legalalien

Oddly the meeting is showing on the website as a south area multi ward meeting as well as a Dulwich Hill Ward meeting. Not sure why. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6945. I?ve already emailed to ask whether there are similar meetings to the Dulwich Hill one for other wards and unusually haven?t had a response. Edited to add - think I?ve managed to find details elsewhere on the Southwark website: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consultations/empowering-communities/empowering-communities-south?chapter=4 . Includes meeting ID and passcode. I don?t see why anyone shouldn?t attend to watch. Although if they allow public participation (that?s the stated purpose of ward meetings), seems only fair that those who live in the ward should be those to take the stage...

Thanks Spartacus, hopefully now fixed! I posted the other one elsewhere.

This is on the planning committee agenda for 22 Feb, committee being asked to approve the release of local s106 funding to allow the project to proceed. So sounds as though things are moving along. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6685 see item 6 There?s some background info about the consultation and a map.

There?s a new petition to make the pedestrianisation of Rye Lane permanent (don?t know any of the background, just flagging up in case anyone is interested) http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000059

Thanks. Don?t belong to any political party so will get on with googling. Seems there is a combined Lambeth/ Southwark constituency.

I think this May we only vote for the Mayor and London Assembly (not the Council)? I?ve just realised how little I know about the London Assembly and the voting process - hadn?t appreciated it was a sort of mixed member proportional system. Not sure I?ve ever seen any campaigning for assembly members as opposed to the Mayor.

The "Batch 2" minor traffic scheme mentioned above has now been approved subject to the outcome of statutory consultation, EXCEPT the removal of parking in Melford Road, where the councillor has requested a site visit. See http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s93315/APPENDIX%205%20MELFORD%20ROAD.pdf for the approvals, the proposal for Melford is here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s93315/APPENDIX%205%20MELFORD%20ROAD.pdf.

When I was a trainee there was no cut and paste. Old, I am...

Like me, Southwark have their own viewing prism? When I was a trainee, there was a clear understanding that whoever controlled the minutes, controlled the negotiations....

Having just read one of TfL's recent FoI request responses on its website, it seems that even the traffic experts can't agree on what is going on with traffic on London's minor roads. Check out email C. Hopefully ex-dulwicher can come along and opine.... https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-1884-2021

Rahrah that?s because you are trying to imagine an objector to the schemes that I don?t think exists - one who is fighting for car dominance on some sort of principled basis. I haven?t seen people on here expressing that view although I think several have been told by others that that?s what they think. Pretty much everyone I?ve come across objects to the elements of this particular LTN on the basis is is poorly designed - they don?t object to LTNs in principle. Which is why this debate goes nowhere - if supporters respond to specific concerns about design with generalisations about the desirability of active travel, or nationwide statistics, that doesn?t address the specific arguments being made, so doesn?t convince. Have been bombarded with ?Neom? promotions on Sky this morning - looks like they are building a new urban planning utopia in Saudi... https://whatistheline-newsroom.neom.com/the-line-launch-media-kit-361021. Interesting. More mundanely, latest Southwark News update at https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/surgeries-say-road-closures-are-hampering-vaccine-rollout-as-new-coalition-calls-for-camera-controlled-permit-scheme-to-replace-low-emission-neighbourhoods/

Minutes from cabinet meeting on 2 Feb here (includes the written answers to public questions regarding the review process for Dulwich restrictions. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g6666/Printed%20minutes%20Tuesday%2002-Feb-2021%2011.00%20Cabinet.pdf?T=1

Just remembered the TfL meeting and took a look - not much to see - commissioner choosing not to comment on live case (given appeal), https://www.london.gov.uk/tfl-board-meeting-2021-02-03 at 1:52:45 for question and then about 2:04. TfL don?t see the taxi decision as necessarily being a precedent for all schemes and are hoping each scheme can / saying each scheme should be considered on its own merits.

I think there was some reference to exchanges that were going on in parallel on the ?chat? function on the zoom call. We don?t know what these were? Interesting academic question about the appropriateness and nature of parallel chats in what are supposed to be public meetings - stuff above and beyond people putting their hands up to speak. One for a rainy day. Should probably be a standard protocol if online meetings become the new norm for local government.

