Dulwich LSP Phase 2 - No access for cars Townley Road to East Dulwich Road from 22 October

[AylwardS]

Another thread made me look at the Council website and I saw this which I believe will affect the Townley Road / East Dulwich Road junction I think I have seen posts on this before but could only find a thread about phase 3 and as this comes into operation on Thursday thought it best to post.

The orders have been published for phase 2 to come into operation on 22 October.

The orders can be found on the Council website.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/traffic-orders-licensing-strategies-and-regulation/traffic-management-orders?chapter=5&article

To my reading this means no left turn from Calton Avenue into Townley Road and Townley Road becomes no access to East Dulwich Road during the morning and evening peaks.

Looks like it will be camera enforcement so if you miss the signs you won?t know until the penalty comes through the door.

Sorry if I?ve started a new thread unnecessarily

[singalto]

The road closures are getting ridiculous.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

You already can't turn from Dulwich Rd into Townley Rd though...

[Cora]

This is insane?! Also interested to know where will all the Alleyns coaches be pushed to? Can someone tell me is this a govt thing or a Southwark one? Tory or labour?

[legalalien]

It's Southwark Council - if you have a look at the last few pages of the "our healthy streets" thread there are links to relevant documents. There is a further council meeting about it today.

[northernmonkey]

Its no access for cars during the timed restriction for cars coming from Lordship Lane towards east dulwich grove - the coaches will still be able to access Townley.

Cora Wrote:

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

> This is insane?! Also interested to know where

> will all the Alleyns coaches be pushed to? Can

> someone tell me is this a govt thing or a

> Southwark one? Tory or labour?

[JohnL]

If they can't have LTN's in Wandsworth they need to up them in Southwark and Lambeth to meet the target IMHO.

[JohnL]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> It's Southwark Council - if you have a look at the

> last few pages of the "our healthy streets" thread

> there are links to relevant documents. There is a

> further council meeting about it today.

The money is coming from central government and is also part of the terma of the bailout - however much some councils welcome them.

It seems to be a cross party plan

[JohnL]

Shapps is trying to play both sides against the middle though

Even the Daily Mail noticed this.

"Mr Shapps' comments, in a letter sent to local councils last week, come despite the fact that many of the cycle lanes were built using money from an emergency ?250million fund which he unveiled in May."

But he's already fixed it (very Boris Jonsonesque - it's oven ready)

"The Transport Secretary explained how he had since ordered his staff to work with local councils, adding: 'Since then, numerous schemes have been scaled back and revised'."

and MORE money is coming

"He warned that the second round of funding could involve some town halls receiving 'considerably less' if they failed to embrace good design."

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8852217/Grant-Shapps-admits-new-cycle-lanes-unused.html

[jazzhino]

Judicial Review

There needs to be a legal challenge by means of a Judicial Review. I have obtained legal advice which confirms that in order to legally enforceable the roadblocks, there needs to be a second order under section 9 and 10 of the Road Traffic Act 1984.

Furthermore, the 15 October 2020 order experimental orders under sections 9, 10 and 63 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 can be challengeable within six weeks. In the the first instance a pre-action protocol letter would need to be served on the council.

[exdulwicher]

jazzhino Wrote:

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

> Judicial Review

>

>

> There needs to be a legal challenge by means of a Judicial Review. I have obtained legal advice

> which confirms that in order to legally enforceable the roadblocks, there needs to be a

> second order under section 9 and 10 of the Road Traffic Act 1984.

>

> Furthermore, the 15 October 2020 order experimental orders under sections 9, 10 and 63 of

> the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 can be challengeable within six weeks. In the the first

> instance a pre-action protocol letter would need to be served on the council.

A few points: ETRO is already made under Sections 9 and 10, there isn't a second order.

ETROs are made under sections 9 and 10 of the RTRA84 and sections 22 and 23 of the LATOR(EW) [which is the Local Authorities' Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and Wales) Regulations 1996)

And you missed Section 22:

Experimental orders

22.?(1) The provisions of regulations 7 (publication of proposals) and 8 (objections) shall not apply to an experimental order.

(2) No provision of an experimental order shall come into force before the expiration of the period of seven days beginning with the day on which a notice of making in relation to the order is published.

(3) The order making authority shall comply with the requirements of Schedule 2 as to the making of deposited documents relating to an experimental order available for public inspection.

(4) Deposited documents shall be so made available, at the times and at the places specified in the notice of making in relation to the experimental order, for a period beginning with the date on which that advertisement is first published and ending when the order ceases to have effect.

