, or indeed all of it, to funding a police officer and wardens, dedicated to the speeding issue. A simple solution and one that might help us avoid digging up yet more roads to no avail or, heaven forfend, blocking them off completely.

[edhistory]

> If I ever agree to any double yellow lines I would have insisted on at least an equal removal of parking restrictions somewhere else

Does this also apply when you ASK for double yellow lines outside 32-34 Melbourne Grove?

John K

[James Barber]

Hi first mate,

I receive around a 100 councillor emails a day. So I don't recall the email.

Could you narrow it down to a time so I can retrieve it more easily please?

Hi edhistry,

I haven't asked for double yellow lines outside 32-34 Melbourne Grove.

I've asked what officers would recommend to solve the problem of disabled residents at these two homes being able to be collected and dropped-off to attend day care centres. The traditional disabled parking bays wouldn't seem appropriate as these residents can't drive. Double yellow lines would preclude anyone parking - including the minibuses that collect them. If you have any suggestions that would be helpful.

Or do you think I should ignore the plight of these dozen disabled people?

[edhistory]

Melbourne Grove

6. Councillor Barber contacted the parking design team to request that a parking

facility be introduced near the residential care homes of Nos. 34 and 36

Melbourne Grove.

It was "near to", and not "outside", sorry.

[first mate]

Hi James, look up around 10 April 2014, the date S'wark state you were consulted about double yellows on Chesterfield? Don't think I can be any more precise. i'd imagine an email search on that date with the keywords Chesterfield and double yellows might be fruitful? However you know more about IT and technology than me I am sure, so apologies if I am teaching granny to suck eggs.

Please see below the email to you last month which states the date you were consulted about "new lengths of double yellows" on Chesterfield. Note the penultimate paragraph.

I cannot think that you would require any more detail in order to respond to the very simple question, did you say "yes" or " no" to new "lengths of restrictions" that js, double yellow lines, when consulted on the matter on 10 April 2014?

You seem to have omitted the name of the person that sent you the email below, but I am sure they could find your response when consulted on that date, that is 10 April 2014, were you to ask?

Our Reference: 551054

________________________________________

Dear Councillor Barber

Thank you for your enquiry dated 12th August 2015, in which you requested information regarding yellow lines in the East Dulwich ward. I believe you are referring to the recent making and publication of a 'consolidation order'.

The traffic order which has been advertised is known as a 'consolidation order' which is exactly this -a consolidation of existing traffic orders to ensure these remain manageable and easy to follow. This London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) Consolidation Order 2015(1) ('the 2015 Order') consolidates the London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) Consolidation Order 2012(2) ('the 2012 Order') together with the 60 subsequent amendment orders amending the provisions of the 2012 Order.

It is deemed best practice (e.g. in guidelines issued by the British Parking Association) for local authorities undertaking decriminalised parking enforcement to regularly consolidate and maintain the traffic orders forming a basis for that enforcement.

This follows the Consolidation Order process laid out in Regulation 21 of the Local Authorities? Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996 (Statutory Instrument 1996 No. 2489).

There are no new restrictions being introduced by way of this consolidation order.

The yellow lines you have specifically queried at Ashbourne and Chesterfield and Melbourne Grove were originally included in an order made on 8 May 2014 as part of the Lordship Lane area traffic order and sign decluttering review . The name of the Order was the London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) (Amendment No. 32) Order 2014(3) ('the 2014 Order').

As part of our review process, surveys on street were undertaken by an officer to check that the road markings in existence matched the traffic orders. In the case of Ashbourne Grove and Melbourne Grove the traffic order waiting and loading definitions would have been amended to reflect more closely the markings as existed on street. Chesterfield Road had new lengths of restrictions installed at this time.

Statutory stakeholders and ward members including yourself were consulted in the process of making the 2014 Order, on 10 April 2014.

I trust this addresses your concerns but if you have any questions about this response please do not hesitate to contact me.

"

[redjam]

Back on the subject of the North X Rd/Lordship Lane roadworks (can we keep the yellow lines debate on the other thread?)?

Start date: 22 June

Original end date: 7 August

Revised end date: 24 August

Revised revised end date: 7 September

Um, anyone know when the revised revised revised end date is?

[Sue]

redjam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Back on the subject of the North X Rd/Lordship

> Lane roadworks (can we keep the yellow lines

> debate on the other thread?)?

>

> Start date: 22 June

> Original end date: 7 August

> Revised end date: 24 August

> Revised revised end date: 7 September

>

> Um, anyone know when the revised revised revised

> end date is?

2017??

[richard tudor]

Saw a man with a clip board and a worker with one foot on his shovel this morning.

Not much else

[first mate]

Post deleted and reposted on James Braber's thread to avoid taking this thread off subject.

[first mate]

I just wondered if there was any further news on a completion date for this work? ....anyone?

[Abe_froeman]

They can't complete it without working on it. I don't think I've seen anyone doing any work there in over a week now. It must be extremely frustrating for businesses along that stretch. I can't understand the total lack of urgency from the ouncil or contractor. There can't be any kind of penalty clause in the contract.

In the real world delivering a project nearly two months late would a lot of financial pain pain for the contractor.

[EPB]

It would be interesting to see the contract, wouldn't it?

[James Barber]

I've been told the new deadline is now 2 October.

Matter escalated as to why and how such inordinate times to do something quite so basic.

Clearly the FMConway contract doesn't have enough teeth to ensure proper service levels and performance.

My FOI around this still no response and data.

[KalamityKel]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> They can't complete it without working on it. I

> don't think I've seen anyone doing any work there

> in over a week now.

That's not true at all. I've seen workmen doing things every morning. Yes the time taken to complete this is ridiculous but to say no work has been done is just wrong.

[bob]

KK

This must be quite early if they start they must pull off, last 3 days no one at lunch or equipment they move on to another site, this firm is having a laugh at us all.

[El Presidente]

the last time i saw these workmen doing anything was when they were standing around watching two blokes fighting in Northcross road. That seemed to pull them away from their well worn seats in the local cafe...