Some useful info related to Southwark, traffic, LTNs etc

[legalalien]

For those who aren't aware (I wasn't), the various "multi-ward" areas have facebook pages where they post info they think relevant to their areas, which people might want to consider following. Having trouble linking them but if you go to facebook and search for "empowering dulwich hill" and "empowering rye lane" ,they should come up.

[legalalien]

Environmental Scrutiny Commission

The next meeting of Southwark's Environmental Scrutiny Commission is on Wednesday 4 November at 6:30pm. The agenda is now up http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=517&MId=6833&Ver=4. The last meeting, back in July, was online so I expect people will be able to contact Southwark in advance and ask to join.

At the last meeting they discussed and finalised the Air Quality Report (which I've linked to previously and deals with matters including LTN issues) and the Climate Emergency Report, so I imagine similar issues will be raised at this meeting. All the info from the last meeting (including the final reports) is at http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=517&MId=6764&Ver=4. The Air Quality report has an appendix showing relative pollution levels across Southwark (in 2016) which I know various people have been asking about. Appendix 2 includes information about car /vehicle ownership and access.

On the climate emergency front there is an input report from Extinction Rebellion Southwark.

The video of the last meeting can be watched at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rV9VJJtNnM. Only watched the first 10 mins so far but looks quite useful to get a feel of current strategy on traffic/ parking etc.

Edited to add: don?t want to sidetrack this but if anyone else is interested in following up and not already aware of the arguments: there?s apparently a conflict going on between local authorities who have set zero carbon targets more ambitious than central government, and central government refusing to fund their plans (Extinction Rebellion supporting the former). See https://extinctionrebellion.uk/2020/02/06/local-rebellion-why-xr-local-groups-building-experts-and-councillors-are-joining-voices-to-defend-local-powers/. Maybe deserves its own thread if anyone wants to discuss!

Edited to add link to summary of Commission's findings by Cllr Werner: https://www.sera.org.uk/scrutiny_has_a_critical_role

[legalalien]

This describes TfL funding sources / notes which programmes are and are not continuing. Haven?t got my head around it yet.

https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs-and-communities/borough-funding

[legalalien]

Making online comments on Southwark Streetspace and experimental measures

Hi all - you'll see from the above that AywardS has posted a link to the general Streetspace Southwark commonplace site for commenting on measures / desirable measures on Southwark streets. Just clicked onto it and was surprised to see so many green comments/ the fact it didn't resemble the commonplace site I had previously commented on... there are in fact four separate sites to comment on the experimental measures in Dulwich Village, East Dulwich, Peckham and Walworth.

So: General site for suggestions is https://southwarkstreetspace.commonplace.is/comments

Comments on Dulwich Village measures is: https://dulwichvillagestreetspace.commonplace.is/

Comments on East Dulwich measures is: https://eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is/

Comments on Peckham measures is: https://peckhamstreetspace.commonplace.is/

Doing it this way does mean that looking at the general site/ map is a bit misleading for those unaware of the additional sites. I can see that some people are putting their comments on the experimental measures on the main site, still. I have no idea whether the council overlays the various maps in order to get a complete picture.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Oh good. You?ve started another thread 🤦‍♂️

[first mate]

RRR, no need to look at it if you don?t want to but seems lots of people do. Lots of very useful info all in one place too.

[legalalien]

Not LTN related, but for anyone interested in some more info about how Councils work. I was pondering what rules applied with regard to Councils funding lobbying campaigns by third party groups (or promoting policies generally).

It's covered by the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity - where

"Publicity" means any communication in whatever form, addressed to the public at large or a section of the public. The code is "recommended" practice but it does have teeth through the relevant sections of the Local Government Act 1986. There are the kind of principles you'd expect around cost effectiveness, objectivity, even handedness etc.

"Publicity by local authorities may seek to influence (in accordance with the relevant law and in a way which they consider positive) the attitudes of local people or public behaviour in relation to matters of health, safety, crime prevention, race relations, equality, diversity and community issues." BUT: "Any publicity describing the council?s policies and aims should be as objective as possible, concentrating on the facts or explanation or both. Local authorities should not use public funds to mount publicity campaigns whose primary purpose is to persuade the public to hold a particular view on a question of policy."

If they "provide assistance to third parties to issue publicity they should ensure that the principles in this code are adhered to by the recipients of that assistance."

I also found it interesting that "Local authorities should ensure that publicity relating to policies and proposals from central government is balanced and factually accurate. Such publicity may set out the local authority?s views and reasons for holding those views, but should avoid anything likely to be perceived by readers as constituting a political statement, or being a commentary on contentious areas of public policy." I guess that makes sense / applies to communicatons from the Council rather than individual councillors.

