former East Dulwich councillor - how can I help?

[EDmummy]

A bit of a rant but here it is.....About 8 years ago I accidently left a shrub in my front garden overgrow and as a result it impinged on the pavement - busy being heavily pregnant at the time. A local council official kindly sent me a letter reminding me that this could be a hazard for disabled people so I quickly lopped the shrub back.

I actually appreciated this reminder and very readily took action. My front garden has never been overgrown since but I can't say the same for any number of people nearby. One person's hedge is so thick that you have to walk sideways on the pavement past their house. I am wondering if the current council has cut back on sending residents these letters?

Cllr Barber, could the local street sweepers be issued with a load of proforma letters to do this sort of thing again?

[Amelie]

Dear James

Thanks for this, I will ask the council about the smaller bin.

[James Barber]

Hi M7Post,

Funnilly enough I'd felt the same about the streets in East Dulwich getting grubbier than normal.

I've asked council officers about this.

Apparently street cleanliness is measured by a company called Encams 3 times a year. The last full years results for Southwark (lower results mean cleaner streets) 08/09 were:

Litter 6%, detritus (eg.leaf material) 12%, graffiti 3%, Fly posting 1%

A Southwark street cleaning inspector has just found for East Dulwich:

Litter 2.4%, dtritus 22%, graffiti 0%, Flt posting 0%

As a result more attention will be made to clearing Detritus in East Dulwich.

However, we don't have the mechanisms for washing all our streets. In the future if very dry periods without any real rain continue e.g. global warming we'd have to review setting up the infrastructure for street washing.

Hope this answers your points.

[indiepanda]

Hello. I've just received the letter on road speeds in East Dulwich which seem to be proposing 20mph limits will be introduced and enforced using speed guns rather than cameras.

Now frankly I find with all the parked cars it's rarely safe to drive over that anyway so it's no skin off my nose if you introduce a limit, but from my perspective what scares me about roads round here isn't the speed but the poor visibility turning out onto main roads, especially Barry Road. Seems like parking is allowed far too close to corners and it's really hard to see what is coming at some intersections (Silvester and Barry Road in particular)

If there's money to be spent I'd far rather it was spent on putting a few traffic lights on intersections instead of just having pedestrian crossings.

Speed policed by speed guns as is suggested in the letter seems like a way of distracting local police from dealing with more serious crime anyway. If it's going to work as a deterrant there's got to be a fair chance of getting caught, which sounds like it would take some manpower. I rarely see police on the beat as it is.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Highway Code 243 states: you must not park opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space.

This site may be an effective way to highlight dangerous spots:

fix my street

[James Barber]

Hi indiepanda,

Signalising a junction costs around ?50,000 and currently has to be done by Transport for London who have a 2 year waiting list unless they decide it is urgent. Also, huge number of hoops to jump through.

Placing 20mph speed signs on roads does reduce speed on their own. Total cost per street roughly ?500->?1000 per street taking into account all the legal hurdles, traffic counter, signs, etc. They also gives the opportunity to enforce where necessary. Happy coincidence is that drivers who break such speed limits on residential streets are disproportionately dodgy in some other way from the no insurance, no MoT, driving without a licence onwards up through crimes I suspect you would consider serious.

Now for the contentious possibility....some residents would like to be trained and borrow the Police speed camera and note speeds and number plates for the Police to send warning letters.

Do you think we should do this in East Dulwich? would you want to volunteer to help?

[Gimme]

Maybe the conviction rate for speeding on side streets in East Dulwich will be as amazingly high as the conviction rate for using a mobile phone while driving! And maybe it will have a similar deterrent effect!

This sounds like a pointless gesture that makes you look like you are doing something without actually having any impact whatsoever (but also without spending much money). But hey, that's stock in trade for politicians...

[indiepanda]

JBARBER Wrote:

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

> Hi indiepanda,

> Signalising a junction costs around ?50,000 and

> currently has to be done by Transport for London

> who have a 2 year waiting list unless they decide

> it is urgent. Also, huge number of hoops to jump

> through.

Is that a "we won't look into it because it's too much like hard work" or "we might but it won't yield instant results"?

> Placing 20mph speed signs on roads does reduce

> speed on their own. Total cost per street roughly

> ?500->?1000 per street taking into account all the

> legal hurdles, traffic counter, signs, etc. They

> also gives the opportunity to enforce where

> necessary. Happy coincidence is that drivers who

> break such speed limits on residential streets are

> disproportionately dodgy in some other way from

> the no insurance, no MoT, driving without a

> licence onwards up through crimes I suspect you

> would consider serious.

