Southwark request for comments re Covid-19 / healthier streets

[geh]

Looking the comments on the Southwark site most seem entirely driven by self interest ?I?d like my road closed?. Everybody wants their own road closed!

I think it is dangerous to do anything (without an undertaking to revert to the pre Covid position).

Once whatever the new normal is establishes, then perhaps it will be the time for sensible study (including the unintended consequences of some of the proposals) and a proper consultation.

[Rockets]

There is a huge amount of self-interest driving this. Melbourne Grove seems to be the epicentre of self-interest but they seem to have the ear of the councillors and seem to be listened to more than anyone else in East Dulwich - look at how they were pandered to during the CPZ "consultations" and look at the red-carpet that was rolled out for them at the CPZ council hearings whilst traders and others were given scant regard and were completely overlooked.

And James, your assumption that traffic magically evaporates is nonsense - it just goes another way. I was kind of hoping we might get a more reasoned response from the "opposition". ;-)

To use the Trojan horse of corona-virus to lobby to try and fast-track this through is beyond belief - you could apply the same acid-test to every street in every city in the country at the moment. I do wonder whether the councillors are trying to force this through before social distancing reduces from 2m to 1m and all this becomes a bit of a moot point. This is political opportunism at its absolute worst.

[Dulwichgirl82]

I also don?t understand why Melbourne grove, Derwent and Elsie road as getting singled out. And I have to ask James what is your plan for the east dulwich grove lordship lane junction? As clearly this traffic won?t evaporate as they are going

Somewhere this will substantially (if as you claim there are a lot of cars using these other roads as a bypass) increase traffic there. It?s already a difficult and dangerous junction and also left turn only, so that will increase traffic at goose green roundabout assumably as people double back on themselves to head up lordship

Lane. This is already horribly busy and polluted at peak times.

Lots of roads locally have this problem of both cars and narrow pavements and changing the rules on one part should not even be considered without a larger overall plan. I?m

Confused as to why these particular roads have such sway?

[northernmonkey]

"We have no choice.. This is not ideological opportunism. This is a necessity"

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/18/a-new-normal-how-coronavirus-will-transform-transport-in-britains-cities?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[EDAus]

Melbourne Grove (South) have been given money for traffic calming measures ? they installed speed bumps.

Melbourne Grove (South) could have looked at many different options suggested to them over the years including:

? timed entry and exit.

? one way for South Melbourne Grove and the opposite way for North Melbourne Grove.

? removing one side of parking and putting in a cycle lane.

? making the whole area vehicle free.

These options are not being pushed nor promoted by Melbourne Grove (South) residents.

They want a barrier to block traffic to their area, but they want freedom to use their own vehicles.

How much more money will be spent on this very small section of East Dulwich?

The real traffic issues are in North Melbourne Grove with the school and medical centre.

[EDAus]

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> "We have no choice.. This is not ideological

> opportunism. This is a necessity"

>

> https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/may/1

> 8/a-new-normal-how-coronavirus-will-transform-tran

> sport-in-britains-cities?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

It calls for a structured, programmed approach for all residents, coupled with rational evidence-based decision making, not people using their privilege to push their own ideology onto others.

Lots of comments on the website about traffic disappearing ? so why does Melbourne Grove (South) not go vehicle free - show Southwark the way.

[first mate]

I would like to wait to get back to winter weather, high winds, rain and dark mornings/ evenings, before looking at these healthy street changes. Let?s test the reality of only cycling and walking then. Remembering ED has two very steep hills either end.

I do see things have to change, that is obvious, but it needs to be thought through for all weather conditions, not just summer months. Cycling and walking can work if your job is local but not if you work the other side of London and have a job that requires you to be on your feet all day.

[Abe_froeman]

If they close Melbourne Grove, eventually they will have to close Derwent Grove too. And then when that's closed they will need to close Elsie Road.

[Rockets]

And also there has to be some rational and pragmatic analysis of where people actually commute to and from everyday. It's all well and good the likes of Khan arbitrarily closing streets in London to encourage more people to walk and cycle due to the limitations on public transport but there is a reason London is one of the biggest linear cities in the world, growth outwards was driven by the rail and tube revolution and the ability to commute long distances to city centres.

