We are trialing a dedicated East Dulwich COVID-19 Area on the forum here - please keep it useful.

Forum Sponsors

www.veganplates.co.uk

www.hensonsecurity.com

http://www.ellyallen.com/

Advertise here

The East Dulwich Forum
Would you recommend your East Dulwich doctor, dentist or butcher?
Goto Page: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 3 of 4
messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by exdulwicher June 08, 03:09PM

Quote:
We absolutely must consider access for emergency services, especially now.

It's more or less the first thing that gets considered. Councils and emergency services are very used to this - any time roadworks and/or temporary restrictions go in (digging up streets for gas works etc), the emergency services all have full advance notice.

There are slightly different legal proceedings depending on the exact nature of / reason for the closure and the location and permanency of any barrier(s) but emergency services are usually involved right from the start of planned closures like this.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 08, 03:19PM

Blocking off major access points does not seem helpful in that respect. Moreover, digging up streets where utilities have failed is in itself an emergency. This is about facilitating social distancing. It is still not clear how these road blocks will help in that respect. Again, the barriers could and should be fully permeable- removable for emergency access. Instead, we understand, they will be immovable.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was june 08, 03:26pm by first mate.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by ed_pete June 08, 03:53PM

On the other thread when I asked about emergency services James McAsh's response was:
"Yes emergency services need to be consulted before any measures like this are put in."
Sounds like they haven't been consulted yet.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 08, 04:06PM

Normally Emergency Services would be statutory consultees for any planned road closures...they have to be so they know alternative routes. However, the legal imperative of these measures leaves their input much less clear, the measures are being framed as temporary but implemented with some very permanent looking structures. Plus emergency services have a lot to consider right now and we do not know how all this is/ will be presented to them. For instance, is it a matter of “residents were asked and over 80% of respondents were in favour”. If something along those lines why would statutory consultees object?

It does not feel transparent. As I keep saying, how convenient that the very measures the council has pushed for years now are, miraculously, the solution for the effects of the pandemic and social distancing requirements.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by exdulwicher June 08, 04:39PM

Quote:
As I keep saying, how convenient that the very measures the council has pushed for years now are, miraculously, the solution for the effects of the pandemic and social distancing requirements.

I'd be more concerned and worried if the council had said "all these things that we've been consulting on and modelling and surveying people with a rough general idea of expected traffic outcomes - yeah well we're not going to do any of that post-Covid, we're actually going to do a whole host of completely unrelated stuff which we've suddenly decided is better".

Not saying they're right or wrong at the moment but they're only NAL barriers (blocks of concrete). Can take them out in a couple of hours.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Charles Notice June 08, 04:54PM

With all your posts and information have you been offered a consulting job from Southwark yet?

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 08, 05:24PM

But we are not talking post covid, these measures are framed as the Council response to Covid and social distancing requirements.

2 hours is a fair chunk of time to remove a ‘temporary’ barrier. No reason it cannot be made permeable to certain types of traffic, especially emergency services.

exdulwicher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I keep saying, how convenient that the very
> measures the council has pushed for years now are,
> miraculously, the solution for the effects of the
> pandemic and social distancing requirements.
>
> I'd be more concerned and worried if the council
> had said "all these things that we've been
> consulting on and modelling and surveying people
> with a rough general idea of expected traffic
> outcomes - yeah well we're not going to do any of
> that post-Covid, we're actually going to do a
> whole host of completely unrelated stuff which
> we've suddenly decided is better".
>
> Not saying they're right or wrong at the moment
> but they're only NAL barriers (blocks of
> concrete). Can take them out in a couple of hours.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Rockets June 08, 06:30PM

It was emergency service access that ultimately forced Lambeth to have to relent on the Loughborough junction debacle - not access along the individual roads that had been closed per se but for the chaos and gridlock it caused on surrounding roads which greatly increased response times for the emergency services. The London Ambulance service couldn't get Lambeth to listen so they had to go to Kate Hoey who wrote to the council and demanded they remove the scheme as it was putting patients at risk. It was only then that Lambeth listened.

