LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[legalalien]

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?

[Nigello]

I support better facilities for cyclists (at the same time as castigating those who don't wear lights or who go through red lights, cycle on footpaths, etc.) but lament the lack of support for all of us - ie. pedestrians/wheelchair users. We all walk or wheel on footpaths whether or not we are cyclists or drivers or riders or bikes, yet we have shoddy pavements, dropped kerbs that pond when there is rain, a council that does not clamp down on householders who keep bins outside their properties and don't cut back branches. More people would be happy to walk if they felt it was that bit less of a hassle, perhaps.

So, if you have a bin on the footpath or a bush that pokes out into the road, please do your bit. The council may, if asked, come along and do it for you if you don;t, especially as it tries to convince us to do more walking and less driving.

[malumbu]

Some good posts. I've tried to post stuff on the bigger picture, no doubt adding to confusion at times, but I feel that motorists have been prioritised for the last 50 or 60 years. Even the active travel agenda focuses on cycling facilities and generally ignores the need to improve the 'walking' experience. Most of us are pedestrians too. Reminds me of being in the US when people were shocked when I walked, but at times there are no footpaths....

The hope is in the near future we will not need so many private cars, which generally stay parked on the road, freeing up more space for pedestrians.

[Metallic]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> As a pedestrian I spend half my time having to

> walk in the road. There is so little room for

> those on foot or on bike. You look up and down

> most streets and can see how much space is given

> over to car storage and car lanes. Cars are

> literally everywhere. I can?t understand who

> thinks that too much space is being allocated to

> cycling and walking and not enough to motor

> vehicles.

Your post doesn't make any sense! Only pedestrians should be on the pavement and if a little deference was given to each other, as happened in the first lockdown, there wouldn't be a problem for you.

[Metallic]

Spent a while watching the youtube Southwark link to the meeting yesterday.

Talk about ticking boxes from the council. It all means very little because the consultation promised (aka steamroller) will just ignore what people think anyway - unless they agree with the councillors.

That's an hour I won't get back.

[snowy]

That comment reads like the pavements are ok for you and therefore fine for everyone else.

Disabled People?s organisations and charities like Age Concern have long complained about the poor state of pavements, tripping hazards, cars illegally parked on them etc.

Pavements can also be mixed use eg pedestrians, cyclists in more mixed use streets.

[Bic Basher]

snowy Wrote:

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

>

> Pavements can also be mixed use eg pedestrians,

> cyclists in more mixed use streets.

Dulwich Common for example which is clearly signed.

[northernmonkey]

I think that in terms of RAs their role should really be as an information conduit - another way for making sure that people can get involved if they want to - but it is the individuals on a street who should be responding, not the RA on their behalf. Its hard to get to a consensus opinion and there are certainly examples locally where an opinion has been expressed where no effort has been made at all to understand what residents think.

As has been identified, there is a lot of info out there but getting at it can be difficult - the RAs should be a means of pushing relevant information that they are given out to members - the Dulwich Society can play a role in this too but neither should be expressing opinions on behalf of other people.

On the other point - I'm not a commonplace fan either, its unsuited for this type of consultation, doesn't move anything forward if its not actively managed alongside a wider engagement process. However, in terms of 'can't blame people for trying to do something with it', that's where I don't agree - its wasn't an 'attempt' it was a blatant effort to willfully misinterpret to suit an agenda and get that mis-intrepreted report circulated as widely as possible!

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?

[Penguin68]

The vaccination roll out is looking great at the moment, and the possibilities are that things will be massively improving shortly and perhaps as early as Easter for a significant easing of the lock down. This will lead (a) to an increase in road traffic and road usage as people start to travel again and (b) a reduction in the needs to create a 'safe (i.e. with a capacity for huge distancing) environment for pedestrians. So many of the pedestrian inspired restrictions now placed on roads will not be needed for pedestrians to be able to use pavements safely - and the impact of diverted traffic onto a few roads will become more marked as air quality plummets for those living, working and walking on those roads.

I wonder how quickly, when things are back to normal (or as close as they will ever be) will the council move to restore roads and parts of roads now sealed off for the benefit of pedestrians who will no longer need, or use, such benefits?

[DulwichCentral]

So - the inevitable increase in road traffic = a good reason to take away safe space for walking and cycling?

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> The vaccination roll out is looking great at the

> moment, and the possibilities are that things will

> be massively improving shortly and perhaps as

> early as Easter for a significant easing of the

> lock down. This will lead (a) to an increase in

> road traffic and road usage as people start to

> travel again and (b) a reduction in the needs to

> create a 'safe (i.e. with a capacity for huge

> distancing) environment for pedestrians. So many

> of the pedestrian inspired restrictions now placed

> on roads will not be needed for pedestrians to be

> able to use pavements safely - and the impact of

> diverted traffic onto a few roads will become more

> marked as air quality plummets for those living,

> working and walking on those roads.

