Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale

[Zebedee Tring]

Of course he will. It's the politicians who make the final decisions - or at least I hope that they do because they're accountable for the actions taken by the Council.

BTW which body will be making the final decision on this scheme? Presumably something as important as this is at least going to a Committee. If not, why not?

[James Barber]

Hi ZT,

The final decision for this will be taken by the Cabinet member/councillor with responsibility for Transport.

I asked and it has been agreed the scheme will be presented at the 28 January Dulwich Community Council which can make recommendations which hopefully the cabinet councillor will follow.

Why?

Because this is the constitution for Southwark Council that the Labour party have passed. As an opposition councillor the constitution we have isn't the one I would wish for. But that debate is for another day.

[Zebedee Tring]

James, if the Cabinet Councillor does not follow the Community Council recommendation, is he/she required to give reasons for failing to follow the recommendation? This would be analogous to a Planning Committee that refuses planning permission against officer advice giving full reasons for its decision. Surely transparency is paramount in such cases.

Will the report that is going to the Community Committee be made available at or before 28 January and will it be available on line?

[James Barber]

Hi ZT,

Yes that would be normal. A cabinet members decision can also be called in to Overview and Scurtiny Committee. But it would need a reason such as contrary to other policies, etc.

Yes the report will be available at least a week in advance of the Dulwich Community Council.

And I've just had confirmation that the DCC meeting will be held at Herne Hill Baptists Church, Half Moon Lane, SE24 9HU http://www.hernehillbaptistchurch.org/

Corner of Half Moon Lane with Winterbrook Road

[Zebedee Tring]

Thanks, James.

[slarti b]

Someone just pointed out to me that sometime yesterday (the last day of the "extended" consultation) Southwark sneaked out some new documents on the Web Site. http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/4031/townley_road-_frequently_asked_questions

The Main document, dated 18 Dec, is headed "Frequently Asked Questions" but it really sets out the objectives (rather different from previously set out) justifications for the council scheme that they wish to bulldoze through and then an assessment of the effects of the scheme based on a rushed traffic survey. It has clearly been put together in a hurry without being properly checked (look at spelling of Carton, sorry Calton, sorry CARLTON avenue) and I assume it is a rushed attempt to address the well founded criticism of this process.

There are no dates on the traffic maps and no description of the methodology used. No LINSIG traffic modelling.

A few key points on these so called FAQ's

- They conclude that the displaced traffic will rat-run through streets such as Gilkes, Dovercourt, Melbourne, Woodwarde etc but don't think it matters

- A "paramount" objective is to reduce or remove potential conflict with the increased number of cyclists on the proposed Waterloo-Crystal Palace Quietway. (ie nothing to do with local issues at all! and obviously no indication of expected numbers,detailed plans, effect on previous modelling etc)

- Removing traffic from the junction, (even though it rat runs through smaller residential streets)

- Key "local interest groups" involved in this scheme are Dulwich Society, Southwark Cyclists (given they only have 10 active members for the whole of Southwark they cant have that many in Dulwich?) and Dulwich\Herne Hill Safe Routes to School. No mention of local residents associations etc.

I have been arguing for rational improvements to the junction based on logic and evidence. I have responded to the consultation in detail pointing out the flaws in the studies and conclusions. I have been wasting my time.

The Council and the pressure groups have drawn up the scheme based round a banned right turn and then selectively chosen evidence to support their choice. To avoid scrutiny and discussion they have released documents only after considerable pressure, as late as possible and, in the case of this "FAQ", without publicity.

This is a disgrace.

When I have time I will go through the FAQ's in detail but is there any point? It seems the politicians will be making a decision on the scheme they wanted in the first place. To paraphrase Ian Hislop, if this is democracy I am a banana.

If you are concerned about the scheme then I encourage you to lobby your local councillors, express your concerns and ask whether they support or oppose the right turn ban.

Members of the Dulwich Society should contact the committee for their opinion and what they contributed to preparing the scheme. I can remember no mention of this in the last 2 magazines.

[Charles Notice]

The officers sit in a room with a red pencil and draw lines on a map.

