Rockets

They seem to rotate them weekly - good on whomever is doing it - our kids love them (nearly as much as we do!).

Waseley, if you don't scratch beneath the surface you often don't find out what's actually going on. I, for one, am glad people are taking time to dissect the numbers the council is putting out to justify the "success" of their LTNs because it is clear they are painting a picture that isn't actually happening in reality. And if it wasn't for outlets like this forum a lot of people would be completely oblivious to the spin the council is putting out in support of their LTNs.

I love these and they are becoming more ornate every time they get replaced - a really wonderful idea and wonderful addition to the area. https://www.dulwichsociety.com/news/post-box-toppers-appear-in-dulwich

And the data is starting to show that very clearly - which is probably why some are happily counting down the days to the end of the forum so some of us cannot remind them of the negative impact.....;-)

Oh my??this Manatee just won?t sink. Admin - keep the strength, you do a fantastic job. Ex- but by the same bar do they count a delivery round as a single journey or many short trips? Chris Boardman was wrong to say 25% of journeys in cars are under 1 mile but I suspect he knew what he was doing b6 saying it. In his position he should have known better. It?s deliberately misleading like much of the data we see from the council and others in support of LTNs. It was the reason I was asking for someone from the pro side to decipher the council?s and TFLs contradictory monitoring data. LTNs clearly create huge displacement and not traffic evaporation and the data is really starting to amplify that as the benefit from pandemic traffic reductions are lessened.

That's why I checked Boardman's claims as I just couldn't believe it was that high. I have relatives who live in the country and they drive a lot because there is no other option - for example their nearest supermarket is 12 miles away - they don't drive short distances because there is nothing to drive to - the shortest trip they do is to the village pub and that is always done on foot for obvious reasons!

Mark Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm afraid it is: > > In 2020, 25% of trips were under 1 mile, and 71% > under 5 miles. > Source: National Travel Survey 2020 > https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/national- > travel-survey-2020/national-travel-survey-2020#:~: > text=Journey%20lengths,-Chart%203%3A%20Mode&text=I > n%202020%2C%2025%25%20of%20trips,and%2068%25%20und > er%205%20miles. But a trip is not a car journey. Look at the chart on the link you sent - it shows 81% of trips under a mile were walked. About 14% are cars/vans and I would love to know how they categorise the use of vans - how do they categorise a delivery van doing multiple stops for example? 14% is still too high but nowhere near the 25% he claimed and he claimed this for cars - it's very misleading and he should know better in his role.

Just heard Chris Boardman on Radio 5 talking about the new e-bike try-before-you-buy pilots in Manchester which is a really good idea but in the interview he said that a quarter of car journeys in the UK are under 1 mile - where is he getting that stat from? That's not correct is it?

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That sounds as though there has been a significant > transfer of traffic from local roads to the SRN, > which is what those in favour want to happen and > which those against, and on main roads aren?t in > favour of in circumstances where the outcome is to > overwhelm the SRN roads? > > Intuitively it feels as though there should be a > combined figure covering local roads and TfL > roads. But I?m not quite sure how that would work. > Unless you can take a snapshot of ALL the traffic > in the area at various set points in time and then > compare with previous set points in time, surely > any reductions / increases that you measure only > show for certain that traffic at particular points > has increased / decreased but can?t tell you what > the overall reduction is, as traffic may have > diverted from/ to non- measured routes? I?m not > explaining very well, but for eg you can say a > reduction of 21000 vehicles on certain routes (and > even then could be some double counting I suspect > as presumably one vehicle could disappear from say > three counts depending on its route- or is that > adjusted for?), but there?s no way of knowing > whether the 21000 cars have popped up on other > roads that aren?t being measured? And we have to remember that the council's monitoring area originally only ran only as far as (and not including) Lordship Lane in the very early days of this programme. Additionally remember their initial monitoring efforts were only on the closed roads (remember the phantom monitoring strip killer) and they had to be forced to install strips on Lordship lane etc (which they subsequently moved to a more monitoring advantageous position towards Melford). I very much suspect they knew all along what the impact was going to be and have done their utmost to try and spin the narrative their way. Welcome back Rahx3.....are you goi.....nah I won't waste my time ;-) That initiative you link to is very good - the app is a great idea but not sure CPZs are necessary around every school, seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut and no-one should be encouraging the council to install more CPZs - surely school streets would be a much better idea? If this was adopted you're pretty much saying you need CPZs on every street across Dulwich - else you just move the problem a couple of streets away. I would love to know what the council are doing to tackle the school run problem - that site gives some sobering stats on the issue for the Dulwich area and the influx (during term-time) of thousands of pupils from beyond a 3 mile catchment area. Are the council even talking to schools about what they can do?

