dulwichfolk

I always ask the same question about the photos and videos of people sitting in the road/parklet having a drink at the square of shame unless it is to wind up the displacement areas more then they already are. Raeburn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not sure what the point of these videos are - they > show precisely how much traffic/pollution is > caused by privately owned cars with single/low > occupancy? How large/over-powered, and inefficient > most of them are for the job? How end-to-end > on-street parking add further to the congestion? > That many of these queuing vehicles and biggest > polluters will be dropped by October with the ULEZ > extension comes in? That the school run is one of > the biggest causes of congestion at this time of > day?... etc etc etc. > > I'd say it's an advert to ask people IF they > absolutely need to drive, and if so, is this the > best time TO do it? > > > slarti b Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Good video here showing how nice it is in the > > morning in Dulwich Village when all the traffic > > has ben diverted onto Croxted Rd, EDG, Lordship > > Lane etc. Really nice that the residents of > > Calton can enjopy their morning cappuccino in > > peace now. > > > > > > > > nnel=OnionBike > > > > An earlier video shows how awful it is on > Croxted > > road now... > > > > > > nnel=OnionBike

Not sure if it still that hard to get into as the birth rate drops the catchments seem to be getting bigger for most infants/primaries. Going by last years distances which were posted on here somewhere.

As with all these things most that are affected don?t have time to search out all the websites they should be sticking pins into. The council seem to be happy with that and only wish to hear from one demographic whatever they may say about inclusion etc....

Pre pandemic there was discussions about flight paths being concentrated. Are all LTN advocates happy to have all the planes fly over 24 hours a day. Will make it better for the majority and is greener due to less changes in direction needed.... Appreciate this is change but there is a climate emergency after all.

There was also an informative slide which suggested that due to ULEZ expansion by 2025 ?Only 2% of road kms in London expected to exceed NO2 limit values?

Watching this you get the impression that as all the other non dulwich councillors reiterate about main roads, schools, and the need for any changes to be equitable in nature they are all talking directly to the dulwich councillors.

Isn?t half the point of these closures (apart from social distancing and active travel) to prevent local car journeys...can?t see how a permit system would prevent those.

To me it appears the majority of people in favour of the LTN are: 1) already bike riders so active travel measures make minimal difference to them 2) live in a LTN 3) have at least one child who is going to a school in the dulwich village area. 4) followed by the councillors on Twitter All of this is fine it just must be upsetting for people to see a Xmas tree in quiet streets of dulwich square while outside the homes in croxted road, lordship lane, EDG, grove vale and others outside the LTN just see the displaced cars.

Thanks still doesn?t say anything about driving on the footways as the previous post said. As you say though I doubt anyone is going to complain and leeway is given but I?m guessing the council highways department wouldn?t expect emergency vehicle to go on the footpath as a means of access on a regular occurrence. Good point about the drivers not usually being familiar with the area much like some of the drivers going through the various blue bus gate signs but that?s another point...

Raeburn Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ambulances are allowed to drive on footways if > they need to on a call. Feel free to look this up > - ? I can?t find this anywhere can you share? Be interested in what other exceptions they have.

You can?t really find it acceptable for any vehicle to be expected to drive on the pavement? So putting the blame on the idiot car drivers who got the planters changed is a bit of a stretch. Clearly like any business the management are saying one thing (no problems with LTN) and the actual workers are saying something different. Who do you believe? I?ve witnessed the ambulances attempting the turn into the various east dulwich closures roads a number of times.

And croxted road the new displacement area...

legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To change the subject slightly. As noted on the > ?info? thread,boroughs are asked to discuss all > Streetspace (including LTN) proposals with TfL. In > addition, there is a statutory requirement to make > Traffic Management Act 2004 Notifications (TMAN): > ?Pursuant to the Traffic Management Act 2004, any > activity carried out by the Boroughs using > Highways Act 1980 (HA) or Road Traffic Regulation > Act 1984 (RTRA) powers which will or are likely to > affect the Strategic Road Network (SRN) or the > Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) is > notifiable by the Borough to TfL through TfL?s > TMAN process.? Section 121B of the RTRA requires > TfL to be notified and either consent, or ?not > object? within one month. > > I thought it would be interesting to know whether > Southwark had gone through the TMAN process for > the village junction closure and/ or the Turney, > Burbage, DV times closures, and the Melbourne/ > Elsie etc closures given the potential knock on > effect on Lordship Lane, > so I put in an FOI request to TfL. Just received > their response. It says nothing about those > closures (not sure that means there was no TMAN > notification or not), but here are some new ones > that Southwark have apparently asked them to > consider: > > ?TfL received a Traffic Management Act 2004 > Notification (TMAN ) from Southwark Borough > Council reference number N2004545, on the 10 > November 2020. This TMAN was relating to Dulwich > Village London Streetspace Programme (LSP) timed > access restrictions. The scheme notification > relates to timed access restrictions on multiple > roads around Dulwich village from 8am ? 10am and > 3pm ? 6pm. The proposed changes are: restricted > access to Turney Road from Croxted Road, to > Gallery Road from A205 Thurlow Park Road, and to > College Road from A205 Dulwich Common. The > information currently provided includes a General > Arrangement drawing with proposed signage > locations / wording and scheme impact monitoring > document highlighting ATC camera positioning on > East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane. Please see > attached. > > At present we are still reviewing the detail of > the LSP and what implications the restrictions may > have on the Transport for London Road Network and > the Strategic Road Network (TLRN / SRN) corridors, > especially the potential for traffic reassignment > on the SRN corridor Lordship Lane and the > potential for impact to bus services along this > corridor. TfL will need to agree a monitoring > strategy with Southwark.? > > May explain why only a temporary sign has gone in > on Turney Road going towards the Village? Tell me > I?m reading this wrong.... Really appreciate the work you are doing on this. So basically looking to close turney road at the open croxted road end and college/gallery road. Doesn?t this then make the two week old bus gates/signage added to the DV roundabout redundant. It?s like they are making it up as they go along and seem to have found a magic money tree with bus gates/cameras for dulwich only. In addition the monitoring seems to be limited to Southwark so I assume any Lambeth side displacement will evaporate....

So following the school trend doesn?t that imply that the closures should be limited to drop off and pick up times? E.g like the school streets. Term time only.

Wouldn?t all the signs to Dulwich ?Village? (from the south) have to changed to highlight at certain times there is no entry? Sure tfl can?t wait to do this on the the south circular for this temporary measure...

Weren?t the council due to release the figures/postcode/details etc around who was filling in the survey originally for the healthy streets programme which led to the first closure? I remember initial they said the data was tricky to obtain but surely by now they would have it? Not that it should be taken as gospel but would be interesting to see. I think there were around 220 odd responses. I just remember a bit argument on the validity of them at the time and the councillors/council saying they would be published in time....

Sorry the way I wrote the! Agreed conservatives not in charge now but I thought they were previously. Maybe the boundary changes didn?t help them. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No there are no conservative councillors in DV / > Southwark any more I don?t believe.

Aren?t the conservatives the opposition in DV or indeed prior to the last election in charge.

I just wonder how the councillors of wards outside of DV are happy to accept all the pollution and cars that these measures will bring. We might as well have a big tip in the middle of lordship lane for the DV resident to throw any of their excess rubbish in, and they might as well make some the parking spaces available to DV residents only. Why stop there how about a speedy bus service which cuts out all the inconvenient stops outside of DV. Makes you wonder why some people take up the position in the first place and how the transport planners if they have any say are happy to go along with this form of social inequality.

I?m guessing on the satnav there are certain standards/up time which need to be kept to. If the free google or waze drop out/crash or stop working you wouldn?t want that to affect all ambulances/emergency services

The video is on YouTube (link sent previously in thread) now if that?s how you like to spend your evening... They are lucky the Guys and Thomas lady was there as they are the only ones doing anything properly. The idea about making google/Waze change their algorithm....do they think they can control that. As for emergency service they might have all ticked the boxes but then why are ambulances still attempting to go through these LTN areas and having to reroute... Interesting how this all works.

I think you can watch the meeting here

Probably one of these once in a lifetime road works/accidents we keep getting told to ignore when thinking about the traffic around dulwich

Would get confusing with the school street due to be put there too. If a bit of the road is excluded it would become the school drop off point, half of which I assume they are trying to stop and encourage active travel. Similar to the cut off bit of court lane and the parents dropping off for the dulwich schools...or so I?ve heard!

You just need to look at the notes for the Southwark environmental scrutiny report (kindly posted in another thread about the meeting today) it talks there about LTN and how they are proven(!) to show reduced traffic/etc.... the people making the decisions are reading this stuff and going along with it...and ignoring the circumstances in dulwich and actually what they see with their eyes. Backed by the same few cycle enthusiasts who know this is the ideal/only opportunity to push through whatever they want and be relevant..