Southwark request for comments re Covid-19 / healthier streets

[richard tudor]

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 d

You mean like the Champion Hill closure, closed and never heard of again.

Dont bring it up people will forget and we will get our way.

Once closed or altered it will never go back.

Covid19 will allow us to do what ever we want.

[Rockets]

Cllr McAsh,

To address some of your responses:

Other Locations:

Why don't you do the pragmatic thing and do an area wide review rather than taking this haphazard piecemeal approach? It speaks volumes to the council's ability to deliver on anything, that you have not undertaken an area wide approach to the issues that Covid presents? You have done nothing to help people trying to go about their business on Lordship Lane - there has been an huge amount of inaction on your part. Other local councils seem to be far more coordinated and have responded more quickly. Your approach seems knee-jerk, panicked and suggests a complete lack of preparedness and it makes some wonder why more thought wasn't given to this over the 9 weeks of lockdown.

The decision-making process

Yes other councils have enacted those powers but have done so in a far more broad brush approach - is the best you can come up with one of your pet projects that you have tried every route available to you to get implemented. I spoke to a lot of people on Lordship Lane today and no-one had any idea that you were planning to do this. All were in shock that you would try to use Covid as the reason to fast-track this through and all said the same thing - what does this mean for the roads and routes around here especially Lordship Lane and why isn't our local councillor doing more for the broader community.

Schools Reopening

In your role as a teacher and a member of the NEU when do you think children will be allowed back in schools? Many share the same concerns you have but there are also many whose children are missing school, their education and their friends and many parents need to start getting back to work and are beholden to when schools re-open. One of your tweets suggested that maybe schools should not reopen until the summer of 2021 per Cambridge University's announcement of the same for lectures. Realistically, when do you think your union's 5 point plan can actually be met and children should be returning to school? I note on another of your tweets that you said no private schools are returning until after the summer (until someone pointed out to you that the schools you mentioned are secondary schools and would not be expected to under the govts current plans). I know you hate everything about private schools but you do realise some of the ones in your local area are returning on Jun 1st?

Your focus to try and close Melbourne, Derwent and Elsie seems to be at the expense of other initiatives that could help more people in your ward. You started a track on this forum asking for input from residents and plenty were given but none have been actioned. I walked down Lordship lane today and it was clear the council need to provide more bike parking structures - that is a simple and effective way of helping people get to and from Lordship Lane and benefits everyone and I am surprised it hasn't been actioned already - you have had fleets of Conway workers doing other work during lockdown so why not divert some of those resources to trying to deliver something tangible to the community.

How You Contact Goose Green Residents

You're trying to divide and conquer on this one. You should be on here engaging with everyone in the community. When you want something from the community - like your Melbourne Grove survey - you carpet bomb the forum to try and drum up support and then when people start asking you questions you don't answer and suggest email instead. A bit like when people challenged you on the lie that your are spinning about the 40% increase in traffic at the Dulwich Village junction to justify the changes to the road there. You repeat it and then hide behind your colleagues and tell people to lodge a complaint when you get exposed. If there's one thing people hate it's invisible politicians.

As I mentioned on another thread the things you are most proud of, per your blog, in your two years in office have little to do with Goose Green and far more about your ideological and political aspirations and this Melbourne Grove farce is a classic example. I will make a prediction now that if you go ahead with it it will cause complete chaos in the surrounding area on a par to Lambeth's folly at Loughborough Junction.

[first mate]

James, I did ask you some quite specific questions and would appreciate an answer.

How many households are there on Melbourne Grove and the other streets being considered for the permeable filter? Of those households how many have actively sought and support these measures...you surely must know this?

Going forward, if the measures are implemented, how will you measure wide-spread support?

One more little thing? How can you possibly know that not everyone that uses email uses this forum...do you ask people?!

[Serena2012]

James - I have genuine concerns about the intersection of the Elsie/ Derwent/ Melbourne proposals and the (currently postponed) East Dulwich CPZ. On the assumption that if the permeable filters proposal passes, this and the CPZ will co-exist for a while, has the council considered the practical and logistical implications of this? Have you undertaken modelling to check that there are sufficient parking spaces on nearby streets so as to cope with the overspill?

