legalalien

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!

TfL updated Streetspace consultation guidance - December 2020 https://content.tfl.gov.uk/appx-twenty-consultation-engagement-approach-new-lsp-schemes.pdf

Upcoming cycle hangars and various double yellow lines etc https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3771087

Hmm. Local residents claiming this is great for / designed for the local businesses, the vast majority of whom beg to differ. First we're fixing a traffic problem that didn't really exist outside an hour a day in the morning on a specific part of Calton and Court Lane (perhaps caused by poor junction design?), and now we're fixing a "north / south parade" problem that didn't really exist (and how does said square change the north/ south thing anyway?) And we've created a massive traffic problem on the boundary roads and a massive Village divide problem between east and west. Genius. Some Looking Glass memes are called for. If only I was more tech savvy.

More flyers about these closures than the London Mayoral election. Just received a new one from the Dulwich Square coalition. See attached. Probably not being delivered to all roads either...

The council should do an audit of its delivery arrangements in my opinion. As I've said before, I've only received three or four copies of Southwark Life in the last decade, and that's supposed to be one of its main communication channels. I suspect the focus on this particular leaflet may be showing up a more general problem with "paper" communication channels. I have spotted a couple of soggy piles of undelivered Southwark Lifes in the street before now.

I'm afraid that's my lack of engagement in the early stages of this project showing - I wasn't able to make the open meetings, and my RA forgot to add me to their mailing list so I was in the dark for quite a while. I was approaching the issue from a technical point of view in terms of council back bench voting power, so take on board what you say. Presumably some of the Labour councillors in other wards are irritated that this "quick win" isn't going so well... b Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @legalalian > You say that the ward councillors have "pretty > much zero power here". Unusually I disagree with > you. > > The OHS consultation, used as the basis for the > current "temporary" traffic measures, was wholly > supported and pushed through by our local > councillors. They are the ones who led the public > meetings, claiming a highly misleading 47% > increase in traffic through the junction made > urgent action necessary; a claim which even now > they refuse to retract. They set up the secret > working group, made up of local activists and > Calton Ave RA, to help lead the consultation > process. They pushed for and supported the ETO's > which allowed them to implement the highly > controversial OHS phase 3 measure without > consultation and they are the ones who are trying > to make "Margy Plaza" permanent by spaffing public > money on shadowy organisations. > > Our concillors have also refused to accept any > responsibility for the impact of their flawed > scheme on the displacement roads and rejected any > suggestions for changes or compromise. I suspect > that, as the elections approach next year, we will > see them claiming they had their hands tied or the > traffic jams on EDG and Croxted were not their > fault, if so they will be lying. > > That still leaves residents with the issue of who > to vote for next year. I will vote for anyone > who promises to listen to and respect the views of > local residents rather than a vocal group of > minority activists.

I?m not sure what the best approach is tactically tbh. Much as I like to complain about my ward councillors, the reality is that they have pretty much zero power in all of this. But at least having independents or Tory councillors would bring in some people who could express independent voices, without being quite so hamstrung by a party whip. (Sort of, the LTN idea stems from central government, although not this specific application). I wonder whether voting Lib Dem might have some merit, in the interests of strengthening their proportion of seats and therefore the number of voices they have on key committees. (See http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s90620/Report%20-%20Establishment%20of%20Committees%20etc.%202020-21.pdf for how the appt process works, places on committee are divided based on overall proportion of council seats. Independents don?t get a look in except at the discretion of the ruling party). Of course the LDs are supportive of LTNs, but at least have managed to get some meaningful adjustments to the ones in the north of the borough. But there will be a Lib Dem whipping arrangement as well. If any party campaigned on a platform of allowing local councillors to speak out / express the views of local constituents even where these conflicted with cabinet /party policy, and only whipping on key decisions I?d vote for that, provided I was sufficiently convinced that the local candidates were up to the job of representing a variety of local voices.

Think this is the map you mean Alice?

I think ex- means that there would be more disabled people everywhere. I read that report and did find it quite interesting. In terms of restricting this to residents within the LTN, I guess they are trying to find a way of avoiding abuse. If you opened it up to all blue badge holders, there would be nothing to stop Kate, a completely able bodied resident of the LTN, from asking her blue-badge-holding mum Gladys, living in Wales, to register Kate's car. Blue badge holders around the country could set up a nice little business of registering people's cars for different LTNs around London. Sounds a bit far-fetched, but if I was a delivery driver or someone providing services from a van in London, I'd be lining up to get someone to register me. So the question is how they should strike a happy medium... (my easy solution is to take the LTN out, but of course not everyone agrees).

It's on the website where you can apply, I just discovered https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/disabled-parking/parking-with-a-blue-badge?chapter=2 alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I wish I had the it skills to post the map of > disability badges in Southwark. Anyone?

Information on new blue badge exemptions from camera controlled restrictions in Dulwich LTNs https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/disabled-parking/parking-with-a-blue-badge?chapter=2 One thing to note (if I am reading it correctly), whereas the blue badge can be used for parking purposes for any car in which the holder is a driver/ passenger, for LTN purposes one specific car needs to be registered against the holder (can be their car or a carer's car, but doesn't work if there multiple carers).

Just received an email from the local RA about the blue badge exemptions, which included an email from the council officer to councillors: "Dear Councillor, Free, local exemptions for disabled people living in Dulwich Village and Walworth LTNs. In response to requests from local wards councillors on behalf of residents requesting blue badge holder access through the restrictions within the Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) where they live we have reviewed the current arrangements. As part of the review it has been noted that blue badge holders often have reduced mobility, which can make walking and cycling much more difficult. Therefore, in the interest of equality and in response to concerns raised we are inviting blue badge holders to register for an exemption. This will enable them to drive through camera restrictions in their local LTN within either Dulwich Village and Walworth at any time during the day. Details of this arrangement, requirements and eligibility is available on the webpage below from Tuesday 06 April 2021: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/disabled-parking/parking-with-a-blue-badge?chapter=2 Blue badge holders will be able to apply for the exemption on the following form: https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=2080 The attached plans show the boundary for which blue badge holders must live to be eligible for the exemption. [ETA I HAVEN'T ATTACHED THE PLAN BUT BOUNDARIES ARE EAST DULWICH GROVE, TOWNLEY, LORDSHIP, DULWICH COMMON AND CROXTED - THE FIRST FOUR BOUNDARIES INCLUDE THE ROADS THEMSELVES BUT BOTH SIDES OF CROXTED APPEAR TO BE EXCLUDED] In Walworth blue badge holders in SE11 and SE17 who already have an AD permit (virtual blue badge permit ) will automatically be exempt from the Walworth LTN restrictions. There are currently 12 AD permits holders in SE11 and 94 in SE17 and we will email them to notify them of this exemption. The same applies in Dulwich Village; blue badge holders within the designated area who already have an AD permit will automatically be exempt from the Dulwich Village LTN restrictions. Currently there are only five in this area and we will email them to notify them of the exemption. We will be working with Dulwich Village councillors to help identify blue badge holders in the boundary area and encourage those living within the scheme boundary to apply for this exemption. Those who qualify but do not have an AD permit will need to apply using the application form above. The exemption will go live on Tuesday 06 April 2021 and I am happy to share this positive update with you."

Thanks JohnL. Read that, confirmed that I thought, not sure I can bring myself to vote for a Mayor this year; and I?m someone who believes firmly in voting and has voted at every opportunity in the past. Will still turn out to vote for a London Assembly candidate I think.