legalalien

The thing is though, that to fix the EDG and LL congestion, then surely Court Lane needs to be open precisely AT peak times (to take pressure off those routes)?

I think maybe Juno means Living Streets Dulwich which is one of the other campaign groups?

For info - there's a Council Assembly meeting on 25 November, the theme is Southwark's response to the pandemic, but there's also a Member question time where council members can each ask a question of a cabinet member. Two of the Lib Dem councillors are asking (i) about adequate consultation / adequate response to the 2500 LTN petition and (ii) about what air quality monitoring will be carried out. List of questions here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s92008/Report%20Members%20question%20time.pdf There's also an interesting motion on transport from cllr Damian O'Brien here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s92009/Report%20Members%20Motions.pdf, essentially saying that because TfL has deprioritised various public transport initiatives Southwark won't be able to meet its current traffic reduction targets and that these need to be rethought "with expert input from leading external visionaries to identify new approaches given the changes in priorities of TfL, and provide a comprehensive update in the next 3 months containing annual targets for reducing annual road traffic and improving air quality. This should also include assessing the impact on different communities and Council income." Sounds like he might have road user charging in mind? Lots of other really interesting stuff too. Will be livestreamed on youtube. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6773

I always have a non-confrontational chat with the JW ladies when they turn up. When I was a child, some JW used to come to our house every week. My father, who was a confirmed atheist, took a copy of their edition of the bible and used to argue with the lady every week. She came back each week because she felt he challenged her faith, and she gained from that. There were some issues at my house and she used to take me to her home for the day sometimes when it was necessary. I'm still grateful for that. So maybe I have a soft spot. I was quite pleased to receive my handwritten letter. I might not agree with lots of the JW stuff (I'm not at all religious) but it's great that people who really believe in something reach out, and I think the people on the ground are largely well intentioned. We can agree to differ.

Not mine. The Guardian's cycling columnist, who is a cycling lobbyist himself, and Manchester's cycling czar don't get to decide who is and isn't a "vociferous minority" or a "noisy dissident". That's just emotive language to put their own spin on it. Yes, surveys show people are in favour of measures discouraging car usage. I'd say yes to the questions posed myself - as would many other opponents of the Dulwich road blocks on this thread - we are people who agree in principle with the idea but think there are problems with implementation in this particular case. Given the government has updated their advice to make it clear that ALL road users, and businesses, need to be consulted against the threat of claw back.... I think it might be some other people who will be scrambling around in response. Hopefully there is room for some sensible modification/ compromise.

On the basis it's always better to go to the primary source material, here's the link to the DoT announcement, which also includes a link to updated statutory guidance on councils' network management duties. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/175-million-more-for-cycling-and-walking-as-research-shows-public-support. Good to see that there is a clear message being given about the importance of consultation: "the Transport Secretary has set tough new conditions on councils receiving funding, requiring them to ensure schemes are properly consulted on. This will help avoid the problems seen in a minority of the schemes developed in the first round of funding. If these conditions are not met by a council, the Transport Secretary has been clear that future funding allocations will be reduced and claw-backs could also be imposed." and "As part of the Transport Secretary?s plan to ensure councils develop schemes that work for their communities, he has set out they must: publish plans to show how they will consult their communities, including residents, businesses and emergency services, among others show evidence of appropriate consultation prior to schemes being implemented submit monitoring reports on the implementation of schemes 6-12 months after their opening, highlighting how schemes have been modified based on local feedback to ensure they work for communities." Not exactly sure whether/ how this impacts LTNS already installed, but the guidance on experimental orders does say this in relation to experimental orders: "Authorities must put in place monitoring arrangements, and carry out ongoing consultation once the measure is built. Although the initial implementation period can be quick, local residents and businesses should still be given an opportunity to comment on proposed changes, and the need for extra monitoring and consultation afterwards can make them a more onerous process overall. Schemes installed using experimental orders are subject to a requirement for ongoing consultation for 6 months once in place, with statutory consultees including bus operators, emergency services and freight industry representatives. This consultation allows a trial scheme to be adjusted in the light of experience and feedback, which can lead to a better scheme overall. Schemes should be monitored and evaluated to help make decisions as to whether the scheme should be made permanent, and if so in what form." From what Cllr McAsh said on the other thread, it sounds as though the council will put in place a formal monitoring and evaluation framework to meet these requirements. Hopefully we'll get visibility of it. The challenge is going to be how to do accurate monitoring on the early closures given we've been locked down. The one thing in the report that made me smile was the guidance that it was not a good idea to put an immovable concrete block over an area with utilities under it as it made it impossible for utilities providers to gain access/ do repairs. Sounds like that's something that must have happened somewhere. You can just imagine the reaction of the folk in the utilities van when they turned up at the location....

