Earl Aelfheah

So if they are why is congestion getting worse....you know the answer...;-) So are you agreeing that your claim that people aren't getting out of their cars is untrue? Would be good to establish that first. Then if we're agreed on the premise, I am happy to answer your question.

Also, it's not true that people aren't getting out of their cars. There is plenty of evidence that they are. And there are a lot more people cycling.

They're both B roads. Ryedale is the smaller, narrower street, and that's why there is a proposal to keep drivers on Underhill and discourage people from using Ryedale to bypass the lights - which impacts traffic flow on Forest Hill Road. I agree that there should be some action to reduce traffic on Underhill generally. East Dulwich Grove is an A road.

I was responding to Ladharrbeinn who was commenting on East Dulwich Grove (the A2214).

I don't entirely disagree with this. Certainly we need strategies to reduce traffic across the entire network. It is true however that there are A roads and B roads; with A-roads generally designed and equipped to handle higher traffic volumes and faster speeds compared to B-roads. What we've seen in recent years is there has been a big shift in traffic from A roads to B roads as a result of dynamic routing apps.

Your example of Waze directing people around a major junction of the South Circular during rush hour (you'll note that it doesn't do this if you plug in the same route at this time of day), just tells you how the algorithm directs people around traffic. This is not a revelation. If you're suggesting there wasn't traffic at the junction of the South Circular during rush hour before a filter was put in on Calton Avenue, well that's obviously not true. If you're suggesting that Waze didn't direct users around it prior to 2021, you are wrong. What is true, is that the number of Waze users has doubled in London since around 2019. Of your other stated 'facts', they're not born out by any evidence - rather data show the exact opposite; The notable exception being the fact that Underhill road has seen increasing traffic since at least 2021 (probably before that). So it just takes us back to the question - what's the likely cause of that increase - and the increase of traffic on Ryedale? Is it a traffic filter (that does very little to interrupt cars driving between the Village and Lordship Lane, and nothing to stop cars travelling through the Village to the South Circular) having an impact on an unrelated route over other side of East Dulwich? There is no logical argument, or evidence for this. Or is it that Waze (the use of which has massively increased in the last 5 or 6 years), directs people around traffic lights and major junctions, diverting more people onto side roads - something that has been studied and the impacts described in the academic research?

A filter on Calton Avenue (that you can easily avoid by turning at EDG) has not caused traffic on Ryedale. Anyone who uses Waze knows exactly what's led to people using Ryedale to avoid the lights on Dunstan's Road. You can read the research I've linked to above that describes the impact of Waze. You can see the same patterns across different areas of the country.

🥱 For info - Waze has had a big impact across lots of areas, with more and more drivers directed around major junctions and traffic lights. As we have seen on underhill and rye dale. Ironically, LTNs are one way that local authorities are trying to address the impact of apps like Waze (the Ryedale proposal being a classic example) I thought this was quite a novel way of creating a (albeit temporary) quiet street!

Yes. It goes via East Dulwich Grove. The idea that Calton Avenue was a 'major East / West corridor is just silly. It was at best a way to cut out the lights on EDG, saving a couple of minutes max if you were travelling from the Village to Lordship Lane. Do you honestly believe that Waze didn't always direct cars travelling from Goose green to Forest Hill around the lights and the Plough junction during rush hour? Honestly? The fact is that as apps such as Waze have become more popular, more and more people are being directed down back streets and around lights / major junctions.

Oh I see. So we’re ignoring the example you gave (that was nonsense) and trying another one. OK. Do you really think that the route given by Waze to get to Forest Hill (no longer just to the grove tavern junction of the south circular) is different because of a filter on Calton Avenue? When would you ever have gone from goose green via calton Avenue to get to Forest Hill? Waze always tries to direct people around the lights. It always has. It’s what it does on Ryedale too. Are you serious?

Yeh, you're right. There was no rush hour congestion at the Grove Tavern junction of the South circular before *checks notes* a filter on Calton Avenue!?🫠 Plug that journey (goose green, to Dulwich Common) in to Waze for 6 O'clock and see where it directs you - via Dulwich Village. There is no way that the filter on Calton Avenue is making people switch their route from Goose green to the junction of Lordship Lane and the South circular, from Dulwich Village to Underhill.

Eh? There hasn't been a closure of a 'main East/West route'. You just can't cut up Calton Avenue, but to drive around it is a 2 - 3 minute diversion. How does someone travelling from the junction of Dulwich Village and Calton Avenue, end up diverting to underhill road as a result of the filter? Explain the route that you think the Calton Avenue filter is leading new people to underhill from.

So how are the timed restrictions in the village (which are between 3.00 and 4.30) causing congestion on Underhill Road between 17.00 and 18.00? What's the route that people are using Underhill for, that they'd otherwise use the village for if it wasn't for a 90 minute restriction period that ends at 4.30? This makes no sense.

Chi Chinese on Lordship Lane is good.

That's true. I was thinking outside the substation, but may be private land.