Code at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5670/1878324.pdf for anyone interested in taking a look.

[legalalien]

there will be another decision, on Post Covid 19 Highway Schemes Batch 6, in December. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50024341&Opt=0.

No idea what these might be, but as with others will keep an eye out.

[legalalien]

Hadn?t seen this before but it is interesting reading: a traffic management study of Dulwich commissioned by Southwark, final report in April 2018. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Dulwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf

Lots of interesting info about the profile of trips within / to and from Dulwich, and also info about things like relative air quality, casualty hot spots etc (locally and as against Southwark averages) - basically hot spots are LL and Dulwich Common. Was quite surprised how the number of car trips to schools stacked up - significantly fewer than most places.

What is also striking is the very small number of responses given to consultations (scroll to end).

[legalalien]

Refresh of the Southwark Council Plan

Quick heads up. The council has a four year plan covering 2018-2022 setting out its priorities. They are currently undertaking a ?refresh? exercise.

Cabinet has agreed on this document, it goes before the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at a public meeting on 9 November, there was (apparently) a six week period for public consultation which ended on 20 October ? it?s due to go to the Council Assembly for approval on 25 November.

Worth a read to get a feel for various Council priorities ? also includes a report on 2019/20 performance.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g6738/Public%20reports%20pack%20Monday%2009-Nov-2020%2018.30%20Overview%20Scrutiny%20Committee.pdf?T=10

You can email for details of the online meeting. It will include an interview with the new leader of the council, Cllr Kieron Williams.

Edited to add - was intrigued to see a "Local Funds" item on the Oversight and Scrutiny Commission's work plan, referring back to a meeting in October 2019. If you look at the minutes of that meeting it's this:

"LOCAL FUNDS The committee discussed this piece of work, which is focussed on assembling a clear picture of the funding programmes available to local people to bid for. Finance officers had drawn up a spreadsheet as a starting point. Committee members agreed that this was a very useful document and could be developed further. One specific suggestion was to add cabinet members areas of responsibility. Cllrs Humaira Ali and Alice Macdonald agreed to take it away for more work and bring back a proposal"

At least it's not just us members of the public that find it hard to keep track!

[FairTgirl]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Hadn?t seen this before but it is interesting

> reading: a traffic management study of Dulwich

> commissioned by Southwark, final report in April

> 2018.

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Du

> lwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf

>

> Lots of interesting info about the profile of

> trips within / to and from Dulwich, and also info

> about things like relative air quality, casualty

> hot spots etc (locally and as against Southwark

> averages) - basically hot spots are LL and Dulwich

> Common. Was quite surprised how the number of car

> trips to schools stacked up - significantly fewer

> than most places.

>

> What is also striking is the very small number of

> responses given to consultations (scroll to end).

I read this some weeks ago and noted that most of the accidents are not surprisingly on the most heavily trafficked routes - LL, EDG and Grove Vale... (all in top 9 roads for highest traffic flow back in 2015) now even heavier. Speeding is not as bad as some like to make out. How little No2 monitoring stations there are - there are alot more than in this report but as an example given the traffic - barely any on LL - none on EDG.

Cycling and bus routes east to west are very poor.

[legalalien]

Greater London Authority / Transport for London - Strategic Road Network

A bit more background. Not 100% on this, but my best effort to figure out how TfL fits into this as regards main roads.

TfL has responsibility for some main roads ?red routes? in London, and also has to be consulted on various matters affecting roads which are designated as Strategic Roads (scroll down to the bottom for info about what these are ? basically Lordship Lane locally).

In response to a few FOI requests in relation to other London boroughs, the GLA has advised that

?The Mayor of London, through Transport for London, is working closely with London boroughs to create more space for people to walk and cycle safely as part of the Streetspace programme. The programme includes the creation of temporary cycle lanes on main roads, wider pavements on high-streets, and the creation of low-traffic neighbourhoods on residential streets. As part of this programme, boroughs submit bids to Transport for London for schemes that they wish to implement, which are then assessed against a range of criteria. There is more detail about how these assessments are carried out on the TfL website: https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs-and-communities/streetspace-funding TfL has provided funding to [borough] for a number of low-traffic neighbourhoods. Pages 7 and 8 of this guidance document set out the legal and regulatory processes of the Traffic Management Act that TfL and the boroughs use to assess and approve schemes such as low-traffic neighbourhoods when they are predicted to have an impact on either the Strategic Road Network, or the Transport for London Road Network: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/lsp-interim-borough-guidance-main-doc.pdf

Where schemes are deemed to have impacts, TfL exercise these powers by reviewing proposals and providing recommendations on changes to ease traffic flow.

The London Assembly has no powers to intervene in these schemes but can make representations to decision makers at councils and Transport for London, and to the Mayor.?

