legalalien

Why do all these reports / summaries of reports always deal in percentages rather than raw numbers? It makes it so hard to know what is going on. If there were two car journeys in the LTN and 100 on the boundary roads then -1 journey in the LTN would be a 50% reduction and + 1 journey on the boundary roads would be a 1% increase, so comparing 50% and 1% is meaningless. (I made up these percentages to illustrate, they are not taken from the actual article). Am I missing something?

Interesting to see the conservatives in the London Assembly raising issues in relation to the decision making process around the proposed ULEZ expansion - the response being that a consultation is not a referendum - where have I heard that before? (That is of course a statement of fact, but doesn’t excuse manipulating the results of the consultation, if that’s what happened...) https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ulez-expansion-consultation-sadiq-khan-london-assembly-labour-conservatives-b1053496.html?amp Conservative allegations here: https://www.glaconservatives.co.uk/post/sadiq-khan-made-false-and-dishonest-statements-to-the-london-assembly-and-manipulated-ulez-results Unrelated I believe there was something in the Telegraph about Dulwich residents’ groups bringing some sort of action to oppose the Turney Road closure. I don’t have a Telegraph subscription, does anyone know anything about that?

I think the townley / edg temporary lights and resultant tailbacks are entirely separate to south circular and LL issues (I say this as we drove back from Bromley late afternoon and had a clear run until we hit the DV/ EDG queue, having chosen to avoid traffic in Townley. Seems like a minor hole in the road at the corner of EDG and Greendale is the reason for the lights, the cordoning off and temp lights seem like overkill and are causing unintended consequences, I saw a couple of motorbikes and bicycles choosing to zoom up the pavement on EDG to avoid the queue, plus one cyclist deciding to take his life into his hands and overtake the queue to the right (heading towards LL, on the wrong side of the road heading into traffic heading towards HH, no lights. Crazy,)

What everyone else says - tube is a bit of a non starter in this part of London but it's perfectly possible to have a manageable commute to the City (London Bridge, walk and or bus to Bank, Moorgate, Liverpool St etc) or to Canary Wharf (via Jubilee line from LB) from here. Whether or not budget for housing is an issue is a different question which I'm sure we can all chime in on if you give further info...

I'm not sure that saying "sorry, we've decided this is now a placemaking project so we're going to ignore the outstanding equality issues from the earlier phase" is a very convincing argument, if that's what's going on. I don't think "access" in this context was intended to mean access to the (remaining) local shops so much as access to the local area more generally (doctor, route to hospital, visiting friends etc.)? Anyway - can't remember if I've posted it already, but here's a link to the current consultation on Southwark's Sustainable Transport Strategy which I believe is the successor to the "Movement Plan", the source of all the policy justifications in the specific decisions that the council makes. It closes 6 Feb so if you have thoughts, by all means send them in: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/sustainable-transport-strategy-draft-consultation/. Worth reading the EqIA assessment attached to the draft. The point about expanding vehicle-free space notes that "Expansions of vehicle-free space will not affect the accessibility of locations by car. Where people still do need to use a car to reach their destination, they will still be able to do so." Which brings us back to the original argument about whether giving the option to drive the long way around, has the substantive effect of enabling blue badge holders to use a car to reach their destination, or not....

To be fair, although the article refers to mothers and kids, the actual quote from the council letter refers to children but not mothers or parents specifically, so it may be a clumsy summary by Southwark News — hard to tell. (The letter does refer to “pushchairs” as users in addition to children which made me smile). Logically, there are either lots and lots of blue badge holders (enough to pose a major risk to other users- if there are that many then their needs should be taken into account more) or very few - in which case they’d hardly pose a major threat, particularly if they were careful - and I’d hazard a guess they’d be more careful than some of the cyclists currently whizzing through. Although this misses the bigger issue, surely the point about having protected characteristics is to protect minority interests- so it shouldn’t just be a numbers game? What about allowing blue badge holders through except during the term time school run rush hours?

I’d say from this doct that it’s out of the highways budget. I found it when trying to find out where my nearest salt bin might be - it’s everything you need to know about Southwark’s gritting programme! https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/148788/Winter-Service-Policy-and-Plan-2022-23.pdf

Here’s a new list of minor traffic schemes (double yellow lines, pavement adjustments etc) https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50030016 Some of them are local. Notably an extension to the pavement build out outside Goodrich School.

