Bicknell

Thanks @slarti b. Intresting. Southwark Councils own feedback sites...

people put in FOIs when they cant get ansers. If its a reasenable reqest, the council must anwswer in 20 days. Not a year.

Campaign update from One Dulwich just out. it says that soutthwark says - ?allowing local residents permits to access camera-controlled traffic restrictions would not support our commitment to reducing shorter car journeys.? So all local journeys now have to go on EAst Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane, Croxted Rd, etc. Whats the point of a review if some of the options have been ruled out?

northernmonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > there has been > a constant theme through the One Dulwich proposals > to introduce a permit scheme or other measures to > retain local driving. > > See https://www.onedulwich.uk/fact-checker 'is it reasnoble to ask for timed restirictions?' 20 June 2020

@alice its on the website! www.dulwichalliance.org

@ malumbu yes some against LTNS might be against bikes. But not the groups supporting this campaign Thats all its saying.

@Spartacus Its all on theewebsite www.dulwichalliance.org

I hope it gets debated at council. it should do.

Reports of people not being able to sign eptition to southwark http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=500000057&RPID=774218585&HPID=774218585

@Spartacus I see it as getting Southwark to accept that what theyre doing now isnt working. Start the conversaton. Details come later. Agree we need discusions around what is needed in the area that suits all, and we have to join together to do that PS not all permits cost money. eg school streets -some people allowed through.

A link to the e-petition - no to 24/7 closures, Yes to permits. I 'd be happy if just ambulances allowed through. Others might disagree. its about getting the council to agree there might be other, fairer solutions. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=500000057&RPID=774265785&HPID=774265785

Thats the problem with whats going on in Dulwich. No data. Just strong opinions.

In an area where publc transport isnt good, you need to really think about which journeys arent possible if you cant walk or cycle. that matters. Not just because its the right thing to do. But also because you wont get people out of their cars - you wont reduce traffic - unless theres another way for them to get around. And if you dont reduce traffic, congestion and pollution stay high on the roads its been directed on to.

@malumbu happy boxing day andhope your Xmas was ok. I said we need better public transport andwe do. doesnt have to be tubes, trams trains, so no time machine needed. Could be green buses.the point is that one reasons people have cars round here is becasuse getting around is hard if you cant walk or cycle. so the council should factor that in. if tfl too broke to do it, have to find another way.

i dont read it like that at all @northernmonkey if you close roads 24/7 and dont allow anyone through restrictions, all the traffic will be displaced all the time onto other roads. a binary solution, as everyone says these days. It is right that some drivers should be allowed through whatever restrictions there are - ambulances, carers, blue badge hodlers etc. The rest you sort out. The council wants roads to be clear when children go to school. So you have to clear them at those times - 8-9 and 3-4, whatever. Then you decide what else is fair. but thats only a small part. if yu really want people to use cars less, for gods sake make sure theres public transportl Dulwich doenst have a tube, and there are no connections east-west. So if people cant drive, and cant walk, or cycle, what do they do? There really are solutions to this, if only people could start talking. its all this us-them, us-them thats getting in the way.

Link to new petition. more than 200 signed. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=500000057&RPID=774240192&HPID=774240192

moved to right thread.

@raeburn I suppose this is what irritates me most about the whole thing ? people not thinking clearly. Yes its good to reduce relying on cars and only use when you realy need to. But corridors arent the answer. If too many people are using cars, we need a borough wide (or national) way to deal with this. just shutting off roads doesnt get us anywhere. Road tax?Fuel tax? driving tax? dont mind, don?t care. But not this mindless pointless closing of roads that makes butterflies and bird and lambs for some roads and lung-clotting pollution for others. thats just not thinking straight. And holding onto it when you can see it isnt working isnt good politics for any party ? tory, green or labour.

@DulwichCentral Look at www.londonair.org.uk, go to Air Pollution, then Annual Pollution Maps, find Dulwich You can see which roads over legal limits (40) in 2016. Court Lane bad b ut roads around it much much worse. Yes I agree lets move forwards. but pusshing cars onto roads over legal pollution limits not the answer

@exdulwicher im against the Dulwich LTN, so I guess im part of the anti LTN lobby, but i dont recognize any of the things you say. I think its okay to say that you dont like something, and criticize it, without being told youre all the things you've said about the Anti- LTN lobby here. Its hard to talk about it because people get heated but i dont think you can say thats the fault of one side or the other. Otherwise you're just as bad as the people youre criticizing aren't you? We agree weve got to reduce traffic. But I dont personally think you do that by taking it off some roads and putting it on others.

Coalition4Dulwich is the usual suspects - Living streets, Safe routes to schools, Clean air Dulwich, southwark cyclists and "Better Streets for Southwark" which is a new one I hadnt heard of before. all the lobby groups the council likes in one handy leaflet with very tiny print. It says "some are wrestling with how to adapt" Too right. If the solution is wrong (which it is, in my view), alot of people will be wrestling for a long time. Unless the council starts to listen.

@Alice @legalalien Cant find zoom council meeting for dulwich ltns anywhere. Could you send link? Thanks

eastdulwichhenry Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have a fear that the pro-car lobby are going to > win out when the trial comes to an end, as they > did in Camberwell Grove, but let's wait and see. > I'm enjoying it while it lasts. Really sad that people still frame the argument like this. Pro-car? Anti-cyclist? No - just want a solution taht's fair to all.

10 formal objections to Calton Ave and Court Lane closure on One Dulwich website www.onedulwich.uk/objections: 1. The ETOs are not delivering the Council?s stated objectives. 2. The ETOs are socially unjust. 3. The ETOs discriminate against vulnerable groups in contravention of The Equality Act 2010. 4. The ETOs do not have the support of the local community. 5. The ETOs are not bringing about a modal shift. 6. The ETOs are damaging local businesses. 7. The Council has failed to introduce adequate, evidence-based, monitoring of its objectives. 8. The ETOs are making life less safe for local residents by blocking access for Emergency Services. 9. The ETOs have disrupted road networks, causing the Council to fail to fulfil its obligation under the Traffic Management Act 2004 to ensure they are managed effectively. 10. 24/7 closures are disproportionate; timed closures, as in Phase 2 ETOs, would be sufficient.

People who live round here just beginning to realize they will be fined ?130 if they drive through resrictions on Townley, DV, Burbage or Turney...