LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[sally buying]

Once in the same everywhere will never be removed.

Southwark are legging over everyone seven ways to sunday.

[lpool]

My wife witnessed what was very nearly a serious accident today at the Nelbourne Grove blockade. As per many drivers, only sees road block last minute so slams on brakes and throws into reverse, only just missing adult with child on a cycle coming out of Ashbourne Grove. I will be contacting the council. I inspected all the current signage yesterday and it is woefully inadequate and in contravention to minimum requirements.

Ashbourne Grove appears to have become a race track with vehicles desperate to make up for lost time. It is only a matter of time before their is an accident and the risk of someone being injured or worse. I?m not sure this was something supporters of the scheme envisaged. If it carries on like this then we may see Ashbourne Grove residents blocking the end of the road to force vehicles to go back the way they came.

[march46]

Agree signage could be better but unfortunately drivers will still ignore in the hope that can get through. They'll figure it out soon, and when Waze / Google maps update it will improve.

Out of interest what's the worst time for the traffic on Ashbourne, or is it constant throughout the day?

lpool Wrote:

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

> My wife witnessed what was very nearly a serious

> accident today at the Nelbourne Grove blockade. As

> per many drivers, only sees road block last minute

> so slams on brakes and throws into reverse, only

> just missing adult with child on a cycle coming

> out of Ashbourne Grove. I will be contacting the

> council. I inspected all the current signage

> yesterday and it is woefully inadequate and in

> contravention to minimum requirements.

>

> Ashbourne Grove appears to have become a race

> track with vehicles desperate to make up for lost

> time. It is only a matter of time before their is

> an accident and the risk of someone being injured

> or worse. I?m not sure this was something

> supporters of the scheme envisaged. If it carries

> on like this then we may see Ashbourne Grove

> residents blocking the end of the road to force

> vehicles to go back the way they came.

[first mate]

And so it will continue. Soon multiple roads in ED will ask to be blocked off. I do not understand why Cllr Livingstone and Cllr McAsh are not more intimately involved in the working detail of these interventions when they have been so hands-on, present and active in consultations and lobbying with targeted locals and pressure groups, to get road closures underway.

lpool Wrote:

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

> My wife witnessed what was very nearly a serious

> accident today at the Nelbourne Grove blockade. As

> per many drivers, only sees road block last minute

> so slams on brakes and throws into reverse, only

> just missing adult with child on a cycle coming

> out of Ashbourne Grove. I will be contacting the

> council. I inspected all the current signage

> yesterday and it is woefully inadequate and in

> contravention to minimum requirements.

>

> Ashbourne Grove appears to have become a race

> track with vehicles desperate to make up for lost

> time. It is only a matter of time before their is

> an accident and the risk of someone being injured

> or worse. I?m not sure this was something

> supporters of the scheme envisaged. If it carries

> on like this then we may see Ashbourne Grove

> residents blocking the end of the road to force

> vehicles to go back the way they came.

[Metallic]

I went to look at the traffic jams yesterday. Not a great way to spend a couple of hours - the standing traffic existed from when I started looking at 3.35pm until well after 7 pm in Dulwich Village, according to people I rang to check. I'm a serious asthmatic and this is no joke - so pleased for Calton Avenue that they have achieved paradise at the expense of College Road, Dulwich Village, Burbage Road, Turney Road, East Dulwich Grove, Village Way, Pickwick Road, Woodwarde Road, and East Dulwich Grove. We all warned about displacement, but it has fallen on deaf ears. It was inevitable with piecemeal action. I know this is only during morning and evening rush hours but as we don't have the complication of coaches and school traffic in the amounts we will get in September, surely this is the time to make sure displacement driving doesn't continue.

The interactive map you can comment on for Southwark and all of us to read, does not really help people who would like to interact with some of the commenters. I am not a OneDulwich supporter, just someone who has lived and worked in this area for many years. The lower part of my road is hell now, and the side roads off it dangerous with frustrated drivers annoyed at the closures.

[first mate]

I think we have to ask ourselves whether this is genuine accident (poor management/piecemeal) or design? What can Southwark hope to gain from this approach?

[Abe_froeman]

Quite right too. They won't the NIMBYs from Melbourne Grove rat running down their road.