Boroughs are asked to discuss all Streetspace (including LTN) proposals with TfL. In addition, there is a statutory requirement to make Traffic Management Act 2004 Notifications (TMAN): ?Pursuant to the Traffic Management Act 2004, any activity carried out by the Boroughs using Highways Act 1980 (HA) or Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (RTRA) powers which will or are likely to affect the Strategic Road Network (SRN) or the Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) is notifiable by the Borough to TfL through TfL?s TMAN process.? Section 121B of the RTRA requires TfL to be notified and either consent, or ?not object? within one month.

In other words if any experimental order made by Southwark was likely to affect Lordship Lane / Grove Vale it would have to be notified through this process- how this works for experimental orders is set out on page 8 of the guidance. I suspect both the experimental orders Dulwich Village and East Dulwich LTNs would meet that test so you would expect that TfL was notified ? not sure how you can find this out!

TfL go on to say in the guidance that ?TfL expects that a borough would run the TMAN and traffic order processes in parallel for expediency and we will prioritise discussions and assessments for those schemes which deliver transport network improvements to support recovery from the COVID-19 emergency. TfL will not require any more information than that required by your own Borough Traffic Manager and commits to a pragmatic approach in our assessment of your plans. TfL will discuss options for assessing the impact of more complex proposals which ban movements and close roads when there is insufficient time to undertake a full traffic model assessment. TfL commit a timely turnaround of submissions to support expeditious on-street delivery.? So there?s a fast tracking process in place, but if a TMAN was submitted I think Southwark would have to provide some modelling of the potential effect on Lordship Lane and TfL would have to turn its mind to it. If anyone knows how to find this out other than through an FoI request, do tell!

____________________________________________________________________

The initial list of strategic roads was set out in the Schedule to The Traffic Management (Strategic Roads in Greater London) Designation Order 2005, see https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/476/schedule/made

?73. A2216 from its junction with Dulwich Common (A205) to its junction with Denmark Hill (A215) including Lordship Lane (part), Grove Vale, Dog Kennel Hill, Dulwich Road, Grove Lane and Champion Park, but excluding Lordship Lane between its junction with Dulwich Common (A205) and a point 15m north west of the party wall of 481 and 483 Lordship Lane.?

It also includes the A2214 but only ?from its junction with Norwood Road (A215) to its junctions with Effra Road (A204) including Dulwich Road, Dalberg Road, Morval Road and Brixton Water Lane? ie not East Dulwich Grove/ East Dulwich Road as far as I can tell, although these were listed as Strategic Roads in the traffic management report linked further up this thread. The Mayor has power to make an order directing that a road become a strategic road, no idea how you find this out! But GLA comments on the hospital site in EDG from 2016 state that the nearest part of the SRN is 200m away, in Lordship Lane.

[legalalien]

Two new TMOs from Thursday:

School Streets trials - Alleyn?s Junior School, The Charter School East Dulwich, Crawford Primary School, Ivydale Primary School, & St. James? Cof E Primary School

Various parking and a cycle track order - parking includes disabled bays in Calton Ave, CONSORTROAD north-east side,extend and formalise existing mandatory with-flow cycle lane between its junctions with Nunhead Lane and Scylla Road; some waiting restrictions in Pickwick Road - you really need to look at the actual thing (Minor Traffic Scheme Q4) to see where they are...

Both available at

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

[legalalien]

Here is the decision notice for the LTNs being funded by the Guys and St Thomas?s charity and discussed at the recent Environmental Scrutiny Commission meeting

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50024511

Those who attended / watched the meeting will know that these ones have been a bit more thought through. Interestingly this decision notice contains a slightly more detailed ?consultation? section:

?

Consultation

15. Meetings were held with Ward Councilors to discuss each location. Main concerns raised related to increased journey times for residents and increased traffic and air pollution of surrounding roads as a result of traffic displacement.

16. Emergency services (Fire, Police and Ambulance) have indicated they will not support schemes which promote hard road closures, as they will increase response times. Their preference is for camera enforced closures without physical prevention for vehicles. Camera enforcement will be considered should any of the measures be made permanent.

17. All measures have been designed in consultation with Southwark Waste Management. In order to ensure residential waste collection is maintained, removable bollards have been proposed. Concerns were raised regarding the additional time required to collect waste due to closures being proposed as part of the GSTTC and wider Southwark LSP schemes.

18. Consultation with schools and businesses will be undertaken prior to the schemes being implemented.

19. Further consultation with residents will be undertaken during the period of the Experimental Traffic Management Order via Commonplace?

I?d hazard a guess this has gone in in response to concerns expressed by ward councillors and generally about the process on some of the measures to date.

