legalalien

So many messages to read through. I understand that Cllr in Chief Kieron Williams and Cllr Rose had a zoom call with reps of residents? associations last night. I?m not sure which RAs. I had a message from ours at 4:15pm about a meeting at 5:30pm and didn?t see it until later that evening so didn?t get a chance to pass on my views to those attending from our street. Apparently the meeting was to ?discuss the ongoing Dulwich Review process, the experiences of your members and your ideas for the future? - the full text of the letter from the council wasn?t sent through to us. Is anyone else aware of this meeting : able to give some insight on what was discussed? Haven?t had an update from our RA.

Minor Traffic Schemes Batch 2 now published, think the only local one is an experimental TMO to put a permeable closure on Gilkes (where the current temporary closure is) https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50026422

This is what is so odd. I don?t drive either, and have mainly walked (and sometimes cycled) during the nearly 15 years I?ve been here - including school runs on some of the roads now being filtered - without any problem at all. Which I guess is why I don?t appreciate the upside of LTNs as much as some others who are making behavioural change. The walking experience locally has worsened overall for me due to air pollution/ noise/ traffic and cycles on pavements on key walking routes, so am with ab29 on that.

Not everyone going to hospital goes in an ambulance?

Never mind it?s working - the suggestion is to turn the existing timed restrictions into all day modal filters and also close off Red Post Hill? Again - not smart to close off routes to hospitals. And 24/7 will only make Croxted, LL and EDG worse. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Meanwhile the pro-lobbyists ramp up the "it's > working" narrative on the basis of some seriously > suspect data from the council..... > > > https://twitter.com/southwarkcycle/status/14153244 > 20038668292?s=19

The rooftop housing I?m talking about is the stuff being built by Southwark on its council estates. Obviously not in affluent areas, and hardly the fault of Conservatives (except to the extent National planning policy might allow the Labour Council to do it, I guess). Just pointing out that voting dynamics are by no means all about LTNs, and lots of non-drivers in historic LTNs, as we are to call them, might be focused on other issues.

Do you think people voted in the mayoral election on the LTN issue given the mayor has practically no power or influence over LTNs? I certainly didn?t, and any candidate campaigning in that issue was really misleading people a bit. True of candidates across the spectrum. A lot of the anti-Labour sentiment locally is not so much anti-LTN sentiment as anti-the-way these councillors and this council are behaving. It extends to lots of people unhappy with similar behaviour in other contexts eg rooftop housing, failing to deal with / monitor developer commitments to provide social housing, building on green spaces.

I?ll acknowledge the point about Tom, although I still think it felt quite scripted. Do you think that when the June data comes, they?ll then compare it with an ?adjusted? June 2019 baseline then - or just give the new data? It should be the former? Hopefully they?ll also give some more info about on what basis they?ve done the ?adjustment?. northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On the April point they did seem to indicate that > there would be more data for May and June coming > soon so that will be helpful to understand what is > a trend vs anomaly. > > I'd also agree that more granularity of data would > be helpful - I'd like to see the directional > traffic counts rather than in total and would > agree that weekday vs weekend would also be > helpful. > > The questions were supposed to be split by area > though - East Dulwich, then the village and then > champion hill so the fact that Tom of Denmark Hill > spoke at the end was because he was one of the > questionners from that area. The assumption that > only negative views can be genuine does reflect > your views rather than people being an obvious > plant.

I just went to it. I asked a question in the chat and put my hand up to ask as well and was roundly ignored - and the questions were pretty innocuous too, I thought. (In case they weren't innocuous, I asked (i) whether we could have a split out of weekday and weekend data on roads affected by the timed closures, to better understand the impact of the timed closures; and (ii) whether using April as the comparison month, which is a school holiday month, might mask any potential redirection of school traffic and also cycle to school traffic.) Mostly the feedback to the council was quite negative - one or two supporters including a fairly staged cameo by Tom of Denmark Hill (whoever that be) who Cllr Simmonds invited to speak right at the end. The interjections of "we don't trust you" summed it up quite well (my opinion obviously).

So: (i)the Council decided and announced in March that it plans to insource the leisure centre contract when it ends in June 2023. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s94286/Report%20Gateway%200%20-%20Appraisal%20of%20management%20options%20for%20leisure%20centres.pdf. (ii) Due to impact of the pandemic, Southwark?s had to plough additional funds in to meet running costs, highly likely the contractor has been making no profit for months and won?t for the balance of the term. (iii) in any outsourcing contact there?s a high risk of underperformance during an exit period and you need a really tightly drafted contract to give you ways of keeping the supplier motivated / penalising poor performance. We can?t see the contract but I doubt there are performance based incentives other than usage-based or share of income ones (and usage and income will be down due to COVID) or service credits for poor performance which would come off fees or income share ( but what if fees or income share aren?t being paid in this bail out situation - hard to know). The decision notice linked above doesn?t even identify poor service during the remaining period / exit period as a key risk of the insourcing option, which it is - particularly with a lead time as long as this. Why would the supplier consider improving its IT system or service in this situation? I wouldn?t expect an improvement any time soon.