There are millions of passenger journeys every day to and from London. In East Dulwich we are lucky as we live within 4/5 miles of the city centre which is perfectly doable on a bike - not everyone can but at least it is an option for a few. Not everyone has that luxury and scant regard is being given to them.

The parallels are strong with what is happening in central London to what is happening in East Dulwich - pure opportunism and a predictable reaction.

And when I read the source of the quote below I cannot help but laugh at the irony (it's a bit like quoting the Daily Mail on immigration....)

"We have no choice.. This is not ideological

> opportunism. This is a necessity"

>

> [www.theguardian.com]

[Siduhe]

It's worth looking at the comments posted on the Council website Covid-!9 Healthy Streets map - lots of people want their roads closed to through traffic - there are comments re Bellenden/Adys/Nutbrook/Townley/Calton Ave etc - including my own street (not by me!).

What that says to me is there's absolutely a discussion to have about traffic calming measures in our area, but on an area basis, not street by street. Those people who want the roads closed to through traffic must accept that they can't have that in isolation (so they get all the benefit while others who don't get their roads closed take all the extra pain), so what compromises are they willing to make? Are they willing to forego deliveries at peak times or not be able to use their car at peak times at all? That seems extreme, but then so does closing roads which are used not just by people passing through our area but by all of us to get to A to B.

You'll also note the Southwark site asks people to confirm they would be happy to keep these changes in place after the Covid-19 emergency ends, so this is clearly being considered as a driver of long term change.

For my own part, I'm absolutely on board with making sensible changes to traffic and streets in our area to minimise driving and promote cycling and walking, but it has to be as part of an actual plan, which includes improving public transport, rather than something piecemeal that benefits those who shout loudest for their own personal interests over the majority of people who live in this area. We've seen with the approach to CPZ that Southwark's view is that it's better to put through radical change in a few areas so as to force nearby streets to move in a similar way. Maybe they are right that is the best way to drive effective change, but I'd rather have a thought through plan that everyone gets a say on.

https://southwarkstreetspace.commonplace.is/comments

[Serena2012]

Sidhue - I can?t agree more.

It is very important to remember that neither Grove Vale nor East Dulwich Grove are super highways, capable of carrying significant volumes of additional traffic. Indeed, the section of East Dulwich Grove between Lordship Lane and Melbourne Grove is incredibly narrow. In fact (although maps often imply that it is wider due to its A road status), it is no wider than Melbourne, Elsie or Derwent, which is precisely why cars are only allowed to park on one side of the road and even then, two buses cannot pass each other on this stretch without one of them stopping to let the other go by.

The junction of Lordship Lane and East Dulwich Grove is also atrocious (and no safer than the Melbourne Grove/ East Dulwich Grove junction), so if the Melbourne Elsie/ Derwent proposal was to pass, the knock on impact would be to make the Lordship Lane/ East Dulwich Grove junction a lot more dangerous (thereby significantly increasing the risks of a fatal accident); to increase the pollution around Goose Green school (which educates 400+ children) and to make the corresponding stretch of Lordship Lane a lot more congested, which is detrimental to everyone shopping and working in this area. Roads such as Zenoria; Matham; Blackwater; Ashbourne etc would all suffer. In essence, the air quality would no doubt improve for the residents of 3 roads and decrease significantly for everyone else. There would also inevitably be a knock on impact on bus journey times (along East Dulwich Road, East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane), which cannot be in anyone?s interests, recognising that some people (including some key workers) have no option other than to travel by bus.

Attempting to adopt a piecemeal approach to a much greater problem risks causing a much more significant headache. Bowing to pressure from those who shout the loudest at the detriment to everyone else, is not how a democratic process should operate.

[rollflick]

Rockets complained:

"And also there has to be some rational and pragmatic analysis of where people actually commute to and from everyday. It's all well and good the likes of Khan arbitrarily closing streets in London to encourage more people to walk and cycle" [etc.]

Melbourne Grove identified as a cycle route (as I said above) after detailed analysis then consultation in 2015: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/2215/Southwark-cycling-strategy.pdf

That's the key reason it's being prioritised. Plus close it off just south of Tell Grove and it stops rat-running on the back streets here.

