LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[tiddles]

Dulres3 you are spot on. Otto2 cycling is great if you can but many are not able simply as they are going about their work. I often have to bod about collecting materials for a small local landscaper. The trip to south London decorators and other suppliers is now taking much more time - spent sitting in idling traffic - for the benefit of the already very privileged?

[rheller]

Hi Rockets - yes we do mainly try to cycle or walk even when it?s cold and have done for the past two years (since we started doing the school run). If it?s raining we would still walk but with waterproofs / wellies etc. If really chucking it down then I would drive but I would park on a nearby street and walk the last bit. This is a rare occasion and likely only did it once or twice last winter.

[first mate]

Rheller how far do you live from the schools? The fact that you chose to make some of the journeys in the car is worth thinking about. If you support the local road changes why do you still own a car?

It may not be the case with you but anyone who has actively sought these road closures should not at the same time own a car and use it when it suits them.

[andrewc]

The goal is to reduce car use, I think most can agree on that.

Unlike parking proposals which can be seen as a form of taxation these road closures clearly have only one intention. The trouble is that road closures effect different people in different ways and it is hard sometimes to see the bigger picture. And in the short term things get worse.

It may be that the closures are misguided but the pain of it has a purpose.

[Rockets]

andrewc Wrote:

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

> The goal is to reduce car use, I think most can

> agree on that.

>

> Unlike parking proposals which can be seen as a

> form of taxation these road closures clearly have

> only one intention. The trouble is that road

> closures effect different people in different ways

> and it is hard sometimes to see the bigger

> picture. And in the short term things get worse.

>

> It may be that the closures are misguided but the

> pain of it has a purpose.

We all subscribe to the idea that car use needs to reduce but council also wilfully ignores the fact that a very large percentage of traffic is not local traffic - you may close roads off and 10% more people cycle because they live within a stone's throw of their destination and they have found that driving becomes a massive inconvenience but the vast majority of journeys still take place - they just get funnelled down an ever decreasing number of route options which ultimately increases congestion and pollution and makes life a misery for many more people than those who benefit.

Remember, the first round of DV works which were designed to improve the pollution led to a "moderate" increase in pollution. I use "moderate" as that was taken from the council's own report so we can probably interpret that as significant rather than moderate but the bottom line is the works created more congestion and increased pollution. These latest works are doing the same but moving the pollution elsewhere to an area the council will not be monitoring.

[Metallic]

singalto Wrote:

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

> The foundation schools have not been operation

> normally this term so I can?t see how their

> ?closing? can have any impact on the current

> traffic. Once the schools reopen and the coaches

> are back, life on the local roads is going to be

> hell. I?m not quite sure why reducing the traffic

> in DV where there are few but huge houses should

> impact so much on the rest of us.

I'm afraid that is inaccurate. The reduction of private and commercial traffic is the goal but the amount of through traffic from Forest Hill, Crystal Palace, Bromley and points south, make an impact on air pollution which unfortunately is breathed in by the children of the four schools based on Dulwich Village. And I don't think that is fair to the very children we are all worried about. Or do you want it to all go down Lordship Lane or Croxted Road, because those are the two displacement points we should be worried about.

[Dulres3]

If the goal is to reduce the levels of pollution that children in Dulwich are exposed to then the project seems to have already failed judging by the increase in traffic levels in the local area. As for reducing the population's ability to travel, what level of decrease is desired? 10% fewer journeys? 50%? 100%?

I'm all for increasing quality of life and reducing pollution levels, but the reality is that we live in one of the largest cities in Europe with a population of 2.8 million people in South London alone, all of whom need to get around. A significant percentage of traffic is either commercial (some of which delivers the things that we all happily consume...) or people travelling to and from areas which are not served well by safe and efficient public transport. Randomly blocking roads and funnelling traffic onto already congested streets is only going to exacerbate the issues that are ostensibly trying to be addressed and further fuel resentment outside of the local political echo chamber.

I?ve only really been aware of this situation for the past week or so, but the level of utopian thinking going on is astounding. Speaking as somebody who used to spend a significant amount of time in the saddle in all weathers, mass adoption of cycling is not the panacea that is going to solve all of our transport problems.

[Rockets]

Dulres3 - absolutely spot-on.

This is why so many are registering their support for One Dulwich.

We all want less car journeys.

We all want less pollution.

We are all trying to walk and cycle more

But we still have to use a car....

The utopians on here would have you believe you shut a few streets and you can scrap your car...it doesn't work like that in real life.....

[andrewc]

There are a lot of measures that added together make it harder, more expensive and more hassle to drive.

Congestion zone, lack of parking, parking fines, parking expenses, the new ULEZ and the journey obstacles like these road closures.

I will keep my car but for the first I have been ( over the last year) imagining life without one and many others will be having similar thoughts. I have definitely used my car less because of the hassle etc.

These street closures are part of the drip drip approach across the capital (not just in Dulwich) to car use reduction ( not necessarily scrappage). I like my car.

[Bic Basher]

Well I discovered ONE advantage to these changes. I'm able to cross Court Lane at LL without having to look out for cars.

[Rockets]

Can I suggest anyone who has not yet commented takes time to negatiate the council's really biased questionnaire and posts their thoughts on the improvement works here by following the link below. It's really important that the council sees a true reflection of feelings towards these works as it seems those who asked for it have mobilised to post their "we love it" comments on the page.