A good Mexican would be very welcome. I think the days of good independent outlets are dwindling in Dulwich unfortunately. Apparently the Dulwich demographic is changing once again and there has been an influx of monied folks from Chelsea, Islington and Essex moving to Dulwich for the greener spaces and proximity to London and are the only ones able to afford the ludicrous house prices that have been seen post pandemic. I think that is why we are seeing chains like Joe & The Juice and Megan's opening outlets here - chasing the ?. Interesting to see places like Walter's opening in West Dulwich, I wonder if the independent places are being pushed a little further out (although you could argue Walter's is part of a group rather than a chain).

Ex- not entirely correct, there's another twist and you, I think, highlight where the council has been trying to hide/mislead on what is actually going on. "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich" - Southwark Council Dashboard. So from this we can ascertain that in the north of Southwark the traffic levels are lower than pre-Covid times - that's understandable and in line with expectations as travel/commuting habits change post-pandemic. The council have also been claiming 21,000 fewer journeys in Dulwich but given what they are saying about TFL network traffic levels around Dulwich that doesn't make much sense - in fact it is completely contradictory. But this where it gets interesting because there's always been the issue of "boundary roads" and whether the council counts those as part of the LTN impact area. I very much believe that what we are seeing here is LTN displacement in action. That the supposed reduction in journeys "within Dulwich" are just being pushed from the LTN areas onto boundary roads - and those boundary roads are the ones monitored by TFL - A205, Lordship Lane, EDG, Croxted Road - in other words the main arterial routes around Dulwich. It wasn't felt in the early days after the pandemic because the general reduction in traffic wasn't being modelled by the council - it was all being spun as "good news" of lower traffic (they claimed because of the LTNs). This was always the worry that as things started to return to normal the squeeze of the LTNs would be felt by the surrounding roads at a greatest rate. It's why we can now explain how, despite of claims traffic being greatly reduced across the whole borough after the pandemic there were still roads in Dulwich that were showing increases in traffic and that could only be because of displacement. Look at the latest info on the council's dashboard (https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/streetspace/traffic-data-analysis) and look at weekday am peaks for the roads they monitor in Dulwich (which I suspect are the TFL monitored roads because they are key bus routes) - many of them are consistently higher than pre-Covid and that should be ringing alarm bells because we haven't seen a return to overall pre-pandemic traffic patterns in London yet (maybe we never will but the trend is alarming). And I bet the A205 is even worse. With each data set it demonstrates that these are the roads soaking up the displacement as traffic routes around the closures. Which was inevitable from day one and is certainly a long way from the success criteria set by the council for LTNs. Interested to hear you thoughts.

ohthehugemanateeLTN4 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Interesting! Several users mass spamming the same > questions (and variations thereof) repeatedly is > fine by the standards of this forum. Pointing this > out and inviting them to go back through the last > few pages of their own spam to actually engage > with my reply is an insta ban! > > Do I suspect a teensy bit of anti LTN bias here? Manatee - that's your 3rd ban isn't it? Whatever you're doing wrong you're doing it repeatedly...admin obviously knows something we don't... Ex- that is a weird response from the system maybe add East Dulwich to the text?

Come on, one of you must be brave enough to interpret the statement from the council.....you all have strong opinions on pretty much everything else to do with LTNs...why can't you take a look at the below and give is your thoughts....what could possibly be the problem...;-) "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich" - Southwark Council Dashboard.

Waseley - agree with your annoyance at bad drivers - we all feel the same pain and frustration when people act selfishly. The deafening silence on my challenge to some of the loudest pro-LTN cheerleaders to dissect the council's own numbers is not surprising - they are acting selfishly and deliberately ignoring the facts that tell a very different story to the one they like to peddle. This note from the council speaks volumes and demonstrates LTN displacement in full effect and why Dulwich should never have been chosen for LTNs on the basis of PTALs alone.... "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich" - Southwark Council Dashboard.