My best guess on the "abrupt shut down" is that cabinet has lots of other things to get through and the non-local councillors are getting a bit bored with hearing about the Dulwich LTN.

Thanks, have come across Fitzroy a couple of times and agree he is very helpful.

I completely agree with your comments on the inadequacy of commonplace as a measure (in fact I filled in a feedback form to that effect) - but if the council is going to hold it out as its means of collecting data, and in the absence of ?proper? data, you can hardly blame people for trying to do something with it. I?m not quite sure what I think the role of residents? associations should be in all of this - I?d say to be conduits for communication rather than any of them coming out ?for? or ?against? based on their (probably) unscientific perception of their residents? views. Our local one forgot to include us for many years after we moved in. Out of interest do residents associations have any formal standing with the council?

Why is there only one for Dulwich Hill residents? Does anyone know if there are similar meetings for other areas?

Partial update: the highways team has (promptly and helpfully) advised that anyone wishing to check on the details for a particular area can email them on the traffc orders email address above and ask to be emailed a pdf map for the specific area. They weren't sure about the diesel parking charges point and suggested emailing the parking team. Have done so and will post if I get a response.

Worth watching the youtube clip. Think it's worth keeping a close eye on the process, seems the commonspace responses are less important now that they oppose the scheme: the councillor response seemed very scripted. There will be some sort of "targeted" survey of residents' experience and perception to be included, amongst other things, and safety rather than active transport looks like the new focus. (Seen through my own prism - watch it yourself, like everyone I come to it with my own biases).

Have had a quick check for the main categories of permit against the Southwark website (existing charges at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/find-somewhere-to-park/pay-for-parking?chapter=5 and https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-permits). All the permits look like the same rate (there is an existing discount scheme for hybrid and electric vehicles for permits), but the differential parking charges for one off "pay for parking" seem to be new - i.e. the different, higher rates for diesel vehicles. Does anyone know whether there is a different diesel rate on the existing "pay by phone" meters etc? (I guess it's possible the Southwark website is not up to date, and this already exists)? If this is a new rate, and they're including it in the consolidation order then it does feel a little as though it's being put through "under the radar" - but I guess they don't technically have to consult on price rises. The order itself says that "There will be no material change to any of the operational specifications or dimensions of those restrictions", and I guess price isn't an operational specification, so that's true! On a related note, I put a link on another thread to some proposed changes to parking charges that were included as an agenda item for a recent Overview and Scrutiny committee meeting - these did vary depending on ULEZ compliance, but not sure where that discussion/ proposal has got to.

I knew the petition was on the agenda, but didn't tune in to watch - I suspected it would be noted and some sort of comment made about an upcoming review. Did anyone attend/ see it? Looks like the meeting is on youtube https://www.youtube.com/user/southwarkcouncil

I wouldn?t read too much into the ?about us? clue - more likely that a local group has cut and pasted the wording from a website it?s seen. When e-commerce first became a thing, copying website terms and privacy notices from existing websites was rife amongst small / independent traders...

No idea, I wonder whether they are knowledge sharing / coordinating on FoI requests to central agencies such as TfL and cutting costs by sharing legal advice... would make sense/ be more efficient.

Just rereading the fine print, ?Copies of this notice, the proposed orders, and a statement of the council's reasons for making the orders may be found online at www.southwark.gov.uk/trafficorders, paper copies may be obtained from Highways, Environment and Leisure, 3rd floor hub 2, 160 Tooley Street, London SE1 2QH and/or access to the map-based Schedules may both be arranged by appointment only. Email [email protected] (or call 020 7525 3497) for booking details.? So seems as though access to the maps is by appointment. I assume you can get remote access, as going into the council office to have a look would be illegal at the moment (no justifiable reason for leaving home)? If that?s the case I don?t think this would work as a consultation - from a quick look at similar consultations done by Kingston and Wokingham a few years ago (these come up if you google), it seems clear that the general rules on TMO consultations apply even though this is a consultation). Given the nature of the order this shouldn?t be a massive deal, but given all the permit rules etc are being harmonised, I guess issues may come up if there have been any ?special cases?in the past that haven?t been picked up by the council?s internal processes...