LTN BooHoo

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Boo Hoo - I think what DA and One Dulwich are > trying to do is redress the balance and give voice > to those members of the local community who feel > they are being ignored and sidelined by the > council, their supporters and their agenda. If the > council had engaged in a balanced, transparent and > open process from the beginning then community > members would not have felt the need to start or > join groups like DA and OneDulwich - they were > born from the council repeatedly refusing to > listen to many members of the community choosing > instead to seek guidance from pro-closure lobby > and cycle groups. > > In the same way that you are frustrated by what DA > and One Dulwich are putting out there are many who > will be frustrated by the stats you are quoting, > many of which have been touted extensively by the > pro-closure lobby (and have since been questioned, > discredited or exposed as false). > > Also, your note highlights the challenge here. You > quote lots of figures for London (and I see > councillors like CllR McAsh claiming that a > minority of people own cars when in fact in area > like Dulwich, and his own constituency to which he > was referring, the majority own cars) and whilst > we live in London you really need to analyse what > is happening in your area. > > You quote the 3.8bn extra miles - did you know > that the Dulwich area has seen a decrease in miles > (although the decrease wasn't as much as the > council thought it would be)? > > You quote road safety - no-one will argue with you > that we need to get all injuries caused on the > road down but, did you know, for example, that > Dulwich has 50% less injuries on the roads than > the Southwark average? This, according to the > Southwark Council 2018 Dulwich Traffic Management > report (7 injuries per km of road in 3 years for > Southwark, compared to 3.8 in Dulwich) which also > sheds broader light on the folly of this LTN > intervention by the council. > > Did you know, for example, that 68% of all > internal trips within the Dulwich area were > already being done on foot (in the majority 65%) > or bike (3%) in 2018? > > Or that Dulwich has some of the lowest PTAL scores > in the whole of Southwark (and the whole of > Dulwich ranks as having poor transport links) - > meaning that public transport is not at all good? > Or that Dulwich has both a young (under 16) and > old (over 65) population (much higher than the > rest of Southwark) which leads to more dependency > on cars? > > It's all in here from the council: > https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Du > lwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf > > I would challenge even the most fervent supporter > of the LTNs not to read that council report and > not question why the council deemed Dulwich as > appropriate for these measures. It was clear from > day one what the impact of closing many of the > routes east/west across Dulwich was going to do to > the surrounding roads. > > This line from that report is very telling: On the > other hand, the lower E-W public transport > connectivity is reflected in higher numbers of > people travelling from/to neighbouring boroughs by > car. > > So why then, has the council targeted E-W travel > with these closures? Surely they must have known > what was going to happen? > > And please - don't fall into the trap of playing > the petrol-head anti-LTN trope - we've been there > a lot already over the last year or so and it's a > little worn now. Also, the change in use of > side-roads is not all rat-runners using sat nav - > far more likely is the changing use of online > shopping and home delivery services delivering to > residents. > > Let me replay your idea back to you: imagine if > the council had engaged with the community > properly and tried to implement area-wide measures > that both addressed the challenge of car-use but > also ensured a fair and equitable outcome for > everyone. We probably wouldn't be in this mess or > having this debate right now! ;-) THE STATS COME FROM THE GOVERNMENT WEB SITE. If you hear one thing hear this: the debate is not about Dulwich.

