Rockets

NorthernMonkey - yes I did read the report and I am glad someone has done some area wide analysis. I liked the way they combined both the East Dulwich and Dulwich Village element linking the two - which the council steadfastly refuses to do and tries to divide and conquer by dealing with each set of closures in isolation. The methdology makes it clear how they built the report - you might not like it but it's clear that the majority of comments left on the Commonplace website (to which councillors have been encouraging people to leave their comments as they said it would be used to judge local sentiment) is against the closures. Have you used the Commonplace website? Have you seen how biased it is towards leaving comments supporting the closures and measures? It's actually quite difficult to leave anything other than glowing praise for the measures so these stats speak volumes. And remember, we were repeatedly told by both the council, the councillors and the pro-closure lobby that it was a "small, vocal minority" who were opposing these closures. With each passing day it seems they all got that assessment badly wrong. The Dulwich Hill zoom call will probably be a good barometer for wider area sentiment over the Melbourne Grove one.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > In fairness, it was stated by the meeting chair > that supplementary questions would not be taken. > Clive asked if he could make one, and that was the > chair's response. I had thought that much later in > the meeting the reason for the response was > further qualified as Clive's question was > submitted late in day and not as expected, or > something like that. Do Clive and Cllr Williams have some previous - the way Cllr Williams addressed Clive suggested so? He was abruptly dismissive - as if he was expecting it. I think the downgrading of the Commonplace was that the Dulwich Alliance got to it first and the council realised they had no way to manipulate the data from then on. Either that or no-one had looked at what was being posted and didn't realise that the sentiment was, in the majority, against the closures. I think the council are on the ropes on this one and they can't make it go away. The Dulwich Hill ward meeting will be very interesting as the council can't expect a group of pro-closure supporters from closed roads from turning up and trying to filibuster the duration of the meeting as the Melbourne Grove residents did. Dulwich Hill is one of the key displacement zones and there are not many who are benefitting from the closures.

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 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? Am I imagining it but didn't the council say that they will be using Commonplace to assess the local sentiment towards LTNs? I interpreted Dulwich Alliance's publishing of the stats as a very clever move to put the council on the back foot. By the looks of the council's response (or lack of it) it looks like it has been successful. Just watched the YouTube video and I thought the representation from Hazel and Bridget was very well done. Cllr Rose really needs to stop turning to her right, it looks like she is reading her responses from a pre-prepared script! THe points Cllr Rose's made about the use of Commonplace don't really stand much scrutiny as the stats speak for themselves. Why was Clive Rates shut down so quickly by Cllr Williams

Do you need to email Fitzroy to get an invite? Have they changed the process from the Melbourne Grove one? Could be interesting given the displacement issues create on roads like Underhill due to the closures.

Malumbu - let's back up a little. What point are you trying to land with those links? One is a potted history of the Rambler's Association right to roam battle, one is an article on road usage (that I agree with entirely) and one is a link to a book. Are you not meandering a bit off-topic here - this thread is on Our Healthy Streets so I am not sure what point you are trying to make - there's a perfectly good debate (one which you fervently try to engage with but other than name-calling never actually do) here - you seem obsessed with trying to take the conversation away from the subject in hand. And on the subject of name-calling you're doing it again and descending into your usual dismissive de-positioning stance referring to "educating yourself". By default that suggests you don't think I am educated.

Local authorities are making such a pig's ear of these measures that they are turning the majority against them so you can scratch them off the "dirty work" list from here on in I suspect. This is going to cost votes and that, ultimately, is what decides the fate of any idea or plan. Those councillors who were the loudest advocates of the LTNs seem to have lost their voice over the last couple of months and don't seem to keen to grandstand over Dulwich Square and other areas - that is very telling. Even chief LTN advocate in chief Peter Walker seems to have moved on to other things.

@malumbu - good try, no cigar I am afraid....it's clear all I was hoping for was a return to some semblance of normality in relation to Covid - not traffic levels. I refer you to my earlier point... @Malumbu Your increasingly spiteful de-positioning of anyone who has a view differing to your own on this subject speaks volumes: it suggests you don't have a valuable contribution or rational argument for the points being raised so have descended to name calling and accusatory finger pointing at people you don't know anything about. A bit childish don't you think?

