Southwark Environmental Scrutiny meeting next week

[legalalien]

That?s true. But what I?m hoping we are heading towards is more transparency from councillors about what they are asking for and why.. and other stuff. I do feel like compared to the last meeting there are more overt statements about why people would like info and where they are coming from. Cld be confirmation bias on my part ....

[legalalien]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Cllr Graham Neale - claiming the council was being

> ambushed by a small but vocal minority (he

> reiterated that small but vocal minority twice) -

> I presume he was referring to the 3 proposed areas

> or more broadly? The small but vocal minority

> seems to be a bit of a narrative the council is

> trying to weave.

Not sure on that one- Leanne asking about displacement now

[Rockets]

Interesting response from the charity lady that no-one has done this level of detail before so displacement is tough to judge but you can expect displacement onto main roads but they think it reduces over time. Their work is designed to prove is definitively.

She has been very impressive but I would also challenge her assumption that sat navs will direct people onto main roads when LTNs are implemented following a question about displacement onto residential roads. Sat Navs will find the clearest route so not sure that stands up to scrutiny. The sat nav algorithms will find the quickest route whether they are main roads or residential roads. Cllr Werner followed up on this point about what work the council can do with sat nav companies.

The question this call poses to me is why can a charity do this and appear a hell of a lot more professional than our council who seem to be taking a very haphazard approach to these measures?

[FairTgirl]

legalalien Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Cllr Graham Neale - claiming the council was

> being

> > ambushed by a small but vocal minority (he

> > reiterated that small but vocal minority twice)

> -

> > I presume he was referring to the 3 proposed

> areas

> > or more broadly? The small but vocal minority

> > seems to be a bit of a narrative the council is

> > trying to weave.

> Not sure on that one- Leanne asking about

> displacement now

Was at work so couldn't join, I will watch the recording tomorrow - but this comment has disappointingly also popped up in a new Southwark Covid Economic Renewal Plan. This is incredibly sad as ability to access local business is a huge part of why it is failing and will continue too with no other alt transport plans or support and outright dismissiveness of a huge number of people's valid concerns.

[dulwichfolk]

I think you can watch the meeting here

[legalalien]

Wtaf. Just had fire guy say they would have liked to be involved a bit more In the LTN thing and Margy has said she realised that the emergency services have not perhaps been involved as much as desirable in the dulwich thing and how could this be improved. It?s a statutory requirement for gods sake! May have misheard (confirmation bias), will listen again in the morning.

They?ve just asked fire guys whether they have been consulted on everything - they say maybe on majority but some have been quite fluid.

[Northern Star]

And they also added (surprise surprise) that they prefer removable bollards to fixed planters.

[legalalien]

I agree

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Interesting response from the charity lady that

> no-one has done this level of detail before so

> displacement is tough to judge but you can expect

> displacement onto main roads but they think it

> reduces over time. Their work is designed to prove

> is definitively.

>

> She has been very impressive but I would also

> challenge her assumption that sat navs will direct

> people onto main roads when LTNs are implemented

> following a question about displacement onto

> residential roads. Sat Navs will find the clearest

> route so not sure that stands up to scrutiny. The

> sat nav algorithms will find the quickest route

> whether they are main roads or residential roads.

> Cllr Werner followed up on this point about what

> work the council can do with sat nav companies.

>

> The question this call poses to me is why can a

> charity do this and appear a hell of a lot more

> professional than our council who seem to be

> taking a very haphazard approach to these

> measures?

[Rockets]

Cllr Newens admitted there was not good communication between the council and the emergency services when they implemented the Dulwich closures. This is obviously contrary to what our councillors have been telling us throughout this process. Amazing.......

[Rockets]

The fact the council seems to be finding out on this call that the fire service would prefer removable bollards over planters is so telling. Clearly, there has been no proper consultations with them at all as I am sure that would have been discussed. Are the council now going to have to rip the planters out and put in removable bollards - how much tax-payers money are they wasting on this?

This call has been fascinating as it is obvious our council hasn't got the first clue how to manage this and are making basic mistake after mistake......it's a complete dereliction of duty.....

[northernmonkey]

Thats not what i heard at all - amazing how take aways can be so different really!

She said that as Dulwich was one of the first, had the way that comms happens with LFB changed since then and is there best practice developing. I think what was interesting was that the LFB were clear that there had been consultation on all areas. They flagged the Tooley St scheme as having some confusion so explained how they had addressed this by talking to the teams on the ground and doing site visits.

legalalien Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Wtaf. Just had fire guy say they would have liked

> to be involved a bit more In the LTN thing and

> Margy has said she realised that the emergency

> services have not perhaps been involved as much as

> desirable in the dulwich thing and how could this

> be improved. It?s a statutory requirement for gods

> sake! May have misheard (confirmation bias), will

> listen again in the morning.

