Zebedee Tring

In view of the failure of Tim Warin and Cllr Simmons to spell out where the no right turn idea came from, it may be necessary to do a Jeremy Paxman at the Dulwich Community Council meeting and ask the same question about this until an answer is forthcoming.

I can't agree with Green Goose's summary of the meeting. Perhaps I'm being na?ve but I thought that Tim Warin and the Councillors who were present got the message loud and clear that the right turn ban would be crazy and dangerous and that they would be passing this message back to Southwark officers and other Councillors. Whether, however, this will result in a sensible final decision is quite another matter.

Just bumping this thread so that this issue doesn't get overlooked on the EDF - unlikely I know.

I thought that it would be a good idea to link this thread to a new(ish) thread entitled "Cycling Quietway - E&C to Crystal Palace Consultation". This issue is of course inextricably linked to the Townley/EDG junction proposal: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1451849

One of the reasons that westbound Jubilee Line trains are busier at LB is because more people are changing from Overground to Jubilee at Canada Water. Tfl website has flagged this up.

Holymoly, I see no reason not to ask for such assurances from the Monitoring Officer if and when you write to her.

While I am almost as cynical as richard tudor on this, the more people make senior Council officers aware of the huge controversy in Dulwich surrounding both the Cycling Strategy and the Townley/EDG junction issues the better. I suggest that Holymoly sends (preferably by email) a copy of his/her letter to the Council's Monitoring Officer Doreen Forrester-Brown, who is also the Director of Legal Services. She is currently dealing with my complaint about the consultation and decision making on the junction, and it would be a good idea to give her more background on the way that the Cycling Strategy is being handled and in particular the role of Cllr Mark Williams. I have asked Ms Forrester-Brown in her capacity as Monitoring Officer, to take the necessary action to ensure that no decision is taken on the junction proposal until a further study on the no right turn suggestion has been carried out and that if such a study is not available to consultees before the Dulwich Community Council meeting on 28 January, a further DCC meeting should be held to consider the study findings. I have also said that it would be totally inappropriate for Cllr Williams to make final decision on the proposal because he appears to be fixed in his views on the no right turn proposal and appears to be dismissing without proper consideration other alternatives. I have therefore suggested that the matter should go to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee or other appropriate Committee and if necessary to the full Council for a final decision. Her email address is [email protected]. Indeed it would be a good idea to tell the local press that there is a story that will interest them.

Charles N, please don't make this a political issue. I'm not a Lib Dem supporter but I'm satisfied that James Barber has done more to help opponents of this scheme than anyone else. Politicians who are in favour of the right turn ban would like nothing more than for opponents of the ban to turn on each other, especially on Councillors of a different political persuasion than their own. I repeat what I said in my previous post, if the Council provide evidence at the last minute (i.e. at or just before the DCC meeting on 28/1)that appears to support the feasibility of a right turn ban, then the consideration of the proposal should be postponed to a further DCC meeting to give objectors a chance to evaluate the evidence properly. This is what opponents of the right turn proposal should be agreed on.

If the Council provide evidence at the last minute (i.e. at or just before the DCC meeting on 28/1)that appears to support the feasibility of a right turn ban, then the consideration of the proposal should be postponed to a further DCC meeting to give objectors a chance to evaluate the evidence properly. Nobody should be bounced into making a decision that could have damaging results. And if anyone at the Council has in mind any 31 March deadline for spending available money (if indeed this the case), such a deadline should not be a reason for making a quick decision.

Cllr Mitchell has recently emailed both my wife and myself in response to emails from us. However, we haven't heard from either of the other two Councillors. BTW does anyone know whether Southwark have yet revealed details of any study that they have carried out of the implications of the right hand turn ban (assuming that they have carried out, or are carrying out such a study)? In my email to the Council's Monitoring Officer (extracts from which are set out in my previous post on this thread), I have argued that if such a study is not available to us before the Dulwich Community Council meeting on 28 January, a further DCC meeting should be held to consider the study findings.

Just wait until next Tuesday when there is supposed to be a bus strike. If they haven't sorted out the LB chaos by then (which is most unlikely), it'll be even worse.

I have written a long letter to Southwark's Monitoring Officer on what I see as the procedural defects in the whole issue. The most relevant passages are as follows: "... In my opinion, if the Council went ahead and approved Option 7 including the no right turn ban without carrying out a further study on the implications of this ban, this would potentially constitute maladministration. I should therefore be grateful if you, in your capacity as Monitoring Officer, would take the necessary action to ensure that no decision is taken on this proposal until such a further study is carried out. Furthermore if such a study is not available to consultees before the meeting on 28 January, a further Dulwich Community Council meeting should be held to consider the study findings..." "... Cllr Williams is therefore on record as saying that the no right turn measure is an integral part of the proposals. He appears to be fixed in his views and appears to be dismissing without proper consideration other alternatives, which have been preferred in previous studies. If he were to make his final decision on this basis, arguably he has fettered his discretion before he has even considered the representations against the no right turn measure. In the words of the old doctrine, not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done. In my opinion, the decision would be challengeable legally and would in itself constitute maladministration. For these reasons, it would be totally inappropriate for Cllr Williams to make final decision on the proposal. The matter should therefore go to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee or other appropriate Committee and if necessary to the full Council for a final decision..."

The London Regional Officer for Unite is called Wayne King. He must have had a tough time at school.

MarkE, have you seen how dangerous the Townley Rd/LL junction is and the congestion in Townley when the Alleyns coaches are parked there? It would be even worse if the crazy no right turn proposal at the Townley/EDG junction goes ahead. Routing the 37 along Townley would be a total non-starter.

Arguably Village Ward residents are potentially more affected by the proposals than anyone else. The cynic in me realises that Village Ward Councillors don't have to face the electorate for over three years. However, it would be courtesy (if nothing else) if they were to take note of the concerns of their constituents.

If I'm correct, Cllr Mark Williams is the person who will be making the final decision on the proposals on behalf of the Council. And if he is really saying that the "no right turn" measure is an integral part of the proposals and then makes his final decision on this basis, arguably he has fettered his discretion before he has even considered the representations against the "no right turn" measure - this would be challengeable legally. Perhaps James B could point this out to him.

Pressing your buttons? Wouldn't that constitute sexual harassment?

I think that Louisa and DF would regard me as an incomer since I've only lived in ED since 1987. And if I were a hipster (which I'm not since my beard is too short), I would be the oldest hipster in town.

Go-Ahead is the bus company presumably providing the 37 service.

Again very sorry to hear about your mother. Sadly hit and run accidents are all too common these days.

RPC, it's Christmas: time to give the personal agenda a rest. Let's leave this one to focus on the poor person who was involved in this accident.

RPC, I repeat what I said in my previous post namely: "And I too hope that the person who was injured (and who I presume was a pedestrian) is OK." My sympathy for the accident victim is therefore quite unequivocal.

And I too hope that the person who was injured (and who I presume was a pedestrian) is OK. The more concern that Southwark show to pedestrians, the better, and they could show their concern for pedestrians (and indeed other road users) by making the LL/EDG safer junction in the way suggested above. And no RPC, I am NOT unbelievably stupid and bigoted. I wish that posters who disagree with something that other posters say would refrain from insulting them. If they disagree with them, they should say why and clearly present their arguments for doing so.

Probably because it's only pedestrians who are getting hurt there and not cyclists. And it seems that, as far as some people in Southwark Council is concerned, cyclists are more important than pedestrians - the Townley/EDG saga has demonstrated this.

"Sun Arise" - the sun wasn't the only thing that was arising ...