I can only go on what the One Dulwich / Dulwich Alliance puts on their web site in terms of trying to understand what they are advocating for. At the moment it?s permits and disinformation eg volumes of traffic hasn?t increased over the past decade. For example, Dulwich Alliance have published a photograph of an ambulance driver speaking to a woman to demonstrate that emergency vechicles are being delay which is not true. Yet we hear nothing from One Dulwich or DA about the number of collisions in London resulting in deaths ( 2019 = 125 deaths, 3780 serious injuries and 26,102 slight injuries) Road danger on residential streets has increased by 38% almost double the 21% increase on main roads. DA supporters should know that in the past decade the number of miles driven on London?s roads each year has increased by 3.9 billion. 400 million more litres of fossil fuels were being burnt by motor vehicles on London?s roads in 2019 then in 2009. Then start to think about the sales of SUVs. In 2019 +150,00 new cars were sold that are too big to fit into a standard parking space. In addition evidence shows that since 2009 our neighbourhoods have absorbed the FULL increase in miles driven on London?s roads, while, since 2006, the number of miles driven on our main roads annually has dropped by 800 million. This is due to satnav technology. Our streets have been turned into convenient bypasses for the benefit of individuals. Short journeys must also be understood- 50% are less than 3km. If the DA and 1D could at least acknowledge the above then maybe there is a common objective to work towards. With the introduction LTNs and other measures the boundary roads are taking back some of the displaced traffic that satnavs have encouraged onto residential roads since 2006. But this doesn?t make displacement acceptable as thousands of Londoners die prematurely due to air pollution - a large proportion of which is generated by motor vehicles. LTNs are a blunt instrument - zero-tailpipe emission vechicles will help urban transit, safe active travel will help, road charging is a must, subsidies for fuel duties must go, low-cost public transport is essential, but still is not enough as the Climate Change Committee makes clear. There is not a city in the world that has addressed the March of the private motor vehicle without placing restrains on where vehicles can go. It?s an uncomfortable truth that we must all face. We cannot meet our legally binding decarbonisation commitments without drastically reducing surface transport emissions. Electrification will help BUT we need to reduce the amount of miles driven by a minimum of 17% against 2017 levels, which is approximately 3.8 billion miles. IF we are serious about addressing the public health, environmental and social effects of car culture then road user pricing, LTNs, safe cycling infrastructure, CPZs, limiting parking permits, the removal of private parking infrastructure on public and private land, bus gates and prioritisation to exclude private cars will have to happen. Anyone who suggests otherwise is misleading the public or merely misinformed. Only by placing limits on what kinds of motor vehicles can use our streets, where they can go, and at what speed, will we begin to gradually hand back our streets to everyone, young, old, rich, poor, boundary road or residential road occupants. Dulwich Alliance supporters have chosen to fiercely contest what has been done to date - from day one. This is to be expected from those who benefit from the status quo - including the fossil fuel industry, the car industry, way-finding app developers, a compromised media who need to attract advertisers, and drivers themselves. Imagine the influence we would have if we worked together to push our politicians to drive real and meaningful change to make Dulwich and the rest of London a great place to live.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rahx3 - do you think the "trade-offs" currently > being experienced outside of the LTN are worth it? > Hand on heart do you really think what is > happening on East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane or > any number of roads being impacted negatively by > the displacement is worth it? > > LTN Boo Hoo - I am glad you have stuck around and > are actually engaging in debate - too many of your > cohorts register for an account, fire off a few > emails and then disappear (or maybe return to > using their original handle...ahem....;-)) > > Was there a protest - I did see a few people with > placards but given the weight of feeling against > the closures I would have expected more people to > turn out if there was a formal protest. > > Just out of interest Boo Hoo - do you live within > the LTN area? Are we also to assume that your > handle is a swipe at anyone who doesn't agree with > your view on LTNs? Everyone lives near or in an LTN and few are unaffected. I?ve made a few comments here and have asked what the alternative is. No one has come back with anything that makes any sense. Foe example a recent post suggest the modal filters should be just a term time! How does that work? Why would I ?swipe? at anyone who disagrees if they have a viable, long-term alternative solution that fully addresses climate change, congestion, and our health crises? I?m the laziest person around. I use to drive to work (3 miles), drive to East Dulwich (2 miles) Kings, Sainsbury?s, the garden centre and so on. But that has now changed because I understand the need and the benefits. If I walk or ride a bike/scooter then people who really need to drive will be able to. I?m afraid I don?t have much time for disinformation (eg ?Dulwich has Spoken? or the LTNs are preventing people from getting their vaccination/ emergency services are being delayed. This along with the entitlement that goes hand in hand with the DA permit proposal. We ALL need to change the way we move around this great city of ours - not for us, for our grandchildren and their children. You will say it?s not working! Oh course it?s not working and that?s because we need to do more to encourage modal shift and to get people to think about alternatives eg car sharing. For the record I don?t know or have any cohorts and as for sticking around I think people just get bored because of the intractable position anti LTNers take. This issues won?t be decided here or on Twitter. It will be decided on policy first and foremost and adopted policy in my view is currently against supporting free and easy vehicle movement. Come out of the darkness and into the light. We need to reshape our environment so human-scale movement becomes the norm, the obvious thing to do. Big ideas are important so what?s yours? PS For anyone who is interested in exploring what modal shift feels like there?s a beginner cycle ride being organised for women, starting in the Square to Dulwich Park and through quiet roads. There are also commuter rides, where guides take you via quiet routes from Dulwich to the city and/or Westminster. Get in touch with Joyriders.com if interested.