Oh, I'd certainly like to see the uninsured etc clamped down on. But you do need to have people out there using the speed guns to catch them - and I am not sure if the opportunity cost of what they are then not going to do otherwise because they are spending the time out with the speed guns is worth it.

As for reducing the general speed - it seemed to me your letter was saying there isn't much of a speed issue anyway - would the quoted 1-3mph reduction your letter suggests it would make to introduce 20mph limits really reduce the number and severity of accidents by that much?

Or is the motivation more about getting to these people who are also breaking other motoring laws - and what proportion of speeders do they usually account for? I guess I am struggling to believe with the sheer number of people that get caught by speed cameras that such a high proportion of the population are really driving without a licence or unisured etc.

> Now for the contentious possibility....some

> residents would like to be trained and borrow the

> Police speed camera and note speeds and number

> plates for the Police to send warning letters.

> Do you think we should do this in East Dulwich?

> would you want to volunteer to help?

Do I think residents should be using the speed cameras. Hmmm, so what are they doing - standing out on the street with these cameras? Risking one of the more criminal (i.e. also uninsured /driving without licence etc) speeders attacking them if they get spotted using it? Does a "warning letter" actually bother one of the more criminal types or is it only beng caught by the police who have the power to fine / given points etc? Not enough information to say whether I think residents should be given the chance to get involved.

Would this resident get involved? Er no. If I had the energy for voluntary work on top of my job there are other things I would rather do with my time.

[peckhamboy]

Sorry, but this sounds like a load of garbage. I can see the sense in imposing a 20mph limit on roads like Barry Road that are used as a cut through by a significant number of vehicles, but it seems like a waste of money on the majority of roads in ED where, due to parked cars, road humps or insufficiently long streets, you can't actually get past 20mph even if you wanted to.

As far as enforcement goes, I agree with previous comments that I would much rather see police out on the beat or investigating genuine crimes than hanging around residential streets trying to catch someone driving at 23mph. And frankly the thought of vigilante residents with speed guns is just ridiculous and likely to be abused by people with too much time on their hands and a vendetta against one of their neighbours. I would have thought that it would be (a) more effective, and (b) cheaper to install one of those signs that flashes up your actual speed and tells you to slow down. My experience is that those signs do actually make people drop their speed by several mph generally. I appreciate that my experience is not a scientific study but I would wager that it's a lot more accurate than your (frankly ludicrous) assertion that all drivers who break speed limits turn out to be criminals. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one and assume that you simply wrote with too much haste, but I would suggest that the number of drivers who exceed a speed limit is very high indeed, and the number of drivers who are caught speeding and turn out to be criminals is probably very low. I certainly don't accept that hanging around Barry Road with a speed gun is an effective way of catching criminals.

JBARBER Wrote:

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

> Hi indiepanda,

> Signalising a junction costs around ?50,000 and

> currently has to be done by Transport for London

> who have a 2 year waiting list unless they decide

> it is urgent. Also, huge number of hoops to jump

> through.

>

> Placing 20mph speed signs on roads does reduce

> speed on their own. Total cost per street roughly

> ?500->?1000 per street taking into account all the

> legal hurdles, traffic counter, signs, etc. They

> also gives the opportunity to enforce where

> necessary. Happy coincidence is that drivers who

> break such speed limits on residential streets are

> disproportionately dodgy in some other way from

> the no insurance, no MoT, driving without a

> licence onwards up through crimes I suspect you

> would consider serious.

>

> Now for the contentious possibility....some

> residents would like to be trained and borrow the

> Police speed camera and note speeds and number

> plates for the Police to send warning letters.

> Do you think we should do this in East Dulwich?

> would you want to volunteer to help?

[karter]

I think that having speed restrictions on Barry Road and Lordship Lane would be a great tool to slow down traffic, especially on LL where in some places it can be very difficult to cross the road due to fast moving vehicle.

Jbarber, are there any thoughts on having a speed camera at the bottom end of LL or Barry Road?

[teresa]

HI I WHANT TO KNOW IF YOU OPEAN A BUSSINESS ARNT YOU SOUPOSE TO HAVE A LICENCE AND HEALTH AND SAFTEY SOUPOSE TO CHECK THAT EVERTHING IS UP TO STANDED THEIR IS THIS RESTURANTE CALL na pura THIS OWMER DOES NOT KNOW WHAT IS IS DOIND DEFROSTING THE FOOD IN HOT WATER ALL DIRTY PANS NEAR THE FOOD WITH I CALLED HEALTH AND SAFTHY THEY SAID THEY HAVE NEVER BEEN THERE MAYBE THEY DONT HAVE LICENSE THE ADDRESS OF THIS PLACE IS 30 NUNHEADGREEN LONDON SE15 3Q7 THIS PEOPLE THAT EAT THERE THEY DONT EVEN NOW WHAT IS DONE TO THAT FOOD THANT PLEASE CAN SOME ONE DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT

[Amelie]

Dear James

Do you know if anything is going to be done about the collapse of the road surface of Lordship Lane in front of the bus stops outside the Post Office and The Sea Cow respectively? I emailed Southwark about it and was told to contact TfL which I did but no response has ever been forthcoming. The surface outside The Sea Cow is now actually starting to split and I do worry that eventually the road is going to collapse completely right underneath a bus and there will be a serious accident.