Thanks nxjen I wasn?t quite sure of the protocol!

Just saw this on a Southwark newsletter. "The Council is committed to creating more opportunities for community gardening and food growing and is launching an Allotment Expansion Guarantee in 2021. If you live on or near a Southwark Council estate and you would like to create new food growing plots, the council can support you. The Community Gardening Coordinators will work with groups of residents to plan, build and run growing spaces on LBS land. Tell us about where your community would like to grow food and we'll be in touch as the campaign launches. Enter your email below and we'll let you know when this Commonplace is ready." The interactive site hasn't launched yet but you can register to be notified when it launches. https://allotmentexpansionguarantee.commonplace.is/?utm_content=&utm_medium=email&utm_name=&utm_source=govdelivery&utm_term= (Am conscious I have started a couple of new threads today. Having signed up to a whole bunch of council alerts I keep coming across things that I think people might be interested in. If I get boring someone tell me to stop!)

For anyone with an interest in Southwark school places and some time on their hands, this is a really interesting read http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s91339/Report%20Pupil%20place%20planning%20report.pdf Lots of info about trends in different areas (there's significant overcapacity in primary school places across the borough - a lot of it in the north west as a result of regeneration projects it seems- but more generally as well. The appendices include a useful list and map of all the Southwark schools, info about what chains they are linked to, and which schools in Southwark and relevant neighbouring boroughs are planning to expand/ contract their numbers in the near future. Also some info about where expansion of SEND provision is planned. And some info about demand for the various secondary schools.

Not just us then. Our wood pigeons and robin (and some thrushes) have disappeared but we seem to have gained some blackbirds and some sort of small tits (not an expert - great tits or coal tits maybe)?

Description of closure: Goodrich Community Primary School, the part of DUNSTANS ROAD between its junctions with Goodrich Road and Mount Adon Park/Upland Road during term time (Monday to Friday 3:00 pm ? 3:45 pm) which will be physically enforced with traffic signs and the installation of temporary barriers located (i) at a point 1 metre south-west of the south-western kerb-line of Goodrich Road and (ii) at a point 7 metres north-east of the north-eastern kerb-line of Mount Adon Park;

So - I emailed first thing this morning to ask and they?ve made the traffic order and put it on the website today. Link here https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/25844/School-Street-trials-winter-2-notice-dated-12-Nov-2020-.pdf

Just on the PS - funnily enough, the SE5 group lady started her presentation at the OSC meeting earlier in the week with some strong words about just how much better Lambeth are to deal with in terms of transparency/ strategy/ organisation/ consulting the community, compared to Southwark. Lambeth have a really good website explaining to people what they are doing and why. It would really have helped Southwark if they had taken a similar approach. https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/better-fairer-lambeth/lambeth-transport-strategy-transport-strategy-implementation-plan

I was interested to see in the most recent decision notice that ?Concerns were raised regarding the additional time required to collect waste due to closures being proposed as part of the GSTTC and wider Southwark LSP schemes.? I was reflecting on that the other day - presumably Veolia have contractual service levels - I wonder if they made these dependent on there not being lots of road closures or not? It would be an easy thing for them to miss. I guess with a 25 year contract they must have given themselves some wriggle room on the traffic / road configuration front. Just idle speculation.

Here is the decision notice for the LTNs being funded by the Guys and St Thomas?s charity and discussed at the recent Environmental Scrutiny Commission meeting http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50024511 Those who attended / watched the meeting will know that these ones have been a bit more thought through. Interestingly this decision notice contains a slightly more detailed ?consultation? section: ? Consultation 15. Meetings were held with Ward Councilors to discuss each location. Main concerns raised related to increased journey times for residents and increased traffic and air pollution of surrounding roads as a result of traffic displacement. 16. Emergency services (Fire, Police and Ambulance) have indicated they will not support schemes which promote hard road closures, as they will increase response times. Their preference is for camera enforced closures without physical prevention for vehicles. Camera enforcement will be considered should any of the measures be made permanent. 17. All measures have been designed in consultation with Southwark Waste Management. In order to ensure residential waste collection is maintained, removable bollards have been proposed. Concerns were raised regarding the additional time required to collect waste due to closures being proposed as part of the GSTTC and wider Southwark LSP schemes. 18. Consultation with schools and businesses will be undertaken prior to the schemes being implemented. 19. Further consultation with residents will be undertaken during the period of the Experimental Traffic Management Order via Commonplace? I?d hazard a guess this has gone in in response to concerns expressed by ward councillors and generally about the process on some of the measures to date.