[Metallic]

Number 19 is a rubbish option weighted away from any kind of constructive criticism. And it is anonymous. Uncle Fred from Camden could be writing a comment for all we know.

[Lucymerc]

good article in Guardian explaining how LTNs myths

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/16/mythbusters-eight-common-objections-to-ltns-and-why-they-are-wrong

[Rockets]

Lucymerc Wrote:

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

> good article in Guardian explaining how LTNs myths

>

>

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

> 6/mythbusters-eight-common-objections-to-ltns-and-

> why-they-are-wrong

Per the other thread....

Written by their pro-cycling activist, lobbyist and author of a book called Bike Nation: How Cycling Can Save the World, Peter Walker......#takeitwithaverylargepinchofsalt...;-)

[Metallic]

Well if you live in a five hour enclave, or in a road shut off, which actually is most of Dulwich Village Ward, you are forced in to an existence where travelling to areas outside your enclave become a terrible chore, taking longer times and then repeating the longer journey when you go home.

After Covid we will really see what traffic is like.

[legalalien]

Hi all, new order which includes making permanent what are described as existing trial point closures in Oakhurst Grove and Peckham Rye / The Gardens junction.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/26605/ETMO-Review-notice-dated-19-Nov-2020-.pdf

[legalalien]

New batch of school streets closures - Batch 3 - decision by Cllr Rose due 20 Nov (think this is a formality)

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50024563

Affects various schools in Southwark, includes timed permeable closure on Dunstans Road outside Goodrich, at junctions with upland and goodrich roads, 3-3:45pm.

Experimental traffic order in Landcroft outside Harris Primary is made permanent.

Slightly odd as the former decision seems to relate to the experimental order made last week and posted at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/25844/School-Street-trials-winter-2-notice-dated-12-Nov-2020-.pdf.

Landcroft one also slightly strange as the notice for it says it's making the original experimental closure permanent but the afternoon timeslot seems to have changed from 2-4 to 2:30 to 4:30. Maybe amended somewhere along the way? Not sure I want to check but not loving the idea of a precedent where unilateral tweaks are made without consultation when confirming an experimental order...

[legalalien]

here's the decision notice for the a further one of Guys and St Thomas' LTN schemes, in Peckham.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50024582. Slightly amended consultation process:

"Meetings were held with Ward Councillors to discuss the scheme. Main concerns raised relate to the lack of consultation on the proposed measure, and the number of closures/filters being proposed. Further design work was undertaken and additional discussions with ward councilors were held, to reduce the number of filters to a level that was acceptable and to proceed without full consultation being held prior to the works taking place.

17.All measures have been designed in consultation with Southwark Waste Management. Concerns were raised regarding the additional time required to collect waste due to closures being proposed as part of the GSTTC and wider Southwark LSP schemes.

18.Consultation with schools and business will be undertaken prior to the schemes being implemented.

19.Further consultation with residents will be undertaken during the period of the Experimental Traffic Management Order via Commonplace."

[Rockets]

Point 19 is interesting. Consultation with residents via Commonplace during the period of the ETMO. Is this the means by which the council will consult on all LTNs moving forward? The government made it clear (according to Peter Walker of The Guardian fame) that there needed to be prior consultation.

[legalalien]

I'm getting the idea that it is the vehicle for consultation. But that's not to be confused with the right to make statutory objections within six months after the experimental order goes in. I'm sure I saw somewhere that a negative comment on Commonplace does not equal an objection. This could be confusing for people, I suspect.

Incidentally, today I received a hard copy of Southwark Life magazine for what must be the first time in more than five years. With info about the new leader of the council/ cabinet and links to various consultations. A move afoot? Perhaps wishful thinking.

[Rockets]

Also the Guys and St Thomas' project is far better thought out and it looks like the implementation is going to be far better than the council ones to date. The charity is insisting on displacement analysis - which could be interesting and finally produce some granular data on what displacement does/does not actually occur.

I actually think that any prior consultation will only apply to new programmes and this one has been in the council purview for some time. I think the council has rolled out all the phases in Dulwich super quick so they can get them in before the government forces them to, heaven forbid, consult with local residents! ;-)

If Commonspace is to be the mode by which they consult this will explain why many of the pro-closure twitter handles encourage people to register their support via Commonspace.

[legalalien]

My concern is - what proportion of Southwark residents actually follow any of this stuff on Twitter etc? I don?t. There are some specific fields I?m involved in where Twitter is really useful but personally I don?t engage generally in community issues via this route and lots of others don?t either. So we have a situation where groups of people with strong and similar views follow each other and conclude that their view is the majority because everyone agrees with each other: and occasional clashes where people from the ?opposition ? challenge each other. Everyone in the middle is blissfully unaware.