Poor transport links: any one else thinking of fleeing East Dulwich?

[titch juicy]

geobz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > JohnL Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > 1 Hour isn't good - we should be talking

> 30-40

> > > minutes.:)

> >

> >

> > Did you know that government guidelines on best

> > practice say that children up to the age of 8

> > (with special educational needs) shouldn't have

> > school journeys lasting more than 45 minutes.

> Over

> > 8s it's an hour. These guidelines have been

> around

> > forever (well decades).

> >

> > So I think an hour to work is perfectly

> acceptable

> > for a working adult :)

>

>

> The issue is that your not an hour away from the

> City. The transportation links are poor.

>

> I often walk from ED to Oxford Street, doesn't

> take me more than 1h20m to get there.

>

> So yes I think a bus that does 1hour against

> walking 1hour and 20 minutes is an issue.

>

> And southern isn't running most of the time, and

> the timeschedules are way off... you don't get

> trains every 10 minutes anymore apart from

> 8:10,20,30, everything else is every 20-30

> minutes... thats awful and it feels like you are

> living out of town. Also on weekends you get

> reduced services and Sundays you'll barely find

> the station open.

>

> Commuting from ED is BAD! Stop trying to convince

> yourself that its alright.

The thing is, those trains that run every 20 minutes are never full, so why would they put more on?

[nina_maniana]

I reckon it's all about being on a tube line if you want better transport as with the train if there's a cancellation or you miss one you are straight away pushed back 10 / 15 mins until the next one. Then there are the issues with congestion at London Bridge.

You could do Forest Hill or Sydenham, then at least you're on the overground.

Or else south bit of the northern line to be further south than the morning crushes. Maybe Tooting. Problem is if you want an area as nice as dulwich but on the tube you're going to have to pay ???.

Anyway you're not the only one who thinks about moving - I've taken to getting the bus to work every day as at least it's a vaguely reliable commute although it takes me an hour and a half each way. 3 hours a day round commute or 15 hours a week is kind of soul crushing when you think about it.

[geobz]

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> geobz Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Otta Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > JohnL Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > >

> > > > 1 Hour isn't good - we should be talking

> > 30-40

> > > > minutes.:)

> > >

> > >

> > > Did you know that government guidelines on

> best

> > > practice say that children up to the age of 8

> > > (with special educational needs) shouldn't

> have

> > > school journeys lasting more than 45 minutes.

> > Over

> > > 8s it's an hour. These guidelines have been

> > around

> > > forever (well decades).

> > >

> > > So I think an hour to work is perfectly

> > acceptable

> > > for a working adult :)

> >

> >

> > The issue is that your not an hour away from

> the

> > City. The transportation links are poor.

> >

> > I often walk from ED to Oxford Street, doesn't

> > take me more than 1h20m to get there.

> >

> > So yes I think a bus that does 1hour against

> > walking 1hour and 20 minutes is an issue.

> >

> > And southern isn't running most of the time,

> and

> > the timeschedules are way off... you don't get

> > trains every 10 minutes anymore apart from

> > 8:10,20,30, everything else is every 20-30

> > minutes... thats awful and it feels like you

> are

> > living out of town. Also on weekends you get

> > reduced services and Sundays you'll barely find

> > the station open.

> >

> > Commuting from ED is BAD! Stop trying to

> convince

> > yourself that its alright.

>

> The thing is, those trains that run every 20

> minutes are never full, so why would they put more

> on?

Because thats why am paying taxes for? and on top ticket fare?

Whats next? because the every 20 minutes are not full change them to every hour? The reason of living in a zone2 area is that you should have fast and easy access to the Center.

40minutes commute for 5 miles worth of travel is so third world!

[titch juicy]

geobz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> titch juicy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > geobz Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Otta Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > JohnL Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > >

> > > > > 1 Hour isn't good - we should be talking

> > > 30-40

> > > > > minutes.:)

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Did you know that government guidelines on

> > best

> > > > practice say that children up to the age of

> 8

> > > > (with special educational needs) shouldn't

> > have

> > > > school journeys lasting more than 45

> minutes.