I think it made sense to extend given they hadn?t published the data (in fact I might have suggested it on another thread). Everyone was criticising the failure to provide the data before the consultation window closed so a brief extension seems sensible to me. The selection and presentation of the data is a different issue. Critics were always expecting the presentation of the data to be ?spun? (in which case might have been better not to call for data to be provided and the additional meeting held before the deadline). It?s only a week at the end of the day. I would say that I?m sure the councillors must know the broad substance of the data by now, but at this point I?m not entirely sure what local councillors, compared to say the cabinet member, or the officers, know at any given point in time. I would be interested to hear from local councillors about precisely what data they are being given by officers and when. Do they get to see the raw data or are they just given the same information as is made public?

Is that a council document or something else (residents survey)? fottos Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Southwark's extension to the deadline is a futile > attempt to change reality. See image for their > interim results on the DV junction

Re councillor campaigning, here?s a couple of pics from Twitter. Amusingly they seem to have taken along a councillor from Colchester who is keen on cycling, and who is copping flak after failing to explain an under-consultation bus gate to his constituents. https://www.gazette-news.co.uk/news/19423678.concerns-proposed-new-bus-gate-colchester-ban-cars/ Here to compare notes on communication strategies, or pondering a move to Dulwich?

One of the strange things about the debate locally is that (out of my personal contacts) some of the strongest advocates of LTNs are ?born again? active travellers- ie those who used to drive LOADS of short journeys and child- ferrying to any from school and activities and who have switched some of their journeys) whereas those against are those who have been walking and cycling these journeys the whole time. Perhaps the former see more potential for change than the latter / the latter see the downsides but aren?t really appreciating any benefit personally?

Why are councillors canvassing now - no election till next May is there? Or are they taking the political temperature locally? I haven?t seen any, or any leaflets, so presumably not seen as being a ?swing? street.

As a reminder, you can submit a new response to the review and change your original response if you want to: "If you've already responded but wish to change some of your answers, you may do so but please give the same name and details, and indicate clearly that this is your second response (we'll disregard your earlier response)." https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review I think the extension is because the council / councillors were getting grief about not providing data prior to consultation end date, as they'd promised to do - the extension takes that problem away.

While we wait for ex- to finish his or her breakfast, some light reading : https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.417.7811&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Assuming these are pneumatic tube counters (are they?), there?s some suggestion that large pulses of traffic can jam the counter. Old article though and not sure whether technology has improved the situation. From what I can gather, suppliers of tubes stress their accuracy and suppliers of other types of counting technology stress their inaccuracy (no surprises there). Quite a few suppliers suggest a minimum speed of 5mph and I saw in a US govt procurement doct that ?Pneumatic tubes... sometimes fail to count when vehicles are moving slowly because the velocity of the air inside the tube is insufficient to trip the air switch.?, which sounds like what you are referring to Rockets?

I think I?d find it more helpful to assess the timed closures if the council could split out the weekday traffic data (when the measures are in place) from the weekend data. I imagine the weekend data smooths out the peaks and troughs a bit? It would also help enable people to understand the breakdown between the increase in commuter and school travel by cycle and weekend leisure cycling.

Here?s the draft Air Quality scrutiny report Part 2 due to be considered / signed off at next week?s Commission meeting https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s100159/Air%20Quality%20Part%20Two%20scrutiny%20review%20report%20draft.pdf

Loads of questions from councillors at the upcoming Members? question time at the upcoming Council Assembly, some the kind of friendly questions you get from Tory back benchers at PMQs, others more challenging. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013441/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.%202%20Wednesday%2014-Jul-2021%2019.00%20Council%20Assembly.pdf?T=9 Cllr Leeming asking about air quality and Cllr Mills about cycle routes on Peckham Rye East, among others.

only had a preliminary look but I have a question as to exactly how pre-implementation data has mysteriously been "adjusted" to April 2019 levels when in some cases there is no pre-implementation data. Also why compare winter school term time in Calton with spring Easter holiday time? Devil will be in the detail. Hopefully some people with better stats skills than me can tell me what is going on....

No you're right, I don't think it was.

That's an interesting debate - "green technocapitalist solutions": Environmental Progress v Extinction Rebellion, and the question of nuclear power. https://environmentalprogress.org/ https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2020/09/16/statement-on-zion-lights-michael-shellenberger-and-the-breakthrough-institute/ Late to the party but trying to educate myself a bit on some of this stuff...

The background info about all the applications is here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=533&MId=6871&Ver=4 The Court Lane beds stuff was potentially out of the Devolved Highways Fund, whereas Harmony in the Square was from the Neighbourhoods Fund. I'm not sure if there was ever a document explaining the rationale for which projects were chosen. It seems to be at the discretion of the local councillors.

The decision notice says ?Parking - to date, twelve stations to park the eScooters have been identified. These are all off the carriageway and are located in the north of the borough near main transport hubs, but some are located in the south of the borough. Some are in the same locations as agreed and used for the dockless bike stations as there was no concern raised with these locations previously.?