Also, I understand that Lordship Lane is a GLA road but I don't think that Southwark should be telling residents to contact TfL when Southwark must know the right people at TfL to whom it could speak directly and speed things up. Messages sent via TfL's website just seem to disappear.

[Steady Eddy]

-

[sian]

Please tell me why Southwark sends so many letters re electoral registration ? I have had 7 letters. Replied to the first with all details and then I continue to receive these.

Also why has so much money been sunk into a brand new town hall at one end of the borough on prime development land>? Couldnt this money have been spent on services for council tax payers? Say on increasing school places?

[PeckhamRose]

At my local Safer Neighbourhood Team Police Ward Panel meetings, I have stated that I am absolutely opposed to the idea of volunteering to use the speed cameras on car drivers. If I were to catch a Mum, for example, driving her kids to school, or a guy going to visit his kid in hospital, or someone off to an interview, and they make the decision, based on their perfect vision and the fact there is nothing in the road, and the road is wide, and it is a clear dry day, to drive 8 mph over the limit, and I catch them, the effect on their life and maybe their finances could be devastating.

Basically I suppose I am saying that if I catch someone who is speeding, the fact they are at that time going over some arbitrary speed limit may be because they have made the decision, based on all the evidence of their surroundings that it is the appropriate speed, even though it may exceed the limit. In my mind they are not criminals. We are having our ability to learn common sense, and our ability to make good decisions from evidence, bashed out of us by the ever increasing laws that say 'Thou Shalt Not...'

Cyclists who go over red lights are making a judgment, based on what they can see and their abilities and so on, and those who ride dangerously will usually result in only them being harmed, so they know the risks. In my opinion they merely prove that there are just too many (mostly unnecessary) traffic lights in London. The fact most cyclists go through red traffic lights safely without any collision with anyone (seriously, it has to be 'most' since if it were not, we would be bombarded with reports every day and cyclists would have to have registration plates) - proves that it works for them and we should not be concerned about it. In another part of the world one can turn right on a red traffic light (or in our case it would be left), so it is merely a matter of opinion that stops them (or anyone else) legally doing it here.

Carrying a hand held speeding machine and aiming it at speeding car drivers is not the answer. Education at the beginning of the process - is, but designing in the criminalisation of motorists along the way, (for example by putting in traffic lights at the bottom of the park that do not give people any time to do a right turn so they HAVE to go against the red light and break the law), along with ridiculous road humps and bumps and traffic angering measures, is making us all really irritated and thus more inclined to drive in what some may perceive to be dangerous. I would never imagine that I would go over a red traffic light but sometimes it is the only way I am going to turn right to get up Peckham Rye! Having me aim a speeding camera at you will not make you drive any better. I am a pedestrian and a motorcyclist, and never owned a car, but I feel the car driver is really being unfairly bashed right now and I refuse to be a part of it.

Now, if you think of the very fast driver who is usually blaring out music and obviously being very dangerous in their road use, then yes the millions of already fixed cameras should be taking note, and in fact we already all have the power as citizens to simply write down their details the date time description of driver and the registration number and description of car, and report it to the police. And we can do that when those cars will inevitably find themselves at a red light somewhere. Off you go then!

But if you all really care about this, why not attend the Police Ward Panel meetings and discuss it with the police around a table? I always state in the What's On In East Dulwich section when the next Police Ward Panel is for Nunhead and Peckham Rye (which covers some of East Dulwich). We invite Councillors, too, but they rarely if ever come along....

(Please note, these are my opinions only Sean McG so leave it, eh?)

[LegalEagle-ish]

Something needs to be done about the dangerous drivers around East Dulwich. I cycle and so does my 10 year old, there are way too many parked cars and other cars going too fast through small streets in this area and it makes cycling with kids very dangerous. Cycling should be encouraged for health, environmental and road safety reasons, but unless something is done about the amount of parked cars, school run driving and terrible parking and the speed of car drivers in East Dulwich, danger to cyclists and pedestrians will not improve.