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

You've also noted Section 63 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 - that refers to providing cycle parking / cycle stands so not sure what that has to do with things?

[legalalien]

The experimental orders include the relocation of a cycle hangar - hence ref to section 63 in the order.

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> jazzhino Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Judicial Review

> >

> >

> > There needs to be a legal challenge by means of

> a Judicial Review. I have obtained legal advice

> > which confirms that in order to legally

> enforceable the roadblocks, there needs to be a

> > second order under section 9 and 10 of the Road

> Traffic Act 1984.

> >

> > Furthermore, the 15 October 2020 order

> experimental orders under sections 9, 10 and 63

> of

> > the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 can be

> challengeable within six weeks. In the the first

> > instance a pre-action protocol letter would need

> to be served on the council.

>

> A few points: ETRO is already made under Sections

> 9 and 10, there isn't a second order.

> ETROs are made under sections 9 and 10 of the

> RTRA84 and sections 22 and 23 of the LATOR(EW) The

> provisions of regulations 7 (publication of

> proposals) and 8 (objections) shall not apply to

> an experimental order.

>

> (2) No provision of an experimental order shall

> come into force before the expiration of the

> period of seven days beginning with the day on

> which a notice of making in relation to the order

> is published.

>

> (3) The order making authority shall comply with

> the requirements of Schedule 2 as to the making of

> deposited documents relating to an experimental

> order available for public inspection.

>

> (4) Deposited documents shall be so made

> available, at the times and at the places

> specified in the notice of making in relation to

> the experimental order, for a period beginning

> with the date on which that advertisement is first

> published and ending when the order ceases to have

> effect.

>

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

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

>

> You've also noted Section 63 of the Road Traffic

> Regulation Act 1984 - that refers to providing

> cycle parking / cycle stands so not sure what that

> has to do with things?

[Rockets]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> jazzhino Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Judicial Review

> >

> >

> > There needs to be a legal challenge by means of

> a Judicial Review. I have obtained legal advice

> > which confirms that in order to legally

> enforceable the roadblocks, there needs to be a

> > second order under section 9 and 10 of the Road

> Traffic Act 1984.

> >

> > Furthermore, the 15 October 2020 order

> experimental orders under sections 9, 10 and 63

> of

> > the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 can be

> challengeable within six weeks. In the the first

> > instance a pre-action protocol letter would need

> to be served on the council.

>

> A few points: ETRO is already made under Sections

> 9 and 10, there isn't a second order.

> ETROs are made under sections 9 and 10 of the

> RTRA84 and sections 22 and 23 of the LATOR(EW) The

> provisions of regulations 7 (publication of

> proposals) and 8 (objections) shall not apply to

> an experimental order.

>

> (2) No provision of an experimental order shall

> come into force before the expiration of the

> period of seven days beginning with the day on

> which a notice of making in relation to the order

> is published.

>

> (3) The order making authority shall comply with

> the requirements of Schedule 2 as to the making of

> deposited documents relating to an experimental

> order available for public inspection.

>

> (4) Deposited documents shall be so made

> available, at the times and at the places

> specified in the notice of making in relation to

> the experimental order, for a period beginning

> with the date on which that advertisement is first

> published and ending when the order ceases to have

> effect.

>

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

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

>

> You've also noted Section 63 of the Road Traffic

> Regulation Act 1984 - that refers to providing

> cycle parking / cycle stands so not sure what that

> has to do with things?

Ex- do these count as "experimental" given they were planned during the OHS consultation? Is there also not a reference to needing to consult with stakeholders in either the "emergency" or "experimental" traffic orders and, if so, does the admission that they failed to consult shopkeepers on Melbourne Grove mean those are unlawful?

[exdulwicher]

Hi Rockets.

The legal / consultation side of things is a little outside my area really but in general...

Emergency are used when there's a threat to life and they can be dropped in literally there and then - the police can arrive on scene of an emergency like a car crash, fire in a building adjacent to the road etc and they can close it. No issues with any of that, it sits a little to one side of the other TROs and although it can last a while (like if there's a danger of a crane collapse until its made safe), generally it's a few hours only.

Experimental - these are planned anyway, you don't just turn up, drop a planter and wander off again, they are mapped out and, by their very definition, some of them will have elements of the previous Healthy Streets plan. What's gone in is NOT the full HS plan - that included a filter at the Plough junction (Dulwich Library / Eynella) and it had camera filters with residents passes. The current Experimental doesn't (no time to process the residents passes).

