LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[legalalien]

I think ex- means that there would be more disabled people everywhere. I read that report and did find it quite interesting.

In terms of restricting this to residents within the LTN, I guess they are trying to find a way of avoiding abuse. If you opened it up to all blue badge holders, there would be nothing to stop Kate, a completely able bodied resident of the LTN, from asking her blue-badge-holding mum Gladys, living in Wales, to register Kate's car. Blue badge holders around the country could set up a nice little business of registering people's cars for different LTNs around London.

Sounds a bit far-fetched, but if I was a delivery driver or someone providing services from a van in London, I'd be lining up to get someone to register me.

So the question is how they should strike a happy medium... (my easy solution is to take the LTN out, but of course not everyone agrees).

[heartblock]

It is simplistic, but as with many discussions and policies inference is taken from the data available. This simplistic view is very much what LTN policy is built on, even on data that needs to be re-adjusted or has small samples and very wide confidence levels.

[legalalien]

Think this is the map you mean Alice?

[alice]

exd you quoted hb who wrote 'very few BB in village LTNs'

You followed that by writing, 'depends how you define disability...'

so my response was logical but I sorry if you did not intend to mean that.

ps. la Yes thats the map.

[Peckham Park]

Some tactical voting in the May elections is in order. The only party that takes residents views about LTNs seriously is the Conservatives. Based on 2018 election results, Dulwich Village is the area where it?s possible. A few 100 votes between Labour and Tory parties. Though Dulwich Hill appears to be Labour stronghold through and through. The only Tory councillor in Lambeth sums up the views of many of us on this forum who don?t believe LTNs are the answer https://www.conservativehome.com/localgovernment/2020/11/tim-briggs-the-left-are-using-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-as-an-ideological-tool-to-undermine-wealth-creation.html

[slarti b]

@scrawford

Unfortunately this May is only the mayoral and GLA elections. We have to wait until next year before we can vote on our Dulwich Village Labour councillors (Newens and Leeming) who have insisted on forcing these schemes through, ignoring local residents who questioned any aspects and even now are squandering local taxpayers money on anymous groups to support their objectives.

As the elections approach I expect they will try and distance themselves from the consequences of their actions, lets make sure people remember who casued this chaos and disruption.

[Peckham Park]

@slarti b....oops my mistake....I agree with your sentiment! :)

[legalalien]

I?m not sure what the best approach is tactically tbh. Much as I like to complain about my ward councillors, the reality is that they have pretty much zero power in all of this. But at least having independents or Tory councillors would bring in some people who could express independent voices, without being quite so hamstrung by a party whip. (Sort of, the LTN idea stems from central government, although not this specific application).

I wonder whether voting Lib Dem might have some merit, in the interests of strengthening their proportion of seats and therefore the number of voices they have on key committees. (See http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s90620/Report%20-%20Establishment%20of%20Committees%20etc.%202020-21.pdf for how the appt process works, places on committee are divided based on overall proportion of council seats. Independents don?t get a look in except at the discretion of the ruling party). Of course the LDs are supportive of LTNs, but at least have managed to get some meaningful adjustments to the ones in the north of the borough. But there will be a Lib Dem whipping arrangement as well.

If any party campaigned on a platform of allowing local councillors to speak out / express the views of local constituents even where these conflicted with cabinet /party policy, and only whipping on key decisions I?d vote for that, provided I was sufficiently convinced that the local candidates were up to the job of representing a variety of local voices.

[malumbu]

Thanks for the link Scrawford. Pleased to see that the Tory councillor recognises: "The keenness of Labour councillors to close roads is in line with a left-wing belief, shared with the Liberal Democrats and Greens, that if you create enough disincentives to drive, children can play on empty streets where cars once drove". A good reason to vote Labour, Lib Dems or Greens.

Perhaps if he had posted that the Tories would achieve reduced traffic through other means I may have taken this more seriously. The kowtowing towards the PM was even more telling - this was a Mayor and now PM who at times has been very interventionist, something you would not expect from traditional conservatives.

[slarti b]

@legalalian

You say that the ward councillors have "pretty much zero power here". Unusually I disagree with you.

The OHS consultation, used as the basis for the current "temporary" traffic measures, was wholly supported and pushed through by our local councillors. They are the ones who led the public meetings, claiming a highly misleading 47% increase in traffic through the junction made urgent action necessary; a claim which even now they refuse to retract. They set up the secret working group, made up of local activists and Calton Ave RA, to help lead the consultation process. They pushed for and supported the ETO's which allowed them to implement the highly controversial OHS phase 3 measure without consultation and they are the ones who are trying to make "Margy Plaza" permanent by spaffing public money on shadowy organisations.

Our concillors have also refused to accept any responsibility for the impact of their flawed scheme on the displacement roads and rejected any suggestions for changes or compromise. I suspect that, as the elections approach next year, we will see them claiming they had their hands tied or the traffic jams on EDG and Croxted were not their fault, if so they will be lying.

That still leaves residents with the issue of who to vote for next year. I will vote for anyone who promises to listen to and respect the views of local residents rather than a vocal group of minority activists.