Has anyone else noticed that Dulwich Square is fast becoming a skate park.....am I the only one to think that this might test the community minded spirit of some of the Square's most vocal supporters.....?;-) I wonder how long it will be before the signs get changed to...Open To....bikes, pedestrians, buggies, scooters (but not stunt scooters or skateboards)

Ex- it will also be essential to see local data. National data demonstrates macro trends not local ones. It would be a foolhardy path for the council to follow if they try and model national changes to determine local impact. They had strips down for periods over both the lockdown and the much more relaxed lockdown so we know they have the data and we know that what many of us could see when we were walking around Dulwich on the displacement roads the council can see too in the data. More broadly, those national figures are interesting and validate how people are changing their habits but I would challenge that these changes will not continue once lockdown lifts. Yes everyone is walking and cycling more - why, because their world extends about 1 mile in each direction at the moment no further. Parents were working from home whilst their children went to school so more people could take their children to school on their bikes and get back home in time for their first work commitment of the day. It's why Dulwich Park/Peckham Rye/Brockwell Park are absolutely rammed as they are only option for most people in the locality to get some exercise and fresh air. Covid has been a massive catalyst for modal shifts in transportation but soon, hopefully, things will begin to return to some semblance of normality and those modal shifts will swing back when people's world's begin extending. That's why we saw the traffic chaos on the displacement roads when the first lockdown was eased.

@DulwichCentral - I think you will find that the majority of statements about awful traffic were before this latest lockdown. Of course the roads are much quieter now (although I hasten to add much busier than during the first lockdown) but the LTN displacement roads were beyond awful before we went into this lockdown. One wonders how the council will aggregate this into their monitoring and analysis because when life returns to normal things will return to being hellish on Lordship Lane, EDG etc etc. I am really interested to see how they present/manipulate this. The worm seems to be beginning to turn on LTNs.

@Malumbu Your increasingly spiteful de-positioning of anyone who has a view differing to your own on this subject speaks volumes: it suggests you don't have a valuable contribution or rational argument for the points being raised so have descended to name calling and accusatory finger pointing at people you don't know anything about. A bit childish don't you think?

Well done Dulwich Alliance - get an early blow in before the council has a chance to manipulate the figures - no doubt they will counter that the people on the closed roads are saying how great it is!!!! ;-)

Also I would hope that the council are reviewing the number of FOI requests they get and determining how they can communicate better - the two are inexorably linked. The catalyst for a lot of these FOIs is their utter lack of transparency and professional communication on this whole programme - they are acting like they have something to hide so people go looking for what they are hiding (and finding it if those emergency services communications are anything to go by).

...response to Covid-19....the High Court may bring this house of cards tumbling down....

But weren't the council and councillors telling us the delays to emergency services weren't happening and the emergency services supported the measures..? It's also very clear from those minutes that there was no, or woefully inadequate consultation, with wemegency services over these closures. Time and time again councillors told us the opposite, that emergency services had been consulted. It's clear these measures put people's lives at risk and the emergency services were telly the council so for a long time and the council seems to.in the main, ignored it and that cannot be tolerated. I know they replaced the planters with removable bollards in at Melbourne Grove but the DV junction is still immovable planters. This council is trying to hide things. They have created a monster for themselves..an informed public who are tired of being lied to and are now emboldened to dig deeper and push for proper answers and expose their lies.The council cannot bury things under the cover of constituent apathy anymore. It makes you wonder what else has been happening over the years...

This might explain why many of the cheerleading councillors are doing nothing on their social feeds. Many of them, who were frequent retweeters of content from the pro-closure lobbyists, seem to have stopped. Perhaps they know they are in trouble and are backpedaling quickly to try and distance themselves from them. Cheerleading and grandstanding is easy, being accountable less so.

DulwichCentral Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > march46 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I see Dulwich Alliance are no longer listing > the > > Dulwich Picture Gallery as one of their > > supporters. Were they not aware they'd be > included > > I wonder? > > Yes I noticed this. Very odd. Does make one wonder > how genuine the whole thing is. Not sure how you question how genuine the Dulwich Alliance is on the basis of that...or is it you are just grasping at anything to deposition any organised opposition? Meanwhile it appears the council may have stopped responding to FOI requests...far, far more concerning if true.

I think many of the fears about the way the council handled the implementation of these programmes are being realised: the council's blinkered approach is going to set proper debate to find solutions to the pollution crisis back by years. If a High Court judge can pull apart the mayor's and TFL's implementation they would have a field day with what has gone on locally. I do hope those who have defended the measures to the hilt, without any consideration for their impact on the wider community, think it was all worth it and that at the end of the day those cheerleaders within the council take full responsibility for their actions.

