LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Bicknell]

@ malumbu yes some against LTNS might be against bikes. But not the groups supporting this campaign Thats all its saying.

[alice]

which groups are supporting this campaign?

[Bicknell]

@alice its on the website! www.dulwichalliance.org

[Abe_froeman]

I have signed that petition because I agree with all of it.

However, it's pretty laughable that a representative of the Dulwich village business and shops is party to the alliance given how much publicity and support they gave to the "Dulwich Square" nonsense last summer.

I guess chickens are coming home to roost.

[holymoly]

very helpful - health practices, traders, residents' associations, sports associations. not just the random few objecting

[mockingbird]

hoorah. I am amazed and encouraged to see that local groups are talking to each other. And that there is a common voice to address these LTNs. well done. Signed

[slarti b]

mockingbird Wrote:

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

> hoorah. I am amazed and encouraged to see that local groups are talking to each other. And that

> there is a common voice to address these LTNs. well done. Signed

Thanks. We have been trying for almost a year now to engage with our councillors. Up to now they have only wanted to engage with those who support their own, most extreme, agenda, rather than listening to their own constituents.

There are many local groups who have been excluded who are now coalescing under the Dulwich Alliance umbrella to try and reach a pragmatic, reasonable compromise.

Please spread the word.

[Rockets]

Glad to see there is another group galvanising voices against the closures. The council hopes that the longer the closures are in so people lose interest in fighting them, it's part of their "small vocal minority" narrative. I think they are finding it is anything but a small vocal minority and that people are in it for the long-haul and won't go away or give up.

It does not surprise me one bit that they have not been engaging...it's a bit like the plethora of local pro-closure lobby twitter feeds who now block comments from their posts! Dialogue will not be tolerated! ;-)

[Spartacus]

Whilst not quite ED the open our roads group in Crystal Palace are seeing how well a council engages

Croydon did a consultation on the LTN in Crystal palace and over 60% of those who responded said it should be removed

Councillors voted 3 against 2 to respect these wishes but now it's future is down to the sustainable cabinet member to decide if it's removed, amended or replaced with ANPR cameras that will have a side effect of raising revenue...

https://twitter.com/EliskaFinlay/status/1349136663700770817?s=19

It will be interesting to watch and if Croydon don't respect the results of a consultation then it may have ramifications for any consultations run by Southwark.

[ab29]

Same here - I can't log in to sign the petition. Can log in in general but then I cannot find the petition - tried browsing using the full name, bits of the name etc but can't find it.

Perhaps someone knows how to look for the petition once logged in.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> Can?t sign in to sign the petition, although I can

> sign into mySouthwark... so if that is happening

> to me there may be many who want to sign...who

> can?t.

[legalalien]

Try this:

Go to https://www.southwark.gov.uk/

Click on the "Services" icon at the top right to bring up the page showing the icons for the full list of services

Click on the Engagement and Consultations icon, on the right hand side (you need to scroll down a bit, it shows three people with a bunch of question marks above their heads), then when you get the pop up box, click on "All Services in Engagement and Consultations".

Then click on "Have Your Say".

Then, when the new screen comes up, click on "Petition Scheme". Scroll down the page and near the bottom there's an embedded link saying you can create or sign an epetition. Click on the link. It should bring up a page with a list of petitions (this page http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgepetitionlistdisplay.aspx?bcr=1).

Hopefully that works! The website is quite functional if you spend some time digging around in it, clicking on random things to see what comes up, but not particularly intuitive (for me, anyway)...

[Metallic]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> I have signed that petition because I agree with

> all of it.

>

> However, it's pretty laughable that a

> representative of the Dulwich village business and

> shops is party to the alliance given how much

> publicity and support they gave to the "Dulwich

> Square" nonsense last summer.

>

> I guess chickens are coming home to roost.

I think you will find only one or two in favour and stood to gain the most. You will not find anyone else happy with this ridiculous "square".

[ab29]

Thank you :) I can get to the page with the petition link - at this point I'm asked to log in again - even though I started as logged in user - and that's it: can't log in. I change my password but computer says no.

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Try this:

>

> Go to https://www.southwark.gov.uk/

>

> Click on the "Services" icon at the top right to

> bring up the page showing the icons for the full

> list of services

>

> Click on the Engagement and Consultations icon, on

> the right hand side (you need to scroll down a

> bit, it shows three people with a bunch of

> question marks above their heads), then when you

> get the pop up box, click on "All Services in

> Engagement and Consultations".

>

> Then click on "Have Your Say".

>

> Then, when the new screen comes up, click on

> "Petition Scheme". Scroll down the page and near

> the bottom there's an embedded link saying you can

> create or sign an epetition. Click on the link.

> It should bring up a page with a list of petitions

> (this page

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgepetitionlistd

> isplay.aspx?bcr=1).

>

> Hopefully that works! The website is quite

> functional if you spend some time digging around

> in it, clicking on random things to see what comes

> up, but not particularly intuitive (for me,

> anyway)...

[mockingbird]

ab29. This might help.

