legalalien

Yes, you?re fine as long as not 8-10 or 3-6 on a weekday. That?s assuming you have a ULEZ complaint vehicle - the ULEZ comes in tomorrow.

I thought the quote stood OK on its own, but to see it in context it?s in Appendix 1 where officers respond to various resident objections. The Rotherhithe CPZ thing actually seems to encapsulate all my gripes about SC: - an initially poorly publicised consultation with a 2% response rate - questions structured to elicit desired responses (eg asked to choose from a range of controlled parking times, ?no zone? not offered as an option (you could only click ?other? and add ?no zone) - a lengthy delay, and then the three week statutory consultation done in the middle of the summer holiday - report contains mixed explanations for the introduction of the CPZ. Initially says ?The main objective of the Rotherhithe and Surrey Docks CPZ is to enable people to lead more active lives. This is achieved by providing better cycling and walking environments, while maintaining and improving their current quality of life through mitigating the effect any future developments will have on parking.? Then ?The aim of this project is to mitigate against future increases in parking stress due to upcoming developments and not against current parking stress.? And then ?The implementation of a new parking zone will benefit the local community by removing commuter parking and parking displaced from other nearby parking zones resulting in an overall increase in the number of parking spaces available to residents. Then later there?s a suggestion that the aim is to reduce parking and free up kerb space for other uses. (Some objections are to the fact that parking spaces are being out in places where there is no current parking) Some residents (I think correctly) see this as a response to the fact that the Council has given planning permission for big new developments without parking attached to them (their climate change policy etc), with the CPZ a back door way of providing parking for those buying property in the new developments. Residents identify gentrification occurring and predict that their young families will be forced out, which will cause schools to close. Officers seem a bit hostile / discernible feeling of ?we?re experts, we?ve decided what to do, this consultation / listening to residents is a right pain.? (That?s not an actual quote needless to say. Shades of Leo Pollack. Anyway, to bring things back to East Dulwich, given the council?s intention to roll out CPZs borough wide, keep an eye out for consultations when they come, read questions carefully - and if you are in a situation where you think you have an allocated park on an estate road / private road / shared area of some kind, dig out the paperwork for it sooner rather than later, I?d say. Loved the Orwell quote.

Looks like the residents in Rotherhithe are not so keen on the Southwark Highways Dept either https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=7466 Not sure what to think about this kind of attitude to comments made during consultation on the Rotherhithe CPZ proposals. "The extent of the CPZ is considered to be correct having due regard to the extent that parking dispersion occurs when space is at a premium. It would be very difficult for residents to have knowledge of how additional developments in Southwark can directly affect them, until after the changes occur of course. They then see changes associated from the new development as time passes, and how the advantages of the CPZ will provide them with parking spaces. The layout and extent of the area was given extensive thought by officers and members, prior to any engagement occurring and the zone area being developed." ie basically residents know nothing about their area, we are right, they will see. What's the point of consultation then?

Hmm. Sounds like my (ii) or (iii) above then?

I?m going to guess either (i) something to do with social care or (ii) the kind of exemptions for residents on school streets that it looks like Waltham Forest has (labelled things like SC1, SC2 etc - see https://www.walthamforest.gov.uk/schoolstreets), or (iii) Southwark has considered (ii) and decided not to but left a ref in the TMO by mistake. Disclaimer - haven?t looked at the TMOs yet. Jb112jb are you on a school street?

Yes one of the cast members from there I think. Interesting article from the Times Where to buy in Peckham https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/29833dc0-2d03-11ec-9657-60f46274c249?shareToken=d370f81c0a8a2a87fec3209316c80844

Maybe ring around some of the local pubs and see whether they have an upstairs room for free or cheap during hours they are closed?

Just out of interest (not to make any particular point), what have class sizes been in England historically? I think they are around 30 now? I was educated overseas and our standard class size was 30-32 (one teacher per class - at least for primary and core secondary subjects), this was taken as a given and not really debated much / seemed to work OK. Have class sizes here increased over the years or have they also always been around this mark? (Obvs might be smaller in more remote spots, so thinking about maximums in populated areas)?