Interesting. Still can't see anything on the Southwark site other than the point closure promulgated back in August - but as we know it's not the easiest to navigate. Maybe take a pic of the notice,and we can try and find the underlying order?

I used to flat with a weather forecaster in another country - he set up a business (run out of our ground floor) in competition with the Met Office equivalent, based on their data feed and supplementing it with info from a network of people on the ground (farmers, amateur meteorologists etc) who used to phone our flat with info late at night and into the early hours. He always told me that although the met office model had much more data than previously, it still wasn't over a long enough period, and there was much to be said for people who knew their environment. He won the contract for the equivalent of radio 4 and was wildly successful (the met office continued to supply tv). So whether or not the change to someone else has worked in this case, maybe weather is another area where there is not just a simple, one version of "the science"? I've used dark sky until recently, it seems to have got less accurate since being adopted by apple.

Have been watching last night's Southwark Overview and Scrutiny Commission meeting on youtube and the second half turned out to be a really interesting discussion about council regeneration projects with inputs / q and a with reps from projects in Bankside, Walworth, Elephant area and Camberwell. If you have time on your hands it's well worth a watch. From about 2 hours in until the end.

Agree. Not sure they?ll make great alternative cycle routes for adults though- post Covid I imagine they?ll be packed with parents / carers/ children having a pre and post pick up gossip!

Still watching last night's OSC meeting on and off. They've just discussed the most recent version of the council's performance reports for 2019/20 which are in the doc below - really interesting as a point by point analysis of all the things Southwark is trying to achieve. From about 1:50 onward it gets into a discussion about the fact that a number of the targets need to be more measurable and reporting needs to be a bit better than "in progress" - the new leader seems reasonably on board with this. And the chair of the scrutiny commission is recommending quarterly reporting. Sounds like they've found it difficult to perform their role based on data provided. All good developments IMHO. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g6738/Public%20reports%20pack%20Monday%2009-Nov-2020%2018.30%20Overview%20Scrutiny%20Committee.pdf?T=10

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/25190/School-Streets-trial-notice-dated-5-Nov-2020-.pdf Yes it is true - notice at this link.it's an experimental traffic order. (And yes it should refer to east dulwich grove rather than east dulwich road)

There's some stuff about that in the onedulwich fact checker that I came across yesterday - as of August they don't seem to have got to the final figures.. (It's towards the bottom of the page) https://www.onedulwich.uk/fact-checker

Rockets - am currently watching last night's Overview and Scrutiny Committe meeting (it's long but I would recommend it - it's councillors having a Q and A with the new council leader Kieron Williams and covers a wide variety of issues relevant to Southwark, its post COVID finances, cladding issues, divestment of fossil fuel investments from council pension funds, the bakerloo line extension (just seen an interesting exchange where one of the councillors suggested that although listed as a response to the climate emergency, the emissions caused in the construction process were likely to take about 35 years to recover through the benefoit... And, bike storage has had a special mention, it is on the council's agenda for sure. They're looking to double it initially (can't remember timeline) but ultimately make it accessible to all.

I like the idea of random consultation. What I will say is that the zoom calls necessitated by COVID are much easier to access / understand than some of the slightly incoherent video recordings of some meetings in the past, and a great way of reaching those with work/ childcare commitments who find it hard to attend public meetings. I really hope they keep them going.

Did anyone mention militant cyclists? I think there's a strong tendency in all areas for the council just to speak to the "usual suspects". Take the climate emergency. The council's strategy papers are full of statements about the need to consult fully, engage, educate, bring everyone along for the ride. Yet so far they've set up a Partnerships Steering Group to act as an adviser / give input on the strategy - described as "a group of local residents, partners, interest groups and others with an interest and expertise in this area to provide advice to the Cabinet Member and the Council." Has anyone heard about this body being set up? I suspect few have. Does anyone know who is on it? I've spent some time googling without success, I will email the councillor. Then there's some consultation, including the online one I've posted to earlier that noone was told about. The decision was to "promote the online portal as part of our corporate communications through this period, we will also use known groups within the council such as those that work with young people, BAME groups, interest groups, community groups and others to promote the hub". Deliberately or not - this is not a conspiracy theory - the Council tends to consult and involve only those within its bubble. It might just be because it's cheaper and easier, but that doesn't make it OK. How hard would it be, for example, to post information on sites such as the EDF and get to a wider range of people? http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s89020/Additional%20Consultation%20Information%20Ltr%20from%20Cabinet%20Member%20for%20Environment%20Transport%20and%20the%20Clim.pdf