[exdulwicher]

It'll settle down. This happens with every form of road closure or blockage, whether it's roadworks, construction work, a serious accident etc.

Short term ones (like an accident where a road might be closed for 6hrs say), you just accept the chaos cos there's not really a lot that can be done about it, there's certainly no consultation or warning.

Medium term ones like roadworks, you get a mix of people who accept the delays and a mix who do all sorts of contorted driving around back roads to avoid it but actually end up no better off - the philosophy of "well I'm moving so I'm making progress" wins out of the logics.

Long term ones like a road closure, you get no useful data at all in the first month. Loads of people don't know about it (in spite of consultations, info on the Southwark website and elsewhere, leaflets through doors (like all the Area A, B and C had about the original Healthy Streets) - there are loads of people who simply don't engage, seek info or know (likely because a lot are outside the borough). Again, short of writing to every single household in London saying "hey if you're thinking of driving through DV...." you will never reach everyone. Drivers then ignore road closure signs (obviously a mere sign doesn't apply to THEM), get to the end and oh look, it's closed.

So you get this:

There was one in DV earlier, as well (can't find the video now, someone drove right over the pavement across the front of the pharmacy then the pavement on the graveyard side of Court Lane.

As

> per many drivers, only sees road block last minute

> so slams on brakes and throws into reverse, only

> just missing adult with child on a cycle coming

> out of Ashbourne Grove. I will be contacting the

> council. I inspected all the current signage

> yesterday and it is woefully inadequate and in

> contravention to minimum requirements.

The signage is temporary, it's perfectly clear and yet they STILL ignore it. The issue with your story is not the road, the closure, the council or the signage - it's an entitled idiot dangerous DRIVER. Like the vast majority of problems on our roads.

It will settle in though, there's nothing useful to be gained in terms of data from the first month of a closure. Let the idiots sort themselves out, the council fix any minor issues (adding to signage, putting extra bollards in across the pavements where required) and then the outcomes can begin to be examined.

[slarti b]

first mate Wrote:

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

> I think we have to ask ourselves whether this is > genuine accident (poor management/piecemeal) or

> design? What can Southwark hope to gain from this approach?

These consequences were obvious and, as Metallica says, have been pointed out to the council by many people. So, my view is that it is deliberate. The council's next action will be to say, crikey, we hadn't anticipated how bad it would be in DV and EDG, we will have to close off Dulwich Village by Roundabout, Townley Road\EDG, Burbage Road etc etc. Effectively they will be using Covid to implement the full OHS scheme by the back door. Except that the closures are likley to be full time rather than timed with residents access.

This will reduce traffic on DV and divert it onto the main roads ( one of teh key objectives of OHS) meaning EDG, Lordship Lane, Croxted Road Half Moon Lane etc.

[first mate]

Yes, and then how will they mitigate effects of pollution to the schools on LL and Charter and Health Centre on EDG? What have they got in mind there? ED is now officially a car free zone?

[spider69]

Dear exdulwicher

Out of interest what local authority do you work for re traffic planning that you alway seem to push never ending traffic schemes without fail.

As its your job I can understand why you would do it, No point in talking yourself out of a job

[intexasatthe moment]

ex dulwicher - I agree with some of your points but whoa there with this -

"Loads of people don't know about it (in spite of consultations, info on the Southwark website and elsewhere, leaflets through doors (like all the Area A, B and C had about the original Healthy Streets) - there are loads of people who simply don't engage, seek info or know (likely because a lot are outside the borough). Again, short of writing to every single household in London saying "hey if you're thinking of driving through DV...." "

I live near Dulwich Library and received nothing through the door about these Healthy Streets propsals ,I bumped into someone who had and went to a meeting .It was pitiful ,A4 bits of paper which interested people like me had to piece together to form a map of the proposals ,staff/consultants who had zero knowledge of the area .It was like an exercise in how not to have a meeting/info session .

[lpool]

"The signage is temporary, it's perfectly clear and yet they STILL ignore it. The issue with your story is not the road, the closure, the council or the signage - it's an entitled idiot dangerous DRIVER. Like the vast majority of problems on our roads.

It will settle in though, there's nothing useful to be gained in terms of data from the first month of a closure. Let the idiots sort themselves out, the council fix any minor issues (adding to signage, putting extra bollards in across the pavements where required) and then the outcomes can begin to be examined."