[dulwichvillagestreetspace.commonplace.is]

[worldwiser]

At a time when we're being discouraged from using public transport, it's stupifyingly moronic to bring these measures in now.

Seems to me the only beneficiaries are the already wealthy property owners of Melbourne Gv and Calton Ave. And while we're on the subject, how is it that the wealthiest streets in the area always have perfect, freshly laid pavements and road surfaces? Just asking.

[Nigello]

Lots of streets have been repaved recently, most of them home to standard Victorian houses/half house terraces, of which a fair proportion are flats and not full houses. The laying is continuing so I think the council is committed to repaving a lot of this area.

[Wil72]

Please visit the onedulwich website to support those that are in favour of sensible ways to reduce congestion- NOT closing roads that lead to yet more congestion & make our lives a misery!

[Wil72]

And a quick reminder to everyone that lives in East Dulwich or surrounding area that you can add your 'thoughts' to the recent road closures on the Southwark website.

Link for the road closures through Dulwich Village is here- [dulwichvillagestreetspace.commonplace.is]

Link for the road closure at Melbourne Grove is here- [eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is]

Their unbelievable 'justification' for sneaking these disastruous road closures through whilst we are all in lockdown is here- [www.southwark.gov.uk]

Please do add as many comments as you can- you are not limited to 1 comment you can comment on all existing posts and add your own.

[eastdulwichlocal99]

.

[Abe_froeman]

Why is the council using those "Commonplace Digital Ltd" platforms for its surveys rather than the normal southwark.gov website?

[exdulwicher]

At a time when we're being discouraged from using public transport, it's stupifyingly moronic to bring these measures in now.

It's GOVERNMENT POLICY. Nationwide, not just London or Southwark or Dulwich.

Even the woeful bunch of incompetents in Government have realised that, if the post-Covid comeback / recovery is car-based, the roads will not be able to cope. If even a fraction of journeys done by public transport pre-Covid switch to cars there'll be absolute gridlock with the associated knock-on to pollution and air quality.

During lockdown, there was a massive increase in walking and cycling - now a lot of that was cos there was simply nothing else to do so people that would normally have gone to the gym switched to walking and cycling. But a fair chunk of it was also families, kids, people who would never normally be on a bike because the roads are too hostile. And key workers found it invaluable, even if there was a spike in bike thefts from outside hospitals.

The goal is to attempt to continue that and minimise the explosion of vehicle use. Already it's back up to 80-90% of "normal" with the return of a cloud of pollution hanging over London. Just for once, there is now a strong push towards Active Travel as literally the only way that towns and cities can cope as people return under socially distanced requirements.

You can argue about the implementation but the POLICY of closing roads, minimising traffic, promoting active travel is a nationwide one from Government.

Lambeth have managed it quite well. Manchester did a mostly good job in the outer stretches but central Manchester (where the councillor has a stake in NCP Car Parks!) have refused to do much or just done it so badly that it's pointless. Dudley completely screwed up their high street by putting in metal crowd control barriers (to block off parking) but it then meant that shoppers couldn't cross the road. Believe me, there's been good and bad implementation of this throughout the country.

Doing it now is a) essential and b) the best time to do it while things are already disrupted, while not all traffic is there to better allow it to bed in. Give it a few months. Trying to ascertain exact effect now, only a week after it was put in is pointless. And trust me, when it comes to looking at comments in those maps, the date they were input will be taken into account. Earlier comments are down-weighted because the disruption is already expected and the early comments are all knee-jerk responses from vocal NIMBYs.

[Abe_froeman]

The last point is a good one.

We must keep objecting to these proposals throughout the 18 month consultation period to counteract the inevitable concerted campaign form the various lobby groups and vested interests that will begin later on when they think we have all forgotten about this.

[spider69]

exdulwicher

Almost every post you put up is on traffic, I believe you were asked what Council/consultancy you work for as you are always in favour of traffic control. THat seems to be your job and I do not expect you will talk yourself out of employment.

Please let us have the answer so we can read your posts knowing you are a committed traffic zealot with extensive knowledge.

Thanks

[Metallic]

worldwiser Wrote:

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

> At a time when we're being discouraged from using

> public transport, it's stupifyingly moronic to

> bring these measures in now.

>

> Seems to me the only beneficiaries are the already

> wealthy property owners of Melbourne Gv and Calton

> Ave. And while we're on the subject, how is it

> that the wealthiest streets in the area always

> have perfect, freshly laid pavements and road

> surfaces? Just asking.

Walk down Calton Avenue. Needs a lot of work.

[intexasatthe moment]

Why is Rye Lane blockaded with utilitarian posts and blocks while Court Lane has wooden planters ?

[Earl Aelfheah]

worldwiser Wrote:

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

> At a time when we're being discouraged from using

> public transport, it's stupifyingly moronic to

> bring these measures in now.

It's exactly the right time to bring such measures in. Making streets safe for people to get around by bike and by foot. You can't seriously be suggesting that everyone should be encouraged to get in their cars.

[Earl Aelfheah]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Why is Rye Lane blockaded with utilitarian posts

> and blocks while Court Lane has wooden planters ?

That's a good question

[Earl Aelfheah]

Wil72 Wrote:

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

> Please visit the onedulwich website to support

> those that are in favour of sensible ways to

> reduce congestion- NOT closing roads that lead to

> yet more congestion & make our lives a misery!

They just want it switched to access only so that they are not personally inconvenienced from what I can tell.