legalalien

Just been reading a paper on this year?s council budget for the cultural celebrations fund. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s98599/Report-Cultural%20Celebrations%20Fund.pdf. This year?s allocation is slightly lower than in past years: seems that in the past quite a fair chunk of it has been spent on fireworks events. Given fireworks are not exactly air-quality-friendly, do people think Southwark might well give fireworks night a miss? I speak as someone who has been keen on fireworks and bonfires in the past, but think they may have to go. See eg https://www.londonair.org.uk/londonair/guide/Fireworks.aspx I would like to see drones but I suspect they are monster expensive.

As a lifelong swing voter: I can understand that you feel let down, but there is a silver lining. Maybe many people outside the core Labour tribe share your views on lots of issues, even if you disagree with them on others? That?s how I choose to look at things. I?m not keen on heavily whipped party politics. We need a whole new thread on the infilling of estates, methinks....

Reading through this month's forward plan. There will be another couple of "minor traffic schemes" in July and September and a placeholder has been put in for a decision on the Dulwich schemes in September - and on the Peckham Rye East schemes in November (decisions have to be flagged up in advance). https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50026429&PlanId=672. Some other interesting upcoming things as well which I'll try and flag up when detail is available.

Just received an email about this council engagement exercise on Peckham Square https://peckhamsquare.commonplace.is/?utm_campaign=NewCommonplaces01_06_2021&lang=en-GB&utm_source=cp-email&utm_medium=email

Here?s the report from December that they recently consulted on, there?s timeframes in there. It does talk about possible level of development with or without the extension, but as the new properties have to be car free, not having the extension would massively affect demand/ feasibility you?d think. It all seems very ambitious and I suspect there?ll be similar gentrification etc issues as have happened at the Elephant. Not really relevant to this thread, but is probably an indication of some of the things we might expect to see in the Climate Change Strategy. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/31613/210111_OKRAAP_Addendum_Reduced.pdf

Any thoughts on potential impact on the Bakerloo line extension? I started reading a Southwark paper about that earlier this morning and was struck by how much Southwark seem to be relying on Old Kent Road development to achieve housing and climate emergency commitments. Need to have a proper read when I get a chance.

Smooch I agree. Perhaps (and I?m speaking for myself here), the best part of a year in lockdown has caused many people to focus more on what is happening in their local neighbourhood and how the processes work - and are not happy with what they see. For years I have blithely assumed that some sort of in built checks and balances ensured transparency and accountability in local govt but on a closer look some of these aren?t operating properly. I think that with such a massive majority at the polls, the Labour local govt administration may have become less sensitive to local views on their policies?

If that?s true that?s shocking. I?m assuming they must be using ANPR now in order to issue the number of fines that they have - either that, or half of their workforce have been diverted to the manual processing of LTN bus gate fines (I wouldn?t rule that out given references in various documents / the internal audit report to deficiencies created by staff being involved in COVID related activities: I guess fining people inadvertently driving through bus gates and dealing with related appeals might be regarded as a COVID related activity). I feel another FoI request coming on. If I put one in now I might get an answer by Christmas.

I?m busy filling in the Dulwich Review Consultation. I now see what people mean about the loaded questions and language. Just got to the bit where it describes one of the closures as creating ?a pleasant place to sit and relax?.

Perhaps you?ve failed (or refuse) to understand the reasoning behind the criticisms of the Dulwich schemes, which are based on specifics rather than the principles of LTNs? I don?t like the idea of ?camps? tbh, I think that all the details of the schemes should be up for debate and we shouldn?t be talking about ?for? and ?against? when it comes to details of schemes. On the other hand, I think being for or against the way the process has been handled and the way the current consultation/ review process is being carried out is possibly a bit more binary. Whatever your view on the merits of the LTNs happens to be, it?s worth thinking about the process issues.

Mr.chicken, grow up and stop treating this whole thing like a joke. It?s not a joke for many, many people, and I don?t think your tone is coming across quite how you envisage it might be. The current scheme causes more pollution for the schools in DV, I suspect, and in any case, as others have pointed out, some schools ought not to be more equal than others.

I don?t think the closures cause that much of an inconvenience for drivers living on Dulwich Village tbh. The couple of people I know who live on DV are more concerned about the increased traffic congestion that the overall scheme has caused on DV, including outside the two schools on DV. There?s an early morning build up of idling cars as well as a post 10am rush that sees plenty of traffic idling outside both schools. With the segregated bike lane before the Village Way / EDG junction and the changed lights phasing there, there?s also now more of a build up of northbound traffic on DV over the weekend.