>

> I wonder how quickly, when things are back to

> normal (or as close as they will ever be) will the

> council move to restore roads and parts of roads

> now sealed off for the benefit of pedestrians who

> will no longer need, or use, such benefits?

[malumbu]

Covid-19 - the opportunity to reset the way we travel/personal mobility, not return to the past.

[Bicknell]

Better public transport is wht we need to reset personal mobility in dulwich @malumbu

[Spartacus]

And with the ULEZ fast approaching and the drive to electric cars, there's change a plenty coming.

[malumbu]

Don't use that old excuse Bickell. Try moving to most other parts of the country, then you will realise how good and how cheap it is here.

[Spartacus]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Don't use that old excuse Bickell. Try moving to

> most other parts of the country, then you will

> realise how good and how cheap it is here.

That's the issue Malumbu, we don't live in the country, we live in a metropolitan area where commuting or travelling is part of our lives

Unless there are viable , frequent and reliable public transport alternatives to get around then people will use cars as cycling and walking doesn't offer a sensible alternative to journeys over a few miles or with heavy packages. Equally think about the elderly, disabled or those with other mobility based issues

Changes need to work with the population of an area, not against it otherwise they will experience heavy resistance.

The council encouraged us to respond on a website yet when the majority state they are against the schemes, questions are raised over who exactly responded.

Care to bet that if it showed support, there would be no questions and councillors crowing about the success of the schemes.

The problem here is a lack of consultation and monitoring prior to implementation and deaf ears in the council after.

[Rockets]

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

[malumbu]

Back to public transport - it is a bottomless pit, you can increase investment but some will never be happy and the money has to come from somewhere. TfL is effectively broke, and suffers from many years of underinvestment, a medieval street plan in much of London, rail lines that are often not connected and the lack of a New York Grand Central hub.

Yet compared to most metropolitan areas, having lived in other UK cities, we are superior. And elsewhere buses are seen as 'poor mans' transport, with patronage reducing in most other cities - hopefully integration and contactless travel will reverse this, but there is an issue over mass acceptance and the "I'd rather be stuck in a metal box on my own that share transport with others".

I struggle with understanding the triggers that will get people out of their cars. I used to drive into central London on the odd occasion. Then parking charges, congestion charge and finally ULEZ put an end to that. I didn't feel the need to get up in arms. I used to have some brilliant rat runs/back streets, most of them closed off donkeys years ago. Again this just persuaded me to drive less. I oon't look back fondly on the times I'd drive more.

Not sure what you need for some on this thread to switch.

[northernmonkey]

Petitions can be presented to cabinet assembly and it is the presenter of the petition who gets to speak. Follow up questions were addressed to Bridget - you can't just decide to speak over people because you feel you haven't been given a chance to present your views! The petition was given and follow up questions were asked. Bridget did get a chance to speak about the petition calculations - perhaps she shouldn't have been the one to present the petition if Clive didn't think she did a good enough job? Anyway - he was told to write in with details so its not actually like he wasn't heard - just more that interrupting in that way wasn't appropriate.

Rockets Wrote:

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

> 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

[first mate]

Rockets said- "Why was Clive Rates shut down so quickly by Cllr Williams?"

Yes, I'd queried this too. I got the impression that a question had been put in later and in a different way from what S'wark expected? But yes, it definitely looked like he was shut down in a very abrupt way.

Catherine Rose certainly has a way of using many words to say very little. The sudden downgrading of the Commonplace tool was rather telling, I felt.

[legalalien]

My best guess on the "abrupt shut down" is that cabinet has lots of other things to get through and the non-local councillors are getting a bit bored with hearing about the Dulwich LTN.

[first mate]

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.

[heartblock]

I hate the idea of going back to normal. East Dulwich Grove will become a traffic bound mess again. I cannot think of any reason why my richer neighbours think it is fair that residents on EDG have to have extra traffic on their road so that LTN residents can have a nice quiet road. It like taking my pooh and chucking it in your toilet.

[Peckham Park]

Sad, but true!

[Rockets]

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]

I think there was some reference to exchanges that were going on in parallel on the ?chat? function on the zoom call. We don?t know what these were? Interesting academic question about the appropriateness and nature of parallel chats in what are supposed to be public meetings - stuff above and beyond people putting their hands up to speak. One for a rainy day. Should probably be a standard protocol if online meetings become the new norm for local government.