Southwark request for comments re Covid-19 / healthier streets

[AylwardS]

Apologies if this is a duplication but I saw it on a thread in General ED Issues and it seems like something for on here.

The Council is asking for comments and suggestions to

* maximise pedestrian space within the public highway to help people pass each other and queue, whilst adhering to the government?s social distancing rules

* provide measures to make it easier to walk, cycle and use public transport, whilst removing through traffic, as the lockdown is lifted

[www.southwark.gov.uk]

[jamesmcash]

Hi all,

Thanks for raising this AylwardS. Much appreciated.

The council has set out its Movement Plan response to covid19 and launched a website where you can make suggestions for changes to the highways or pavements in specific places around the borough. Do have a look here: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/health-and-wellbeing/public-health/for-the-public/coronavirus/impact-on-council-services/coronavirus-help-us-combat-covid-19-by-suggesting-healthier-streets

More specifically, there are some proposals for Melbourne Grove, Derwent Grove and Elsie Road. If you live on one of those streets please let us know what you think: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSec3c3OCsSboVdTnBrOScgFUz6YjVpU1l7GTdYobFNKZCYdvw/viewform?usp=sf_link

Any questions, please get in touch!

I hope everyone is staying safe and well, and having a pleasant weekend!

Best wishes

James

[goldilocks]

Hi James

The link mentions pavement widening on Lordship lane. I went down Lordship Lane last night and there was no pavement widening in place. Do you know when this will be done please?

[bels123]

It?s much needed on Lordship Lane. Will help local businesses post-lockdown whilst social distancing is still needed.

I see Lambeth has done similar in Herne Hill recently.

[n dulwich northerner]

James,

I'd suggest suspending the car parking spaces directly outside Moxons / Mons / Franklins where the queues are long and the pavement has pinch points. Walking in the road isn't as safe there as near the similar queues outside Jones and M&S where you can walk in the bus lane. The vehicles aren't "passing trade" and there's enough space in nearby streets.

NDN

[goldilocks]

I?d agree, this stretch has lots of businesses where people need to queue outside in a short stretch of shop fronts. Taking out the parked cars would give greater access for both shoppers and pedestrians passing through!

[jamesmcash]

Hi all,

Goldilocks - I will look into this on Monday morning. You're right that this is not correct.

Thanks for all the other comments, please do put them onto the interactive map too so that officers can consider them as they go.

Best wishes

James

[first mate]

The measures on Melbourne etc look to be opportunistic. The proposed permeable filters are something the council and a small number of residents have been pushing for ages and not a response to Covid 19. If there is an expectation that car use will rocket up because people want/need to travel safely I don?t see that putting up impediments is necessarily going to help at the moment? Why heap further stress onto the situation?

[rollflick]

Melborne Grove is supposed to be a safe route to the school and new health centre - so why is the survey only aimed at people living on those streets, not the wider catchment area? (or indeed anyone in the wider area who's at risk from COVID if there isn't space for social distancing?)

This is Southwark parochialism gone mad. With attitudes like this no wonder we are years behind other boroughs like Lambeth and Croydon that have published ambitious plans to keep their citizens safe and done more in three weeks than Southwark has in as many years. In any event the Melbourne Grove etc survey looks like an opportunistic data grab for Labour party marketing. Surely people's health should be more important than party politics?

[Rockets]

Rollflick, all James cares about is party politics and keeping the comrades happy. I completely agree that the council should be amending Lordship Lane for the new socially distanced world but I think many of our fears are being realised that the council see Corona-virus as a great opportunity to fast-track some of their broader political traffic plans through without any scrutiny. The Melbourne Grove survey is a joke. They are starting the land grab, ignoring the fact that people are likely to look to cars as few return to public transport - it?s going to be chaos.

I am shocked by the brazenness of it.

[rollflick]

Rockets - Southwark has for years been in breach of its duty to reduce air pollution, etc. and now risk being in breach of its new mandatory govt guidance to provide extra space for social distancing across the borough "within weeks".

So plans are urgently needed for legal reasons not political ones. I am shocked by how dysfunctional politics are in Southwark that the borough is falling so far behind on delivery. People I know who've been to local Labour party meetings say they are full of factional infighting.

Feels like our borough is run like Brazil when we need to be like New Zealand!

[EDAus]

A campaign was held to close Melbourne Grove years ago and a large number of local objections meant it was stopped.

While people understood there were issues with speeding and traffic on Melbourne Grove, their was a lack of consideration made for displaced local traffic.

So once again - if they close Melbourne Grove to vehicle?s where does the traffic go, including residents?

Are the residents of Melbourne Grove planning to give up their parking spaces and cars?

Are they planning to drive up and down Chesterfield / Ashbourne / Bassino / Blackwater / Tell Grove / Colwell etc., to enter and exit in their cars?