>

> They?ve just asked fire guys whether they have

> been consulted on everything - they say maybe on

> majority but some have been quite fluid.

[legalalien]

Let?s not get into a argument but all have a look at the recording in the morning with our

confirmation biases in mind. Happy to admit I probably have one. Think we all do. And I think there?s a massive amount to be gained if we can all keep challenging each other?s views without drawing redlines . Old fashioned #gettingtoyes

[Rockets]

northernmonkey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Thats not what i heard at all - amazing how take

> aways can be so different really!

>

> She said that as Dulwich was one of the first, had

> the way that comms happens with LFB changed since

> then and is there best practice developing. I

> think what was interesting was that the LFB were

> clear that there had been consultation on all

> areas. They flagged the Tooley St scheme as

> having some confusion so explained how they had

> addressed this by talking to the teams on the

> ground and doing site visits.

>

>

> legalalien Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Wtaf. Just had fire guy say they would have

> liked

> > to be involved a bit more In the LTN thing and

> > Margy has said she realised that the emergency

> > services have not perhaps been involved as much

> as

> > desirable in the dulwich thing and how could

> this

> > be improved. It?s a statutory requirement for

> gods

> > sake! May have misheard (confirmation bias),

> will

> > listen again in the morning.

> >

> > They?ve just asked fire guys whether they have

> > been consulted on everything - they say maybe

> on

> > majority but some have been quite fluid.

The great thing is we can all rewatch it again tomorrow to reconfirm our bias!!! ;-)

It was clear to me that she admitted there had not been good communication between the council and the emergency services about the Dulwich LTNs.

Additionally, if there had been consultation how does anyone explain the fire service telling the councillors on this call that they would prefer removable bollards to planters? One of the Cllrs asked that very question at the end. That doesn't suggest there has been any sort of proper consultation as we have a load of planters in place......

[legalalien]

And has all ended a bit strangely with statements from Cllrs rose and Burgesaband then a plea for no parking for everyone. Fun times rewatching tomorrow :)

[legalalien]

There was just a weird bit where Leanne and catherine mentioned being interviewed by the scrutiny commission and were silenced. Will re watch when the video goes up.

FWIW I think Cllr Jason Ochere (who I had never heard of before today) did a great job today.

[dulwichfolk]

The video is on YouTube (link sent previously in thread) now if that?s how you like to spend your evening...

They are lucky the Guys and Thomas lady was there as they are the only ones doing anything properly.

The idea about making google/Waze change their algorithm....do they think they can control that.

As for emergency service they might have all ticked the boxes but then why are ambulances still attempting to go through these LTN areas and having to reroute...

Interesting how this all works.

[northernmonkey]

I think that the ambulances point is rather more about why are our emergency services trying to work using outdated satnav systems when free options like waze exist. I know its not as good a story but it is a very valid question.

[dulwichfolk]

I?m guessing on the satnav there are certain standards/up time which need to be kept to.

If the free google or waze drop out/crash or stop working you wouldn?t want that to affect all ambulances/emergency services

[Rockets]

dulwichfolk Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The video is on YouTube (link sent previously in

> thread) now if that?s how you like to spend your

> evening...

>

> They are lucky the Guys and Thomas lady was there

> as they are the only ones doing anything

> properly.

>

> The idea about making google/Waze change their

> algorithm....do they think they can control that.

>

> As for emergency service they might have all

> ticked the boxes but then why are ambulances still

> attempting to go through these LTN areas and

> having to reroute...

>

>

> Interesting how this all works.

I think the discussion around Waze etc was about making sure the closures were flagged on the systems (I may be wrong though). Waze, Google etc use user posted data to show whether roads are closed or blocked because of an accident, burst water main etc. I think it is naive of councillors to think (if this is what they meant) that sat nav companies would prioritise main road usage over others. The USPs for systems like Waze is that they find the quickest and clearest route using other user data shared over the cloud.

[Abe_froeman]

It doesn't sounds like this was very coherent given how confused all of the above reports are!

[legalalien]

Here's the YouTube link if anyone wants to watch

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50012333/Video%20Link%20YouTube%20Wednesday%2004-Nov-2020%2018.30%20Environment%20Scrutiny%20Commission.pdf?T=9

Date for the diary: the next Environmental Scrutiny Committee meeting is at 6pm on Wednesday 2 December. I'll request and post the link.