> > > Over

> > > > 8s it's an hour. These guidelines have been

> > > around

> > > > forever (well decades).

> > > >

> > > > So I think an hour to work is perfectly

> > > acceptable

> > > > for a working adult :)

> > >

> > >

> > > The issue is that your not an hour away from

> > the

> > > City. The transportation links are poor.

> > >

> > > I often walk from ED to Oxford Street,

> doesn't

> > > take me more than 1h20m to get there.

> > >

> > > So yes I think a bus that does 1hour against

> > > walking 1hour and 20 minutes is an issue.

> > >

> > > And southern isn't running most of the time,

> > and

> > > the timeschedules are way off... you don't

> get

> > > trains every 10 minutes anymore apart from

> > > 8:10,20,30, everything else is every 20-30

> > > minutes... thats awful and it feels like you

> > are

> > > living out of town. Also on weekends you get

> > > reduced services and Sundays you'll barely

> find

> > > the station open.

> > >

> > > Commuting from ED is BAD! Stop trying to

> > convince

> > > yourself that its alright.

> >

> > The thing is, those trains that run every 20

> > minutes are never full, so why would they put

> more

> > on?

>

> Because thats why am paying taxes for? and on top

> ticket fare?

>

> Whats next? because the every 20 minutes are not

> full change them to every hour? The reason of

> living in a zone2 area is that you should have

> fast and easy access to the Center.

>

> 40minutes commute for 5 miles worth of travel is

> so third world!

Unless you live somewhere with the tube- best of luck.

Oh, and how does paying your taxes have anything to do with private rail companies?

[DulwichLondoner]

Otta Wrote:

> Did you know that government guidelines on best

> practice say that children up to the age of 8

> (with special educational needs) shouldn't have

> school journeys lasting more than 45 minutes. Over

> 8s it's an hour. These guidelines have been around

> forever (well decades).

>

> So I think an hour to work is perfectly acceptable

> for a working adult :)

Are there also government guidelines on the time employees should leave the office, because otherwise their third-world trains will make them arrive after their child's nursery closing time?

Are there also government guidelines on the maximum number of consecutive trains that can be cancelled before one is allowed to complain?

[DulwichLondoner]

titch juicy Wrote:

> Unless you live somewhere with the tube- best of

> luck.

ED does not have the best train services, which has contributed to keeping property prices lower than elsewhere. Life is about compromise. I'm not saying I expect trains every 2 minutes; I am simply saying I'd like the service to be the same it was 5 years ago. Cancelling train after train is not normal. 1 train per hour in the morning rush hour over last summer is not normal. Oh, and is it me, or do trains now take longer? The official schedule shows 16 to 19 minutes to London Bridge. I seem to remember it was more like 12 when I moved here.

> Oh, and how does paying your taxes have anything

> to do with private rail companies?

Well, railways in this beautiful country are still subsidised - some lines more than others. Also, didn't the government provide some ?20MM of emergency funding to Southern Fail around September 2016? This sounds like tax money to me.

[DulwichLondoner]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> But our 'metro' service has been nowhere near as

> bad as the longer-distance Southern services. And

> if you live in Brighton, there's not much

> alternative

Very true. I started commuting by motorcycle. Some people cycle. It's far from ideal, but we have more alternatives than the poor people in Brighton.

Cardelia Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> One thing you may wish to consider is that the

> next South West Trains franchise will almost

> certainly be affected by RMT strikes concerning

> driver-operated doors. Currently SWT have guards

> who open the doors but these roles will be changed

> in line with Government policy regarding the

> modernization of the railways. So there will be a

> lot of disruption in the next few years.