Are they proposing to displace local traffic onto smaller less equipped streets, impacting the safety and well-being of a large number of local residents?

[Siduhe]

The issues said to be affecting Melbourne Grove and others equally apply to many other streets in our area. But again we see this sort of one-sided proposal that takes no account of other nearby residents. I?d be more supportive of this sort of approach if there was a quid pro quo - agreement by residents not to have deliveries in peak times or closing the street to traffic entirely, including residents. Which, of course, would be totally unfair and unrealistic to expect those residents to put up with.

I?m disappointed to see this proposal come back again, in this guise, with so little detail and opportunity for others to comment. There?s absolutely a debate to have about traffic access to residential streets in ED. But a proper discussion, informed by data and with everyone getting a say.

[nxjen]

I think First Mate got it right when they said the resurrected plan for closing Malbourne Grove is opportunistic.

[Serena2012]

Whilst the widening of the pavement on Lordship Lane is to be supported, the proposals regarding Melbourne Grove, Elsie and Derwent appear opportunistic; an example of extreme nimbyism and fail to address what will no doubt be a significant knock on impact of displaced traffic on surrounding roads. Indeed, the benefits for the residents of the area as a whole are far from clear, nor is it clear that the perceived issues that these proposals set out to fix (e.g. the challenge of social distancing on the pavements) is more pronounced on these roads than it is elsewhere. Indeed, I have encountered far more issues attempting to social distance on Grove Vale, Matham Grove, Zenoria/ Oxonian and East Dulwich Grove than I have on any of these roads.

In terms of knock on impact on neighbouring roads, I have significant concerns about the impact of the proposals on the junction between East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane, which is incredibly dangerous to pedestrians and has been the location of numerous accidents in recent years. Increasing the volume of traffic using this junction cannot be prudent, and is a fatal accident waiting to happen. There will also invariably be heavier traffic on the stretch of Grove Vale that runs past Goose Green Primary, as well as a higher likelihood of tailbacks at the Goose Green roundabout, which combined with the knock on impact on all other neighbouring roads, makes it hard to justify these proposals.

[EDAus]

In response to northernmonkey Today, 10:15AM

"Its interesting the way that this is being portrayed and it isn't wholly accurate. The Melbourne South closure was part of the OHS consultation and therefore has already been consulted on. The rationale for the closure is not to change the route that people use to access their homes (whilst inevitable)but instead to stop the large volume of traffic that uses the length of Melbourne Grove as a rat run to cut off Lordship Lane.

If you use a map and look at the layout of the road, the idea that traffic would cut down Melbourne south when travelling North and then right turn down Ashbourne or Chesterfield is clearly unlikely as it would essentially be going back on itself. Whilst there may be some journeys that go down these roads from residents of Melbourne its more likely that there will be a significant decrease in traffic cutting through to reach Melbourne Grove and travelling beyond."

The Our Healthy Streets Consultation gave two options for Area A:

"Melbourne Grove experiences high levels of motor vehicle traffic currently - this could increase if some of the above proposals are implemented. We want to explore options with residents for either:-

a northbound no entry restriction (south of the Tell Grove junction); or

a permeable closure (no motor vehicles) between Tell Grove and Ashbourne Grove."

Residents of Melbourne Grove have choosen to pursue / push for option B - a permeable closure (no motor vehicles) between Tell Grove and Ashbourne Grove.

This will block off Melbourne Grove to traffic but residents will use other streets to enter and exit - plus their delivery trucks, vans, rubbish collection trucks and visitors.

Consultation is not implementation, the Council has outlined Next steps:

model the likely impact of measures - Summer 2020

phase 4 engagement - Autumn 2020

decision on the way forward - Winter 2021

statutory consultation - Spring 2021

construction - Summer / Autumn 2021

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/our-healthy-streets/our-healthy-streets-dulwich

Healthy streets are for all not a few.

It is worth recalling in 2015 over 250 people signed a petition to the Council to stop a barrier on Melbourne Grove at the same location.

[Nigello]

https://southwarkstreetspace.commonplace.is/

This takes you to where you can comment. Or, just search for a speech bubble near to a part of Southwark that concerns you to look for comments and agree/share if you like.

It?s easy to use.

[first mate]

I would very much like to know:

1. How many households are there in total on Melbourne Grove (I would count 2 flats within a house as separate households)?

2. Of the total households, how many have given clear support for a permeable filter on MG?

Does anyone know this?

For CPZ consultation , although it was a breach of their own street by street methodology, Southwark chose to cur Melbourne Grove in half and treat the two halves as separate streets, enabling them a majority in favour of CPZ around the station.

