Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale

[intexasatthe moment]

My reading from the correspondence to JB is that most of the works only need temporary Traffic Orders which have to be advertised but not consulted on .

But " certain, limited elements of the scheme require permanent Traffic management orders to be made. Specifically, where new double yellow line restrictions and mandatory cycle lanes are proposed. These have not yet been advertised but will be in July by way of press advert and street notice.Due process will be followed regarding making TMOs for these elements of the scheme "

it was possible to start the other works without having to wait for the TMO for the yellow lines and bike lane .

That's ok isn't it ?

[Tessmo]

No, it isn't OK. We were told right from the beginning that there would be a formal statutory consultation on the whole scheme. There were design changes made to the scheme in March that no one has even seen. They haven't been made public. Who knows what the final design looks like?

The junction is being changed to make everything safer for cyclists and pedestrians. But the final detail of what the cycle lanes look like won't be made public and formally consulted on until work has already started. That's not transparent or democratic or good practice.

[mockingbird]

InTexas, I get your train of thought but I don't think we are being given the whole picture. What is a Statutory Consultation supposed to consist of. And putting that aside, this is a very tight time frame project. If you are trying to keep it to time, design and budget, you would project manage this effectively by doing all the statutory requests together. I have not seen what was in the press and would be pleased to see that if someone has a copy. The temp traffic orders will alert on road closures for the police and emergency services and I understand that is a 21 day notice. Has this been done. Something about intent feels awry and concealed.

[intexasatthe moment]

Yes ,sorry bad choice of words on my part .

I guess sticking to the letter of the law ,covering their backs might have been more appropriate .

"If you are trying to keep it to time, design and budget, you would project manage this effectively by doing all the statutory requests together" - good point .

" We were told right from the beginning that there would be a formal statutory consultation on the whole scheme. There were design changes made to the scheme in March that no one has even seen. They haven't been made public. Who knows what the final design looks like?" there's no way that's ok .

I presume that work won't start on the yellow lines and bike lane before a TMO application made and consultation carried out ...

[Zebedee Tring]

There is another way in which Southwark are being very disingenuous. The officer response quoted by James Barber in his post earlier today includes the following:

" .... In an ideal world, these elements (in the Traffic Management Oorder) would have been advertised, and any objections duly considered, prior to commencing the main works. However, due to the programme pressures of needing the works to be built in the school summer holidays, we have had to progress them in the way that we have."

I think that I am correct in saying that the Cabinet member approved the scheme in April, i.e. over two months ago. This means that the TMO consultation could have started weeks ago and objections considered in good time for the works to commence.

[mockingbird]

Yes ZT. If this thread does nothing else we should make sure we get Southwark to be specific and clear about its policy and governance. And also how consistent it is in the way it implements that policy. At the moment the policy looks opaque and the implementation inconsistent and ineffective. And as a result, misleading.

[James Barber]

Read about Liverpool City Council getting dispensation from DfT to install two thermal cameras at cycle lights. Part of the new Towny Road junction is giving cyclists a head start of several seconds. Adding thermal cameras would mean this only occurs when cyclists are present.

I've asked if this can be added into the scheme - it would give a little more capacity back to the overall junction.

[Tessmo]

Who knows whether anything can be added to the junction design, James. No one will let us see it...

[@Woodwarde]

We are in the dark about what constitutes the 'Statutory' consultation for Townley. Hopefully our questions to Southwark will shine a light on the Southwark Statutory consultation policy and how they implement it.

In the meantime:

The works at Townley have been noted in two sequential editions of the Southwark Press - 18th and 25th June. See attached. There are no TMO identification nos indicated on these press notices.

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200083/roadworks_and_highway_improvements/1957/traffic_management_orders

It is not clear from this link or the Southwark website just how you can trace Temporary works notices (eg road closures) vs permanent works (cycle lanes).

I wonder what another London Council would advise as best practice if we explained the context for Townley and asked how they would approach consultations on it?

[edhistory]

We've had the diversions map delivered.

The diversions run from 4 July to 31 August.

Bet the residents of Court Lanr were not expecting this.

John K

[Scootingover]

I wonder if the residents of Court Lane received the leaflets. Most of Court lane was missed during the original Southwark leafteting regading Townley.

The proposed diversion map will not be the route that traffic takes. Have a look at the route if you have received it.

If Calton is completely closed is traffic really going to travel up Court Lane - to the junction with the South Circ and then back along Lordship? I can think of many other roads - between Court Lane and Lordship Lane that will be be used. Locals know the roads and Sat Nav has no respect for Diversion notices.

Green Dale work commenced 22 June according to the notice.

[@Woodwarde]

Strange. Walked to the station at 8am this morning and overnight, cameras and road monitoring wires on Woodwarde (outside 113) and between the junction of Woodwarde and Gilkes, on Calton Ave. They were not there last night.