Lambeth had completely failed to consider the impact of such closures on surrounding streets and I fear the same thing is happening here.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by lpool June 09, 11:36PM

Having given this further thought, to ensure the council achieves its objective and does not accidentally push traffic onto side roads from Melbourne Grove, they should consider a series of No Left Turn signs along Melbourne Grove. This will ensure all vehicles on Melbourne Grove have to stay on the road to reach Lordship Lane. This will help reduce traffic flows on side roads and also prevent vehicles where driver unaware of barrier, doing a U-Turn and using Ashbourne Grove instead.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 10, 08:08AM

Do you mean no left turns off LL into those roads. How would residents get onto their streets?

What about volume Of traffic on Lordship Lane and ED Grove, that also have schools and a medical centre within yards of the road? Additionally, what about social distancing next to all the shops?

I suppose we can then narrow LL to further block through traffic and enable pedestrians on the road but that will hamper the regional economy and cause issues for those using public transport and emergency services access.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by ed_pete June 10, 02:26PM

I think lpool meant no left turn from MG into Ashborne/Chesterfield/Blackwater etc, forcing the residents to enter and exit MG at LL junction. Not going to happen. Whole scheme is idiotic.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 11, 07:33AM

As they are doing on Goodrich we need to object to this. At the very least, it can be a barrier that can be closed for school times and lifted for the rest, that way emergency services can get access all the time. This notion of a ‘temporary’ barrier using great concrete bollards is Cllr Livingstone nonsense.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Rockets June 16, 08:13PM

According to a Onedulwich.uk update sent tonight the emergency orders have been approved and the Dulwich Village barriers will be installed within 9 days. I presume all the others in Melbourne Grove and Goodrich will all go in then as well.

I suggest anyone who is dismayed with the way the council are handling this registers at [www.onedulwich.uk] so we can approach this as one community.

Interesting to read on that site that the reason the council are using the emergency orders and trying to spin this as a response to Covid is because they have been told by TFL that the Healthy Streets initiative can no longer be funded due to the financial challenges TFL now has due to the deal they had to strike with the Tories to get emergency funding - so this is a desperate last ditch attempt to railroad their plans through.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 16, 08:49PM

Does the council state exactly what these road closures are meant to achieve? It could be that independent measuring of outcomes against objectives will be necessary to hold them to account. Clearly the council and its supporters cannot be trusted on evidence and will lie and fabricate when it suits them.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Spartacus June 16, 10:18PM

I Wouldn't want to be a councillor come the next election if this is the way that they treated the people who voted them in.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by mockingbird June 16, 10:52PM

If you get rebuffed by Southwark for an FOI request and told to resubmit – refuse! Quote the ICO guidance that gives them leeway on timeframes but not the right to refuse your FOI. Ask for a reference number for your submission:
[ico.org.uk]
Extract from ICO guidance below and the reminder to Counciles that they need to have proper record keeping :
Freedom of Information Act and Environmental Information Regulations:
This unique crisis has required quick decision making and innovative uses of data, including geolocation and geospatial information. There has been, and will continue to be, intense public interest in understanding how and why decisions were taken and how information was used.
V2.0 15 April 2020
5 We will take an empathetic and pragmatic approach to our role regulating access to information regulation, recognising the importance of transparency, especially where people have seen their civil liberties impacted.
We recognise that the reduction in organisations’ resources could impact their ability to comply with aspects of freedom of information law, such as how quickly FOI requests are handled, but we expect appropriate measures to still be taken to record decision making, so that information is available at the conclusion of the emergency.
We do not expect this will impact on the ability to take and progress actions that are necessary.
1. We will continue to accept new information access complaints. We will take a pragmatic approach to resolving these complaints, keeping engagement with the public authority to a minimum and being guided by them as to whether they are able to respond to our requests or require more time to do so.
2. We will recognise that the reduction in organisations’ resources could impact their ability to respond to access requests or address backlogs, where they need to prioritise other work due to the current crisis. Organisations should recognise the public interest in transparency and seek as far as possible to continue to comply with their obligations for particularly high-risk or high profile matters. 3. We understand that there may be extreme circumstances where public authorities have no option but to temporarily reduce or suspend elements of their information access function.
4. We encourage public authorities to proactively publish information they know will be of importance to their communities.
5. We will continue to emphasise and support the importance of proper record keeping during a period of time