Here’s an update on the council’s proposed changes to Bellenden Road as part of the Southwark Spine. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50030873 Looking at the objections, there seem to be problems from various perspectives (I) shops concerned about reduced parking and the effect on business and current customers concerned about access - the council report seems slightly more accommodating to businesses than the Dulwich closure one did, at least referring to the Local Economy team for monitoring rather than the usual blanket assertion that active travel will potentially increase footfall) (ii) those in favour of an LTN in the area saying that this doesn’t go far enough, and than increased traffic calming is solving the wrong problem - the issue is volume of traffic not speed of traffic and LTNs are the only way to achieve that (iii) potential for increased problems for cyclists and pedestrians as a result of the specifics (iv) council has decreased the time restrictions on loading in response to business concerns but others wanted them increased to address cyclist concerns, and also extended to weekends. Not sure what to think as I only walk there occasionally during the daytime on weekdays when not much traffic. But thought others might be interested.

I haven’t read any of the underlying council documentation but according to the judgment the smaller MUGA (as opposed to the 3G pitch) is going to be available free of charge and on a non-bookable basis, with the intention that it be available to the community on a similar “informal” basis as the astro has since the council unlocked the gates to it in 2018. There’s also a suggestion that the club has to use reasonable endeavours to secure a long lease of the St Olaves grounds for additional community use ( reasonable endeavours not the strongest of obligations of course). The judge says when considering the public sector equality duty point: “ In my judgment, unlike in Williams, the Council did not overlook a main impact of the proposal. The real point was that local people including many BAME people, use the Astroturf for informal sport and recreation and for them it is important that it is free and does not require booking. The Council expressly considered those matters and its judgement (in agreement with the GLA) was that the kickabout space together with the new and replacement facilities regulated by the Community Use Agreement would appropriately mitigate the impact.”

yes, that's my understanding (worth noting that the decision on repurposing MOL wasn't the subject of the legal decision - there were other grounds as set out further up the thread). There's a helpful summary of proposed community and school use in the judgment which I'll paste here as people might be interested: "Schedule 12, paragraph 1.1.2 of the s.106 agreement requires the football club to submit a draft Community Use Scheme which has been prepared in consultation with the Community Use Review Committee for approval by the Council before implementing the Football Site. Clause 1.1 of the s.106 agreement provides that the Community Use Review Committee shall include representatives from Sport England, London County Football Association, the Council, Football Foundation, and any other organisation required by the Council. Clause 1.1 also provides that the Community Use Scheme is required to set out details of (i) affordable rates to be charged to the local Community for use of the Leisure Facilities which shall not exceed those rates charged in similar facilities owned by the Council; (ii) mechanisms to minimise Pitch hire costs for the Community ("Pitch" being defined in Clause 1.1 to mean the multi-use 3G all-weather pitch); (iii) number of hours per week during which the Pitch will be available for use by the Community with the number being no less than 36 hours per week in Season and 38 hours per week in Close Season; (iv) the availability between the hours of 8 am and 6 pm for 25 hours per week during term time in Season and 36 hours per week during term time in Close Season of the Pitch, classrooms and changing rooms for use free of charge by state funded schools located within the Borough; (v) support and assistance to be provided to the Community Use Review Committee to enable them to carry out an annual review of the Community use of the Pitch and Leisure Facilities including details of usage, bookings, maintenance and rates; (vi) range of activities to be offered at the New Stadium including lessons and courses and block bookings for the Community; and (vii) the measures to be taken to ensure the New Stadium programme of Community use shall be subject to continual development, and how the general intention will be to manage a balanced programme encouraging use by the Community. The "Community" defined as follows: "Community means but is not limited to schools, registered charities, voluntary organisations, non-profit organisations, residents associations, clubs, groups or individuals based in the London Borough of Southwark and "Community Users" shall be construed accordingly". "

Judgment here https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2022/3211.html Haven’t read it yet but from a very quick scan looks as though the Council’s decision (or more accurately decision making process) has been upheld - the claim failed.