What happens next is really interesting and cast your mind back to Southwark's first push for these measures which was based solely around "social distancing" but it clear one of the key findings in that case applies locally too: As it was, the measures proposed in the Plan and the Guidance, and implemented in the A10 order, far exceeded what was reasonably required to meet the temporary challenges created by the pandemic. It seems the mayor, TFL and councils have created huge issues for themselves by being way too keen to use Covid as a trojan horse to role out programmes without proper consultation or engagement. It was like catnip to them and they couldn't help themselves. I very much hope this is the beginning of the end for these flawed schemes and then we can analyse how much time, money, resources and effort was wasted by the council when they should have focussing on other more important, community-wide, challenges. They all got sold down the river by the pro-closure lobby and completely misjudged the wider public sentiment and, as we all know, a politician does that at their peril.....

We got a huge batch of letters delivered today - it looks like it was all of our post for the last two weeks. Luckily nothing urgent but does anyone have any idea when they are going to get on top of this - it's getting beyond a joke? It seems there are a lot of no-shows for vaccines (a family friend went to have a pacemaker adjustment and was given the jab "as he was there and a lot of people hadn't turned up so they had spare") and I do worry that a lot of people just aren't getting their letters in time. I think we can all live with the occasional delays to post but the service now seems to be totally unreliable. Has anyone heard anything from our local councillors on the matter?

Ex- really! You can tell you have worked in council consultations previously! Your warping of stats is worthy of an honorary Southwark Council OHS Consultation medal for services to misrepresentation! That petition showed, quite clearly, that there was a group of people who were against the way the council had gone about their deployment - it may be 1% of the overall Southwark population but there's not another e-petition that the council has run on its website that has had more people sign. Given some bright spark on the pro-closure lobby then decided to set their own e-petition up in support of the closures and managed to gather about 60 signatures probably aptly shows the balance of local weight of feeling towards these closures. Yes the council paid lip service to the e-petition but that was always going to be the case - they have never wanted to have any sort of proper debate on the LTNs. They have been hoping the problem goes away and people lose interest but, perhaps most worrying for them, a new group has been set-up, 650 people have managed to negotiate their new confusing log-in system and signed another petition against it, 1800 people are signed-up for OneDulwich and hundreds of sets of eyes are waiting in eager anticipation to cross-examine the council's monitoring methodology, data and reports that they are promising sometime in the future. All at the same time as they head towards council elections in under 18 months. The longer the current lockdown goes on the worse it is for the council as, at some point life will begin to return to normality and the queuing traffic will return and the council will be back in the cross-hairs - and that will probably be under a year before the local council elections - and politicians start getting very angsty - especially as many will be looking to those elections as a bell-weather for Labour under Keir. Let's be honest, they've got themselves into a right mess and it was all of their own making and they keep digging the hole deeper and deeper.

Wasn't there one on Dawson's Hill too?

I suspect many are not aware of the new rules and process to get them collected as many of the streets of East Dulwich resemble medieval Christmas tree burial grounds.

Iona - try not to worry about it - there are a lot of idiots around at the moment who are too quick to lash out - I wholly suspect it is due to lockdown stress. Also, I wonder whether the pedestrian was looking at the main lights rather than the bike lights (this does not at all justify their reaction). A lot of people don't realise that bikes have their own set of lights and priorities at many junctions and that it can be red for everyone else but green for cyclists. It's quite simple, if everyone follows the instructions presented to them by the lights it works perfectly. I very much suspect that the pedestrian ignored their red light as they thought the main red lights would give them time to cross. So they are very much the idiot rather than you and don't let them put you off getting out and enjoying some fresh air and exercise!

Rofflick - would those be the consultations that were skewed to the council's agenda? The CPZ consultation that told the council the majority of East Dulwich residents were against them so the council skewed the results to allow them to go forth with their plans? Or the OHS consultation for Dulwich Village that were based on a willful manipulation of data (47% increase in traffic)? Perhaps in that light you can see why people feel the need to try and galvanise support from a large number of residents to get the council to pay attention to the voices they have overlooked and deliberately ignored for so long. The council is reaping what they have sowed. They chose to ignore the views of the majority to focus on the minority. And now they are doing everything they can to desperately hold on to their position. Every day we get closer to the local council elections in 2022 and every day councillors start thinking about re-election - that will likely be the main catalyst for ensuring the majority are listened to (whichever way that might be).