former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[Abe_froeman]

Thanks rch, that would also explain why there doesnt appear to be any paperwork avilable for these schemes.

ETA: it would so explain why only one Melbourne Grove CGS project approval is referred to in the DCC minutes.

The combined cost (?30,000) seems extraordinary given what was said could be done for 34,000 in last years feasibility study.

[James Barber]

Hi bargee99,

Can you please point me at this research?

[bargee99]

Hi James,

It appears the full Nice document is out for consultation before publication in July. The BBC reported this in December.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38156778

It is also in the Guardian, Telegraph and the Mail so covers all political flavours. Strangely I can't find the original Imperial college report.

I have copied a section from the Telegraph below. The original report was reported as recommending the removal of speed humps but in Dec '16 was reinterpreted as saying that they should be redesigned.

"The researchers found that in one north London street with a speed limit of 20mph and fitted with road humps, a petrol driven car produced 64 per cent more Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) than in a similar 20mph street fitted with road cushions. It also produced 47 per cent more Particulate Matter (PM) and nearly 60 per cent more Carbon Monoxide (CO2) emissions.

The contrast was even more pronounced when it came to a car using diesel.

This produced 98 per cent more NO2 when driven over humps rather than cushions, along with 64 per cent more CO2 and 47 per cent more PM.

The report concluded: ?This can be attributed to the difference in speed calming method. Whilst both employ vertical deflection, in the case of Liverpool Road it is predominantly speed cushions, whilst on Furlong Road it is speed humps. Speed humps are higher and usually span the width of the carriageway, therefore requiring additional deceleration.?

There was also a noticeable difference in the amount of emissions produced by a vehicle on a 20mph road without any raised traffic calming measures compared to one fitted with road humps.

In Exhibition Road, south Kensington, which has a ?single surface? for both vehicles and pedestrians, a car produced 0.5402 g/km of NO2; 0.0159 g/km of PM and 161.64 g/km of CO2.

That compared to far higher readings of 0.9911 g/km of NO2; 0.0222 g/km of PM and 245.45 g/km of CO2 produced by the car going over the humps in Islington?s Furlong Road.

Professor Lewis, who is also a director of the National Centre for Atmospheric Science, said: ?If you are scrutinizing whether road humps are really needed then places where children spend most of the day are a good place to start, because you carry the harm caused to your development by pollutants with you for the rest of your life.?

Describing the impact of a road hump on emissions, he said: ?On the acceleration cycle you get combustion pollutants. On the braking part of the cycle you get non-exhaust emissions caused by friction on brake pads and tyres which throws out fine particles into the air ? this happens even if you drive an electric car.?

Roger Lawson, of the Alliance of British Drivers, backed calls to remove road humps from outside schools , as well as elsewhere, saying they damaged health while having a negligible impact on safety.

He said: ?Road humps provide no real safety benefit and they have a negative impact on pollution. There are lots of alternative traffic calming measures which can be used more effectively near schools, such as road narrowing and speed display devices. Most road accidents with children do not take place outside their schools, but councils like to indulge in gestures such as fitting humps.?

[rch]

Excellent, Bargee... I kept my mouth shut because it's much better that James hears this from someone else besides me.

Just to add that govt legislation was to be proposed at the end of April, but this is put on hold until after the general election, hence the July date for Nice.

Furthermore, the previous Mayor of London had banned speed humps for precisely these reasons, but this policy seems to have evaporated... hopefully new legislation will address this madness as there are now other far more effective ways of addressing genuine speeding issues.

Last thing... I just want to address two extremely misleading comments that James has made about me, then I'm going to shut up and move threads.

I just need to get into the mood to type it all out...

[James Barber]

hi bargee99,

I've also not been able to find the original research. The NICE report reporting was mangled and I'd like to see the source.

The Air Pollution campaigns haven't taken up this angle of removing speed cushions which is strange if the evidence is clear or researched well. So I'd reserve judgement. One piece of research doesn't usually mean spring has arrived.

Alliance of British Drivers. I have spoken to them in the past and chap admitted membership of sub 500. Evidence is usually not something they're interested in. So frankly I'd ignore them. Their local rep. used to campaign for the rights of all drivers to drive around Dulwich Park for instance.

Hi Robin,

Uou've mentioned the previous London mayor banning speed bumps. That mayor funded lots of raised treatments across London. Where di he ban speed bumps? his TfL funding has funded many during his term in office.

In 2008 he wrote an article about getting the hump with humps. But he didn't do anything discernible.