As the council should be well aware, there are parking restrictions along some of roads in the CPZ (including East Dulwich Grove) which means in practice, that there is insufficient parking on these roads for the number of households and accordingly, residents on these roads and their visitors (including carers; tradesmen etc) frequently have no option other than to park on Melbourne/ Derwent/ Elsie. If these proposals were to pass, has the council got a solution for this issue?

I?m assuming that the only logical solution would be to set the permeable filters in such a way that anyone with a CPZ permit can park on these roads, as otherwise, I foresee a scenario whereby all other residential roads in the vicinity will quickly become overwhelmed, and those who are elderly, disabled or very young and accordingly cannot walk long distances will be significantly disadvantaged.

Indeed, if the permeable filter proposals were to pass, there is a good argument that there should be a further consultation on the CPZ, not least as charging residents for the privilege of parking is one thing; but deciding before the CPZ is even implemented that three of the roads within it are going to become elite gated communities, where those within the CPZ can no longer park is downright outrageous, and essentially means that everyone else within the CPZ will end up dolling out significant sums of money for permits every year with no guarantee that they or their visitors can park anywhere near their homes.

Edited to add: I may have misunderstood the implications of a permeable filter re: parking. Grateful if you would clarify whether the intention would be allow everyone with a CPZ permit to park on these roads.

Further edited to add: even if everyone with a CPZ permit will be allowed to park on these roads, I am not in support of the permeable filters proposal. However, I?m just trying to understand fully its likely knock on impact, and to ensure that the council has considered this.

[KidKruger]

?If these proposals were to pass, has the council got a solution for this issue??

Not the Council?s problem, that?ll be a residents problem !!

[Serena2012]

KidKruger: It is the council?s issue at the moment. It feels very unfair that every other road in the area has to suffer from more traffic, more congestion, worse air quality, as well as added inconvenience for their residents, simply so that three streets can become exclusive enclaves.

[rollflick]

If you want to put a filter in, surely better and cheaper to trial it on Melbourne Grove between Tell & Ashbourne Grove. This would allow space for turning etc.

As for Cllr McAsh's claim "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."

This process has in fact been around since at least 1984:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/part/I/crossheading/experimental-traffic-schemes

[Nigello]

Cars will not be banned. Roads will not be closed in nearly all cases where closures have been requested. The best way to reduce motor vehicle use is to not use or support the use of motor vehicles. That?s it. So, that means every single one of us considering whether we use our car, van or motorbike or use the services of another person using a motor vehicle, buses and taxis included. It?s simple but not easy. It?s up to you. Consider wisely and often!

[techmanx]

what are timelines for implementation? When they stop collecting comments and provide some action plan? anyone knows? there seems to be a project team spun up in council on collating but heard nothing more.

[Jakido]

It would be great if a few Parklets could be out outside cafes and restaurants for the summer. Like this:

https://www.cyclehoop.com/news/cyclehoop-design-and-install-the-first-on-street-uk-parklet/

[first mate]

Yes, but not onto the pavement. Social distancing on pavements for those that want and need must be the priority, as must free access for the disabled etc.. We must not push people to walk on the roads.

For those premises lucky enough to have outdoor space to accommodate ?parklets? or for the occasional incredibly wide section of public pavement it might work but not realistic for the bulk of ED streets.

[Jakido]

Agree, need a to keep the pavements free. I think the parklet replaces a parking space on the road.

[first mate]

Now I think you are being a tiny bit provocative!:)

[geh]

a done deal:

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50023147&Opt=0

[first mate]

Wow it states 70% of Melbourne Grove residents support closing the street, but where is the evidence for this and is this the whole of Melbourne or just one side ( for CPZ they massaged the results by treating the North and South side of Melbourne Grove as two separate roads).

I think if they are going to shunt through a long held aim using Covid as the excuse they should be forced to show the rest of us the evidence that 70% support it.

I asked James McAsh about this twice and he never answered.

[jamesmcash]

Hi all,

Sorry for the delay in responding. As some of you may know, I am a primary school teacher as well as being a councillor (being a councillor is not, for most, a fulltime role) and the ongoing preparations for school reopening has taken up a huge amount of time, in addition to my usual responsibilities both in the council and in school.

Let me try to respond to all these points.

Timeframes for implementation

rollflick suggested "If you want to put a filter in, surely better and cheaper to trial it on Melbourne Grove between Tell & Ashbourne Grove. This would allow space for turning etc."