As Southwark say you can put shredded paper in your home compost bin (listed as an organic material) it makes sense they?d collect it in the brown bin https://www.southwark.gov.uk/bins-and-recycling/food-and-garden-waste/compost-at-home. But as the bin collectors probably don?t consult the Southwark website on this, probably best to ask them.. (Incidentally it says on that site you can buy a home compost bin from Southwark or get a free one if you are a community group or school, which I didn?t know).

Hadn?t heard of this and just put it on in the background. Quickly became obsessed by bus continuity ( no buses in initial shots and then at about 15 mins in onward there are blurry background glimpses now and then). If they filmed it all in advance and are now having to add in the occasional bus so it seems to be more real time, that must be a right pain for them. (I used to flat with a guy who advised film crews on weather continuity, it ruined me for life). Not going on my must watch list, but then I don?t watch TOWIE, MiC etc, def not the target audience!

Interesting about the sites. There was some mention at the scrutiny committee meeting about trying to keep any sites for community use/ so they?re potentially still there in case of future uptick in demand, but given the housing situation I?d imagine there?s a strong case for converting to housing. Although possibly closing a school and then having developers create expensive apartments (including some affordable housing commitment no doubt) wouldn?t be a very good look. Still theoretical at this stage as regards individual schools of course but there did seem to be a sense of inevitability that some primary schools would end up closing.

In case anyone is interested, there is a current consultation on public art in Southwark, with input going towards formulation of a policy on public art. Closes 10 November. https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/public-art-in-southwark/ Worth filling in to give your views on the types of public art you?d like to see, and also who you think should be responsible for what public art is created and where it goes (for example, do you think experts / council should decide or should local residents be consulted etc). In this context public art includes events such as music and dance, not just static items. You can suggest particular things at particular locations if you want. Also there?s an option at the end to be put on the mailing list for future consultations on various unrelated topics as and when they happen.

Not sure. There's a report on the St Johns school closure earlier this year that seems to set out the process https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s99896/Report%20St.%20Johns%20Walworth%20Church%20of%20England%20primary%20school

Just to update on this, licensing proposals were approved at Cabinet on Tuesday, details are here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013639/Appendices%20-%20Part%201%20Tuesday%2019-Oct-2021%2011.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=9 If you are a local landlord worth checking / keeping an eye out for council communications - for those requiring one of the new licences there is an early bird discount on the fee that applies for the first three months. If renting to a single household (rather than multiple occupation) the selective licensing scheme only applies in some areas, these include Champion Hill and Goose Green.

Just watching cabinet meeting from Tuesday where they discuss the pupil planning report. From about 1:12 onward. Very sober discussion, including the fact that the council?s accounts haven?t provisioned for bailing out/ costs of closing failing schools. Costs like this reduce the fund available to remaining schools - the longer (economically) failing schools are allowed to continue the worse the picture overall. Some mention about how this relates to planning / regeneration - KW suggesting that it?s all down to benefit caps forcing families out of London. (Nothing to do with the fact that the problem is around devt like Elephant. Hmm. Other cabinet members didn?t seem very convinced tbh). Watch the video?. ETA the minutes have now been posted and include a resolution that ?a report be brought back to cabinet within six months on the extent to which changes in the benefit system have led to a reduction in the number of school-aged children in the borough; working if possible with other boroughs and the regional schools officer.? There was nothing in the underlying report about the benefit system. Why wouldn?t they ask for a report on something neutral like ?the reasons why there has been a reduction??? These cabinet meetings really are a piece of political theatre.

Meanwhile over in Lambeth there's a petition running to replace the "Cabinet" system of government there with a committee system (which some councils have) with a view to individual ward councillors having a greater voice: https://lambethref.co.uk/petition. Looks interesting.

In case it helps, here?s the slide pack from the meeting with the council?s map of the Spine route https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013666/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.3%20Wednesday%2013-Oct-2021%2019.00%20Overview%20Scrutiny%20Committee.pdf?T=9 Also has the figures about station usage.

The timed restrictions aren?t in place on the weekend but the Court/ Calton closure is, and many believe that to be the root of the problem.

Yeah, right.

