legalalien

Good luck with FOI requests to Southwark - I?ve only ever made one, the response was late (after six months) after the ICO intervened, response received literally on the afternoon of the day they specified for a response. Someone asked me to look at an FOI response last year and the council had completely misstated the law as part of their justification for withholding info - notwithstanding their legal obligation to (basically) be helpful. It?s a joke. Meanwhile a local councillor accuses lobby groups of lying when they publish responses to FOI requests. Not sure what to think there. So, on a practical note, submitting an FOI request is not as helpful or useful as people might hope.

I agree. More info in this article https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/do-the-honourable-thing-campaigners-call-for-former-southwark-housing-chief-pollak-to-resign-from-council/ (including some of the details redacted in the report).

I?m just thinking that as the blue badge is (I think?) issued to a person not a vehicle, you?d have to register a particular vehicle with Southwark to get the exemption. I just checked and for the congestion charge, for example, you have to separately register a vehicle to take advantage of the exemption.

For those who followed the Leo Pollak incident, the external solicitors?s report into whether his behaviour breached the Code of Conduct is now on the website https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7252. The draft report apparently found that all of the anonymous tweeting activity was outside the scope of the Code, the final one concludes that the tweets relating to specific housing projects that the councillor was involved with were within scope, but the content of the tweets was such that there was no breach, but operating anonymously in that specific context was problematic. Interesting discussion of the law relating to freedom of speech in this context. And also worth noting that sometimes a political remedy (public outcry leading to resignation) is more effective than a legal one.

Spider69 the adjusted arrangements haven?t come into force yet, you can?t drive that route between 8 and 10am or 3-6pm on Monday to Friday ( I think including public holidays that fall Monday to Friday). There is a plan to exempt all Blue badge holders who are Southwark residents, again I?m not sure that has happened yet, if you haven?t been asked to register I would assume not. ?We currently have Blue Badge exemptions to the camera-controlled closures, which we're planning to extend to all Southwark resident Blue Badge holders across all Streetspace areas. ?

Thanks Penguin68. I think you are probably right But the thread is still useful to keep people up to speed on developments, given the poor state of council engagement / notification of what is planned / going on. I think so, anyway.

I don?t really understand this as have been I?ll and not read data properly so apologies. EDG central is now less than EDG East or South as I understand it. Do we know what EDG central was historically or not? Or has this always been the case or is it a new development or do we not know? If we don?t know then how can we say it?s not due to different choices of route? And the thing about reducing pressure on Townley Road must have had some basis in the data? goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its not the different choices made - its that the > base count for that section wasn't included before > as (like many on this thread) people assumed it > would be the same as at the junction with Lordship > and its not the case. > > I'd also note that the reduction in traffic at the > central section is even more impressive when you > consider that the vaccination programme has been > run with TJ as a hub centre for Southwark GPs so > has generated lots of extra trips for people > getting to appointments, especially given the > absurdly ample parking on site. > > > legalalien Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Yes, the results of consultation should be used > > carefully, but the point is that they should be > > used, with views acknowledged and not ignored > > completely. It feels (to me and apparently to > > quite a few others) as though the consultations > > have only been done because they are a legal > > requirement and not with a genuine open mind and > a > > desire to improve predetermined plans. Whether > > that?s true, or a perception caused by poor > > communication by officers and councillors (in > > particular councillors on social media), who > > knows? > > > > Cllr Rose has said in a couple of recent > meetings > > that the council need to learn from the Dulwich > > experience. I take that as an acknowledgment > that > > it has been handled somewhat less than > perfectly. > > Ex-D I note you haven?t responded to my > > suggestions that repeat ETMOs on champion Hill > and > > failing to include school input on MGN > (resulting > > in revocation and the temporary traffic order) > > aren?t things that inspire confidence. Not that > > you have to, of course! > > > > Leaving aside everything else, I?d have a lot > more > > respect for the council if they could put their > > hands up and organise some meetings allowing > > people to vent about process and discuss - not > the > > substantive details of this scheme - but how > they > > can improve what seem to be fairly poor > engagement > > processes. I would be happy to volunteer time > for > > that sort of process review exercise. I wonder > > whether it sits with the transport department > or > > the cabinet member in charge of engagement > > generally? There seem to be similar problems > with > > housing issues. > > > > As Christmas approaches, maybe time to spend > time > > reflecting on and trying to better understand > each > > others? perspectives and dialling things down a > > bit? Just finished a documentary on Amazon > Prime > > entitled ?The Street? from 2019, dealing with > > gentrification in Hoxton and different > > perspectives on that. Well worth a watch. > > > > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Street_(2019_f > > > ilm) > > > > All the best to everyone for the festive > season, > > in difficult times. > > > > PS I will of course get out a map at some point > > and try to understand the central EDG ?Bermuda > > Triangle? issue. I?m going to guess it?s > parents > > on the way to private schools choosing Townley > > Road over Melbourne Grove and left into EDG - > that > > would seem consistent with the original > rationale > > of removing the MGS closure to relieve pressure > on > > Townley?