[Serena2012]

EDAus - I think you nailed it when you mentioned that clean air is for the many and not the few. Any proposal which stands to benefit the residents of certain roads at the significant detriment to others, and where there are little or no discernible benefits to the community as a whole cannot be supported.

Repeating here my response to NorthernMonkey on the now closed thread (with some tweaks reflecting further thoughts): - On the assumption that not all pupils attending Charter East Dulwich live on the Northern portion of Melbourne Grove, and will therefore almost invariably need to walk along Grove Vale or East Dulwich Grove in order to to get onto the relevant section of Melbourne Grove, I struggle to see how a proposal that threatens to displace traffic onto these other roads, thereby making them more polluted, and more dangerous for walkers and cyclists alike does much to promote active travel.

If the social distancing of students is a key consideration, a far more proportionate response would involve turning the Northern portion of Melbourne Grove into a ?school street? (for the weeks of the year when Charter East Dulwich is fully open).

In any event, I struggle to see why these closures should also be applied to Elsie Road and Derwent Grove, particularly given the issues the displaced traffic will invariably cause along Grove Vale, Lordship Lane and East Dulwich Grove(which arguably will have a much more detrimental impact on the community as a whole). I get why the Northern section of Melbourne Grove is in a somewhat unique position in this context, given the size of Charter East Dulwich. However, a proposal that allows other roads like Elsie and Derwent to jump onto the bandwagon at huge cost to the safety and well-being of those living, commuting and travelling along the other streets in the area cannot be supported. Nor does it make sense for traffic restrictions to be placed on three roads 24/7, 7 days a week when the perceived concerns relate to only a small section of ONE of the three roads, at certain times of day, 5 as opposed to 7 days a week, and only 39 weeks of the year.

[1921]

Please do not let the Melbourne Grove residents "re kindle" their wish to for a barrier. It seems to be exploiting an opportunity to me.

[Serena2012]

I?ve just looked up the new Tessa Jowell Health Centre, (the GP part of which is due to open later this month). Its address is 72H East Dulwich Grove, and whilst it looks as though it will be possible to enter from Jarvis Road, it is inevitable that the vast majority of users will arrive via the East Dulwich Grove entrance (as they do currently). Indeed, there is a new ?Tessa Jowell Health Centre? stop along the 37 and 42 bus routes in anticipation of the fact that bus passengers are likely to jump off here for the medical centre. With that in mind, any suggestion that the northern portion of Melbourne Grove must be turned into a traffic free zone to protect the users of the Medical Centre is somewhat misguided.

[ruffers]

Can someone tell me what is so spoecial about Melbourne Grove? There are many many pavements, I'd hazard "most" in SE22 which are too narrow for social distancing, this is opportunistic nonsense at shoving their share of traffic onto someone else.

The feedback mechanism is a joke if they're only interested in the views of the people on that road specifically also.

Seriously, the council spend time and money on this? Wow. Just...wow.

[James Barber]

It has been disappointing that Southwark Council have not opened some of the current car parking up for people trying to social distance while walking along Lordship Lane.

We also know air pollution makes COIVD19 more impactful on victims - so keeping vehicles away from people helps.

I personally have also had this problem while walking along Melbourne Grove and Derwent Grove - having to walk in the road while cars seem to be speeding very closely by. This feels worse than before this global crisis.

I would not propose removing parking along these residential roads, instead stop them being through routes for vehicles so people are safe to walk along them.

Making Melbourne Grove (North), Derwent Grove and Elsie Road no longer through routes for cars would deter significant rat running from people avoiding main roads to get through south Southwark. Much of this will evaporate - much as when the M25 was opened lots of extra new car journeys occurred.

Much of this rat running currently goes along Lordship Lane-Melbourne Grove-Dog Kennel Hill. The other route is along East Dulwich Grove-Melbourne Grove-Dog Kennel Hill. Making these harder will help the area generally.

The increased congestion charge and time of operating will also help.

For these reasons I hope these changes are made swiftly at least until we're out of the current health crisis. This is an emergency and I'm astounded at how slow Southwark Council have been to act beyond mere words, press releases and dare I say political questionnaires.

[ruffers]

James Barber Wrote:

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

>

> I personally have also had this problem while

> walking along Melbourne Grove and Derwent Grove -

> having to walk in the road while cars seem to be

> speeding very closely by. This feels worse than

> before this global crisis.

And I personally have had this problem on Wood Vale, Melford Road in fact all my local roads. Can we close them too please? Almost everyone can say this James, it's no argument.

[first mate]

This is so odd. I have been out along these roads regularly and have not witnessed this same increase. Perhaps it occurs at a time of day I am not ouT? This is not to say I have not witnessed some singularly horrendous speeding but this is on various roads, especially Barry Road. Never though on Melbourne!