dulwichfolk

Shouldn?t all these questions about the LTN/traffic orders be directed at the highways officers listed on the appropriate traffic order? I assume they must be under some obligation to respond in order for the order to be valid. As aren?t they the ones who give the final say so regards these changes as I?m assuming the councillors aren?t experts in traffic management/etc. I could have it wrong...happens often.

Great work rockets...what is the attachment picture of? I love the documents Southwark produces This one here https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/11717/Southwark-JSNA-2019-Childhood-Obesity.pdf Basically says children in dulwich village are significantly better off (weight wise) than the whole of the borough but yet the vocal minority I guess who go to the schools on dulwich village aided with the cycle lobby seem to lift the ward to the top of the list to promote active travel/council time irrespective of the consequences.

I heard they also get a council tax amnesty and chocolates and flowers delivered once a week...by bike obviously. Isn?t the main entrance to the school due to move to east dulwich grove? Or is that just for some years.

The extra burbage gate wasn?t in the original proposals. There were various complaints on Twitter and I assume in person when the select few get consulted that the changes would mean traffic would go down gallery/college road and then burbage and left at Turney causing another ?rat run?. I assume as turney is a cycle highway/etc (has schools they actually care about) they wanted to prevent this, or at least attempt to get some residents on side.

Amazing how in Dulwich Village at least when the state schools are still open but the private schools have half term there is no/limited issues..... But lets continue and bring in more changes so that it can feel even more privledged...

I like that it says ?..it can no longer be acceptable? Implies everything that has been implemented along with the bus gate changes whose orders have conveniently been added in the last week don?t have to pass this test!

The ULEZ and the government plan to potentially increase the congestion zone will do wonders for car numbers without having those with and those without road closures.

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > dulwichfolk Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Such a shame this didn?t happen a month from > now > > when dulwich is totally closed due to the bus > > gates. > > > > Then the traffic would be even worse and public > > transport so delay maybe tfl would put us all > out > > of our misery and overturn the closures. > > It isn't anything to do with TfL. Once the buses get delayed tfl will speak to the council/government and remove them. It is why most of the big planning permissions consult with tfl and the impact to buses/transport. If it delays them it doesn?t get passed....at least that?s how it should work.

Such a shame this didn?t happen a month from now when dulwich is totally closed due to the bus gates. Then the traffic would be even worse and public transport so delay maybe tfl would put us all out of our misery and overturn the closures.

Around 1220 ambulance with blue lights flashing today going down grove vale indicates right to go down Melbourne grove, can?t so continues to drive still indicating right in the end has to go via lordship lane traffic to eventually get to a house on east dulwich grove near green dale. This is the real life affect of these closures.

Council will probably survey the residents at the top of dog kennel hill who?ll say it was quiet today and use it justify closing the top of dog kennel hill permanently!

New leader and new councillor in charge of signing off on all of these decisions....

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Fair enough (although they didn't give the LTNs > the same chance). But make an educated guess. What > do you think @dulwichfolk - Do you think that the > congestion is going to significantly improve now > in Tooting? I think the pollution will improve for those already suffering the highest levels. Maybe better overall due to shorter less stationary traffic. It is a bit like flight paths and how noise is being concentrated to the unlucky few

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I can?t speak for everyone but I rarely drive, > I?m > > usually a pedestrian often with small > > Children and due to where we live the closures > > don?t really effect my journey times. So from a > > selfish perspective (which we all have) my > > concern is for the pollution in the ?communal > > areas? such as lordship lane and goose green > where > > I take my children which I feel is worse since > the > > closures . However I also dislike seeing > > inequality and this feels sadly the case. I > would > > love to reduce car use over the borough, for > > everyone, but I don?t think helping some and > > making it much worse for others is fair. > > I actually think we are roughly on the same > side > > regarding car use but possibly not in the > respect > > of what is fair. > > Fair enough. I just wonder how much difference it > would really make if we were to remove all the > planters. Traffic levels have increased all over > london since we came out of lockdown, even in the > outer boroughs. In Tooting, where they've reversed > all the changes, congestion hasn't improved, it's > just made side roads more dangerous and polluted > too. With regards the tooting reversal still showing congestion...clearly you need to give it time for the reversal to bed in and traffic to change....

With regards the light rephasing/filtering maybe tfl are waiting for Southwark council to decide what changes they want. If they changed them now and then the northbound traffic is blocked due to bus gates this would negate the whole process Maybe changing the lights here will worsen things in Herne Hill or at the townley road junction... Tfl planners may actually consider consequences of their actions unlike others

Sounds a great idea. But EDG is very narrow even more so than most of the roads closed so where exactly would there be space for the cycle lane?

Might be issues with refuse trucks with any closures in the middle of the road.

It isn?t personally at you but the supporter/councillors will throw out figures all over place trying to justify the changes and then they are repeated as facts. Just need to dig a little and it falls apart. Is it uplifting? The extra noise/waste/road being taken over and lack of social distancing? If someone allowed me to increase my restaurant space by 50% of course I?m going to be in favour of it.

Are the businesses breaking down the uplift in takings by day/weekend or is it a total including all days? Some could be due to having more places(seats on the road). Which sort of defeats the purpose this was put into which was to promote active travel and help with social distancing. The reduction in cars has been happening year on year in dulwich it is just the council fudged one years record when roadworks were on.

Is just seems the pro closure will throw any stat at the subject. Northcote Road uplift due to pedestrianisation - really? Not due to more people at home or the eat out scheme. Maybe

Maybe to help car/refuse trucks to turn around?

The problem with this is due to covid the alternatives (public transport) do not exist so lots will just sit it out...

Has that twitter linked been deleted?

All very well but the actual figures regards car/motor traffic in the dulwich area is that numbers were coming down year on year unless you used the period when roadworks were going on as per the council documents.

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There is significant opposition across London from > residents impacted by these changes. The Uber > driver I was talking too lived in Brixton and he > said it was a nightmare around there due to local > closures and that he wished residents would set-up > something like One Dulwich. > > Most of the surveys being done nationwide by a > variety of means (online, social media, by post) > are returning an average of about 5:1 in favour of > low traffic neighbourhoods. It also acknowledges > that the "1" part of that are likely to be much > more vocal than the "5" part so the initial > impression of everyone being against it is often a > case of a shouty minority. > > Again, this is an average of the schemes > nationwide; I've seen outliers as well - Islington > were claiming 90% in favour on a survey they did > although that was 10,000 posted leaflets and a > response of about 350 so that upsets my data OCD. > > There's a councillor in Hackney, Jon Burke > (@jonburkeUK on Twitter) who's worth a follow for > some good updates of their LTN and the general > ideas behind it. Our own James McAsh is also on > Twitter, @mcash although much less active on > there. Less about traffic and LTNs. Do you have link to these 5:1 surveys?