Update on flood alleviation scheme https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50028083

Yes, the results of consultation should be used carefully, but the point is that they should be used, with views acknowledged and not ignored completely. It feels (to me and apparently to quite a few others) as though the consultations have only been done because they are a legal requirement and not with a genuine open mind and a desire to improve predetermined plans. Whether that?s true, or a perception caused by poor communication by officers and councillors (in particular councillors on social media), who knows? Cllr Rose has said in a couple of recent meetings that the council need to learn from the Dulwich experience. I take that as an acknowledgment that it has been handled somewhat less than perfectly. Ex-D I note you haven?t responded to my suggestions that repeat ETMOs on champion Hill and failing to include school input on MGN (resulting in revocation and the temporary traffic order) aren?t things that inspire confidence. Not that you have to, of course! Leaving aside everything else, I?d have a lot more respect for the council if they could put their hands up and organise some meetings allowing people to vent about process and discuss - not the substantive details of this scheme - but how they can improve what seem to be fairly poor engagement processes. I would be happy to volunteer time for that sort of process review exercise. I wonder whether it sits with the transport department or the cabinet member in charge of engagement generally? There seem to be similar problems with housing issues. As Christmas approaches, maybe time to spend time reflecting on and trying to better understand each others? perspectives and dialling things down a bit? Just finished a documentary on Amazon Prime entitled ?The Street? from 2019, dealing with gentrification in Hoxton and different perspectives on that. Well worth a watch. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Street_(2019_film) All the best to everyone for the festive season, in difficult times. PS I will of course get out a map at some point and try to understand the central EDG ?Bermuda Triangle? issue. I?m going to guess it?s parents on the way to private schools choosing Townley Road over Melbourne Grove and left into EDG - that would seem consistent with the original rationale of removing the MGS closure to relieve pressure on Townley?

An update - I posted mine on Sat on before the postbox pick up time and got results early this morning, so still a reasonably quick turn around time. It took me longer to get the test kit!

I just googled and it?s confusing, either 50+ or 25+ https://roadsafetygb.org.uk/cyclingevent/index.php/programme/rachel-aldred/ https://www.roadsafetytrust.org.uk/trustees/dr-rachel-aldred But given peer review seems to be such an amorphous concept and vary across disciplines does it really make a difference? I was more surprised when I realised Prof Aldred was a sociologist rather than an engineer / traffic planner. I don?t think she?s ever pretended otherwise but the Professor of Transport title led me to make assumptions.

I walk that way quite a lot and there does seem to be more traffic on Ashbourne, would be useful to monitor it. Map on my iPad has its own unique version of the closures - see attached. Seems to think Calton/ court / DV is open as well.

Why not all the way up to chesterfield - otherwise chesterfield will get the traffic?

Absolutely right, but it?s reasonable to expect compliance with the associated safeguards laid down in the legislation / regulations. For example, a max 18 month period (I?m not convinced by the two successive ETROs at Champion Hill), appropriate pre implementation consultation with emergency services, and proper well thought out consultation before things are made permanent with all voices given an equal chance to be heard. There seems to have been something of a move from public meetings to small group meetings with individual residents associations and I?m not sure I like it. And the point made above stands - surely the input from the school and issues around the school gate should have been picked up in the detailed consultation before the October order was made? They?re revoking it before it has even been implemented, and we?re back to yet another temporary order (at a further cost of ?5k). It doesn?t exactly inspire confidence. exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How much longer can they use the cover of Covid > for the experimental/temporary TOs - it seems > ludicrous they can still invoke them two years on > - will this ability to avoid talking to residents > continue forever - is this not a classic example > of a council abusing the powers given to them in a > time of emergency? > > Experimental Traffic Orders can be put in at any > time. Section 9 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act > 1984. > It's not an abuse of power at all, it's > specifically within legislation. > > It's actually a far better way of doing things > than endless rounds of consultations and what ifs > and modelling and "well we think x.." and then > spending ??? rebuilding an entire junction. > > Get on and do it, monitor it, decide if it has or > hasn't had the desired effect and then either > remove it, adjust it or make it permanent. Answers > via a mix of consultations and real life "we can > see what is happening and why".

Not sure it?s that, as both experimental and temporary orders are available in non-emergency times. I just don?t understand why the school?s input wasn?t solicited and taken into account as part of the consultation. Maybe inefficiency, or maybe wanting to be seen to compromise and then realising it wouldn?t work (or maybe waiting for the movement data). Did someone mention that the main entrance to the school is to move to EDG? Maybe this new arrangement is linked to the delay in finalising funding / kicking off the construction contract which might delay the change of entrance and make safety at the current entrance more of an issue? Also think I saw a revised temporary closure on Gilkes, removing parking bays etc outside St Barnabas Hall to facilitate the construction project. Until Oct 2022 if I read it correctly, will look properly next time I go past.

