first mate

Given these are emergency measures why, as Ed Aus alludes to, are emergency services not fully in the loop? That strikes me as very odd and, if true, a significant oversight. Surely those MG residents that asked for this road closure are not themselves continuing to use cars. Shouldn?t they now be forced to walk, cycle or take the bus? KatyKoo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > thebestnameshavegone Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > They're being asked to implement these measures > > *specifically* via the ETRO process, by both > the > > Mayor, and the DfT, as a way to enable active > > travel as a response to coronavirus. This is an > > emergency, and the appropriate tools are being > > used. > > At last a voice of reason :)

That is most interesting. On another thread James McAsh gave the impression emergency services had been informed. Am I alone in finding it odd the haste with which the council has forced through its OHS agenda, cynically using the Covid emergency to do so but, in the process, has seemingly failed to properly communicate with emergency services about street closures and the potential impact on those who might need those services? EDAus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We knew the barrier had been installed as the > traffic on Ashbourne Grove has increased already > with cars / vans from Melbourne Grove to Lordship > Lane in particular, a number speeding. > > It is interesting to note double yellow lines have > only been installed on one side of Melbourne Grove > South which would not allow for a truck or > anything bigger than a car to turn. > > In the 10 minutes we visited we saw over three > cars approach the barrier and turn down Tell > Grove, a small narrow road which is not equipped > for this high volume of traffic. > > We have also been contacted by one of the > emergency services as they have not been contacted > / consulted on in relation to the closure, they > requested additional information. I am concerned > the road closure will lead to poorer outcomes for > emergencies.

Hi James, The example of the Loughborough Junction fisaco indicates that while agencies are consulted they may not necessarily be across the detail and implications. I wonder if in this case emergency services are across the detail and aware that only a minority of local residents support the measures?

But aside from what it looks like, what is your response to the experience of those like the poster above you?

I don?t think Southwark Cyclists care. This is about their fanatical car free vision for ED. Once they have helped the council realise mass CPZ let?s see how much car parking suddenly becomes available again, once it?s a source of income for the Council. If you require a car for work too bad, if you work too far to use a bike, again too bad, if you are not fit enough to negotiate the very steep hills either end of ED, too bad, if you feel to nervous to cycle at night, too bad. Let?s not forget that representatives of Southwark Cycling have also implied that people who do not live close enough to cycle to their workplace should move. It?s a very rigid way of thinking.

I certainly think for many older people carrying a folder is tricky but for young, fit people, perhaps more of whom might be flat dwellers, the folder is perfect for commuting and can be taken into the office or home. I have found it easy to take into most leisure facilities and, as you say, also great on public transport. Agree, no good to leave chained as easily stolen, but then that seems to be the case with many half decent bikes and I don?t think we should invest public money in storage unless we are very confident they are secure. It is not as though the council has loads of dosh to spare. I would personally prefer to see that money spent on mending dangerous, uneven pavements and pot holes in roads. Finally, it seems no money has been spent on social distancing by foot- a much more urgent consideration right now.

Indeed. Just query the wisdom of spending on hangars that are clearly not secure. I keep saying folders are a great option!

That?s what happens when a hospital is turned into a giant GP Practice with an appalling record of incompetence ie Concordia /Hambledon. Another cracking Southwark decision. If they cannot get the phones sorted do we really trust them with our health? Interested to see that the Health Centre has been downgraded to a GP Practice. Is this the case or is the Practice contained within a wider health centre?

I think most of us had figured this.

Well, in this one instance I guess it does make sense to get the work done before autumn but let?s hope it is done as quickly as possible. For those needing to travel and who for health reasons cannot, walk, cycle or take public transport it is pretty galling.

Hi Sally, Are these hangars now secure then?

Just think CPZ...money!

James, Is MG having planters as well as concrete bollards now or just the former? Are the planters easily moved for emergency vehicle access? Planters Jakido - there should be planters in the road on Melbourne Grove south very soon! I am chasing up plans for elsewhere in the ward.

Wow, if any of that was happening on my doorstep I would be very unhappy, especially if posters, some of whom seem to know the children involved, advised me I was overreacting and that the most important thing was to avoid labelling antisocial behaviour as just that. Surely this goes to show that even children from ?good? backgrounds can get up to no good if left too much to their own devices. The parents of these teens ?just being teenagers and having a bit of fun? in the early hours need to put themselves in the shoes of the poor residents living on the estate. My sympathies are wholly with the residents.