I've only being involved in transport for about 30 years, and aside from the odd global events which I have either led or advised on re transport planning, probably don't have the same level of experience as exdulwicher when it comes to temporary road closures. But I guess I'm still entitled to an opinion. So in my somewhat inexperienced view, the signing is both inadequate and non-compliant, the scheme has not been fully thought through, and using the excuse that it is purely down to idiot drivers if there is an accident either injuring or killing someone is not a form of defence I would ever use as the basis for how I set about transport planning work. I leave you with a picture of one of those "perfectly clear" signs. This is one of the better ones as most don't even exist.

[EDguy89]

lpool Wrote:

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

> My wife witnessed what was very nearly a serious

> accident today at the Nelbourne Grove blockade. As

> per many drivers, only sees road block last minute

> so slams on brakes and throws into reverse, only

> just missing adult with child on a cycle coming

> out of Ashbourne Grove. I will be contacting the

> council. I inspected all the current signage

> yesterday and it is woefully inadequate and in

> contravention to minimum requirements.

>

> Ashbourne Grove appears to have become a race

> track with vehicles desperate to make up for lost

> time. It is only a matter of time before their is

> an accident and the risk of someone being injured

> or worse. I?m not sure this was something

> supporters of the scheme envisaged. If it carries

> on like this then we may see Ashbourne Grove

> residents blocking the end of the road to force

> vehicles to go back the way they came.

I appreciate that people living on Ashbourne Grove have had a bit of a rough week with traffic being diverted down their road to get back onto Lordship Lane.

I anticipate this will drop over the course of time because there isn't any time gained by switching off of LL, onto Melbourne Grove, down Ashbourne, then back onto LL. As someone whose been renting on Melbourne Grove for the last 4 years. Your recent experiences is what those who already live on the road have been dealing with, but at a lesser extent.

My wife and I have noticed an almost immediate decrease in traffic with the barrier in place. I think the road still sees more usage than many other solely residential roads, but once sat nav tools update to reflect the closed road then I think usage will drop further.

This isn't coming from a place of NIMBYism (literally because it's BEEN in our back yard the entire time), nor is this the position of someone who stands to benefit financially from the road closure. It's from someone who has been dealing with people using Melbourne Grove as a cut through excessively ever since moving here.

[Rockets]

I went for a run this morning at 6.30am and it was noticeable how much busier the A205 and Dulwich Village were. I think what the council have done is created an even busier thorough-fare through Dulwich Village - there used to be a natural dispersal of cars along Calton and Court Lane but now people are faced with the prospect of joining a line of traffic along the A205 (which incidentally was tailing back from the Grove Tavern to Dulwich College this morning - this may or may not be linked but it was odd for that time of the morning) and will instead take their chances through Dulwich Village and then work their way around the road blocks. By removing the turn into Calton and Court Lane Dulwich Village is now a fast main road - there are no longer cars slowing others by waiting to turn across the junction - which used to control traffic flow and speed outside the shops in the village.

It's funny isn't it that road management seems hellbent on preventing dispersal - it's a bit like designing multiple exits OUT of a sports stadium and telling everyone to use a single entrance.

[rupert james]

EDguy89

What are the numbers that turn a road into being used excessively, is it per hour and per day?

Did Southwark measure this or was it just by looking?

Interested to know

[73jem]

Just walked through the center of the village. Because a few drivers have got through the closure by driving on the pavement, the council has had to put in further measures, sadly nothing like so pretty a space now, all the fault of the selfish drivers whose actions have altered the whole feeling of the new space. I hope that at least one of these drivers reads this, but fear that they are people who just use the area as a useful cut through.

[intexasatthe moment]

"solely residential roads" are there roads which are solely residential ? Or is this wishful thinking .

I suppose cul de sacs ,gated communities ,the odd group of houses set back on an in fill site would rank at the top of this heirachy where it seems some roads are more deserving than others of barricades to protect them from vehicles .

The rest of us low life at the bottom end will just have to suck it up .

[EDAus]

Ashbourne Grove is now a 'rat run' for the residents, businesses, visitors of Melbourne Grove (South) and roads leading off it. They are joining Lordship lane via Ashbourne Grove to avoid the traffic lights outside M&S and / or the set between the Harris school and William Rose Butchers - if traffic was directed to exit via Melbourne Grove South at the Lordship Lane end.