No idea. Seems to be part of an ongoing pattern of tree destruction - see this recent article in Southwark News https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/climate-emergency-southwark-lost-nearly-2000-trees-in-a-decade/ They committed earlier this year to planting 10000 trees by 2022, see https://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/2021/jan/southwark-council-to-plant-10-000-new-trees-by-2022. On a related note, the tree management service is one of the items flagged red in the internal audit report that I linked to above: "Purpose of audit:review of the adequacy of the Council?s Tree Management, ensuring key risks related to ETRP are being adequately addressed. Key findings: ?The in house team was significantly under resourced to carry out the required ongoing maintenance of ageing and growing trees. ?There was an increasing backlog of tree inspections and resourcing gap due to the inability of in house team to complete the jobs allocated to them ?There was inaccurate calculation and inconsistent monthly KPI's within the "Performance Monitor" with no formal working papers retained to validate the data.

The current status of Southwark's Climate Emergency strategy has come up on a couple of other threads recently and I thought it might deserve one of its own. I'm not any kind of climate campaigner but, after reading lots of LTN-related documents, thought it would be interesting to get an idea of how the council went about deciding who and how to consult local groups on issues, so put in an FOI back in November, asking what individuals and groups were part of the "Partnership Steering Committee" for the climate emergency strategy. After numerous emails (with no response) from Southwark, I involved the ICO and I miraculously got a response this week, on the afternoon of the tenth working day of the ten working day deadline that the ICO set. The response is pasted at the bottom of this message in case anyone is interested - I wasn't expecting a smoking gun, and there isn't one, but it's interesting all the same. On a related note, the draft internal audit report that has just gone up on the website - https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013238/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.%201%20Wednesday%2002-Jun-2021%2018.30%20Audit%20Governance%20and%20Standards%20Committee.pdf?T=9 has this to say: "Purpose of audit: advisory review of the Council?s planned governance arrangements over the implementation of the council?s climate emergency strategy, adequacy of stakeholder engagement and the achievability of the plans in place to deliver the strategy. Key observations: ? A number of draft climate emergency strategies were written during 2020, which have been hindered in terms of engagement with the members of the public due to the Covid-19 pandemic. ? The Council has not yet developed a communications plans or a risk register to support the successful implementation of the Strategy ? There were synergies between initiatives in the Transport and the Movement Plan but these have not been harnessed so far although they have the same lead cabinet member." Amendments to Southwark's constitution to address Climate Emergency commitments were due to be tabled at the Council Assembly meeting earlier this month, but have been delayed until July 2021. The Cabinet Member who was responsible for this portfolio has stepped down and been replaced. I'm left wondering what on earth is going on. I should add that the various red-flagged items in the internal audit report relating to other issues alarm me slightly as well. It is a document worth a read. ______________________________________________________________________________________________ Response to FoI request: Your request: I would like to know the names of the groups and individuals who are part of the Partnership Steering Committee for Southwark's climate emergency strategy and plans; and how those participants were identified and selected. Our response: The partnership steering group was set up last year to enable the council to bring together various groups with an interest in climate change to discuss issues facing the borough. The groups below were invited to join the PSG. The PSG has been an opportunity to share plans and to discuss how Southwark should respond to the climate emergency. Officers in the council compiled the list based of groups it knew to be active on this area, and also to cover a range of interests including business, campaign groups and other key institutions in the borough. The group has grown in the last year as suggestions have been made on membership. Not every group on this list has chosen to take part. Age UK Lewisham and Southwark Arup Bankside Open Space Trust Bede House Bermondsey BID Better Bankside BID Blue Bermondsey Improvement District BOST British Land BYO Citizens Advice Southwark Client Earth Community Southwark Dulwich Hamlet Extinction Rebellion Fossil Free Southwark Gowling WLG Greater London Authority GSTT Keep Britain Tidy Kings College Hospital NHS Foundation King's College London Lendlease Living Streets London College of Communication London Councils Makeshift Morley College Mountview Multi Faith Forum Mums for Lungs Notting Hill Genesis Nunhead Knocks Plastic Free East Dulwich Plastic Free Peckham Pluvo SGTO SLAM Southbank BID Southwark Cyclists Southwark Friends of the Earth Southwark Greenpeace Southwark Law Centre Southwark London Gallery Surrey Docks Farm Sustainable Workspaces Tate Team London Bridge Tenants Council Thames Water Unite University of the Arts London Veolia We Are Waterloo BID WRAP

I?m not sure how useful this is, but here?s the Council?s report on Phase 3 of the Our Healthy Streets consultation. Doubtless we will all read it from our own perspectives and draw different conclusions. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/42203/OHS-Phase-3-Consultation-Summary-Report.pdf

