Jump to content

Southwark Streets for People Consultation

AylwardS

By AylwardS
in Roads & Transport

 Share

Recommended Posts

AylwardS

AylwardS

Posted
Posted

 

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/streets-survey

The Council is consulting until the end of March. First complete for where you live and then you can select to comment on other areas of Southwark.

I don’t live in the East Dulwich Grove ward but was able to comment on the need for a pedestrian crossing at the Lordship Lane end.
 

 

Spartacus

Spartacus

Posted
Posted (edited)

Southwark seem to have created a whole department churning out consultations, and whilst it's important to get residents views they have gone from Area consultations to Borough consultations. With the diversity of different areas in Southwark is there a danger that one size doesn't fit all ? Especially around transport needs and on street parking / shared use? 

Edited by Spartacus
Penguin68

Penguin68

Posted
Posted (edited)

I note that the questionnaire lists a range of actions the council could take as regards streets etc. - you can not complete these but you cannot confirm that there is nothing that you wish them to do to your e.g. local street. That means in interpretation that every action called for will be listed (e.g. wider pavements, more crossings etc.) but there will almost certainly be no listing for the %age of respondents who don't want/ need changes to their streets.

Equally all the actions are posited as effectively cost free. Nowhere can you say that you'd prefer what are (in effect) wholly discretionary actions to be substituted for others, which might indeed be statutory.

Nowhere can you say that you'd want potholes addressed before pavement widening, or education to be better funded rather than more crossings. Or sealed off streets. This questionnaire is written to licence more interference along the lines we already know - and it gives no space to say 'things are broadly OK, for me, in my neck of the woods'. It is therefore just a charter for change, and sticks to the agenda we already know about. I'd have liked to ask for better speed control in Barry, for instance, but there's no option for that. I'd like cyclists kept off my local pavements, but ditto!

Edited by Penguin68
spelling

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Advertise Here

  • Latest Discussions

    • camilla68
      T Rooney Heating Ltd

      By camilla68 · Posted

      Tommy has been servicing our boiler for a number of years now and has also carried out repairs for us.  His service is brilliant; he’s reliable, really knowledgeable and a lovely guy.  Very highly recommended!
    • sunshineSJ
      Recommendation: Spoiltdog aka Andy

      By sunshineSJ · Posted

      I have been using Andy for many years for decorating and general handyman duties. He always does a great job, is very friendly and his prices are competitive. Highly recommend.
    • Earl Aelfheah
      Is Rachel Reeves becoming the new Liz Truss?

      By Earl Aelfheah · Posted

      Money has to be raised in order to slow the almost terminal decline of public services bought on through years of neglect under the last government. There is no way to raise taxes that does not have some negative impacts / trade offs. But if we want public services and infrastructure that work then raise taxes we must.  Personally I'm glad that she is has gone some way to narrowing the inheritance loop hole which was being used by rich individuals (who are not farmers) to avoid tax. She's slightly rebalanced the burden away from the young, putting it more on wealthier pensioners (who let's face it, have been disproportionately protected for many, many years). And the NICs increase, whilst undoubtedly inflationary, won't be directly passed on (some will, some will likely be absorbed by companies); it's better than raising it on employees, which would have done more to depress growth. Overall, I think she's sailed a prudent course through very choppy waters. The electorate needs to get serious... you can't have European style services and US levels of tax. Borrowing for tax cuts, Truss style, it is is not. Of course the elephant in the room (growing ever larger now Trump is in office and threatening tariffs) is our relationship with the EU. If we want better growth, we need a closer relationship with our nearest and largest trading block. We will at some point have to review tax on transport more radically (as we see greater up take of electric vehicles). The most economically rational system would be one of dynamic road pricing. But politically, very difficult to do
    • HeadNun
      Is Rachel Reeves becoming the new Liz Truss?

      By HeadNun · Posted

      Labour was right not to increase fuel duty - it's not just motorists it affects, but goods transport. Fuel goes up, inflation goes up. Inflation will go up now anyway, and growth will stagnate, because businesses will pass the employee NIC hikes onto customers.  I think farms should be exempt from the 20% IHT. I don't know any rich famers, only ones who work their fingers to the bone. But it's in their blood and taking that, often multi-generation, legacy out of the family is heart-breaking. Many work to such low yields, and yet they'll often still bring a lamb to the vet, even if the fees are more than the lamb's life (or death) is worth. Food security should be made a top priority in this country. And, even tho the tax is only for farms over £1m, that's probably not much when you add it all up. I think every incentive should be given to young people who want to take up the mantle. 

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...