But Duncan this wasn't, to coin the phrase adopted by Cllr Rose, a referendum ;-) In fact, the so-called pro-LTN councillors went out of their way not to mention LTNs..... Anyway it seems Rahx3 and Manatee are taking some time-out from the forum so maybe you, or any of the other pro-LTN forumites, can explain what is happening here.... "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich" - Southwark Council Dashboard.

Might be planes going into City - they come in a lot lower than those going to Heathrow and when the wind is in the right direction they use Dulwich to turn before their approach to the airport.

Manatee - maybe you can use your obvious wisdom in such analysis and help Rahx3 answer the question, what do you think is happening here: "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich" Like my old primary school teacher I think I know what is happening but will let you try to determine the answer for yourselves.....remember, according to the council there are 21,000 less journeys happening in the Dulwich area....

I do wonder how Megan's is going to get on. The DV one is terrible (and we keep trying to give it chance after chance but finally have given up) and I don't hear many people with a good word to say about it. Apparently they, like so many places post-Brexit, are struggling to find staff so I can't imagine they are going to magically fix it on the Lordship Lane outlet.

Rahx3 - when you refuse to reply to questions you normally don't grace us with your presence for a few days...welcome back so soon! ;-) Anyway, on the basis of your refusal to answer my analysis of the reality of what is happening can you take a look at the following from the council dashboard and explain what you think is going on here: "Traffic has been rising across Southwark since the end of the 2021 COVID-19 lockdown, and was at 92% of pre-COVID levels in November 2021 at count points in the north of the borough, and above pre-COVID levels on the TfL network near Dulwich"

Yup - the council seems to be the final decision-maker on what is a consultation or not - if they like the result it's a vote if it is not a result they like it's a consultation or as Cllr Rose put it "it's a consultation not a referendum".

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > do you think the reduction in traffic is due the > LTNs or the fact there are many fewer cars on the > road because of the pandemic....? > > As of September 2021, when schools properly > re-opened and a lot of restrictions were lifted > further, traffic returned to more or less > pre-pandemic levels with some regional variations. > In fact this rise was seen from mid-2021 although > with schools off over summer it was a relatively > gradual rise initially. > > There's some easy-to-read info in various places: > https://www.brake.org.uk/how-we-help/raising-aware > ness/our-current-projects/news-and-blogs/the-retur > n-of-rush-hour-are-traffic-levels-at-pre-covid-lev > els-or-higher > https://fleetworld.co.uk/uk-road-traffic-back-at-p > re-covid-levels/ > > Bus, train and tube ridership continues to be > below pre-pandemic levels (again with regional > variations in bus and train), it's hovering at > about 70%-ish. > > But to all intents and purposes, (for travel at > least), Covid is over, people are going about > their normal lives again. > > As traffic levels on roads rose, the active travel > dropped off again - much of this is attributed to > people simply being unwilling to cycle on roads > dominated by car traffic which is why active > travel interventions are necessary. > > You can't keep claiming that the drop in traffic > is solely due to Covid. It was for a few months in > 2020, yes. As restrictions eased, it rose again > dramatically and is now more or less at 2019 > levels, sometimes above it. > > That was part of the reason the LTNs were > introduced - the Government, in between awarding > themselves corrupt PPE contracts and partying, > recognised that there would be a significant > car-led recovery as people avoided crowded public > transport hence providing funding for councils to > install pop-up cycle lanes, LTNs, wider pavements > and so on. > > LTNs have never created traffic evaporation they > just move the traffic from one street to another. > They have been, and always will be, a very blunt > instrument that does not address the fundamental > issue of reducing vehicle use. > > Data from thousands of "LTNs" or similar schemes > worldwide suggests you're wrong on that. > In fact, this document: > https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ > S2213624X22000281 > > is a meta-analysis of 800 peer-reviewed studies > from around the world which summarised the 12 most > effective interventions for reducing traffic. As > you've noted on here so many times, you're very > keen on data so I'm sure you'll read it in full > and digest it carefully but as a very brief > summary, the top 2 most effective interventions > are: > charging and pricing (congestions charging, ULEZ, > workplace charging levy) > access limitations (filtered streets, school > streets, LTNs) > > Repeating "LTNs don't work" doesn't make your > belief any more true. It remains as wrong now as > it was the first time you typed it. But Ex- you claim things have returned to normal - they haven't and that is patently clear. In fact, even the council acknowledges that traffic levels are not back to pre-Covid levels and have been significantly down since the pandemic (yet they were happy to claim the reduction as a direct result of the LTNs). You quote public transport usage is still down - have you not noticed the lengths some companies are going to try to encourage their staff to travel back into London and to return things to how it was pre-Covid? Life is not back to normal as far as the daily commute (on public transport, cycling or driving) is concerned as people are still not back in offices or places of work 5 days a week as they were before. So it is utterly incredulous that the council continues to compare pre-Covid traffic monitoring with post-Covid traffic monitoring without factoring in the Covid reduction in traffic. Their monitoring results are deliberately misleading. LTNs don't work and our local experience is proving that. What they do is make some roads quieter and some roads busier and make some people love them because the traffic no longer goes down their street and some people hate them because more traffic goes down their street - even the most ardent fan of them can realise that reality can't they? The grand plan was to make every road quieter in the Dulwich area and that has clearly failed - massively.

