legalalien

I think the restrictions on Dulwich Village are to prevent the serious traffic impact that the CA/CL closure would have on DV, creating a permanent traffic jam past the shops and schools. And then closing DV meant that displaced traffic would be likely to go down Burbage and Turney - and some of those living there and involved in the consultation didn't like that idea, so they closed them as well, and diverted the traffic to Croxted Road. One thing led to another... which is why I think the permanent /all day closure of CA/CL is a critical part of the problem. I'm guessing but I imagine that the time periods chosen correspond to the modelled time periods of problems with displaced traffic. They haven't been chosen to enable active travel to schools - were that the case they could be much shorter and wouldn't be needed in school holidays? On a related note to Poppy, I spoke to a guy from a sports charity this morning who said they are having to look at reducing the number of sessions that they run as it's now impossible for their staff to meet their coaching schedules. So ironically, for an active travel initiative, less physical activity for a number of children in some of the less well-heeled schools about the place who don't have full-time PE staff.

Good news.

Thanks. Agree that road user charging is the way forward (and that the cost of on demand deliveries needs to be passed on to consumers). As a non- driver and someone who doesn't like shopping much, amazon was like catnip to me. Have been weaning myself off it during lockdown, with some success - not entirely but at least aggregating orders as far as possible and accepting that delivery doesn't need to be instant. You're right that we could usefully have a separate thread on this.

Agenda for this Thursday?s Environment Scrutiny Commission here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6992 Includes draft Air Quality Scrutiny report and draft Environment and Planning scrutiny report (latter summarises some evidence taken of whether / how the New Southwark Plan fits with Southwark climate emergency targets. Meeting is at 6:30pm and generally streamed live on Southwark?s YouTube channel.

Southwark Air Quality report part 2, April 2021 now up on the website in advance of tomorrow evening?s meeting. Haven?t read it yet. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s96603/Air%20quality%20part%20two%20draft%20review%20report.pdf

I thought Gilkes Place was closed (the second closure) for the purposes of the ex SG Smith construction site? No idea if / when construction is going to happen but I do wonder how the construction traffic is going to access it- I think the original plan was via the now- closed junction? I'd be in favour of a tax regime that hit delivery vehicles, in particular non- food deliveries. The whole business of ordering clothes online / trying on/ sending back in particular strikes me as a complete waste of resources. Call me old fashioned :)

The next Environment Scrutiny Commission meeting is on Thursday 29 April: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6992 The various reports to be discussed at the meeting haven't been put up yet but should be available at that link in due course.

Laura, I'm with you. I emailed to ask who was on last year's climate emergency steering group. No answer. Submitted FoI. No answer. Escalated FoI in accordance with Southwark policy. Twice. No answer, no answer. So I've complained to the ICO. If the council won't even answer a simple question about who they have been speaking to, the chance of getting more detailed info is, I suspect, zero. I agree that the council shouldn't have made the declaration / set the target if they don't believe they have sufficient powers to do the things required to achieve it. If they do believe they have sufficient powers, then there should be a plan.

Or maybe Gilkes Crescent given the preference for a professional expert arbiter and the enthusiasm for the Dulwich Square mock-up? I don't think a third party expert is the solution here, given one of the big problems has been a lack of proper "before" data. The third party isn't going to have any more "real" data to work with than anyone else has. Plus the debate is now so polarised that I doubt either side of it will trust a single expert. The (missed) solution was for Southwark to comply with its statutory / regulatory duty to properly consult TfL and Lambeth before implementing the Phase 2 closures. It didn't. If it had, perhaps the entirely foreseeable Croxted Road chaos might have been avoided. I know someone who used to take the number 3 bus and is now driving (via an alternative route) because the bus can't get them where they need to be, on time. heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I imagine the new poster is living in Melbourne, > Derwent or Court, much like all 5 of the people > who make up Clean Air Dulwich-EDSTN ..which is > basically the same group, of course the silly > councillors know all five in this group..isn?t one > a town planner who designs for the Council? > > A real campaign for clean air would be raising the > terrible idea of plans to build on green spaces > with mature trees in the Bells and Brenchley > estates, campaigning for local transport, asking > for pollution monitoring on all roads and asking > why green spaces are being removed. > > These are not real campaigns about clean air and > places for children to play safely. They are > campaigns for gated, exclusive traffic free areas > for the wealthiest in Southwark. Desperate to > dismiss residents on LL, EDG and Croxted, they > troll on Twitter and block mothers, businesses and > cyclists who disagree with them - calling them > ?misinformed? and trying to indicate they are all > against reducing pollution and want to be able to > drive anytime, any place and denying the actual > lived experience of people who live on these > boundary roads.

Some pot plants have now arrived. See pic.

Meanwhile the parklet outside Romeo Jones has appeared but is not yet operational...

The planters on Court Lane and Calton Avenue seem to have acquired blue ?pedestrian priority? signs. I think they are new?

I?ve donated but I am really cross. I think the council has failed to comply with the law, as a result my council tax will be funding the council?s legal bill and I?ll be funding the challenge to the council. If only all that money could be spent on something practical/useful.

Just saw the attached on Twitter, walk in appts on Monday afternoon for those in eligible groups who are yet to receive their first jab.

