Jump to content

LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

bobbsy

By bobbsy
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted

Yes good to see that more roads have now been added to the "Register your Interest" site but why so few were added initially is a bit odd - another council oversight per chance.....;-)


I have to admit that I am not totally convinced those roads being added mean that they are part of the review area.


See the attached from legal from the flyer being distributed to some residents in Dulwich. Looks at the shading of, what we presume is, the review area. Another page of the flyer says that all households within the LTN area, and those households either side of the boundary roads...will receive a letter - that looks like the shading area. Does this mean that roads like Underhill will not receive the letter? Surely everyone in SE22 should be both covered on the pull-down menus and receive the letter.


Does anyone have any clarity on this?

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted

I am not sure, that's what I am trying to ascertain.


Has anyone outside of the indicated area on the map legal shared received the council flyer on the review? I only know of people receiving it who live within the blue shaded area - it seems that everyone in the blue shaded area has received one. The flyer is definitely suggesting that only those within the LTN area and households on either side of the boundary roads (which one presumes is the shading to the east of Lordship Lane) will receive the flyer/letter.

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted

I am not sure - I am hoping all will become clear because at the moment it looks like the council isn't doing their best job and getting this review right.


It doesn't look good:


1) Didn't add the main displacement route (Underhill) to the pull-down menu and had to be chased to do so

2) Has now added a number of roads (Underhill, Melford, Upland etc) when residents complained that they were missing yet there are still roads not included in the pulldown menus that could be impacted by displacement traffic

3) Seems to have mailed the flyer to those only living within the review area (please correct me if I am wrong if anyone has had these delivered beyond the blue shaded area)

4) Has sent the flyer that includes a map that suggests the review area is limited to the blue shaded area on the map - this was the same map Cllr Rose shared on the Dulwich Hill LTN review call and she referred to it, quite clearly, as the LTN review area



I do wonder if this might go some way to explain the delay to the review - remember this review was slated to start (by Cllr Williams) in February. I suspect the council started socialising their (limited) review area and people pushed back (either within the council or outside it) that it was basically gerrymandering to get the result they wanted and they had to expand it but by that point they had already printed the flyers and they are now playing catch-up.


Has anyone heard directly from the council why roads like Underhill were missing on the initial pull-down menus? It looks like, from posts earlier in the thread, that the council were alerted to these omissions by residents.


A lot of this is all so familiar to those of us who lived through the CPZ "consultation". Remember how badly the results (68% of residents against the CPZ) went against the council agenda and how they had to squirm and manipulate the presentation of the results to get the CPZ in.


One wonders how wedded the council are to an area-wide LTN review...


The problem for the council is many constituents are putting them under the microscope and challenging their every move to make sure the review is fair and equitable to everyone impacted by the results. And the council seem to be making a pig's ear of doing that from the outset.

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted

Alice, is it their tweet that takes you to this: https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/who-closed-dulwich-village-junction?s=09


I had not seen this but it is fascinating and I think goes some way to demonstrate why the council might be less than keen to engage with the wider community on the LTN review.


The fact OneDulwich had to use an FOI to get this data speaks volumes - what are the council trying to hide one wonders?

legalalien

legalalien

Posted
Posted

Plus I think I saw (not sure where - possibly twitter), that the hard copy leaflets went to residents on Melbourne Grove but not the businesses (who were missed out last time) - similar for closures on Rye Lane.


The One Dulwich FoI info is also on their website. Not sure what the base data looked like / how they extracted the positive info, but looks interesting...


https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/who-closed-dulwich-village-junction

FairTgirl

FairTgirl

Posted
Posted

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Plus I think I saw (not sure where - possibly

> twitter), that the hard copy leaflets went to

> residents on Melbourne Grove but not the

> businesses (who were missed out last time) -

> similar for closures on Rye Lane.

>

> The One Dulwich FoI info is also on their website.

> Not sure what the base data looked like / how

> they extracted the positive info, but looks

> interesting...

>

> https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/who-closed-dulwich-

> village-junction


This is correct, not a single business in the review area was sent the newsletter about the review, but flats above businesses and direct neighbours were.

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted
It does seem that leaflets are being distributed to areas beyond the blue shading as someone PM'd me to say they had received one and they live outside the central LTN area - so hopefully this means everyone is getting one (which is important to ensure everyone is aware of the opportunity to have their say).
rjsmall

rjsmall

Posted
Posted

Jakido Wrote:

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

> does anyone know if OneDulwich is campaigning to

> have the Dulwich toll booth removed?


Slight difference in that College Road is a private road and therefore not maintained by council funds. https://www.thedulwichestate.org.uk/property-on-the-estate/tollgate-and-roads/private-roads

Rockets

Rockets

Posted
Posted

Sue - that's good news.


I think it is vitally important for everyone to have their say (for or against) and I would encourage everyone to get their neighbours to have their say.


The OneDulwich FOI demonstrates that previous closures (Calton Ave/DV) have been implemented on the basis of supportive responses from a tiny proportion of the local population (if the OneDulwich map is correct the council used feedback from less than 100 people to validate their decision - many of whom lived way beyond the impacted area).

northernmonkey

northernmonkey

Posted
Posted

Until they release the underlying data you'll have to excuse me if i don't take their 'analysis' at face value.


The 'report' they produced on the commonplace certainly stretched the limits of some of the words used, so would like to see the data they're basing this analysis on.


Can't see that they've shared the underlying data though?

Concerned2021

Concerned2021

Posted
Posted

I found the minutes for the Lewisham Healthy Streets schemes. Unbelievable that a scheme that has such a massive impact on our lives and infrastructure was decided by a few cyclists and council officials. The Feb minutes indicate that the consultation in Lewisham will only include those inside the LTN. Basically it?s a stitch up.


https://lewishamcyclists.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Meeting-Record-20210217.pdf

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...