The lack of data is a problem for both sides of this debate. I wish we?d done the whole thing with more advance planning and before and after data collection. Maybe this is something everyone might agree on? If someone could produce reliable data to show that there is no increased pollution (air, noise) on the boundary roads I?d be prepared to reconsider my position, but the quality of data to date has been poor and I do trust the evidence of my own eyes. How would people on both sides of the debate feel about a reduction in the hours of the timed restrictions and limitation to term time? (I personally still think Court Lane needs to be reopened, but we all need to discuss options that we think are imperfect- ?getting to yes? and all that.) rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > legalalien Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Rahrahrah - number of car journeys or number of > > vehicle journeys - is there really a benefit if > I > > get something delivered rather than driving to > get > > it? > > > > I get the behavioural point, but still think > that > > it?s critical to calculate miles driven, not > just > > number of journeys. That?s important for the > > pollution / emissions point - I get that it > > doesn?t address active travel considerations. > > Measurements of the two things could usefully > be > > considered separately, I think. You can only do > a > > proper balancing act once you know exactly what > > you are dealing with. > > I think there is probably an initial, small > reduction in vehicle journeys as a result of modal > shift which increases over time as a result of > behaviour change. This seems to be what most > studies suggests happens generally, at least in > most cases (possibly not in any one specific case > of course). Emissions are more complicated. Slow > moving traffic may increase pollution (although > there is a stop start nature of London driving > regardless). The bigger issue I guess, is about > where the pollution goes - is it more concentrated > on main road than it ever was? People have strong > views on this, but little data from what I can > tell.

Rahrahrah - number of car journeys or number of vehicle journeys - is there really a benefit if I get something delivered rather than driving to get it? I get the behavioural point, but still think that it?s critical to calculate miles driven, not just number of journeys. That?s important for the pollution / emissions point - I get that it doesn?t address active travel considerations. Measurements of the two things could usefully be considered separately, I think. You can only do a proper balancing act once you know exactly what you are dealing with.

Decision on Minor Traffic Schemes Batch 1 now made https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50025701&Opt=0 In case of interest, the Council Assembly had a cabinet reshuffle at Monday?s meeting, details at https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013249/Tabled%20Papers%20Monday%2024-May-2021%2019.00%20Council%20Assembly.pdf?T=9. Cllr Rose remains in charge of Transport, Cllr Burgess? job title has changed from Deputy Cabinet Member for Low Traffic Southwark to Deputy Cabinet Member for Clean Air and Active Travel. Chair of the Environment Steering Commission, Cllr Ochere, has been promoted to Cabinet and put in charge of Jobs, Business and Town Centres. Cllr Johnson Situ steps down from cabinet and Cllr Dennis takes on the Climate Emergency portfolio. The scrutiny committees have also been reconstituted: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013245/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.%201%20Monday%2024-May-2021%2020.15%20Overview%20Scrutiny%20Committee.pdf?T=9

It?s in danger of ceasing being a discussion and taking on the tone of the clashes taking place on Twitter. I despair. Whatever happened to reasoned debate, acknowledging the weaknesses in one?s own argument and pausing for reflection? Call me old fashioned but I find all this playground /trolling stuff a bit of an irritant - I guess that?s the point of it, but I can?t see how it progresses anything. ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > For non-participants, where has this discussion > got to so far?

Did anyone attend the streetspace online meeting this afternoon? I planned to but unfortunately had to be somewhere with poor mobile coverage/ no data access. Just wondered what happened and whether there might be a recording online.

Actually, not all traffic is equal when it comes to pollution. (types of vehicles, start/stop nature of traffic, idling). Similarly, there is a big difference between reducing number of trips vs reducing mileage. Something that gets lost a lot in the official statements. Did anyone ask "to reduce traffic where?"

I had an email notification about the consultation this morning. Southwark Council Dear resident, We are writing to you because you registered to be updated on the Dulwich Review consultation. The consultation launched on 17 May and will run until 11 July 2021. You can view background information and respond to the consultation online at www.southwark.gov.uk/dulwichstreetspacereview Everyone who pre-registered receives a ?unique identifier? code ? your code is: XXXX Please enter this code where requested in the online form. We are using this system to help track the success of the registration system. If you live in the Dulwich area you may also receive a newsletter through the post with a different code on the envelope ? please use one or the other, and do not respond more than once. If there is more than one person in your household, you may use the same code ? but it cannot be used outside your household. If you have any queries about the consultation process, please write to: [email protected] Kind regards, Southwark Council Highways Unsubscribe from any further emails from Southwark Council. You may also choose to modify your subscriber preferences. www.southwark.gov.uk This email was sent to [email protected] using GovDelivery Communications Cloud on behalf of: Southwark Council ? PO BOX 64529 ? London SE1P 5LX GovDelivery logo

Envelope update - there is nothing on the outside of the envelope to indicate it's from Southwark or anyone else, and just says to "The Resident" (with specific address). Postage paid, 1st class. As mentioned I thought it was one of those estate agent "do you want to sell your house" things.

The ref to the unique ref number is on the attached page. It doesn?t say you can?t comment without one, but I assume it must be used for something. Will have a look at envelope when I get home later.

Here?s a link to the online survey thing https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review And the engagement plan https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/39884/Dulwich-Review-Summary-Engagement-Plan.pdf It says all those who registered online to be notified will be informed, FWIW I registered online but haven?t yet received any notification by email. ETA have attached the map of the trial schemes. Not sure why the planters in ED are ?permeable? while the CA/CL closure is a ?junction closure? - is there a plan to get rid of the bikes in Dulwich Square? Also the large purple circles are a bit confusing.