Metallic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LTN BooHoo Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The protest in the Dulwich Square today was not > > well attended. Anyone know what happened? > > > Who said it was a protest? Margy? Richard? The > lady from Ash Cottage? It looked more like a > photo opp to me. Well when people turn up with posters on sticks and there are more posters on sticks than there are people, that to me looks like a protest gone wrong. ( no one told me I saw it with my own eyes while picking up my baby from the child minder) By the way the use of ?All Streets Matter? is just WRONG. Please respect the BLM movement.

The protest in the Dulwich Square today was not well attended. Anyone know what happened?

alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your post does not make sense. Yes it does. One Dulwich advocates for a permit system where residents can drive their cars when and where they wish. Permits will also be given to friends, family, service personnel, deliveries vans by the special permission of ?day permits?. It?s a great idea because SE21 residents don?t have to contribute the the health of our long-term environmental health or road safety at all. The problem is what happens when adjoining areas also want permits? Where do SE21 residents drive their SUVs to? Answers on the back of an envelope please. One Dulwich supporters like to discuss equality! Well a permit system certainly promotes fairness!

This is how to do it ?Copenhagen reported that 62% of its residents are now commuting to work or school by bike ? an increase from 52% in 2015 & 36% in 2012, when the City Council launched a 14-year-plan to improve the quality, safety & comfort of cycling.? Spartacus I appreciate your enthusiasm but quite simply electric cars are not the answer. They still require power, batteries have to be dealt with and congestion will not disappear. Do we have 20 years?? We need to do more not less to protect this planet of ours. Eg We need serious road charging for all miles driven, safe routes to encourage walking and cycling. I don?t have the answers but I know doing nothing is not the direction of travel we should be going in.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I imagine .... something like this? You form a > small group in a posh road or roads and call > yourself something like ?rich people for only our > children?s health? then you flatter certain > Borough councillors..get on any campaign or > sub-group you can, Green-wash your NIMBY ideas and > also helpful if you have something like an > architect or town planner who is on a council > planning sub-committee ... I imagine Who is on the sub-committee that you object to? Sounds like unfair advantage!

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rosamund Kissi Debra - "Asked why I don?t support > LTNs? Bcos its slowly poisoning my kids & > thousands more due to daily exposure to toxic air. > I?m a mum of 3 & love them equally never choose. > Supporting such a scheme means you support > #lungapartheid. If your rd is clear, congestion > has moved elsewhere" So what do you suggest? What is the alternative? How do we encourage people out of their cars for unnecessary short journeys? What will London look and feel like in 20 years if we go back to what we had? How well will children e breathing then? What about the health of their children? I understand that change isn?t easy and appreciate we must work quickly to resolve the issues that have emerged but I need a response to the above if we are to go forward.

You don?t say where you live to judge how far you would need to push it, but what I have done is park on Gallery Road and walked the last 7 mins. I have then walked back in the evening to collect it. This has only happened once as I drive very rarely and never for short trips.

Get out of your cars. My husband has a cracked rib. He just left the house to pick up a battery on his bike. He is 71. ( the car battery is dead because we never use it)

I don?t disagree with you more is needed not less to encourage alternative modes of travel. I can?t comment on whether traffic figures have been manipulated because I dint have access to that information. What I do know based in TFL figures is that traffic on main roads has decreased over the last decade and at the same time, over the same period it has increased on residential roads. The Dulwich Alliance/ One Dulwich web site claims traffic has not increased over the past decade which is simply false. We need to look at the next 10 to 20 years to work towards a solution across London to reduce traffic on all roads and the only way to do this is to encourage ordinary people out of their cars and put their bums on saddles. Dulwich is in an amazing position to contribute; we have more disposable income, larger than some houses, garages, gardens and so on to make alternative choices eg store bikes, purchase an electric bike/cargo bike and so on. This will make room for those who need to travel by car. The Dulwich Alliance brigade have resorted to scaremongering and distorting the truth. The ambulance and woman talking at the DV junction I was told was that she had a dizzy spell and ambulance was called and when it arrived she was feeling better. Now this may or may not be the case but unless someone has the facts that the circumstances confirmed, this image should not be used to scare people. The ambulance service has confirmed they are meeting their targets. I don?t understand your justification for giving up your commute by bike as there is a great network of quiet residential streets that can take you from Dulwich to the city or Westminster without getting caught up in congestion. If your female get in touch with Joyriders.com who are running bike rides not the city during commuting hours. I would also encourage people to contact Peddleme.com who will make deliveries on your behalf, pick up children in their cargo bikes or pick up parcels. They would be a great service for the shops who say they can?t get/make deliveries. The owner of Peddle me recently said they would give shops a free go to demonstrate their efficiency. Rather than moaning I wish people would look to the future and say ? how can I help to make this work for me, my children and grandchildren?. This is about the future not now.