Siduhe said:

"What that says to me is there's absolutely a discussion to have about traffic calming measures in our area, but on an area basis, not street by street. Those people who want the roads closed to through traffic must accept that they can't have that in isolation (so they get all the benefit while others who don't get their roads closed take all the extra pain"

This is exactly what other councils including Lambeth and Lewisham are doing, publishing a map of neighbourhoods to filter across their entire borough to engage communities with: https://lewisham.gov.uk/myservices/roads-and-transport/our-traffic-reduction-programme-healthy-neighbourhoods

By contrast Southwark's planning is largely waffle or simply ad hoc as for Dulwich.

And it's what the govt is now requiring councils to deliver, especially where public transport use highest like here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/reallocating-road-space-in-response-to-covid-19-statutory-guidance-for-local-authorities/traffic-management-act-2004-network-management-in-response-to-covid-19#reallocating-road-space-measures

"Measures should be taken as swiftly as possible, and in any event within weeks, given the urgent need to change travel habits before the restart takes full effect.

...Modal filters (also known as filtered permeability); closing roads to motor traffic, for example by using planters or large barriers. Often used in residential areas, this can create neighbourhoods that are low-traffic or traffic free, creating a more pleasant environment that encourages people to walk and cycle, and improving safety."

[Abe_froeman]

Oh, is the plan already to close all of Elsie Rd, Derwent Grove and Melbourne Grove?

That will create a lot of extra congestion at each end of all those roads, and an island of pollution surrounded by EDG and Grove Vale

[Rockets]

Rollflick - as I said there needs to be pragmatic and rational analysis and your point illustrates that perfectly. Just because Melbourne Grove is a designated cycle route doesn't mean it should be closed. Now I understand why Khan is suggesting closing (amongst others) the route from Waterloo, across Waterloo Bridge and on along Kingsway past Holborn to all traffic bar buses and bikes (one presumes they are encouraging those who have no choice but to travel to Waterloo by train - per my comments on London's linear creation - to do the last part of their journey on bike instead of on the tube) - but I am sure you'll agree there is far less justification to close Melbourne Grove when applying the same rational and pragmatic analysis of transport in the new Covid world - I doubt you'll see flocks of commuter son bikes bombing along Melbourne Grove. Also when you look at the report you linked to there are a lot of other designated cycle routes that are not being closed to through traffic or their residents being consulted by our councillors.

So it begs the question - why this, why now and, to your point, why is it being done in isolation and not part of an area-wide consultation? Once again the council and councillors are opening themselves up to a lot of difficult questions, alienating themselves to a large percentage of their constituents but they don't seem to care - they did it with the CPZ, they are doing it with the Dulwich Village "consulation" and now are at it again. They are completely incapable of engaging in any sort of balanced dialogue and use under-hand tactics to lever their projects through.

[jamesmcash]

Hi all,

I hope you are all well and have had opportunity to enjoy the lovely weather! Thanks for all your comments. To respond to the key points:

Permeable filters on Melbourne, Derwent and Elsie

The transformation of our travel patterns have completely changed the dynamics on our roads. So we need to consider new measures. Initially there was not time scheduled in to ask residents for their view - it is considered an emergency measure. I argued that we should allow a short period of time to hear from residents before making a decision - and that a short delay would be worth it to make sure that residents want it, and that if it shows that residents do not then we should abandon the plans!

The people most affected are plainly those who live on these three streets, so their perspecive is prioritised. However there is an option on the survey for others to respond with their feedback too.

Please do let us know what you think.

Measures elsewhere

A few people have pointed out that similar measures could be useful elsewhere too. Yes, absolutely! Please identify other spots using the map in the original post above.

These particular streets were identified first because they had been previously raised through different schemes (Cleaner Greener Safer, and Our Healthy Streets) and because of the specific circumstances with the three schools in close proximity.

It's certainly not a case of giving these roads special treatment, rather we are just responding to these first because we know they are where there is appetite for some changes!

Contact details

It is true that the survey above gives residents opportunity to leave their contact details. I make no apology for this - we councillors want to be able to contact the residents we represent and our normal methods are now hampered. Of course, this survey question is entirely optional - you are free to share your comments whilst opting not to receive any further contact from us.

Pavement widening on Lordship Lane

Thanks for raising this. The council was initially looking at the pavements being widened around 3 key pinch points - at the junctions with Blackwater, Chesterfield and Ashbourne. I was told that these were happening and I know that some council communications have said that they have already happened, which is clearly not right. I am trying to chase this up to find out what has happened.