Coming home tonight, the cameras have vanished but the road monitoring wires are still there outside 113 Woodwarde.

What's being measured - perhaps traffic in advance of the Quietway consultation which is just about to start?

If so - the results will not reflect the period when the schools are active.

Anyone else spot them?

[edhistory]

Was there about 09:10.

Saw the stuff on top of the pole and on the pavement by the Woodwarde Road and Calton Avenue junction.

More interesting was the SRS Signals truck awkwardly parked opposite the old burial ground gates. I've never seen so many temporary traffic lights in one place as on the back of that truck.

John K

[@Woodwarde]

Not inexpensive to put them in place but for such a short time is curious.

[@Woodwarde]

A traffic order is on the Southwark Web site (dated 9 July 2015) at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/2558/traffic_orders

which suggests that notices will be going up shortly and people may object until 30th July 2015.

Public notice

Townley Road at East Dulwich Grove: junction improvements

The London Borough of Southwark (Waiting and loading restrictions) (Amendment No. *)

Order 2015

The London Borough of Southwark (Prohibition of stopping on entrance markings) (No. *)

Traffic Order 2015

The London Borough of Southwark (Cycle lanes) (No. *) Traffic Order 2015

1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the council of the London Borough of Southwark

propose to make the above-mentioned orders under sections 6 and 124 of and Part IV

of Schedule 9 to the Road Traffic Regulation Act 19841

, as amended.

2. The general effect of the orders, so as to complement a scheme of junction

improvement, would be:-

(a) to introduce new lengths of ?at any time? waiting restrictions in CALTON

AVENUE, EAST DULWICH GROVE, GREEN DALE and TOWNLEY ROAD;

(b) to relocate an existing length of ?school keep clear? markings in GREEN DALE;

© to designate mandatory cycle lanes at the following locations:-

(i) EAST DULWICH GROVE, the south-east side, on the approach to its

junction with Townley Road ? a with-flow cycle lane;

(ii) GREEN DALE, the north-east side, on the approach to its junction with

East Dulwich Grove ? a with-flow cycle lane;

(iii) TOWNLEY ROAD, the south-west side, on the approach to its junction with

East Dulwich Grove ? a with-flow cycle lane.

3. FURTHER NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the council of the London Borough of

Southwark propose to construct under section 65(1) of the Highways Act 19802 a

segregated cycle track for the use of pedal cycles only at the following location:-

CALTON AVENUE and TOWNLEY ROAD, the south-west side, a one-way northwestbound

cycle track comprising a 1.5 metre wide corridor indicated by a traffic sign

within the north-western and south-western footway extending from a point on the

north-western kerb-line of Calton Avenue 9.6 metres south-east of the south-western

kerb-line of Townley Road to a point on the south-western kerb-line of Townley Road

11.5 metres north-west of the north-western kerb-line of Calton Avenue.

4. For more information about these proposals, please contact Mr. Chris Mascord of the

council's Public realm projects team: telephone 020 7525 5385.

5. A copy of the proposed order and a plan giving more detailed particulars of the

proposal may be viewed either: online by visiting

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/trafficorders or by scanning the QR code below; or for

paper copies, upon request at Public realm projects (parking design), Southwark

Council, Environment and leisure, 3rd floor hub 1, 160 Tooley Street, London SE1 2QH.

Please telephone 020 7525 2005 to arrange an appointment.

6. Persons wishing to object to the proposal, or make any other representations in respect

of it may either use this online form:

https://forms.southwark.gov.uk/ShowForm.asp?fm_fid=1081 or send a statement in

writing (in the case of an objection, stating the grounds on which the objection is

made), to: the Traffic orders officer, Public realm projects, Southwark council,

Environment and leisure, P.O. Box 64529, London SE1P 5LX or via e-mail to:

[email protected] quoting reference PRP/ND/TMO1516-014, by 30 July

2015.

7. In the preparation of an objection and the statement of grounds of objection it should

be borne in mind that the substance of any objection or representation may be

communicated to other people who may be affected. Information provided in response

to this consultation, including personal information, may be subject to publication or

disclosure in accordance with current access to information legislation.

Dated 09 July 2015

Nicky Costin

Road network and parking business unit manager

Public realm

TMO1516-014_PN1.doc

[wulfhound]

Having accurate traffic count data (speed, volume and type) is something they need for a Cycle Quietway. Doesn't necessarily mean they'll do anything about it, but it means they've got an accurate picture of which bits of the route are better/worse than others. There's a points scoring system, but almost no minimum standard.