DKHB could it be that the council's "reduction" numbers were built on the pandemic reduction in vehicular traffic and now, as vehicle use starts returning, the council's monitoring numbers are starting to reflect the fact that LTNs have no negligible positive impact on reductions in car use? Perhaps it is time for the sheeple of the pro-LTN lobby groups to actually analysing the numbers (instead of taking them at face value) to work out the story for themselves.....- now I don't profess to being the sharpest tool in the box but I have been able to work out what is going on here...;-)

Starmer (interesting to see Rayner has been dragged into it as well after first denying she was there) could be in for a rough ride, you suspect whomever has leaked it from within the party will have more and Starmer's expression the last few days suggests he thinks there's more on its way. Looks like the hard left might be starting to try to wrestle the party back. The problem for Labour the last few years has been their ability to spend more energy fighting themselves than the Tories.....just what the country doesn't need. If there is a leadership battle let's hope they learned some lessons from 2019 and don't do something daft like go for another hard-left leader.

ohthehugemanateeLTN3 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rahrahrah, traffic isn't down! > > But if it is, it's not due to the LTNs. > > But if it is due to the LTNs, it's still bad. > > But if it's actually an improvement we should > still scrap it in the interests of fairness > because no one wants it. > > But it turns out most people do want it, there's > nothing we can do to fix it. > > But if we can fix it we still want to drive 3 > minutes to the shops. > > And that's the important thing, so really 1D was > right all along. > > Right rockets? ;-) Manatee, do you think the reduction in traffic is due the LTNs or the fact there are many fewer cars on the road because of the pandemic....? LTNs have never created traffic evaporation they just move the traffic from one street to another. They have been, and always will be, a very blunt instrument that does not address the fundamental issue of reducing vehicle use.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My thought in the above btw Rockets is that the > latest data shows traffic down at every monitored > site except On the section of EDG between > Melbourne grove and LL (EDG East). This is the > result of cars no longer being able to turn off > EDG early onto Melbourne Grove North, passing the > entrance of ED Charter. Cars now have to stay on > and turn a little later at LL. We could ?solve? > this ?problem? by having them drive past the > school gates. So that?s a legitimate debate to > have. But we?re talking about roughly a 250m > stretch of road and there is a clear rationale for > why you might want traffic to avoid the school > entrance. Otherwise, traffic is down at every > other monitored site. > > You seem to be arguing that we should have more > traffic everywhere, equally distributed across all > streets. This is frankly bizarre to my mind. But > sure, fill your boots arguing for more traffic > everwhere on grounds of ?fairness? Avoiding the question again Rahx3.....it's pretty clear what I am saying, you just chose not to hear it/acknowledge it/accept it.. But is that traffic down due to post Covid traffic adjustments or the LTNs....deep down you know the answer? Sometimes the truth hurts.... The fact you are going to great lengths to avoid the answer that is staring us all in the face in the councils numbers speaks volumes: the traffic reduction hailed by you and the council in relation to the LTNs is nothing to do with the LTNs and everything to do with the pandemic and the overall reduction in traffic due to the inapct of it on everyday life.