legalalien

"Village-lens"? Rest assured that there are large numbers of people living in the Village Ward who oppose the measures and who are wondering what on earth has happened to representative democracy. ETA: article in the Times today about LTNs and house prices: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/low-traffic-zones-force-cars-into-streets-where-poorer-people-live-6svsbck3k?shareToken=aa4f58f43d9a69d35a1c20f43b802d7e

So - Twitter. Reporting Elm Lodge surgery no longer supporting Dulwich Alliance as it?s possible to get there outside the closure hours. Fine. But then this comment about how everyone in Dulwich can afford a taxi anyway (see attached).

Meanwhile, over in Ealing, according to Twitter the Council has sidestepped the court case by cancelling its experimental orders and replacing them with new ones (presumably now backed by an equality assessment etc)... not a good look

Our neighbour had a grey heron visit a couple of days ago. It sat on the fence for ages in the snow, looking cold, then dropped down to ground level and did an elaborate slow motion performance of sneaking up on their pond. Unfortunately (for me, perhaps not the fish) it was startled and flew off before reaching its destination...

Looks as though Sutton Council (which is controlled by the Lib Dem party) plan to take out their temporary LTNs and do a proper consultation - meeting to decide / confirm that decision today. Interesting statement saying that they (not sure whether ?they? means Sutton or the Lib Dem party more generally in this context) raised concerns about the ?no consultation? approach at the time but were effectively banned from consulting by the DfT/ TfL terms: https://www.suttonlibdems.org.uk/low_traffic_neighbourhoods_update. They believe they have no choice to take the steps they propose because of the HC judgment. Additional article here: https://www.yourlocalguardian.co.uk/news/19080195.controversial-sutton-ltn-barriers-removed/ Given it was one of the LD councillors on the Overview and Scrutiny Commission who reminded the committee of the need to discuss LTNs at the end of their recent meeting, perhaps we might see a push from them for a more ?listening? approach...

A few new pedestrian proposals lately. New decision notice re a pedestrian crossing on Whateley Road, subject to statutory consultation. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50025299

The appeal was inevitable - leaving the judgment as it stands allows a precedent that would cause many schemes to fall - not to mention raising question marks over the release of the funding by DfT. With more court cases in train, it?s important for scheme supporters to try and get a Court of Appeal judgment that overturns the HCcase and will then be binding on judges making HC decisions in future cases. City am article here: As I understand it (not a litigator), there?s an initial hurdle in getting permission to appeal - CA decides whether appeal has any chance of success- and then if/ when that?s given there?s the appeal itself. Important to remember that these judicial review proceedings are all about whether the proper process has been followed, rather than the merits of the underlying scheme.

Thanks Rockets. Would be interesting to see whether Croxted Road is included. Champion Hill is interesting as it seems the Council put in an experimental order extending the original 18 month order. I have some doubts about that approach as it makes a mockery of the 18 month maximum on experimental orders set by legislation. Not sure what happened there. ETA: have now watched last night's Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting. It was really interesting, especially the secnd half, from about on hour onward, where a community campaigner named Eileen Conn gave evidence on the subject of regeneration, quite a bit of which related to the issue of council/ community engagement - on the specific issue of planning but I think the same principles apply to road network management. Link here if anyone is interested in watching - starts about an hour in. There's a related article here: https://www.grosvenor.com/our-businesses/grosvenor-britain-ireland/positive-space-our-community-charter/inside-out-development Dates mentioned at the end: LTNs were said to be on the agenda for the Environment Scrutiny Committee meeting on 11 March (delayed because officers papers weren't in order). That meeting is showing as 9 March in the council calendar at present. And they also agreed that they should ask Cllr Rose to attend the second Overview and Scrutiny Commission meeting in March to update them on LTNs and other environmental issues - looks like that is 22 March.

Just finished a different meeting and went to see whether the dulwich Hill meeting was on YouTube (it wasn?t). Instead caught the tail end of the overview and scrutiny committee meeting with lots of subdued councillors, sounded as though someone had complained about being excluded from council Comms - hard to tell. Followed by a q from Lib Dem councillor Victor about when committee would look at ltns (apparently some sort of delay due to papers not being in order - think they said late Feb)? But also mentioned that Cllr Rose would be before the committee for an interview shortly. Sorry to be vague - was multitasking - will watch video back when available.

I think everyone attending should call themselves Britney Spears in honour of Jackie Weaver.

I guess they?re aiming to address everything in one review, and don?t want to spend money on ANPR until after that?s done, but you?d think that with feedback like that from emergency services, they?d replace the planters with something more moveable in the meantime, to be on the safe side. Just been reading this report on LTNs and the local authority consultation process by a disability group - see here https://www.transportforall.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Pave-The-Way-full-report.pdf . It?s a small study of 84 participants (many in Lambeth) - there are some figures that people could seize on but I think it?s more useful in the way it presents the perspectives of different people and how they are (and feel) affected, positively and negatively, and how unhelpful a polarised debate is. Interesting that only about half the respondents with disabilities were blue badge holders - so let?s stop referring lazily to access for blue badge holders... and lots of other food for thought - reinforcing my personal view that when it comes to these schemes the devil is really in the detail, and generalised arguments don?t help. From what I can gather from news reports, allegations of failure to comply with equality legislation will feature in the various judicial review proceedings down for hearing shortly (Friday I think), which could set an interesting precedent).

Actually, looking at the most recent (December) update to the Empowering Communities Programme web page, seems as though the number of mandatory ward meetings has been reduced from 6 per year to 2 due to COVID. No idea why that should be the case due to the availability of Zoom, which is being used regularly for other council meetings? https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consultations/empowering-communities/empowering-communities-programme. I need to check to see whether that means the Village Ward can now just count the 2 ?multi ward? meetings (where the public don?t get to speak), canning any stand alone ward meetings where the public do get to speak. I hope that?s not the case, but it?s noticeable that some wards are having more ward meetings than others. I find it odd that the site says ?Ward Councillors have the responsibility for shaping the agenda and managing the meeting process, but for the time being, officers will be required to administer the online facility.? It sounds a bit as though officers are sick and tired of trying to chase councillors to sort meeting dates - there have been several arranged and cancelled. I am not feeling very empowered.

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.