Perhaps those first time posters, some of whom appear to know the young people involved, might also consider if there are grounds for them to speak to the children involved about what they have been doing or is the OP?s upset completely groundless? It does not seem to be just that person who is upset either.

intexasatthe moment Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Right ,so they are de-scoping the scheme .What > exactly does "de-scope" mean ? Fancy ?council speak? for back-pedalling, fast?!

Although it was once implied by one of the cycling advocates on here that if you couldn?t cycle to your place of work that perhaps you should consider moving!

More than that Rockets, it shows these measures have very little to do with the stated aims.

Wulfhound, Okay, but just so we are clear about the level of local support for proposals we need to know exactly who is being consulted and how much weight is given to those views. If the consultation is open to children of any age to express their views then that needs to be clearly flagged, similarly if any old cyclist anywhere in the Borough has an equal voice within the process, that too should be flagged. By that logic anyone, of whatever age, anywhere in the Borough should perhaps also have a say? However, taking all that into consideration, how then can the council claim the majority of locals support something; it is a nonsense. Additionally, how then does the council rationalise their method of measuring support for CPZ on a street by street basis only? My objection to all of this is around slippery practice and dishonesty by the council, not that I feel the views of all children should be dismissed. That said, whether they should be given equal weight and prominence with those of adult residents is moot. wulfhound Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > So we can take it that children, of a non-voting > age have participated and been counted within the > consultation process? Do you know more about this > Wulfhound? > > > No, I don't know of it at all. Zero information > one way or the other. You could presumably FoI it > if you wanted. > > But equally, I don't think we should dismiss the > views of children. Rather, I think their > perspective on the world is a valuable one, and > that their day to day experiences matter. Do you?

And alas, I think certain stakeholders have been well and truly hoodwinked and used. Some are saying the same about councillors. You don?t put in double yellows as a short term measure to allow cars to turn until word gets round- road signs do that job. No, Cllr Livingtone knows full well that car delivery of children will not cease as many come from too far away. This is a designed in Charter school drop off.

Except, exdulwicher, I really do think this will become a drop off point for parents driving their children to school. Let?s wait and see but I still fear the real council motive behind the barrier is to hasten CPZ expansion not to reduce cars, though there might be some reduction. However, don?t you find it a little odd that within the blocked zone they are also putting in double yellows to facilitate cars going up and turning around? Surely a couple of well placed road signs would make this unnecessary? However, parents dropping kids off to school will be able to do so with relative ease.

Note use of weasle-words and phrases like ?improve perception of air pollution? (no proof of actual improvement necessary) ?broad support? (not a majority then).

Dear Southwark resident, Experimental transport measures in East Dulwich The Covid-19 pandemic has required us to introduce measures that fundamentally alter people?s travel patterns and the ways in which we use Southwark?s streets and spaces. Across Southwark, we are taking action to fast-track a variety of transport measures that support increased walking and cycling, allow social distancing, improve perception of air pollution exposure, and prevent motor vehicle traffic levels from rising. The Melbourne Grove area has been identified as a priority, as it receives a very high volume of through traffic. ?Our Healthy Streets ? Dulwich? engagement project has identified a number of interventions with broad local support. We have adapted some of these to develop interventions that can be installed quickly and trialled to provide safer routes through the area for socially distanced, active travel. These are experimental measures ? we will be required to conduct full public consultation before these are made permanent, and within eighteen months from installation. The measures are flexible as the experimental nature of the trial allows us to make amendments and changes within the first six months. An option will of course be to return the highway arrangements to the original state if the trial is not deemed to be successful. We will be monitoring the impact of these changes throughout that period, using counts of motor vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists. In addition, we are inviting residents to let us know about the impact on the streets they use ? whether positive or negative ? on the feedback map at https//:eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is. You are also able to sign up there for regular updates on this project. The site will be live once the measures have been installed. Cllr. Richard Livingstone Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency [email protected] Date: 19 June 2020 Page 1 of 2 These are unprecedented times ? in collaboration with central government and Transport for London we are taking these urgent steps to ensure the health and safety of our residents. We remain committed to working with you to ensure that all the measures we take work for local people and contribute to enhanced quality of life both at this difficult time and in the future. Yours faithfully, Cllr. Richard Livingstone Cabinet Member for Environment, Transport and the Climate Emergency Page 2 of 2

Can we deal with Melbourne Grove next, which looks set to be a drop off point for Charter down the line?

So we can take it that children, of a non-voting age have participated and been counted within the consultation process? Do you know more about this Wulfhound?