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by snowy June 17, 08:22AM

Rockets Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> According to a Onedulwich.uk update sent tonight
> the emergency orders have been approved and the
> Dulwich Village barriers will be installed within
> 9 days. I presume all the others in Melbourne
> Grove and Goodrich will all go in then as well.
>
> I suggest anyone who is dismayed with the way the
> council are handling this registers at
> [www.onedulwich.uk] so we can approach this
> as one community.
>
> Interesting to read on that site that the reason
> the council are using the emergency orders and
> trying to spin this as a response to Covid is
> because they have been told by TFL that the
> Healthy Streets initiative can no longer be funded
> due to the financial challenges TFL now has due to
> the deal they had to strike with the Tories to get
> emergency funding - so this is a desperate last
> ditch attempt to railroad their plans through.

Or it’s the Department of Transport Emergency Active Travel Fund that’s investing £2bn across the UK

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by northernmonkey June 17, 11:58AM

Oh come on @snowy - where's the fun in that response? Haven't you learnt that its all a massive conspiracy?

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Serena2012 June 23, 05:45PM

The verdict is in (for the next 18 months at least): [www.southwark.gov.uk]

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 23, 06:16PM

Dear Southwark resident,
Experimental transport measures in East Dulwich
The Covid-19 pandemic has required us to introduce measures that fundamentally alter people’s travel patterns and the ways in which we use Southwark’s streets and spaces. Across Southwark, we are taking action to fast-track a variety of transport measures that support increased walking and cycling, allow social distancing, improve perception of air pollution exposure, and prevent motor vehicle traffic levels from rising.
The Melbourne Grove area has been identified as a priority, as it receives a very high volume of through traffic. ‘Our Healthy Streets – Dulwich’ engagement project has identified a number of interventions with broad local support. We have adapted some of these to develop interventions that can be installed quickly and trialled to provide safer routes through the area for socially distanced, active travel.
These are experimental measures – we will be required to conduct full public consultation before these are made permanent, and within eighteen months from installation. The measures are flexible as the experimental nature of the trial allows us to make amendments and changes within the first six months. An option will of course be to return the highway arrangements to the original state if the trial is not deemed to be successful.
We will be monitoring the impact of these changes throughout that period, using counts of motor vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. In addition, we are inviting residents to let us know about the impact on the streets they use – whether positive or negative – on the feedback map at https//:eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is. You are also able to sign up there for regular updates on this project. The site will be live once the measures have been installed.
Cllr. Richard Livingstone
Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency
Richard.Livingstone@southwark.gov.uk Date: 19 June 2020
Page 1 of 2

These are unprecedented times – in collaboration with central government and Transport for London we are taking these urgent steps to ensure the health and safety of our residents. We remain committed to working with you to ensure that all the measures we take work for local people and contribute to enhanced quality of life both at this difficult time and in the future.
Yours faithfully,
Cllr. Richard Livingstone
Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency
Page 2 of 2

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 23, 06:19PM

Note use of weasle-words and phrases like

“improve perception of air pollution” (no proof of actual improvement necessary)

“broad support” (not a majority then).

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by ed_pete June 23, 06:42PM

"if the trial is not deemed to be successful." ...and the success criteria are ???

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Rockets June 23, 06:46PM

Have they expanded the closures on Melbourne Grove as they now refer to it as "a closure to all motor traffic on Melbourne Grove, south of Tell Grove" - which suggests no vehicles will be able to gain access to the whole section of Melbourne Grove or is it just badly worded?

Also, the fact they have left the Healthy Streets map in place does this mean that they will also be pressing ahead with the closure of Eynella and the expansion of the CPZ to areas B and C under this plan too?