I am trouble by the suggestion I don't listen to you. I've regular pushed to support CGS schemes you've applied for. Often when we're at meeting walk you home sharing ideas. Baffled.

And if I've misunderstood any comments you've please accept my humble apologies. Sorry.

[bargee99]

Hi James,

I assume it came from the NICE draft document section 1.4.2 which says " Where physical measures are needed to reduce

speed, such as humps and bumps, ensure they are designed to minimise sharp decelerations and consequent accelerations".

https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/gid-phg92/documents/draft-guideline

This was originally interpreted by the papers to suggest removing them altogether but subsequently modified to say road cushions were preferable to full width speed humps and tables at junctions were best although recognising the substantial cost involved.

[bargee99]

This is a very interesting PhD study from an Imperial student. She focuses on the additional impact of brake and clutch dust and the shearing effect of tyres on roads and the subsequent dust caused.

http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/medicine/newssummary/news_17-10-2016-13-41-22

[James Barber]

Hi bargee99,

Apparently huge part of the PM issues is tyre wear and tear. No amount of diesel or petrol engine banning will get rid of that - electric vehicles have tyres.

WRT to speed humps - trying to go faster between the humps is the issue.

[bargee99]

That's why the recommendation is to have cushions or tables to restrict speed but allow that speed to be constant. Not so dramatic that the vehicle has to slow down below the speed limit to clear the hump and then speed up again between them. To think that drivers will stay at the 5-10 mph required to negotiate the hump and not speed up between them is, I think, naive on the part of the regulators.

[James Barber]

Hi bargee99,

The speed humps we have are not designed to slow people down to 5-10mph. They're designed for 20mph. People are accelerating an decelerating to go above 20mph between humps. Speed cushions have almost no impact reducing speeds.

[bargee99]

Hi James,

I would not try to cross a full speed hump at 20mph without fear of severe damage to my car and everything and everyone inside being thrown around. I don't agree that here they allow traffic to flow at 20mph without braking, clutching and speeding up and down. I don't have them on Landcroft Road where I have lived for over 50 years so don't suffer the noise impact that I fear they must cause to residents beside them. We are never going to agree about them. Drivers, residents and planners see things very differently.

[TheArtfulDogger]

Hi James

Can you let us know if the Southwark street works register is still being updated by the council as I've noticed a number of old entries still showing and nothing new for a while.

It's a useful tool but only if it's accurate

[James Barber]

Hi The ArtfulDogger,

I'll try and find out.

[rcmacf]

I've just received a parking fine for a 3 minute stop on Lordship Lane. Granted, I did get it wrong and thought it was pre 4pm, not post. I'm furious, but not because of the ticket. I'm furious because I live on Derwent Grove and I cannot find a parking space there, or elsewhere within a 5 minute walk, as our street is used as a de facto parking facility for the nearby East Dulwich train station. Nearby other stations, such as Herne Hill, there are 2 or 3 hours of parking restrictions during the day, preventing commuters using the nearby streets as they do in Dulwich. I'm sick of it, and it has my wife and I looking for a new house outside of the area. Likewise the traffic situation, with cars passing each other down our street so closely that ours has many scratches down the sides - even though we kerb the wheels to keep out of the way. Derwent, Melbourne and Elsie (as examples) need to be converted to one way, with parking restrictions added. It has been a worsening situation for years.

Other parts of London have mid-day parking restrictions, and they flourish with shoppers and businesses grow. People can park at home or close by, and know that they should find parking to go shopping for an hour or two. As a direct comparison, Northcote Road in Clapham is extremely busy, has endless traffic, with multiple schools, and yet does not jam and fill like ED.

Yes, I'm venting as I received a ticket, but the situation is appalling, and our votes will go to anyone pledging to sort out this issue - without resorting to the lazy use of double yellows everywhere.

And don't get me started on the loss of our street's charm due to the encroachment of wheelie bins, and the attendant summer stink as they fill faster than they are emptied. We now do a weekly run to the municipal refuse dump. Nice use of resources/fuel/time...

We love this area, but for the traffic and parking and the lack of any activity by the Labour council to alleviate the misery - or to do anything, in fact.

James, we are not alone in this.

[James Barber]

Hi rcmacf,

Parking around your street and area is clearly very hard. WE had a public consultation and insufficient residents supported such controlled parking. I'm afraid we'd need a clear sense residents opinions had shifted to undertake a further consultation on this.

Experience suggests residents for controlled parking are vocal until a consultation occurs. At that point residents against make the case against.

Recent changes have been controlled parking introduced around North Dulwich station and already talk of that spreading further towards us.