Post a piece of paper on a lamp post and hope no one noticed what is happening

Local pressure groups badger Cllrs and the thing gets passed.

Most locals have no idea it happens.

Join a local green or cycling pressure group and find out.

Any thoughts on my comment made earlier on 11th December. Not surprised

[Zebedee Tring]

In view of what slarti b says, the more people who attend the 28 Jan meeting and speak the better.

[dulwichquine]

Thank you Slarti. Very well put.

[Zebedee Tring]

Sorry, slarti. I should have thanked you as well.

Looking on the positive side, maybe the decision makers at Southwark will think again, once they have seen the strength of opposition to the right hand turn ban proposal.

[hopskip]

The new Q&A document added on the final day of the consultation, changes tack.

The original consultation framed it: Local stakeholders have raised concerns regarding the safety of pedestrians and cyclists at this junction, particularly during morning and evening peak hours. Pedestrians have been observed to cross the junction diagonally (not using the staggered crossing facilities due to excessive waiting times) and conflict has been experienced between cyclists using the junction and traffic turning right out of Townley Road. The key aim of the proposals is to significantly improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at the junction, whilst ensuring that there is no adverse delay to traffic on East Dulwich Grove.

Following pressure for the evidence to be published, which showed two minor incidents in the past 5 years, the new Q&A document posted on the final day (19th) of the consultation introduced the following:

The need to safely cater for anticipated future significant increase in cyclist

numbers going through the junction between Townley Road and Greendale on the

established cycle route that is to become a ?Quietway?.

It seems that Councillor Mark Williams has encompassed this in the Cycling Strategy which you can listen to on the link: (listen to minutes 27-30 for the East Dulwich Grove statement). This was a presentation to the Southwark Oversight and Scrutiny Committee on the 10th Nov - well before the Townley Consultation was released. What was the reason for this to go on to YouTube; there does not seem to be anything else from the Oversight Committee on YouTube.

Be aware that while we focus on Townley, the Cycling Strategy is also out for consultation until the 1st Feb.

http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200107/transport_policy/3623/cycling_strategy

And to entice you - a chance to win ?100. And don't worry about the 500 character limitation - this is lengthy questionnaire for you to answer.

This Townley consultation is far from transparent and there is no clarity on the process for the consultation nor any sense that its impact on the community is going to be taken into consideration.

Has anyone conducted an FOI request?

[James Barber]

Hi Charles Notice,

Local councillors are typically asked about the counsultation area for such schemes after an initial suggestion from council officials.

Hi hopskip,

Yes, we need lots of feedback about the Cycling Strategy.

[sillywoman]

slarti b Wrote:

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

>

> - Removing traffic from the junction, (even though

> it rat runs through smaller residential streets)

> - Key "local interest groups" involved in this

> scheme are Dulwich Society, Southwark Cyclists

> (given they only have 10 active members for the

> whole of Southwark they cant have that many in

> Dulwich?) and Dulwich\Herne Hill Safe Routes to

> School. No mention of local residents

> associations etc.

>

> I have been arguing for rational improvements to

> the junction based on logic and evidence. I have

> responded to the consultation in detail pointing

> out the flaws in the studies and conclusions. I

> have been wasting my time.

>

> The Council and the pressure groups have drawn up

> the scheme based round a banned right turn and

> then selectively chosen evidence to support their

> choice. To avoid scrutiny and discussion they have

> released documents only after considerable

> pressure, as late as possible and, in the case of

> this "FAQ", without publicity.

>

> This is a disgrace.

>

Thankyou SlartiB,

Your post sums up my issues with this ill-considered proposal nicely.

[holymoly]

And from South London Press 24th Dec (A Turn for the Worse)

http://www.southlondon-today.co.uk/news.cfm?id=19323&headline=A%20TURN%20FOR%20THE%20WORSE, it seems that that Councillor Mark Williams is indeed fixed in his views and that the man's NOT for turning :-). So perhaps he is saying that the decision has been made regardless of the Consultation. Why is that when there are other preferred alternatives?

