legalalien

From what I read the new building would be some sort of interactive space, not a space to display children’s art as there are glass walls/ no hanging space - but I stand to be corrected! I like the idea of more child friendly activities (I thought there were some spaces in the existing building for this, plus the renovated cottage is intended as a reception area for school groups - but really don’t like the proposed design of the new building.

I know it’s not strictly speaking in East Dulwich but still relevant to ED residents I think. I noticed on the Southwark website that the planning committee is due to hear an application to renovate/ extend the cottage next to the gallery, to open up and landscape the meadow south of the gallery, and to build a new children’s picture gallery close to the current entrance on Gallery Road. Was surprised that this was the first I’d heard of it - I would have thought it was something that loads of people locally would have been aware of /discussing given the proposed size of the development. Seems I may not be alone in this given there seem to have been only 36 public comments, 34 of which were in support. Officer’s report here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s115298/Report Dulwich Picture Gallery Gallery Road London Southwark SE21 7AD.pdf Seems likely that they will approve the cottage extension and landscaping but not the new building given it’s quite large and this is Metropolitan Open Land - given the way MOL works It seems to me quite difficult to argue the new building is permissible (I also think it’s quite ugly/ unsympathetic to the existing buildings - but that is of course a matter of personal opinion). There’s some suggestion that if the new build doesn’t go ahead then the other changes won’t either, as the funding comes from the new building at least in part (ticketed entry). The planning meeting is on 18 July https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7742

Just following on from the bit about the Movement Plan, don't forget that Southwark did an additional consultation last year on a refreshed Sustainable Transport Strategy - which is quite high level - and I don't know where it has got to - it doesn't look as if it has been signed off yet as I can't see it on the Southwark website (will have a quick look at the Forward Plan and see whether I can spot it). That strategy is to be accompanied by an action plan: "Each objective will be delivered through several actions, which will be included in an action plan. While the strategy has set objectives to be reached by 2030, the action plan will be a working live document and will be used internally to define specific deliverables and projects to keep us on track for the delivery." https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/sustainable-transport-strategy-draft-consultation/. On the specific question of CPZs, I think it's pretty clear from Cllr McAsh's recent approval of the decision on the Old Kent Road CPZ that the council will be pushing ahead with the borough wide roll-out regardless of responses to the consultation, perhaps with some specific tweaks to particular parking bays etc. Seems to be a very hot issue in the OKR area because (i) there is still quite a bit of commercial/ light industry who rely on there being charge-free parking and (ii) there is a lot of new build housing that has been built without associated parking, in part on the assumption of better public transport (Bakerloo extension) that isn't happening. The report and associated appendices are here: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=7910 Notably (given 87% objections, on not a particularly high number of responses): "Although there were greater number of objections than support for the scheme, officers recommend progressing with the proposals to implement a controlled parking zone in the Old Kent Road area because a CPZ offers an opportunity to rebalance the road space in an area where the majority of people (60.3%) in the borough do not own cars. While there are not necessarily parking issues in all roads at the moment, this proposal protects against the impact of upcoming developments and prioritises space for residents and businesses, as well as supporting our Streets for People approach and Council Delivery Plan to make this a borough for people and not their cars." Worth having a look to see the approach taken to blue badge holders, social workers and carers and (in the Appendices) concerns raised by specific businesses, in case people want to flag up these sort of specific issues in the current consultation.

Admittedly off topic on LTNs, but since we’re in the Lounge now - did anyone see this article in the Times about this less than brilliant expenditure on improving active travel? I mean, I guess it worked well from a bovine travel perspective… Cambridge’s bike-friendly cattle grids fail to stop cows seeking pastures new.https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6739f324-0bbf-11ee-997e-7710367054a0?shareToken=976c0cb18b196c5a23ea5a044af1be69

Here’s the latest report on Southwark’s plans to deal with falling school rolls - on the agenda for the next cabinet meeting https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s114705/Report Keeping Education Strong.pdf Locally, seems as though they are looking at a reduction in the PAN (published admission number) at Goose Green and Bessemer Grange. ETA specific recommendations on these two schools on p19-20 of accompanying report https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s114694/Appendix 2 Keeping Education Strong - Isos Partnership Southwark Primary Place Planning.pdf

So- Denmark Hill made the final but seem to be trailing Wemyss Bay near Glasgow on the Twitter vote. You can vote here: https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/component/rsform/form/49

Denmark Hill now 1% ahead of Okehampton so keep the votes coming in- I have a suspicion that the DHFC massive may be behind the uptick in votes…

I actually wondered if the decision had something to do with DfT not funding LTNs in its latest active travel funding round https://www.localgov.co.uk/LTNs-blocked-from-200m-active-travel-cash/56193 I saw a more detailed article about this a couple of days ago, will see if I can find it.

Am sitting on the platform at Denmark Hill and the announcer has just urged us all to get online and vote for DH in the semifinal of the World Cup of stations. Okehampton seems to be way out in the lead at present… https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/component/rsform/form/46

There’s a really interesting discussion of Southwark’s strategy for dealing with this issue at last week’s Local Economy and Scrutiny Commission, Posting link. ED is in planning area 5, it looks like the next round of proposed changes only involves a PAN (pupil admission number) reduction at one academy in the Goose Green area (not sure that they can force PAN reductions on academies, they did also note that some of the schools where they were suggesting reductions were already below their permitted PAN.). It’s the first agenda item.