Not sure if people have seen this - looks like they are turning the Melbourne Grove North closure around again ie keeping it at the Grove Vale end? Haven?t read it yet. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50028079 Temporary order to protect the safety of pupils at Charter ED. Getting all very messy now in terms of consulting on experimental orders, and then revoking them and putting temporary ones in thereby bypassing further consultation.

Pity you?ve missed the Neighbourhood Funds round. Think there?s the kernel of a good idea in there though.

No details yet but council are applying to reduce the intakes at Ilderton, Dog Kennel Hill, Coburg and English Martyrs. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50028068 ETA here is the report https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103860/Report%20-%20Variation%20to%20Published%20Admissions%20Numbers.pdf Of the various areas Dulwich has the lowest level of overcapacity with 29 surplus primary places this year.

Talking about councillors, an updated political ward map has just been posted on the website and I see one of the Labour councillors is now an independent (Cllr Fleming in Faraday). Is that a recent development? I googled but couldn?t see anything. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103709/Political%20Ward%20Map%20December%202021.pdf

Just had an email with a 22 Dec response date (first email in the last couple of weeks, ?Dear all, Thank you for your continued interest in the Dulwich Streetspace measures. We would like to advise that the all latest monitoring data has now been published here. We want to give everyone an opportunity to reflect on this information, which has been central to our decision-making process . Therefore, if you wish to comment on the new data or the decisions that we have published, the deadline for comments has been extended to Wednesday 22 December 2021. A full report on the representations and the associated officer recommendations is available to view here. It is really important to note that, although this marks the end of the current constitutional process, we will continue to monitor the situation in the Dulwich area, meet with residents and other stakeholders, and to review the progress of the measures against our objectives.?

I think they have to use the traffic fine funds for road etc infrastructure don?t they- I thought they were ringfenced? In any case, they?re built into the council budget already and there?s still if I recall correctly something like ?6mill in efficiency savings to be found in order to balance the budget - I wouldn?t get too excited just yet ? (See here for draft budget proposals https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103542/Report%20Policy%20and%20Resources%20Strategy%202022-23%20to%202024-25%20update.pdf )

Jenijenjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Data would have been collected in the same way > before installation of LTNs so I don?t see what > difference that would make. Is that directed at my comment? If so I don?t understand your point. What I?m saying is that because most of the closures are timed, the traffic and bus delays caused by them occur only during the closure periods, so it would be useful to know what the additional delays during those periods is. There is one map/chart aiming to show that but it doesn?t tell you the actual delays being caused. It would be interesting to know whether it?s two minutes or twenty two (I?m exaggerating obviously). ETA - should have said, on some roads only during the closure periods, and on other roads (e.g. Dulwich Village) immediately before and after the closure periods

As someone who has walked up and down East Dulwich Grove and speculated about the scale of construction works at Charter ED many times over the last couple of years I found this report about the contract for Phase 2 construction works quite interesting and thought others might as well. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103674/Report%20Gateway%202%20-%20Contract%20Award%20Approval%20to%20award%20the%20main%20works%20contract%20to%20deliver%20phase%202%20of%20T.pdf Looks as though things are a bit tricky as the cost of building supplies is skyrocketing meaning at least a ?1.5 million funding shortfall which the council are asking DfE?s funding agency to cover. Given the time critical nature of the project it?s not feasible to re-tender the contract to try and get a cheaper price. The price with the selected contractor has been negotiated down as far as possible. If DfE doesn?t come to the party with funding the design may need to be revisited slightly - the example given is removal of the hall. The council is anxious to avoid delays that might cause problems with expanding intake and the provision of 20 new ASD places. Currently projected total cost of build is just shy of ?43 million, of which ?5 million is a council capital contribution (made to cover a funding shortfall on the original design, seems Southwark wanted something slightly better than central govt would fund) and ?900k is council money for the new ASD resource.

Surely the chart to look at re buses is the one showing changes at peak times when the timed closures are in effect, since this is when the problem congestion /biggest delays occur? If you have to travel to work, school etc during the peak and your journey is made problematically longer, it doesn?t help you if this is averaged out by slightly faster times over the rest of the day. The peak chart is expressed in standard deviation terms, you can see there?s an increase of more than 1SD on Dulwich Common, Croxted at both am and pm peaks and also on EDG, Grove Vale, Red Post Hill at the pm peak, but as its just ?more than? it?s hard to get an idea of the scale of the delay, I think?

Ok got it, Oct only features for EDG on page 39 and no October data for other sites? A bit odd and easy to miss in a section entitled sept data. Why are car/LGv numbers given for October but cycle numbers only given for September? Consistency would be better/ more reassuring?