"Councillor Mark Williams, Southwark's cabinet member for regeneration, planning and transport, said: "It is vital that we bring forward safety improvements for this junction that sits between two schools. To create the safe space and enough time for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists, our proposals include removing the right turn at Townley Road.

"We want to hear what local residents, businesses and parents think about these proposals to improve safety at this junction.

"The 'no right turn' measure is an integral part of making the proposals work.

"We will review all the responses before making a final decision early next year."

East Dulwich ward councillor James Barber said: "If motorists can't take the most direct route, they will go elsewhere and be on the streets for longer and that will make roads more dangerous than they are now.

"Improvements to this junction are long overdue, but it is unnecessary to ban this turn. These proposals will not carry public support. All of the other changes are fantastic."

[Zebedee Tring]

If I'm correct, Cllr Mark Williams is the person who will be making the final decision on the proposals on behalf of the Council. And if he is really saying that the "no right turn" measure is an integral part of the proposals and then makes his final decision on this basis, arguably he has fettered his discretion before he has even considered the representations against the "no right turn" measure - this would be challengeable legally.

Perhaps James B could point this out to him.

[Jennys]

Hopefully local residents will turn up in force at the meeting.

[Jennys]

Did anyone receive any reply from the Village Ward councillors? I emailed all three of them separately about these proposals in mid November but have heard nothing except an automated out of the office reply from one.

[Zebedee Tring]

Arguably Village Ward residents are potentially more affected by the proposals than anyone else. The cynic in me realises that Village Ward Councillors don't have to face the electorate for over three years. However, it would be courtesy (if nothing else) if they were to take note of the concerns of their constituents.

[James Barber]

Hi ZT,

You could always point this out to him and the councils monitoring officer Doreen Forrester-Brown asking them to confirm the decision making process considering such fettered comments.

Hi Jennys,

Write a letter to a local newspaper asking them - you'll get a response then!

[@Woodwarde]

http://www.peoplesrepublicofsouthwark.co.uk/hold-news/news/3261-high-standards-of-behaviour

ZT - this link is of possible interest.

High standards of behaviour

Details Created on 13 November 2013 .

Last week's issue of Southwark News carried a piece which was easily the most surreal article to date.

The Southwark News reported that, since 2010, there have been 30 complaints against local councillors, adding Southwark got more complaints than any other London borough..............................

[James Barber]

...and of the 30 complaints only 2 were upheld and of those 1 was for talking about information already in the public domain. The other I believe one was about me freaking out and escalating a concern to the wrong person after having my fears ignored.

[Overhere]

I am coming late to this thread, but just want add in yet another voice: As a pedestrian who uses that junction nearly every day, I am all for improving it. But removing the right hand turn is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. I don't need any fancy studies (which are usually commissioned with an eye to confirming the commissioners' preconceived notions; he who pays the fiddler, calls the tune and all that). That smacks to me of typical special interest politics.Village Ward elections may be 3 years away, but I, for one, won't forget this.

[Overhere]

perhaps, but that still doesn't change the fact that there have not been any serious accidents at all. I am sure there are some rude drivers, but I have encountered some rude cyclists who do not stick to the rules of the road, especially at that junction,

[Tessmo]

There is an update posted on the online petition (https://www.change.org/p/southwark-council-townley-road-junction)

UPDATE There is a meeting of the Dulwich Community Council at 7pm on Wednesday 28 January 2015 at Herne Hill Baptists Church, Half Moon Lane, SE24 9HU where local councillors will report back on the public consultation. There will be further debate, so please come and make your voice heard. If you would like to help with leafleting local roads before this meeting, please email [email protected]. Please also continue to ask local residents and businesses to sign the online petition.

[tomdhu]

Jennys Wrote:

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

> Did anyone receive any reply from the Village Ward

> councillors? I emailed all three of them

> separately about these proposals in mid November

> but have heard nothing except an automated out of

> the office reply from one.

I also emailed the three councillors on this subject and did not get one response.

I recall also one of the Village Ward councillors coming round canvassing 3 years ago and in the conversation we had he admitted that he hadn't even heard of the E.D.Forum!

And these people represent us??