Most recent batch of minor traffic schemes here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=7845&LLL=0 Various DYLs locally, and blips on the DYL on the corner of Calton and Townley, where parents have been stopping to do school drop offs.

Update on plans for building works at Charter ED, two stage tender process for the remaining part of the site , with actual construction contract to be awarded towards end of this year and works completed by August 2024 as I read it. Southwark stumping up an additional £6.5 million (including £1.5 million for a specialist 20 place ASD resource) and negotiating with DfE to get the rest of the additional funding needed (about £4 million more) out of them. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IssueId=50031696&OptionNum=0 Pics of temp layout and final design are in the Appendices.

For info, council proposals for experimental traffic orders to out in place parking areas for e-bikes and escooters , proposed locations in the Appendix https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50031189

Info online for next week’s south multi ward forum with (v limited) info about grant applicants. Interesting to speculate what the various CGS ones are for, particularly “Save our pedestrians from attack”. “Herne Hill Shady Streets” has a ring to it (assume is about trees rather than something more sinister). Am sure there will be divergent views on the application for neighbourhood funding and the devolved highways budget. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7511&x=1

I know what you mean, the assembly meetings are particularly painful to watch. Written answers are here, including cost of events team and contribution to parks budget. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50015311/Tabled%20Items%20Wednesday%2022-Feb-2023%2019.00%20Council%20Assembly.pdf?T=9 ETA , I’ve just seen that some Labour councillors on the overview and scrutiny committee have “called in” the council’s decision to demolish and rebuild the Abbey field estate on grounds relating to inconsistency with the council’s visions / policies on housing and climate change strategy ( one of the councillors is Cllr Pollak who was formerly in charge of the housing portfolio I think). That’s a positive development in terms of local government democracy! https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7390

I see what you mean Spartacus, if I’m reading the table correctly only 156 Londoners were actually asked in that survey? I’d favour a ban on wood burners in urban areas, it’s a simple message to get across to people. (Speaking as someone who grew up burning most of our household rubbish - including plastic items - in a 44 gallon drum in the back garden - I remember lighting and keeping an eye on the incinerator being a childhood chore - different times! Makes me wonder what filters etc the council puts on the SELCHP incinerator - guess it’s in the climate strategy somewhere.)

One of the LD councillors has put a question about the commercialisation of parks and the cost of the events team on the agenda for tomorrow’s council assembly meeting (see pic attached). Will be interested to see what the response is.

I would just add that it's also possible to hold the view that while in principle LTNs are capable of working, the success of any particular LTN is a function of its design in its local conditions, taking into account any other LTNs that are being put in place; and that the closures in Dulwich Village have been a design fail, both for local businesses and in the way that they have shunted traffic onto other roads - in particular Croxted Road, which is a significant bus route and a key active travel route to one of the local schools. The closures were rushed in despite TfL's request for a pause to consider the implications, and TfL still have some concerns, which the local council seems to be doing nothing to address.

For balance, the Conservatives in Thurrock seem to have crashed theh finances - the rise there is 10%, same as Labour controlled Slough. There's going to have to be a reality check on local government ambitions across the board, I suspect. All the latest on Southwark's draft budget here https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=66539#mgDocuments

Just FYI Cllr King raised the issue of the Dulwich pool, showers, water temperature etc in yesterday’s audit and standards committee meeting in the context of discussing the insourcing and ensuring standards continue to be met in the remaining period before exit in June. The council officer in charge undertook to go away and look specifically at the issues around the pool.

FYI, consultation opening this week on a proposed school street closure on the Kingswood Estate - has implications for cutting off traffic up Bowen Drive, (in)famous for DPL drop-off traffic. https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/kingswood-estate-school-street/

Just in case anyone is interested- there’s a further report on falling school rolls and the council’s plans to address them on the agenda for an upcoming scrutiny commission meeting, which is worth a read, it outlines the scale of the problem (potentially greater than flagged in the planning report linked above) and the implications for school finances (for example, indicates that a class size number of around 27 is the break even point and below 25 starts to be unfeasible.). Falling birth rates and unaffordability of housing seem to be key drivers. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s111761/Document%20Keeping%20Education%20Strong%20-%20Strategy%20for%20future%20proofing%20primary%20schools%20and%20protecting%20t.pdf Information about particular schools should filter through in the next couple of months. The council can only take steps to close/ amalgamate non- academy schools, and as noted above I suspect most of those at risk are in more northerly parts of the borough.

Update based on what is in the most recent Forward Plan: Decision due next month on supply of temporary “modular” teaching accommodation https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50030451&PlanId=748&RPID=7198025 Decision on Phase 2 building contract still due next month https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50030716&PlanId=748&RPID=7198027 As well as an additional decision on increasing value of demolition and strip out works https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50031194&PlanId=748&RPID=7198031 Looking at the forward plan more generally there are quite a number of new items relating to variation of various housing construction contracts to increase contract values, so seems to be a significant (and unsurprising) inflationary increase in construction contracts going on.

Some form of experimental traffic orders relating to E-bike and E-scooter parking appear to be on the way - not yet clear whereabouts in Southwark https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50031189&PlanId=748&RPID=7198016 Will keep an eye out for the decision and post if local.

indeed - I saw a forwarded message from the local Safer Neighbourhood Team that said "A burglar responsible for recent commercial burglaries was arrested by AS officers caught red handed last week. He was remanded in custody and taken straight to court and was sentenced for the offences."