[Serena2012]

It?s important to bear in mind the behaviour of the Goose Green ward councillors on this issue. I still find it incredulous that James McAsh, Charlie Smith and Victoria Olisa justified the closure of Melbourne Grove, Derwent Grove and Elsie Road off the back of the following self-serving survey, addressed only at the residents of the streets earmarked for closure, which used incendiary language referring to these closures being necessary to prevent car numbers rocketing on the closed streets as lockdown measures eased. https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSec3c3OCsSboVdTnBrOScgFUz6YjVpU1l7GTdYobFNKZCYdvw/viewform The corollary being that it was perfectly acceptable for those very same car numbers to ?rocket? past a day nursery with capacity for 90 preschoolers, what will soon be the main entrance to Charter East Dulwich (currently used as the entry point for years 10 and 11), the main entrance to the Tessa Jowell health centre, the front of Goose Green Primary School, the front of Harris Primary Academy East Dulwich, a care home for vulnerable adults, Goose Green park, the main shopping thoroughfare on Lordship Lane; at least 12 bus stops, and significant social housing.

The Goose Green ward has been a Lib Dem stronghold in recent history so there is definitely scope to vote the current incumbents out. I for one am hoping that lots of independents stand.

[first mate]

Yes, independents are what we need.

[heartblock]

As an EDG resident this is the first time I have seen this survey, thank you Serena. I?m actually shocked that this was not sent to residents in EDG. Hopefully I have maintained some semblance of politeness, with occasional moments of less well worded interactions, but this is disgraceful! How dare they make changes that effect us, our children, our neighbours by consulting these roads and not our road!

[malumbu]

Not sure why the survey was described as incendiary, a bit of overstatement.

Here's a nice survey that shows that most people are in favour of LTNs. I posted before with some objective views but didn't get any response. Here's another opportunity to rip it to shreds. I've also got loads of stuff from Sustrans, Living Streets and the like, but if I posted that this forum would go up in flames.

https://redfieldandwiltonstrategies.com/steady-support-for-for-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-in-london/

[legalalien]

I'm afraid that's my lack of engagement in the early stages of this project showing - I wasn't able to make the open meetings, and my RA forgot to add me to their mailing list so I was in the dark for quite a while. I was approaching the issue from a technical point of view in terms of council back bench voting power, so take on board what you say.

Presumably some of the Labour councillors in other wards are irritated that this "quick win" isn't going so well...

b Wrote:

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

> @legalalian

> You say that the ward councillors have "pretty

> much zero power here". Unusually I disagree with

> you.

>

> The OHS consultation, used as the basis for the

> current "temporary" traffic measures, was wholly

> supported and pushed through by our local

> councillors. They are the ones who led the public

> meetings, claiming a highly misleading 47%

> increase in traffic through the junction made

> urgent action necessary; a claim which even now

> they refuse to retract. They set up the secret

> working group, made up of local activists and

> Calton Ave RA, to help lead the consultation

> process. They pushed for and supported the ETO's

> which allowed them to implement the highly

> controversial OHS phase 3 measure without

> consultation and they are the ones who are trying

> to make "Margy Plaza" permanent by spaffing public

> money on shadowy organisations.

>

> Our concillors have also refused to accept any

> responsibility for the impact of their flawed

> scheme on the displacement roads and rejected any

> suggestions for changes or compromise. I suspect

> that, as the elections approach next year, we will

> see them claiming they had their hands tied or the

> traffic jams on EDG and Croxted were not their

> fault, if so they will be lying.

>

> That still leaves residents with the issue of who

> to vote for next year. I will vote for anyone

> who promises to listen to and respect the views of

> local residents rather than a vocal group of

> minority activists.

[slarti b]

@Malumbu,

There is nothing wrong with LTN's in principle, but the traffic measures the councillors have put in place in Dulwich are badly thought out and poorly designed. They are displacing traffic onto residential roads, increasing congestion and pollution and causing disruption to vulnerable and less mobile residents.

As to the study you linked based on London, it says 24% of respondents lived in an LTN, 49% didn't and 27% weren't sure.

According to Aldred, 4% of London inhabitants live in an LTN so it seems a hopelessly biased sample in the study.

[Abe_froeman]

Malumbu is just trolling. She doesn't even live in Southwark. Best ignored.

[heartblock]

yep..that's my policy.

[Bicknell]

leaflet from Dulwich alliance

https://dulwichalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Dear-Dulwich-Neighbour.pdf

[alice]

Mine too

[slarti b]

@Alice, @Heartblock, @Abe

Normally my policy too but I made an exception this time as it was actually something of reference to the thread.

[Rockets]

It speaks volumes that the Dulwich Alliance is having to do the council's job for them and distribute leaflets - I am still hearing from a lot of people across the area who have not yet seen anything from the council - it's almost as if they are trying to keep the review under the radar!!!!

[first mate]

Indeed, not had a thing from the council, despite being within area.

[Metallic]

Not had the leaflet, some neighbours of mine have, and I'm hearing of several addresses who were missed out whilst neighbours received one. Why can't the council get anything right?

[heartblock]

No leaflet..no consultation....still waiting.