Aaaaargh! Although, to be honest, I don't know how much is to do with the strikes and how much with sheer incompetence. To me it all started going downhill around December 2014, with 'improvement' works at London Bridge. The key issue is not the strikes, but the fact that service is awful even when there are no strikes! Are so many Southern employees pulling in sickies? Did Southern fail to hire enough staff? Are workers simply refusing to work overtime, ie did Southern rely too much on overtime?

[rendelharris]

God almighty. Sorry, I'm going to go off a bit on one, but in response to the OP, we live in just about the most privileged city in the world, yes transport isn't all it might be but there's virtually nowhere in the capital that one can't reach in an hour or less - much less if you use a bike - if you don't like living in ED then stop whining and go somewhere else. Good heavens. I work with charities trying to cut down the journey to get water from five hours walk to three! Life is not perfect, get over it.

[KidKruger]

Rendel mate I don't think there's any point telling people who's bosses are looking at them coming in late for work day after day and week after week that it's really no big deal because somewhere else on Earth some poor bloke has to walk 5 hours for water ! What are you on about ?! The pressures of getting to work are tied-in with large mortgages (as they have to be these days) and high rents needing to be paid. If everyone was just popping out to the gallery or a picnic your comment may carry some weight, but they way you laid it out I'm afraid it doesn't.

'get over it' makes it sound like people haven't got worries and pressures - if they didn't WHY would they be so concerned about the frigging trains ?

I'm probably on my way out of ED/London because I find it untenable on a consistent basis, recently I was working in Milton Keynes / Leicester and with cancelled trains/Southern strikes/having to get to Victoria or other transport modes just to get North of the river it was a nightmare. I needed to be there by 0800 and there's no genuine reason that should not be possible - all that's needed is scheduled bloody trains run on time FFS. It's not OK.

So your man with the 5 hour walk is welcome over here to do what the people already here cannot do - namely, run a train service !

[rendelharris]

KK - we live in an area where one can cycle to the City of London in about twenty minutes. One can walk to the City in about an hour. It befuddles me that people would rather stand on a platform whining about the trains rather than do that. Of course there are the elderly and disabled who can't do that, and better provision should be made for them, but it astonishes me that able-bodied people insist on the government providing them with mechanised transport to get them three or four miles - there are alternatives!

Looking forward to being told how wrong I am...

[Jeremy]

Walk from ED to the City in an hour? Don't think so. You might get from Goose Green to Elephant in an hour...

[rendelharris]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Walk from ED to the City in an hour? Don't think

> so. You might get from Goose Green to Elephant in

> an hour...

True, bit optimistic, sorry. Still it's only four miles, so a bus ride and a two mile walk in an hour well doable...

[rendelharris]

KK - in the cold (and sober, I admit - was at a mate's birthday last night so maybe a bit over the top!) light of day perhaps my comparison was a bit useless. But still, I do find it incredible that people talk as if there's no alternative to the train and say they'll have to move...yes there should be a clean, efficient and cheap mass transit system, but there isn't and even if we started building it now it wouldn't be in place for a decade or more. If someone has to face "bosses looking at them coming in late for work day after day and week after week," they should get a bike! If they're too unfit or unwell to ride four miles, get an electric bike. With the new cycle infrastructure the "it's too dangerous" reason has been removed, why not, instead of putting up with ridiculous delays, insane fares and the damage that does to one's psyche and family life?

I know it shouldn't have to come down to such a choice, but it does.

[titch juicy]

If the boss gets on your back for being late every day, leave earlier and get in on time.

We had a lady at work living in Essex who was late most days, mainly blaming the trains. Someone said to her to leave earlier-her response? It's not my fault the trains are rubbish.

[KidKruger]

oh yeah cheers - I must have overlooked those solutions when they were staring me right in the face !