Info on p31 of this document - appears to be a draft from last year, if anyone can find the final version & see if it's different, go for it:

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/draft-london-cycling-design-standards/user_uploads/ch2-tools-and-techniques.pdf

I also notice there's a load of monitoring gear popped up at the Calton / Court Lane / Village junction, which appears to be controlling the lights (at least late at night). It wasn't working terribly well at 11pm last night - very long red phase for Court Lane, to the point that eventually one motorist got fed up and drove through. Ironically, I think it was because he was being considerate to a bunch of cyclists in the right hand lane - he was too far back for the sensor to detect, and those units never seem to do a good job of detecting bikes.

[Tessmo]

Thank you, @Woodwarde, for posting the Southwark notice about Townley Road.

But where is the plan?

Page 16 of this (Townley Road at East Dulwich Grove) seems to be what we need https://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/2558/traffic_orders

Hard to read without expertise. Like posting something up in a language no one knows. Anyone with any expertise out there? What have we got here? Does the diagonal crossing work for the elderly and mums-with-buggies for example?

A great example of statutory consultation.

[intexasatthe moment]

Yes ,thanks Woodwarde .

Waiting restrictions in Calton . Mmm .Distinctly remember Southwark chap at DCC answering a question about effect on Calton by saying that road was not included in the study .

But what do I know .

[Tessmo]

@intexasatthemoment

I think that's the point, isn't it? Southwark doesn't want us to know anything. Until it's too late.

[intexasatthe moment]

You could be right Tessmo .

If it is a deliberately intentioned plot to make us feel we're loosing our minds it's definitely working on me !

[rch]

I've had a quick look... it looks like this Traffic Order mainly addresses the permanent parking restrictions (i.e., double yellow lines and School Keep Clear markers) along the build outs of all four arms of the junction redesign, which makes me think that the main junction redesign Traffic Order has already been publicised and approved.

I'll try to have a better look later when I have more time and post an update.

FYI, I've been trying to save a tree on Green Dale that has had its roots exposed during the cycle lane prep work, but I think the poor thing is going to die.

[intexasatthe moment]

robin - do you need any help ,watering ,etc to look after tree ?

[MarkT]

RCH wrote:

"it looks like this Traffic Order mainly addresses the permanent parking restrictions (i.e., double yellow lines and School Keep Clear markers) along the build outs of all four arms of the junction redesign, which makes me think that the main junction redesign Traffic Order has already been publicised and approved."

RCH, the following makes me think otherwise:

DCC 17th March 2015. Agenda Item 8. Report from Head of Public Realm "Townley Road... Junction Improvements"

Paragraph 6 "Informal public consultation took place for Option 8a... from 20th February 2015 to 13th March 2015?

Paragraph 9 ?the Cabinet Member is recommended to approve the implementation of the proposed improvements associated with Option 8a? subject to completion of statutory procedures.?

Paragraph 18 ?If approved for implementation this will be subject to statutory consultation required in the making of any permanent Traffic Management Orders. If any objections are received to that statutory consultation, that cannot be informally resolved, a further decision by the cabinet member will be required to consider and determine those objections?

MarkT

[first mate]

rch Wrote:

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

> I've had a quick look... it looks like this

> Traffic Order mainly addresses the permanent

> parking restrictions (i.e., double yellow lines

> and School Keep Clear markers) along the build

> outs of all four arms of the junction redesign,

> which makes me think that the main junction

> redesign Traffic Order has already been publicised

> and approved.

>

> I'll try to have a better look later when I have

> more time and post an update.

>

> FYI, I've been trying to save a tree on Green Dale

> that has had its roots exposed during the cycle

> lane prep work, but I think the poor thing is

> going to die.

How utterly disgraceful and ironic, given the alleged eco credentials of the cycle lane. I hope the relevant Councillor is alerted and fines the contractors (this would cover the cost of your good work and time, RCH and others, in trying to save the tree, as well of course as replacing the tree- if it dies).

[rch]

Firstly, trees... thanks for the offer, intexas, unfortunately exposing the roots may have already caused enough damage to slowly kill it. James has notified the tree manager who is liaising with highways and I have identified a location to transplant it to asap, but nothing seems to be happening.

I flagged this tree during the St Barnabas consultation, but was told that it would be okay and not need transplanting... it looks like contractors have over-zealously prepped the area not realising the problem with leaving the roots exposed.

Am trying to bug everyone, but my own life is complicated at the moment, so I don't have time to be consistently annoying...

Am also hoping that the rain will help out some of the other trees I'm worried about, will let you know if we need to do a watering session.

MarkT, I suspect that the first Traffic Order for the junction reconfiguration was registered just after the March 17th DCC approval and has gone through (prob at the end of June, just before the prep work started) and that this one is a supplemental one to tidy up the no parking orders, etc., but I don't have time to dig through documentation.