I hope that everyone is staying safe and well. Please do not hesitate to email if you need anything - I check my emails much more frequently than I check on here.

Best wishes

James

[Mrs D]

Crystal Palace Road is a cycle route too... could we close it for other traffic too please ;). Asking for a friend .. if not, please can we have a safe Pedestrian crossing over Whately or Underhill at the junction with Crystal Palace Road?

[first mate]

James, in total, how many households on the streets under discussion (Melbourne and those around)? Of those how many have actively sought and are in favour of a permeable filter? I think this is key.

[Rockets]

James,

But why Melbourne, Derwent and Elsie? You mention 3 schools nearby but that's hardly justification for emergency closure of roads when none of the schools are open. Given your work within the NEU and your passionate fight against the government for a June 1st return for parts of the school community I just wonder when are you expecting schools to re-open - if September or more likely much, much later given your fight then surely these measures are not urgent and should be properly considered to assess the impact on other parts of the area and within a properly organised and community engaged area wide review? Knee-jerk implementation of such measures will not end well.

Am I interpreting your note correctly that your colleagues in the council were about to block those 3 roads without any consultation under the emergency powers you have been given and you had to intervene to give residents a "say"?

I am not sure many people trust you that anyone other than the residents of Melbourne Grove etc will be listened to and even if they said no to it you wouldn't rehash the results to give you your mandate as you did with the CPZ. Also, this is a Labour party survey conducted via Google Docs not a council survey so does it count as a consultation?

We would be a lot more supportive if you properly communicated with your constituents and didn't make arbitrary decisions that impact everyone. You have been rallying to get these closures in place for some time and it seem to a lot of us that Covid is the trojan horse and it is political opportunism.

I have suggested to you before that perhaps you should spend more time on here - this is one of the main community forums and your drop-in, drop-out approach and encouragement to people to email rather than discuss here suggests a divide and conquer strategy. You spend a lot of time on twitter so maybe a little less time there and more here might improve your communication with your constituents as I am sure you can see there are plenty of people locally who are incredulous that you are trying to implement this! ;-)

[Dulwichgirl82]

Hi James, while I appreciate this response I don?t understand how this can be considered as an isolated measure. This will clearly impact surrounding streets, in a significantly negative manner. This seems grossly unfair that because they haven?t been as vocal the council want to arbitrarily increase pollution and traffic along their streets.

I asked earlier regarding the edg and LL junction as this will massively increase traffic there as well as goosegreen roundabout which is already horribly polluted. Surely this should be sorted before any local roads are?

Bearing in mind the plans you describe will increase traffic on east dulwich grove which has a nursery, 3 schools and a health centre how can this be considered acceptable without a wider view of the area and changes made to prevent the increase of pollution which will effect the children and patients of the health centre?

[first mate]

The Council has been intimately involved in the genesis of both Charter and the TJ medical centre. I believe James Barber was the driving force behind the former.

It has always been felt that insufficient thought was given to car parking for both builds. Poor planning and poor decision making by the council all round. Add to this the fact that many children attending Charter will be coming from much further afield and it is clear why traffic will become even more of an issue and the Council would have known this from the start.

Permeable filters will displace traffic and parking and then obviously the streets bearing the burden of that displacement will clamour for CPZ and I believe this is the reason why the council has chosen to focus exclusively on Melbourne Grove etc... The latter is adjacent to the area that resisted CPZ. They want mass CPZ and so far they haven?t managed to get it. That said, if they can get a smattering of permeable filters all round ED this too will speed up CPZ. So presenting themselves as being even-handed the council will be very keen to ?listen? to and ?explore? ideas for permeable filters on other streets.

This has been a Council long game, from the time the medical centre and school builds got underway Southwark was fiddling around with plans to unnecessarily increase yellow lines and so on to reduce parking. They had their sights set on mass CPZ years ago. James Barber was a big, big fan. Covid19 is just the latest opportunity to be seized by our Labour Council and further measures can now conveniently be framed as an emergency.

I am not suggesting things do not have to change but it is the haste with which Southwark is continuing to push through very old ideas (James Barber was very involved with residents on Melbourne Grove years ago With attempts to block off that street) and rehashing and spinning the rationale to fit the current narrative each time, that jars. You then wonder if the health and best interests of residents really are driving Council proposals, or is something else?