[Earl Aelfheah]

The bottom line is that the trains have got busier, more expensive, less reliable and slower over the last decade. That shouldn't be acceptable and people are right to criticise it. To fire back with a glib 'leave earlier', is unhelpful. Clearly, people do find alternative ways into work, but often at great disruption or inconvenience (particularly in relation to childcare) and they shouldn't have to. Telling people to 'get a bike' fails to hold our elected representatives and the train companies to account for their failures. This is a wealthy city and should have a decent, world class transport system.

[DulwichLondoner]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> KK - we live in an area where one can cycle to the

> City of London in about twenty minutes. One can

> walk to the City in about an hour. It befuddles

> me that people would rather stand on a platform

> whining about the trains rather than do that. [...]

> Looking forward to being told how wrong I am...

20 minutes? Really? It only takes me 20ish minutes on my *motorcycle* from ED to the City late at night, when there is no traffic, but there are still a gazillion traffic lights every other yard. Oh, and the stupid 20mph street limits on large A roads do not help, either. I understand most cyclists don't realise 20mph speed limits and red lights apply to them, but they do. On these routes, as far as I can remember, cycle lanes go along roughly the same routes I do on my motorcycle, and do not exempt cyclists from red lights. So, I ask again: 20 minutes? Really? Do you never find a red light? Are you faster than me on my motorcycle (I respect speed limits, however stupid)? Or maybe does it, in fact, take longer than 20 minutes?

Similar story from Mayfair to ED: it takes me 20-25 minutes only at night, with no traffic. Around 8.30am and 7pm it's more like 35 to 45 minutes.

It befuddles me that people do not appreciate how dangerous cycling in a city like London is; I explained a few posts above why I consider cycling way more dangerous than motorcycling, so I'm not going to repeat myself. And no, segregated cycle lanes don't change the situation much, because they only cover a small portion of the route.

Even if I didn't consider cycling dangerous, in my office there are way too many cyclists and way too few showers. My only option would be to stay smelly and drenched in sweat, at least for an hour till the showers become free - not to mention how much time showering and changing adds to the commute. And how about all the morning meetings I typically have with external people? "So nice to meet you, sir, we could hear your smell from across the hall, so it's very nice to finally put a face to a smell".

Oh, and before you ask, no, leaving an hour earlier is not an option because I am constrained by the time I have to drop off my child at the nursery. yes, I know, how shameful and inconsiderate of me to reproduce.

I am not asking to be teleported to the office, Star-trek style, in 2 minutes. I am not asking for additional infrastructure. I simply want the existing infrastructure to work the way it used to 5 years ago. Is this really too much to ask?

PS I consider the 20mph speed limits on large A roads stupid because the "20 is plenty" campaign failed to prove the use. If there is any significant study linking 20mph limits to lower accident rates, they haven;t shown it. It is also very odd that so many councils have introduced these limits just while the Department of Transportation was conducting a study on the issue, with results to be published in a few years. 20mph limits make a lot of sense in small, secondary residential roads, but I fail to see the point in wide A roads, where you can't park on the sides.

[DulwichLondoner]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The bottom line is that the trains have got

> busier, more expensive, less reliable and slower

> over the last decade. That shouldn't be acceptable

> and people are right to criticise it.

All true, but let's remember that the southern Fail shambles has more to do with incompetence and heel-dragging in the negotiations than with simply more users. More users cause trains to be busier; they do not cause trains to run every hour in the morning for the entire summer, or to be cancelled constantly for no apparent reason, or to be always late.

[BrandNewGuy]

You spoil your argument with gross exaggeration. The trains are not cancelled constantly, nor are they always late.

[treehugger]

re cycling -

I don't disagree at all that we are ill-served by reliable public transport in East Dulwich. But that is exactly why I cycle into the City everyday. I am a 56 year old woman, but can easily make it in 30 minutes door to door (unfortunately yesterday I had to go by the 12 bus to Peckham Rye; the train to City Thameslink and then walk and it took an hour of stress). I have a lovely route: along the surrey canal and then wiggling through the back streets to the Shard (check out the quiet cycle route on citymapper). There are few traffic lights and it is a really pleasant and safe ride, especially now the weather is improving. I don't go crazy and therefore don't sweat. I don't need a shower and I arrive in a good mood and energised for the day. My work colleagues find me sickeningly upbeat at the start of the day. Cycling home is even nicer. I recommend it.