You'll be pleased to hear that that is exactly what is happening! It should be in place in the next two weeks. Full details here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50023147&Opt=0

Discussions are ongoing about the section north of East Dulwich Grove - a number of people raised concerns about the proposals which we are trying to address.

Also, thanks for correcting me regarding which legislation the experimental traffic orders used - apologies for making that mistake.

Parking and permeable filters

Thanks for raising this Serena2012. As has been noted already, I think there is a misunderstanding about how a permeable filter works. I apologise if I have not communicated it clearly enough. The filter would mean that cars cannot use the road as a through-route but they would still be able to enter and exit by the same route. It would in no sense create a gated community - just a barrier in the middle of the road to stop through-traffic. When the CPZ is implemented, residents with permits who do not live on these roads would still be able to park in them - as was always the plan.

Bike stands

We are looking to have some cycle stands installed on Lordship Lane soon.

How many consulted

First Mate - a couple of hundred people responded to the survey. You are absolutely right that this is not a majority of the households on these streets but it is does give an indication of what people think. As emphasised above, any measures implemented will be followed by a monitoring period where changes can be made or the measures removed.

The southern section of Melbourne Grove has previously been consulted as part of the Our Healthy Streets consultation.

Edit:In the time it took to write this first mate mentioned a figure of 70%. I have just glanced over the documents and cannot see that anywhere but I suspect that it refers to Our Healthy Streets, not the survey we councillors did.

Decision-making process

Rockets has raised a good point about having an area-wide review. I agree that this would be a good approach. The issue is that the wider the area you're considering, and the more widely you want to consult, the longer the process takes. As it stands, I am receiving huge numbers of emails from residents on these roads who are keen to get some measures put in place as soon as possible. The kind of area-wide approach you are suggesting would take months - as we've seen from the Our Healthy Streets consultation.

So instead, like most other councils, Southwark is implementing some experimental orders and then assessing them once in place. These can then be amended or removed at a later point. Richard Tudor points out that in other cases the temporary measures have become permanent because people forget. Yes, I agree! Often people do forget about the concerns they had about a measure once it has been implemented, because those concerns never materialise. If they do materialise then we have opportunity to make the necessary changes. I fully trust the residents of Goose Green to let me know if it is not working!

Work in Goose Green vs work in the council

Rockets says "the things you are most proud of, per your blog, in your two years in office have little to do with Goose Green and far more about your ideological and political aspirations and this Melbourne Grove farce is a classic example."

Rockets is referring to a blog post which I sent to Labour Party members. Consequently, it makes lots of reference to things which will not interest non-party members. Of the five points I make, two have a more party political and Southwark-wide focus, two are explicitly Goose Green focused, and one is a bit of both. I am not remotely embarassed by this - the role of the councillor is to do community work in your ward, and to do political work across the borough and beyond. I could of course do more in both areas but I think I have struck a fairly good balance.

Also, it seems a little odd to describe traffic measures on Melbourne Grove as a 'classic example' of something that has "little to do with Goose Green" when the proposals are being considered for roads in Goose Green and when they respond to issues raised by residents in Goose Green.

Schools reopening

I've already explained how the question of schools reopening affects the council's plans for the local roads. The rest of Rocket's questions are regarding my role as a teacher and member of the National Education Union in a different borough, or regarding my general political beliefs. Some are based on mischaracterisations of my views. Honestly, I do not think it is worth entering into a lengthy discussion on them here and I doubt that many people reading this thread about the local streets want or expect to discuss my trade union activity or political beliefs.

The use of this forum

As I said before, this forum is an important part of how we councillors communicate with residents but it is only one part. This Forum is great in lots of ways but it is not representative of the whole community, nor is it an effective way for me to identify urgent casework. So I come on here, but I do not make it my top priority. The two points above are good examples of the kinds of debate that I tend to get into on here but not by email: interesting and totally legitimate criticisms of my political perspectives and decisions. By contrast, the emails I get from residents is almost exclusively to raise an issue which I can directly act on and get positive results for the people I am here to serve.

I hope that this answers everyone's questions. As always, drop me an email if there is anything I can do.

Best wishes,

James

[Rockets]

And look at the link, it's not just Melbourne Grove - they are basically trying to fast-track every programme they have under "consultation" - Dulwich Village, Champion Hill etc etc.