The Southwark site seems to have two levels to log in. One is My Southwark and it is possible that you changed the password for that. When you are on the petition web pages, you also need to register and this is different to My Southwark. So look for that first and create a sign in for it or ask for a password reset from that link (not My Southwark).

All very badly put together.

Another potential problem that I can see is that as you move from this page:

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consultations/have-your-say/petition-scheme

by clicking on the 'create or sign a petition' link, the pages move from being secure with the padlock sign, to insecure with the open padlock sign. A pc may block this so perhaps try from another device, phone perhaps, if so.

[rollflick]

Had a look at Dulwich Alliance website, which says

"controversial plans to close Dulwich Village junction and Melbourne Grove have been around for years...we need to reduce traffic in ways that take all needs into account. We can only do this through creative thinking and by taking collective responsibility toward the community as a whole"

Yes people have been concerned about traffic here for years, the council ran multiple consultations asking for ideas, surely plenty of time for creative thinking to have come up with alternatives that won't annoy these people?

Except those alternatives don't exist. The evidence-based interventions proven to reduce traffic all boil down to charging for or reallocating space from private motor vehicles, whether driving and parking, to make sustainable alternatives relatively more attractive compared to driving. All things that the usual suspects will, indeed have jumped up and down about: CPZs, bus lanes, segregated cycle routes, filters. It's telling this latest anti website is unable to propose anything constructive, simply calling for more time for wishful thinking to work its wonders.

This is a demographic that's gorged on cakeism.

See p138 "Focus on mode shift and traffic reduction: inner London"

http://content.tfl.gov.uk/lip3-guidance-for-borough-officers-preparing-lip3-2018.pdf

Yes there are also some measures about freight too but would have limited impact in this area, worth doing at borough level though.

[Rockets]

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).

[ab29]

You are right - it is a separate account so had to register separately to sign the petition!

All done now. Thank you :)

mockingbird Wrote:

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

> ab29. This might help.

> The Southwark site seems to have two levels to log

> in. One is My Southwark and it is possible that

> you changed the password for that. When you are

> on the petition web pages, you also need to

> register and this is different to My Southwark.

> So look for that first and create a sign in for it

> or ask for a password reset from that link (not My

> Southwark).

> All very badly put together.

>

> Another potential problem that I can see is that

> as you move from this page:

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consul

> tations/have-your-say/petition-scheme

> by clicking on the 'create or sign a petition'

> link, the pages move from being secure with the

> padlock sign, to insecure with the open padlock

> sign. A pc may block this so perhaps try from

> another device, phone perhaps, if so.

[Abe_froeman]

The council spent about ?25,000 commissioning an independent third party report into the benefit and impact of closing Melbounre Grove at EDG, as well as other alternatives, and that report noted that it was a very bad idea to proceed with a closure.

But some people now know better of course.

[mockingbird]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> The council spent about ?25,000 commissioning an

> independent third party report into the benefit

> and impact of closing Melbounre Grove at EDG, as

> well as other alternatives, and that report noted

> that it was a very bad idea to proceed with a

> closure.

>

> But some people now know better of course.

Is there a copy of this report?

[heartblock]

Could Southwark Council be accused of structural discrimination... I think so.

[Abe_froeman]

It was somewhere in here.

I think the report cost only ?10,000 actually...

https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1536718

[Spartacus]

Hmmmm

Read all the twitter thread and see if it sounds familiar in terms of how a handful of pro LTN supporters seem to work.

Not sure how true it is but some of the tactics seem to have been used in the past, especially the blocking on social media.

[JohnL]

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> Not sure how true it is but some of the tactics

> seem to have been used in the past, especially the

> blocking on social media.

Everyone blocks on twitter - mainly bots/multiple accounts as there are loads. Why do people still accept the 8 figures as a username suffix if they only have a single account (twitter does it automatically these days on creating accounts but if you love your account you'll remove it and add something less bot like).

[snowy]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> Could Southwark Council be accused of structural

> discrimination... I think so.

> https://twitter.com/rosamund_elsfdn/status/1350906

> 689969598471?s=21

Hmm wasn?t he suspended from the Labour Party for saying that ?there no basis for the Jewish race??

His paper is on Liveable Streets - which are slightly separate from the LTN implementation - liveable streets was a Tower Hamlets / TFL initiative.

[Spartacus]

JohnL Wrote:

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

> Spartacus Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Not sure how true it is but some of the tactics

> > seem to have been used in the past, especially

> the

> > blocking on social media.

>

> Everyone blocks on twitter - mainly bots/multiple

> accounts as there are loads. Why do people still

> accept the 8 figures as a username suffix if they

> only have a single account (twitter does it

> automatically these days on creating accounts but

> if you love your account you'll remove it and add

> something less bot like).

You are right johnl but if you read the tweets of people who object to Southwarks car polices, you will see that time after time they get insulted and then blocked by the pro account.

This seems a tactic often used against businesses in ED who raise objections and they often get blocked after being told how people will never shop with them again.

😱

I did have a strange thought this morning are the pro cycling lobby the social media equivalent of the old pyramid selling scheme, where the more new cyclists they sign up, the better their standing ? 😂