Darren then says (1:06:09) that the number of delayed responses due to infrastructure changes (ie LTN's) across London is 170 of which 51 are in Southwark!! (C'llr Newens "death stare" look is conjecture and questions the professionalism of Darren Farmer so I won?t respond to that. You are correct that the Ambulance Service would prefer camera controlled access rather than hard 24\7 closures. The proposal put forward by the Coalition4Dulwich group suggests a shared cycle/emergency route through the square. I only support it because this is the first tangible suggestion I have seen. We have all witnessed cars disregarding the timed restrictions on Dulwich Village, a similar situation within the square would create a safety hazard and no local authority in their right mind would sign up to that because ultimately Councils have to take responsibility for safety. Your ?Dr Evil impression? comment is not worthy of a response. You are right Gilkes Crescent and Milo Road are not LTNs but they are closed roads. They were closed due to rat running and not because of ?poorly thought through traffic measures implemented by Southwark Council despite warnings by local residents that traffic would be diverted along those roads.? If you have evidence then let?s see it. Traffic use to cut down Gilkes Crescent and then travel along Woodward, Carlton or Court Lane. Speed bumps were introduced to try and control speeds and then the first gate on Gilkes was introduced. Some traffic was diverted onto the main roads as a result but die heart rat runners used Gilkes Place until it too was closed. Gilkes definitely displaces traffic back onto the main roads but maybe motorists should not have used it as a cut through in the first place? Traffic has increased in London and this includes Dulwich. (I believe the One Dulwich web site disagrees) Traffic in the last decade has decreased on main roads and increased on residential roads. LTNs encourage people to change their travel behaviour but this takes time and has to be supported by other measures. In many respects traffic counts/before data and so on miss the point because if as a society we are to address the climate emergency we have to introduce radical interventions. Wealthy areas, parks, gardens (as suggested by ?heartblock? is irrelevant this is bigger than Dulwich. ( Hard to believe I know). An arbitration exercise is not what I?m suggesting. What I?m suggesting is a team of professional experts who can look at an area and make recommendations on how to make things better for everyone. Eg where the blockages are occurring and how to make adjustments to ease them. Traffic - too many people in cars/ on line shopping etc often making short journeys is what creates congestion for people who need to drive and can delay our emergency services.

I appreciate the concerns that have been expressed and accept that the current LTNs are not perfect. I have seen some of the rubbish on Twitter and have to say most of the aggressive behaviour comes from the anti LTN side. If not aggression than being economical with the truth. But never mind that if there are people who want to explore what is best for Dulwich and best for London in terms of making a meaningful contribution to the climate emergency then let?s do it. However, discussions needs a facilitator who is impartial and has the expertise in transport and urban design to look at Dulwich and the wider area. Such an exercise will only be successful if there is broad agreement that something needs to be done to reduce cars, short journeys and encourage walking and cycling. I?ve not seen much that is positive coming from the One Dulwich group who seem to want the LTNs removed or for residents to have permits which is a proposal I don?t understand. But I honestly don?t think any of the bone will happen even on World Earth Day so carry on with your discussions.

Certainly talk amount yourselves, but I find the discussion rather limited and slightly hypocritical. We have long standing LTNs in the area that didn't raise any issues. What's the problem now? E.g. Gilkes Crescent and Milo Road, closed road due to rat running.Roads in and around Dulwich have always been congested, mostly due to school runs. Well maybe we should think more about the long-term health of our children that are being run to school. We have One Dulwich promoting the falsehood that ambulance services are being delayed, However, Darren Farmer gave evidence in March 2021 to Southwark's Environment Scrutiny Committee and stated that this was not the case. (Look it up) On balance I think the LTNs are a good thing but they will only be successful if the community works together as more must be done to encourage people out of their cars. Trump style scaremongering and falsehoods will serve no one. I for one was encouraged by the image that was sent about a month ago, showing what Dulwich could look like. Why not work towards a positive outcome rather than something half baked?What will London be like in 30 years time if we don't act now? Can someone provide me with an alternative plan to reduce car journeys?