Both the new super health centre replacing the Dulwich Hospital and the Charter East Dulwich school will potentially have significant staff with minimal staff and patient car parking. This will add further parking pressure to the area.

[alex_b]

James, the problem I have with CPZs is that in my experience they are poorly run and the inevitable outsourced provider aims at maximizing revenue rather than providing a good service to residents. In Twickenham and Windsor I experienced prolonged delays in issuing and renewing permits (leading to fines that then needed to be appealed) and expensive/cumbersome arrangements for visitor parking. I don't see any evidence that Southwark will somehow be more effective at managing this.

[James Barber]

Hi alex_b,

I've not heard of any such issues with Southwark's parking contractor around CPZ permits etc. I've asked councillor colleagues in areas that have CPZ areas.

I actually live in a Southwark CPZ area Champion Hill and we've never had any issues with permits or visitor parking permits. i think the difference council estate parking permit cost of ?25 and public highway of ?125 odd. The latter clearly doesn't;t reflect the cost of issuing permits. But they do seem effective as solving commuter parking and can be limited as around Herne Hill to a couple of hours a day and even o1 hour a day has been agreed as workable by the contractor.

But it would change a tangible increase in support to make it worth a council consulltation again. What we might do is run a survey as we supported residents on the East Dulwich Road end of Crystal Palace Road. A clear majority didn't want controlled parking there so we didn't ask the council to run a consultation. It doesn't make those that wanted it happy but they can then see why one cannot proceed.

[James Barber]

This is the answer I've received:

"

Dear Councillor Barber

Thank you for your enquiry regarding the Council's Street Works web site.

Due to the changes and improvements to TfL's web site, London Works, the Council will be removing the central register from it's own web site and directing users to http://public.londonworks.gov.uk/roadworks/home

All of the permittable works in Southwark upload to London Works in the same way they would upload in to the Councils site.

If you have any questions about this response please do not hesitate to contact me....

"

I've asked when can the Southwark website and Maps system reflect this and told "work in progress".

Regards James.

TheArtfulDogger Wrote:

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

> Hi James

>

> Can you let us know if the Southwark street works

> register is still being updated by the council as

> I've noticed a number of old entries still showing

> and nothing new for a while.

>

> It's a useful tool but only if it's accurate

[esme]

Hi, do you know of any events in relation to the campaign against school funding cuts locally?

The national day of action is tomorrow from all I've read elsewhere, tho perhaps there's a thread on here I've missed?

Thanks

[James Barber]

Hi esme,

The School Cuts campaign has no events planned in Southwark - https://schoolcuts.nationbuilder.com/?email_address=&address_change%5Bsubmitted_address%5D=se5+8bs&address_change%5Bdistance%5D=1&commit=Search

But nothing to stop you running a street stall against them - I have a batch of their leaflets you could use some of those. You could print a petition against the cuts. If you do decide to do this you can publicise it here - https://schoolcuts.nationbuilder.com/forms/user_sessions/new

Happy to talk you through this. I would normally jump in but I'm virtually housebound with a foot injury currently and have to prioritise getting well to go to work.

You could also ask friends and family to contact their general election candidates -https://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#!/email-your-candidates

support the campaign through social media.

Lots you can do.

[esme]

Hi, we had a campaign to sign the postcards and write to our local MP...

I've been advised Heber and DVIS are planning a picnic protest tomorrow and Ivydale in Nunhead too :)

Hope your foot is better soon!

[James Barber]

Thanks Esme.

Managed to attend walkabout along Lordship Lane with council officers and fellow councillor looking at breaches of planning and advertising rules. Determined to tidy Lordship Lane up.

[edhistory]

> Managed to attend walkabout along Lordship Lane with council officers and fellow councillor looking at breaches of

Planning and advertising rules. Determined to tidy Lordship Lane up.

Did the council officers trip or stumble over the paving stones?

Are non-orthogonal paving stones untidy?

[ianr]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Managed to attend walkabout along Lordship Lane with council officers and fellow councillor

> looking at breaches of planning and advertising rules. Determined to tidy Lordship Lane up.

James, does that include A-frames? Is there an accessible map showing the curtilage of each shop? Notwithstanding that LL is not a red route (and so, I assume, not a TfL regulated highway), London Travel Watch's booklet "Inclusive Streets" http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/documents/get_lob?id=3756&field=file 2.7 MB ) is useful on the law and positions taken by various London borough councils. Is the attached still current for Southwark?

[edhistory]

I'm expecting the Picturehouse to appear on Mr Barber's list when he releases it.