[geh]

James, it is not true to state that:

"The people most affected are plainly those who live on these three streets, so their perspecive is prioritised. However there is an option on the survey for others to respond with their feedback too"

Those living on the three streets will directly "benefit" from the proposed barriers but it is the residents of surrounding streets who will be most affected in a detrimental way.

It is not democratic to prioritise one residents view over another.

I am most concerned that without a unequivocal undertaking to revert to the status quo (without Southwark subsequently seeking to weasel out of that undertaking) that this is an attempt to railroad residents into a traffic scheme without a full understanding of the consequences and a full consultation.

[richard tudor]

The elephant in the room regarding this is how will it effect residents house prices?

Most people in Melbourne and other streets will back any scheme if it will raise the value of their house by turning it into a private enclave.

The vocal few and a Council that wants to push any scheme through will not consider others in the borough.

I will put my tin hat on now.

[Abe_froeman]

I just don't understand where the council gets the money from for all this.

Tens of thousands of pounds, probably hundreds of thousands, have already been wasted trying to impose changes on parking and traffic schemes year in year out, which are always rejected. Schemes that would only benefit a handful of people who bought million pound plus homes next to a train station and two busy main roads.

This money would be much better spent buying PPE to save the lives of workers and residents in council owned care homes who earn and own a fraction of what those in Melbourne Grove do.

It's utterly baffling a labour council (including self proclaimed marxists) would promote this scheme at this time.

[heartblock]

If Melbourne Grove becomes a ?gated community? for larger houses and higher income families, then us lot in flats on East Dulwich Grove will suffer more noise, more pollution and more traffic. I walk down Melbourne regularly and it really is not the traffic rat run the residents are making out. Put a bike lane down EDG, this will slow traffic and make less people want to use the roads connecting onto it. Encourage bike usage, but don?t create the haves and have nots.

[jamesmcash]

Hi all,

I hope you are all staying safe and well, and that you have had the opportunity to enjoy the fine weather.

Let me try to answer as many of the points raised as possible.

Other locations e.g. East Dulwich Grove junction, Crystal Palace Road

If possible, please leave these comments on the interactive map linked in the original post. I am keen to consider as many safety measures as we can.

The decision-making process

These measures, if implemented, will be done through an Experimental Traffic Order. These are new processes introduced by the government to get work moving quickly in response to the new circumstances of the pandemic. Unlike other similar traffic orders, they do not require any consulation at all. Nearby local authorities have introduced wide-ranging changes using these, without any consultation. In Goose Green, we have prioritised measures which we suspect - from previous consultations and other methods - will have wide support. To be extra sure, we have run this very short survey as well.

The measures are temporary. They can be removed at any time. But they can also be made permanent after 18 months. We would have to see their impact before making this decision.

Schools reopening

It is true that, in my capacity as a teacher and member of the National Education Union, I have been campaigning against the government's plans to re-open schools more widely before the NEU's five tests are met. But I am not the secretary of state so it may well be that many more pupils do begin to attend school from June 1st. Moreover, the five tests may well be met before the summer holidays, even if not by June 1st, in which case schools will become much busier then. It's important that any works we do take place as soon as possible.

How we contact Goose Green residents

My colleages, Victoria Olisa and Charlie Smith, and I try to reach residents in a range of ways: email, door-to-door canvassing, surgeries, public meetings, engagement with community groups and so on. I try to come onto here when I can but I do not prioritise it over the other forms. There's a number of reasons for this. First, anyone who can access this forum can also access email, whereas not everyone with email access uses this forum. Second, I want to prioritise the residents who live within Goose Green ward and many on here do not. Third, emails from residents are almost always regarding casework that I can help with, while lots of posts on here are more general comments or criticisms, which are an important part of a democratic system but not so time-sensitive or pressing as someone with a specific problem I can address.

That said, I will continue to come onto the forum when I can to read everyone's comments and respond where appropriate.

House prices

Interesting point about the potential for house prices to rise on these steets - I hadn't considered that. It's definitely not a motivating factor for me!

Where does the money come from?

TfL would fund the measures as part of their project to make London streets safer during and after the pandemic.

I hope this is helpful!

Best wishes

James