The 20mph zone is a start - but people do need to police it. We need double yellow lines near to junctions because drivers egnore the highway code and park wherever they like and we need traffic wardens and PCSO's to police the school run madness of the local primary schools at dropping off and picking up times.

[PeckhamRose]

Then go to the Police Ward Panels and demand it! Seriously, that's what they're there for. They highlight three topics each meeting and we all discuss which ones should be highlighted and then the police act on our suggestions.

[Steady Eddy]

-

[LegalEagle-ish]

I used to be a panel member of the safer neighbourhood team in SE1 when I lived up that way because I was chair of our community centre. How would I get onto the panel here in East Dulwich because I would like to ask them to do more about the threat of death and injury by drivers than chasing people who cycle on pavements or don't pick up dog crap. Cycling on pavements may be annoying and dog crap is unpleasant, but they are hardly life threatening.

[Steady Eddy]

-

[James Barber]

Hi Jeremy,

Sorry its taken so long to get the exact details. Council project manager has been on holiday.

The works taking place on the East Dulwich Estate which weirdly are not part of East Dulwich ward are:

electrical rewiring, boiler replacements, (where required), kitchen renewals, bathroom renewals, coldwater stoarage tank renewals, electrics in communal areas, upgrade communal lighting, brickwork repairs, decorations to communal areas, window renewas, fronnt door renewals.

Block by block plan:

Phase 1 ? Sectional Completion - 3rd July 2009

Ivybridge House

Inwood House

Phase 2 ? Sectional Completion ? 5th January 2009

Gatcombe House

Felbridge House

Phase 3 ? Sectional Completion ? 2nd March 2009

Whaddon House

Melbreak House

Phase 4 ? Sectional Completion ? This is due and I await a date from our Contract Administrators

Ledbury House

Stagshaw House

Ringmer House

Petworth House

Riseholme House

Tidworth House

Phase 5 ? Sectional Completion (Works Ongoing)

Wheatland House

Whitney House

Wilton House

Walcot House

Phase 6 ? Sectional Completion (Works due to commence early 2010 and complete July 2010)

Gedling House

Fernie House

Eridge House

Cowdray House

Bramham House

Badminton House

[ralphation]

Citizens with speed cameras is just high-tec curtain twitching. Seriously, what would be the point? There's no way I'd accept a warning letter having been "caught" by some busybody waving a radar gun about.

I agree with the earlier point that a lot of the danger is caused by poor visibility. On my street, there are two dangerous junctions. At one, I've seen at least one crash a month in the 6 months I've been in my current flat - all caused by drivers having to slam on the anchors at the last minute because it is impossible to see round the corner when pulling out. Then last night there was a big smash at the next junction up which is a busy crossroads despite the roads are effectively back streets.

Luckily, there have not been any injuries at these junctions but it might be worth making the area safer for drivers (by removing parked cars) than supposedly making it safer for pedestrians by having an army of old biddies armed with radar guns tutting loudly at anyone with the temerity to leave 2nd gear.

[Gimme]

There are about 20 ways you could improve road safety that would be more logical than putting up signs and providing curtain twitchers with radar guns. Unfortunately they all cost money. Things like speed bumps, chicanes, putting in crossing points as required, putting chevrons on the road to warn drivers that they are approaching a zebra crossing (like the one on East Dulwich Grove where I almost get run over every time I try to use it), speed limiters on buses, someone taking time to identify accident hotspots or dangerous junctions and adjusting the layout or putting in traffic lights...

This suggestion about signs and radar guns is a total gimmick and should be crushed as an idea before time and money is wasted on it. You'd probably save money in the long run by avoiding the radar gun idea as the court fees for every successfully contested charge of being caught by a civilian with a radar gun will soon mount up.

If the council is allowed to get away with nonsense like this, it just postpones their needing to think about proper traffic calming and road safety measures.

[Steady Eddy]

-

[PeckhamRose]

Anyone can go the Police Ward Panels. How daft of you to suggest it is an attempt to control, on my part, just because I attend Police Ward Panels. I have no wish to control anyone, which is why I think volunteering to use a speed camera is a bad idea. It's not behind the back of my neighbour, either. My neighbour is more than welcome to come along.

And dear SteadyEddy, I am not angry, just making an argument against most of everything you said; that doesn't make me angry. I am a happy motorcyclist just trying to get from A to B - if only the over-regulation and designing in of the criminality, and designing out of my ability to use common sense - would let me.

Cllr Barber will you attend the next one?

I shall alert people in the What's On in East Dulwich section when the next one is due.

It's on Thursday 3rd December 2009 at Harris Girls Sports Academy School college whatever the heck it is! Note this is for Nunhead and Peckham Rye, though, but parts of East Dulwich do figure in it, around the Gardens especially.