[Abe_froeman]

ED station to the closest edge of the city in 20 minutes would mean an average speed of 12 mph, faster than the average speed of traffic in London

[DulwichLondoner]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You spoil your argument with gross exaggeration.

> The trains are not cancelled constantly, nor are

> they always late.

I decided to start commuting by motorcycle in early 2015, after, for a period of almost 3 months, my commute back home took 1 hour instead of 1.15.

Last summer, trains from East Dulwich to London Bridge in the mornings were one per hour. This lasted many months.

I have been late at multiple important work meetings because I took into account that one train might be cancelled, but not two in a row. Apparently I was wrong.

We have in multiple occasions messed up our nanny's plans, or she messed up ours, because we arrived home too late or she arrived late in the morning.

Not to mention all the people I know who missed flights at Gatwick because trains after trains were cancelled.

What can I say? If my experience is not representative, I must be very unlucky!

[rendelharris]

Just to answer a couple of your points, Dulwichlondoner (by the way I said nothing about leaving an hour earlier and I'm quite aware of the pressures of childcare):

- from my door to St.Paul's is 4.05 miles. I cycle at around 20MPH, which is not difficult for any moderately fit person on the flat (and apart from Blackfriars Bridge it's all flat), so that's 12 minutes cycling plus eight for waiting at lights etc (and believe it or not I never jump red lights and shout at cyclists who do). I actually only face six sets of lights between home and the city, by the law of averages half of them will be green anyway, at the ones that I know have a long hold I sometimes dismount and push my bike over the pedestrian crossing. I'm going into some detail as you appear to be calling me a liar. When I had a motorcycle I generally found I was slower than on a cycle in any sort of traffic. By the way speed limits do not apply to bicycles anywhere except in the Royal Parks, which have their own regulations: the Met police recently confirmed that speed limits apply only to motorised transport;

- Segregated cycle lanes do not just cover a small portion of the route from East Dulwich to the City, in that four miles I have to ride 0.75 of a mile on road (all quiet and traffic controlled), the rest is segregated cycle routes, and once I reach Blackfriars I can get all the way to Limehouse in one direction and Lancaster Gate in the other without ever sharing space with motorised traffic (apart from a tiny section alongside St.James' Park which will very soon have a cycle track);

- If your office is full of cyclists and shower provision is inadequate, lobby management for better provision. Alternatively, join a gym near work with the money saved from paying rail fares and shower there. Another option would be simply to cycle more slowly: at 10MPH you'll be using less energy than you would walking and you'll still cover four miles in half an hour and be way less sweaty than standing in a packed train carriage would make you.

With a little planning cycling is a perfectly good safe alternative to public or private motorised transport. If you don't want to avail yourself of it, fine, but don't call people who perfectly truthfully set out its advantages liars, it's not polite.

Interesting, by the way, that you're happy to ride a motorcycle but think cycling's too dangerous in London: cyclist fatalities in London 2015: 9. Motorcyclist fatalities: 36.

[BrandNewGuy]

The one train an hour period was awful, but it went on for a number of months only. For months now, we have been back to having ten trains to LB between 06.55 and 08.57. Not perfect and there have been some cancellations and delays, but the picture you paint is nothing like my experience.

[rendelharris]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ED station to the closest edge of the city in 20

> minutes would mean an average speed of 12 mph,

> faster than the average speed of traffic in London

See my explanation above. Also, next time you're on a bus or driving in London at rush hour, observe the cyclists (the law abiding ones) - you'll notice they travel significantly faster than motorised traffic as a) they have their own tracks in many places and b) they can nearly always get to the head of tailbacks at lights etc.