The idea behind Experimental is that it happens alongside a consultation and sometimes a bit of on-the-fly adaptations as required. Personally I'm a big fan of them as it makes things vastly cheaper than consulting, revising, re-consulting etc, then obtaining planning permission and roadworks clearance, putting up with months of roadworks and then finding that it doesn't work and you need to re-do it. Councils really need to do a lot more of this although the political side of things (for example the perceived lack of consultation) needs careful management. Lambeth seem to have managed that better than Southwark to be honest.

It also really helps with modelling work, there's far less theory involved as you can almost see what is happening in real time, work the predictions and mitigations far more accurately and then use that to extrapolate other methods. Usually, one measure on its own is insufficient - like putting ion a 20mph zone, that's often useless on its own as everyone ignores it; you need to do it in conjunction with traffic calming / cameras / a filter.

They're not unlawful - obviously they do get people's backs up but equally many people are in favour of them. That often depends on exactly which roads people live on, want to use and the way they want to use it (walking, cycling, driving etc). The challenge here (and elsewhere in London and nationally) is that it's dropped into a very pro and anti entrenched position, there's seemingly little middle ground.

As I say, the political aspects of it are kind of outside my area of modelling. Generally though, the councils know what they're doing from a legal point of view - usually because it's incredibly expensive for them if they get the legal side of things wrong!

[jazzhino]

Even Experimental orders can be challenged by a Judicial Review, within six weeks.

[tommyboy]

Anyone seen the proposed new signage about this? Walking along Townley earlier today and couldn?t see anything.

[Penguin68]

tommyboy Wrote:

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

> Anyone seen the proposed new signage about this?

> Walking along Townley earlier today and couldn?t

> see anything.

Why sign when you can fine?

[Drxyster]

I am confused, one end of Townley Road is at Lordship Lane, the other end is at East Dulwich Grove. It is not at East Dulwich Road, unless I am missing something.

[tommyboy]

According to the plans, signs will be at both ends. The signs at Lordship Lane advising ?no through route? through Townley Road during the proposed times.

[James Barber]

Effectively these proposals for Townley Road are producing a School Street. I don't think they're using the name. Much more ambitious than previous School Streets in that it a popular route rather than a culled sea almost on one drives down.

The change to Townley Road etc have been trailed since before COVID. The council believes they have consulted on them.

Some of the reasoning comes from complaints about how dangerous school coaches and traffic levels on Townley Road can be.

Previously threads on this forum, and also direct complaints to Southwark Council and Councillors, about traffic on Townley Road. Often from drivers complaining about School Coaches blocking their journeys. Be careful what you complain about!

[legalalien]

But they are officially putting a School Street on Hillsboro road as an experimental measure. Maybe there?s a one School Street per school limit!

[Nigello]

James ? no school street for Goodrich despite the assertion it would be shut off (permeable) at Dunstan?s. The other roads that attract complaints are normal sized roads away from schools (certainly not on which schools are actually situated), not narrowed to 2m which is what Goodrich is near to Dunstan?s. Result ? jams, aggro and large (8 wheel) lorries squeezing past a narrowed section that doesn?t appear on TomTom, etc. as such. It?s not realistic. Can you help?

[Rockets]

The Brakes catering lorry that delivers to Goodrich now has problems as it used to pull over in the areas that are now blocked off. A couple of weeks ago he had to sit blocking the entire road as he unloaded the deliveries to the school.

[Nigello]

Then you know how it is to experience congestion and house shaking due to narrowing of a road for safety. This narrowed section is and never has been suitable for the Waze and GPS-led huge lorries.

[Roky Erickson]

I'm sorry to hear that, but all of us here presumably live on residential streets vulnerable to GPS-directed traffic. That's a separate issue and nothing to do with School Streets.

In that respect, there is absolutely no reason for a permanent closure of the Goodrich/Dunstan's junction. In line with every other School Street in the surrounding area, it could just be timed, around the morning and afternoon times when the school is actually open, operative, and children are travelling. There's no justification for it being shut off completely. Especially as the 2 main entrances to the school aren't even on that road (hence the road-widening)....

Nigello Wrote:

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

> Then you know how it is to experience congestion

> and house shaking due to narrowing of a road for

> safety. This narrowed section is and never has

> been suitable for the Waze and GPS-led huge

> lorries.