Looks as though judgment has been sent to the parties and is publicly available From 10:30 today: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/royal-courts-of-justice-cause-list/royal-courts-of-justice-daily-cause-list#administrative-court-daily-cause-list

I'm in SE21 with different sorting office and haven't seen any post in the last fortnight either. Had dinner with a relative who is temping at Royal Mail in another South London borough and he says the depot is completely overwhelmed, permanent staff are on a bit of a go slow, and unless there is a parcel or a tracked package involved, items are likely at the bottom of a large pile of stuff. Virtual Christmas cards this year! On a related note, I diligently filled in the form and posted off my old-style stamps to the designated Freepost address weeks and weeks ago, and no sign of any new style replacements. I did take a photo of the form and stamps before sending, but I'm not optimistic about receiving the replacements, it has to be said.

I think the new occupants of my tree are indeed redwings. Here’s a pic. Def change in visitors this year, usually pigeons and parakeets have eaten all the fruit before the leaves fall off the tree, this year lots of small birds (tits, sparrows etc) Bird picture

Flicking through some recent Council documents (the Health and Social Care Scrutiny Commission look like they are going to gather evidence about availability of medical appointments) and came across a council- funded organisation I hadn’t heard of before called Healthwatch Southwark https://www.healthwatchsouthwark.org It’s a kind of local health watchdog tasked with providing advice about accessing services and also on how to complain about services- and has some power to visit publicly funded places to see what is going on. If there are particular concerns about any local NHS practices it might be worth contacting Healthwatch and getting them on the case? There’s a contact form on the website and you can request a call back.

I think www.justairports.com have baby seat options - they used to anyway.

I now seem to have attracted a whole bunch of things that look like thrushes. Are they likely to be fieldfare? I googled and that seems to be the closest looking thing, although the video said they were more October time visitors to towns. But then again the wood pigeons were late?

For anyone who wants to watch the relevant bit: From around 28 mins. As someone who is relatively feminist it does irk me when people throw around the word "mansplaining" when people are just expressing an opposing view. My take, as always, is that local government in this country is far too party political. I got the impression that the council leader really does believe that this is some sort of Tory party initiative, and I think perhaps he has that the wrong way around - my impression is that Clive and the other guy (whose name I have temporarily forgotten) stood for the Tories because they wanted to argue about the junction, rather than are arguing about the junction in order to make Labour look bad. Of course I can't be sure about that. Tristan? Tristram?

Quick reminder that the petition regarding emergency service and blue badge access at Court Lane/ Calton is on the agenda for today’s 11 am Cabinet meeting. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s110558/Report%20Petition%20Calton%20Avenue%20and%20Court%20Lane%20Access.pdf I believe it will be live-streamed on you tube with a link to watch later. As a sometime critic of some of the ways the council seems to go about things I was very pleased to see another agenda item regarding a senior council reorganisation which seems to focus on better governance and finding some efficiencies in corporate areas. Presumably this has been instigated by the recently appointed CEO. I like the sound of it. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s110727/Appendix%20A%20Senior%20Management%20Update.pdf

Spotted this on the council website and thought it would be of interest to users of Dulwich Leisure Centre. The project to bring the services back in house from Everyone Active is continuing with an expected transfer date of June 2023. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s110542/Report%20Progress%20with%20Insourcing%20of%20Leisure%20Services.pdf Not surprisingly in the current economic climate / given the cost of energy, it looks like the services will cost Southwark more to run than originally budgeted. Oh, and apparently there’s a nationwide shortage of swimming pool chemicals which has forced pool closures in other places - so that’s one to keep an eye on.

Maybe try Girls United who are local and run some mixed age sessions at Alleyns, they say it’s for all levels of experience, but if it’s not the place for a 14 year old beginner I’m sure they’d tell you and maybe point you in the right direction! I’m involved in a different sport and have come across the Girls United guys at one of our shared grounds, they seem like a nice bunch. Good luck! https://www.girlsunitedfa.org/london-club#londonclub-sessions

Usually we get 5-6 giant wood pigeons who arrive in September and scoff all the crab apples from our tree. None this year, which made me sad and wonder about bird flu (although a bonus for smaller birds who have been feeding there). This morning a very skinny looking wood pigeon arrived on its own, and must have eaten its own body weight in crab apples. And now there are three of them! They’re not the most exciting birds but I am pleased to have them back.

Perhaps he thought you were part of a car burglary ring and were doing some advance reconnaissance? If I had a car I might think it was odd that someone was taking a close up picture of it.

It does look like transport professionals trying to resolve a conflict.