The communication from the council has been appalling - deliberately confusing and unclear - and I am interested to see that Comrade McAsh is keeping a very-low profile nowadays and now seemingly applies a controversy-filter to anything he responds to and avoids any questions he doesn't see fit to answer.

The sooner we get a chance to vote on whether we want this rabble in control locally the better - it seems the Labour party haven't learnt anything from the election and the sooner Keir Starmer gets to grips with rooting the far-left out of the party at all levels the sooner they will have the chance to start earning the respect of the electorate once again.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by 1921 June 23, 08:21PM

As this barrier is to do with social distancing, then surely the situation has changed with todays announcement that the distance can be reduced and this is no longer justifiable.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by rupert james June 23, 08:38PM

"Sadiq Khan admits he has 'not been providing proper leadership' as Mayor of London because of bouts of 'loneliness' during lockdown as he opens up on his mental health 'struggle'
Sadiq Khan opened up about his mental health struggles amid Covid lockdown
London Mayor said there were days 'when I'm not providing proper leadership'
Mr Khan said he has 'no doubt' the lockdown affected his mental health"

Mail on Sunday.

Perhap he could be removed legally as by his own admission he has not been up tp the job and Southwark should not follow any actions he has laid down as law.

Just a thought

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by EDguy89 June 23, 08:38PM

Rockets Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Have they expanded the closures on Melbourne Grove
> as they now refer to it as "a closure to all motor
> traffic on Melbourne Grove, south of Tell Grove" -
> which suggests no vehicles will be able to gain
> access to the whole section of Melbourne Grove or
> is it just badly worded?
>
> Also, the fact they have left the Healthy Streets
> map in place does this mean that they will also be
> pressing ahead with the closure of Eynella and the
> expansion of the CPZ to areas B and C under this
> plan too?
>
> The communication from the council has been
> appalling - deliberately confusing and unclear -
> and I am interested to see that Comrade McAsh is
> keeping a very-low profile nowadays and now
> seemingly applies a controversy-filter to anything
> he responds to and avoids any questions he doesn't
> see fit to answer.
>
> The sooner we get a chance to vote on whether we
> want this rabble in control locally the better -
> it seems the Labour party haven't learnt anything
> from the election and the sooner Keir Starmer gets
> to grips with rooting the far-left out of the
> party at all levels the sooner they will have the
> chance to start earning the respect of the
> electorate once again.

[www.southwark.gov.uk]

The hyperlink to the PDF file entitled "Melbourne Grove" has a map that shows exactly where the barrier will be placed.

Looks like vehicles won't be able to get access to Melbourne Grove from East Dulwich Grove.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by dulwichfolk June 23, 09:29PM

I like how the map hides/doesn't show Matham Grove...as if no one will now use that road if wanting to travel south on Lordship Lane...

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by Abe_froeman June 24, 09:19AM

It's much easier to distance yourself from others in a car than it is on foot or a bike

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by exdulwicher June 24, 09:41AM

Quote:
It's much easier to distance yourself from others in a car than it is on foot or a bike

But then you can't fit as many people on the road. And we're back at the beginning with the fact that there is not enough road space to accommodate the current number of cars, never mind if all bus / rail passengers leave public transport and get into their cars.

messageRe: Melbourne Grove South Barrier
Posted by first mate June 24, 09:58AM

Except, exdulwicher, I really do think this will become a drop off point for parents driving their children to school.

Let’s wait and see but I still fear the real council motive behind the barrier is to hasten CPZ expansion not to reduce cars, though there might be some reduction. However, don’t you find it a little odd that within the blocked zone they are also putting in double yellows to facilitate cars going up and turning around? Surely a couple of well placed road signs would make this unnecessary? However, parents dropping kids off to school will be able to do so with relative ease.

Goto Page: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 3 of 4

Back to top of page
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Donate                   Terms of use                  Help & FAQs                   Advertise               RSS rss feed               Copyright 2006 - 2018 East Dulwich Forum