And the point of that post is what? To suggest that the protestors have something in common with national socialists or to suggest that the proponents of DS are setting it up as a memorial to national socialists? Either is inappropriate / pointless / a bit juvenile.

one of the Charter North parents mentioned to me last week that their Oct holidays have changed to match the independent schools - not sure if true or not. DVIS still seem to be in this week. Galileo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isn?t it only the start of half term for private > schools - I think most state schools are still in > this week.

I suspect Helen (and Cllr Simmonds) will have spent a big chunk of this summer (and will have to spend quite a bit of time going forward) on the electoral boundary review process and who stands in the new seats if the current dissection of her existing seat goes ahead ( more info at https://www.helenhayes.org.uk/helen_s_response_to_the_boundary_commission_for_england_consultation_on_new_parliamentary_constituency_boundaries and https://boundarycommissionforengland.independent.gov.uk/guide-to-the-2023-review-now-published/). Interested to see that Helen?s ability to address traffic problems in Croxted Road are included (in her August submission) as a reason not to change boundaries there: ?As the local MP, I am currently convening a working group officers and councillors from Lambeth and Southwark and Transport for London to explore potential solutions to this issue.? Has this working group happened yet?I I think I heard that Lambeth councillors are keen to engage?

Yes Penguin, I?m sensing a theme. Motorbird so DfE approve schools opening but after that don?t control their intake? Or do they technically have the power but just don?t exercise it in practice? I?m getting boring now but I can?t get my head around LAs having to try and manage pupil places without having any control over academy intakes. Is this because the initial Labour policy was that failing schools could academise and it would only be a small proportion that probably weren?t super-attractive? And then (I have been googling), the coalition govt introduced converter academies so better schools / everyone could convert, and this current problem is an unintended consequence?

I really hadn?t realised quite how much academies privatise the education system until now - I was all in favour of some aspects eg more freedom around curriculum / style but hadn?t appreciated how little governmental control there was over admissions and numbers. They seem almost like state-funded private schools in a sense, I can imagine how those in wealthier catchments can top up funds from parent contributions / well off PTAs / economies of scale and more savvy executives - I guess that?s great if everyone gets to go to one but they don?t. Motorbird83 if you can point me in the direction of any further reading I?d be interested (otherwise Mr Google will doubtless help me).

?The job of an elected official is to cater to the needs of ALL their citizens, and I don't mean those who live in leafy mansions on Calton Avenue, I refer to those who are disadvantaged, disabled, young etc. Governance is not a question of who shouts the loudest on an internet forum or go marching around the streets on a Saturday. That means that sometimes they have to go against what is "democratic", to do what is *right*. In the case of creating safer streets for local children and poorer residents without cars, to walk and cycle on, is clearly the right thing to do. ? I 100% agree with the first two sentences but not the last one. As regards the first I think they?ve failed spectacularly to do so. I would add to the second sentence, nor should it be a question of who has the most well organised lobby groups, given more information and able to influence councillors behind closed doors, or those who councillors instinctively feel are ?people like them?. I agree that sometimes the Council has to go against what the majority want, but I also think (and this is the purpose of consultation), that if the majority are telling you that something isn?t working (rather than just that they don?t like it), you need to take another long hard look at the data and see whether you might be missing something - particularly when the data is as flimsy - and as heavily modelled - as it is here. At least you could fulfil your promise to release raw data so that people can test it and see for themselves. In other words, the correct response is not ?this is not a referendum?, it?s ?why do so many of our constituents think that things haven?t improved for them in the way we intended / so many think that we have made things worse?? Otherwise it just comes across as treating constituents with contempt / as ?deplorables? whose views shouldn?t count. And history tells us that doesn?t end well. To put it a slightly different way - the issue here is not (in most cases anyway) LTN opponents agreeing with the data but saying they?d prefer not to have closures, it?s people trusting their own eyes and, given the way data has been created and presented, not being convinced that the council?s analysis is correct - same applies to things like the Aldred hypotheses. That?s what I think anyway. Ps to head off the inevitable response, the reason I don?t agree with the last sentence is because of the words ?clearly right? - an aim may be clearly a good one viewed in isolation, but in reality that ?good? needs to be offset against the ?bads? that result from the means that you use to achieve it. Life is complicated.