They are using Covid as a means to circumvent their own consultation process - you have got to admire their chutzpah.

[first mate]

Sorry James, to say a couple of hundred people ?responded? gives no indication of whether they are in favour. Please can you tell us if the whole of Melbourne was ?consulted? or just one end and then, for whichever case applies, how many total households were in the area of consultation and within that how many households were ?consulted? and of those how many in favour?

So are you saying there were two consultative processes around this, a ?survey? by Councillors and Then another within Healthy Street? What a lot of effort around just a part of one street? Can you explain please?

I clicked on the Southwark link in geh?s post, just a few posts up from your reply James. You should have a look. Within that there is a PDF labelled Melbourne Grove, it states and I quote:

?Recent engagement from Our Healthy Street Dulwich scheme shows around 70% of respondents? ...in favour.

So 70% of how many asked? What is that figure and what proportion of all the households on Melbourne is that?

How many consulted

First Mate - a couple of hundred people responded to the survey. You are absolutely right that this is not a majority of the households on these streets but it is does give an indication of what people think. As emphasised above, any measures implemented will be followed by a monitoring period where changes can be made or the measures removed.

The southern section of Melbourne Grove has previously been consulted as part of the Our Healthy Streets consultation.

Edit:In the time it took to write this first mate mentioned a figure of 70%. I have just glanced over the documents and cannot see that anywhere but I suspect that it refers to Our Healthy Streets, not the survey we councillors d

[Rockets]

James,

Our messages crossed in the ether.

I am glad you will be installing some bike securing points along Lordship Lane - you might also want to look at temporarily widening some of the footpaths along Lordship Lane - anyone who has walked down Lordship Lane can see that a quick fix can be installed very easily and will be hugely beneficial to aiding social distancing.

You say that the temporary measures will be installed in the next two weeks - yet the council's document within the link you pasted says, quite clearly, that a decision "is not due BEFORE Jun 15th" by my basic maths that is 9 days away. Have you jumped the gun a bit or was this always a done deal from the outset, like many of us suspected?

On the basis of this can we presume that all of the other measures are like Dulwich Village and Champion Hill are also being given the green light? It will be interesting to see what the cumulative impact of the DV, Melbourne Grove and other closures have on the surrounding roads once they all start in the next two weeks.

The point you, deliberately, miss on my challenge to you is that everything you do can be rooted back to your political views and party political aspirations. Look, we understand - you're a politician - you're a marxist - you're a teacher - you're a union activist - all of those things are admirable and I commend you on fighting the government at every opportunity (somebody has to but I also think schoolchildren should not be used as a political football by either side) but sometimes, just sometimes, you have to take a step back and question whether you are actually listening to all your constituents or just those who resonate with your own ideology.

Unfortunately the Labour party took an absolute hiding in the last election and delivered us four more years of tory fun and games because of just this blinkered approach and, I am afraid, you seem to be falling into the same trap and it is the constituents as a whole across all of your ward who will suffer.

[ruffers]

Can I just ask the citizens of Melbourne Grove if there's anything else they'd like?

[first mate]

What is clear is that it does not have to be a majority, it just needs to be some people whose thinking aligns with the Council agenda ( a very long-term agenda in this case, nothing to do with Covid and first mooted when James Barber was Cllr).

Farewell democracy, all residents are equal just the views of some are more equal than others!

[Abe_froeman]

James Barber did at least have the good grace to accept the conclusion of the report the council paid thousands of pounds for, that concluded that closing Melbourne Grove was a tremendously stupid idea.

[Spartacus]

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50023147&Opt=0

Are we allowed to comment either in support or against these schemes ?

[first mate]

I think they are using Covid as a tool to drive them through as emergency measures.

We are told they are temporary and feedback will be monitored - believe that if you want. But, isn?t it a coincidence that many of the measures they wanted to implement long, long before Covid just happen to somehow be exactly the right ?Fix? for the current situation?

[ed_pete]

"But, isn?t it a coincidence that many of the measures they wanted to implement long, long before Covid just happen to somehow be exactly the right ?Fix? for the current situation?"

Spot on. This is opportunism of the worse kind dressed up as listening to concerned residents. The 70% number is meaningless and shouldn't be quoted as justification unless it was achieved fairly and can be thoroughly audited.

I presume the emergency services are OK with this btw.