The same cars and work vans evidenced driving up and down Ashbourne Grove during the day, can be found parked on Melbourne Grove South overnight.

Residents can call for the

1) closure of all the junctions leading onto Melbourne Grove South, except for the junction with Lordship lane or

2) making all the streets on-way leading from Lordship Lane to Melbourne Grove South

In terms of dangerous driving and near misses please report them to 101:

https://www.met.police.uk/ro/report/ocr/af/how-to-report-a-crime/

and the council

https://eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is/

If the council implemented additional double yellow lines on Melbourne Grove South, safer turning could be achieved and there would be less reversing into traffic.

[heartblock]

The high density housing, with no gardens on roads with the worse traffic, families on low incomes are suffering the worse aspects of pollution. It must be lovely to be wealthy, living in a big house, with a big garden and a big income...with a lovely quiet road. I?m all for green policy, but not to the detriment of our most vulnerable residents.

[dande]

For many of us, it's clear that we need the Council to urgently re-think and re-wind. Unfortunately, it's never easy for people to do u-turns. There is often too much emotion and pride at stake. That's why I would urge all of you to please support the One Dulwich initiative. I've just checked their website and they now have nearly 600 registered supporters. What I like about the One Dulwich team is their commitment to finding a compromise solution that is fair and balanced. I think they're the best shot we have at encouraging the Council to take a more joined-up approach to the creation of healthy streets.

To be fair to the Council, I think their intentions were good but they didn't fully dimension just how perverse the outcomes would be. For example, whilst I believe their objectives were socially progressive in intention, the reality is that the road closures (and no doubt the knock-on ones to try to rectify issues created by it) end up becoming deeply socially regressive in so far as they push traffic and fumes away from a very affluent and relatively low pollution part of Southwark to surrounding areas which are already more disadvantaged on both these scores. These road closures also make the lives of those who have no choice but to drive (e.g. delivery vans, utilities, careworkers, the elderly etc.) much more difficult, especially when many of them are already leading vulnerable, low income lives.

All of which suggests a classic instance of a well-intentioned Council enacting decisions that inadvertently pervert their own ideals and principles. The problem, of course, is that all of us hate acknowledging that we might have miscalculated. And, instead of re-thinking, we usually double-down.

I am hopeful that One Dulwich can help broker an exit path for the Council that will allow them to undertake a positive re-think. So if you haven't done so already, please sign up and register your support at https://www.onedulwich.uk/get-involved

[Metallic]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> The high density housing, with no gardens on roads

> with the worse traffic, families on low incomes

> are suffering the worse aspects of pollution. It

> must be lovely to be wealthy, living in a big

> house, with a big garden and a big income...with a

> lovely quiet road. I?m all for green policy, but

> not to the detriment of our most vulnerable

> residents.

From my last post: "College Road, Dulwich Village, Burbage Road, Turney Road, East Dulwich Grove, Village Way, Pickwick Road, Woodwarde Road, and East Dulwich Grove." None of these roads are lovely quiet roads.

[Abe_froeman]

They are all residential roads though, just like the newly gated communities in Calton. Melborun etc

[heartblock]

My point was that....the now lovely quiet roads are all in wealthy areas....but we all need less pollution and less through traffic.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The question about the prioritisation process for these schemes is a fair one. I'm in favour of what they've done in the Village, because we desperately need to reduce pollution, and the number of road casualties. The allocation of public space is massively skewed to giving priority to cars over people and anything which moves us away from this and starts to redress the balance, has to be positive.

But it does seem that on the whole, the Council's approach is to allocate funding towards small, vocal resident campaigns, who are demanding less traffic on 'their' road, (or in the case of CPZs, easier parking outside their houses). Whilst I don't criticise these campaigns for trying to improve their immediate environment, this doesn't seem like a very strategic or joined up approach from the Council when deciding where to invest.

In practice it means that poorer, typically high pollution, high density areas, (often where car ownership is low), get a smaller proportion of the funding in favour of more affluent, lower density neighbourhoods. I would dearly like to see an approach, which prioritised interventions based on the principle of reducing pollution and road casualties and creating public space *where it is most needed*.

Funding is limited, so it needs to be directed to where it will have the biggest impact, not just where there are the loudest voices.