I agree slarti b- the space now seems like something designed by committee - is it a square? Is it a cycle quiet way? Is it saving the planet from climate change? (Apologies for last facetious comment). The pedestrian square vs quiet way thing is an issue though from a safety perspective. Technically it is still a road open to cyclists, the street furniture etc sends a different message to pedestrians, bit of a recipe for disaster.

I have a vague recollection that there?s something in the planning rules that say that if you?re going to have a car park, you have to provide electric charging points / possibly at least a stated proportion of parks with electric charging points. irst mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > On that site there are also charging stations for > electric cars....why?

You?re right in that the parklets are Southwark?s flagship response to the climate emergency. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/2020/nov/southwark-council-celebrates-climate-action-week-with-a-new-micro-park They?re one of the main reasons why climate emergency activists have pulled their support for the Council it seems: https://london-tv.co.uk/turmoil-over-southwarks-climate-commitments/ ... following widespread ridicule on Twitter alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ?The greening of the square? begins > > So it wasn?t about bikes at all.

The consultation map is a joke, I think everyone can agree. I commented a while ago but suspect most have lost faith. Lots of stuff shows as orange and if you drill down there are plenty of reds and one or two greens. Plus the colouring isn't just based on yes/no. And there are no controls on number of comments. I guess the administrators must be able to filter to see where there are multiple entries from the same email address but it doesn't stop people using different email addresses, plus the map doesn't show the location of the person making the comment, it shows where the person commenting dropped the pin before making the comment. That last point is important.

Not true. Metallic is right. Plenty of people in the Village are being very vocal. Many of the people making deputations to the council, arranging petitions, and (like me) trying to keep people informed, live in or close to the Village. It really, really is not about ALL villagers either "loving" the current situation, or being wilfully blind to the problems caused. Many long time residents are conservative with a small c and not that thrilled with the changes. Not trying to start an argument - just want people to know that there is plenty of support from within, so to speak... ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Metallic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > heartblock Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > I think Alice is right, for Dulwich Village > it > > was > > > never about cyclists or clean air for all > > > residents ... it was for very rich people to > > have > > > access to all that a large city provides, > > > cleaners, gardeners, Waitrose delivery, wine > > > shops, sourdough, expensive restaurants, > > excellent > > > private education, private areas for parking > > the > > > second car - while living the life in an > > exclusive > > > area, as close to a rural Village as > > > possible...and they don?t give a flying fig > for > > > anyone who suffers from displaced traffic. > > Croxted > > > Rd and Lordship Lane residents do not matter > to > > > the Villagers. > > > > That is completely untrue. If you care to ask > > people who are apparently benefitting you will > > find the majority are embarrassed at the money > > spent, and furious. > > Furious but not very vocal.

Just had an email about an upcoming Goose Green ward meeting. Thought I'd re-post it here, given I received it (not a GG resident, but when I signed up for website updates I ticked GG I think), "Hello Goose Green resident, Join your local councillors in Goose Green, Cllr James McAsh, Cllr Victoria Olisa and Cllr Charlie Smith on Tuesday 11 May for an online ward meeting. The theme is: Local High Street Let?s come together to discuss: - Supporting our local businesses - Making our high streets as vibrant and attractive as they can be - Bringing the East Dulwich community together after a tough year The meeting starts at 6pm ? 7:30pm and will take place via Zoom. Pre-registration is required to attend this meeting. Simply visit: https://zoom.us/meeting/register/tJYpd-2rrTguH9eHKxmW_zvfCfZ0hv4brgxj and enter your name and email address. You will then receive a confirmation email with the meeting link and passcode. Hope to see you on the 11 May. Regards etc"

I love suggesting gift ideas but we possibly need to know a little more about your friend (interests, rough age bracket?) I gave someone one of these for Xmas and it was a hit, but your friend would need to be able to put it somewhere outside. https://www.metalbird.co.uk/collections/new-birds/

Only problem is what to do about residents in the streets from Hillsborough through to Glengarry as EDG is their only means of ingress/ egress. Might have to make an exception. Gilkes can be solved by opening the entrances onto DV and Calton. The traffic will go somewhere else though, no doubt... won?t traffic that would have gone up EDG towards LL and onward to Nunhead/ Peckham now have to go up court lane and then left into already busy LL or channel up Eynella/ Barry Road? Could you put a cycle route along Green Dale/ the back of the school and Tessa Jowell site and into East Dulwich station ? (Looking at this on a map as I don?t know what the topography behind the school is...)

Meanwhile the traffic in Dulwich Village was awful post-closure window this evening. Not sure whether there?s something additional causing this today? Acrid air (I know other streets have this much worse, but DV is a loser in this as well I think, as normal patterns of life resume).

Parklet plans attached

A friend forwarded me something from his residents' association sent earlier today. It says these are going in, the one outside Romeo Jones is six feet out from the kerb according to that. It quotes Cllr Leeming: "While Margy and I, and the council more generally, fully believe in the role of wide consultation to build legitimacy for projects, that doesn't prevent us from delivering things which are within our statutory powers, and for which we have a democratic mandate. The 'parklets' fall well within that - we are allowed to do it, they're low cost, and we consulted the people most directly affected". There are some plans attached. Will see if I can post. I assume the RA isn't inventing this!