LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[lbsmith73]

This is about changing behaviours that for some are too ingrained. I?m a car owner and like to use it for my and my family?s convenience however I understand that I need to change my behaviour to make the environment that I live in a better place to be. I work 9 miles from where I live in East Dulwich and used to use a moped to get to work but careless car drivers which nearly cost me my life stop me using that mode of transport. I tried the train but the reliability is so poor that was a non-starter. Eventually got a push bike and now cycle the 18 miles there and back it takes about 35-40mins each way which is way faster than the car and train (by the time I have walked to and from the station). It?s a free 80mins exercise so I don?t have to join an expensive gym or find time to exercise. I?m not particularly fit or young and I was surprised how quickly I adapted. It?s quite nice to go past all the stationary traffic it feels like you are making a difference. I know it can be dangerous but I suppose there is risk in anything we do. There is always an alternative to using the car but people find it hard to change when they are used to doing something. Hopefully getting frustrated in traffic might persuade more people out of their cars.

The big issue around Dulwich is the traffic created by the Independent schools. I never really understood why they bus students in surely they could use public transport to get there.

[Rockets]

Rahrahrah, to address some of your points:

>It's not that unrealistic to share a little of the public realm, through the opening of a couple of streets topedestrians and cyclists is it?Actually, most local journeys are incredibly short and could be done on foot. A little over a third (35 per cent) of >all car trips are shorter than 2 km. Some journeys need to be done by car - that's fine. But they are the minority >and a 5 minute diversion isn't going to make them impossible.

Yes but by default that means two-thirds are longer than 2km which suggests the majority of journeys may not translate well to cycling or walking. Also, if you factor in children or bags of shopping the distance people are prepared to walk or cycle reduces dramatically. Within the same TFL report, from which you take the one third stat, they went on to say that the further out of London you go the more car use becomes more prevalent. They also go on to say that areas with poor transport links also have higher car use. As do those areas with a high number of families with children. All of the previous statements are interlinked and apply to Dulwich. You suggest that the number of journeys needing to be done by car is in the minority but I am not sure the stats back you up on that one.

You say a 5 minute diversion isn't going to make them impossible. You're right, but that does increase pollution and congestion on the diversion route - which is counter to the whole point of having these measures.

TFL's spending goes in this order: London Underground, Buses, Rail (including CrossRail) with Roads a distant 4th place. And I suspect if you were to analyse the space dedicated solely to car use over the last 5 years it has declined massively already - just think of all the dedicated bus and bike lanes that have been installed in recent years. I am not saying that is a bad thing but as some point you have to say this is getting a bit silly. I understand why you take 2 lanes of Vauxhall Bridge and dedicate that to cyclists (although bar the rush-hour the lanes pretty much sit idle) but can't see how closing off Melbourne Grove or Dulwich Village will have the same impact.

I am not sure the evidence backs this up and for some time people have been saying that cycling has peaked in the capital - it's growth has trebled since the 90s but it still represents just a fraction of the number of journeys made in the city on daily basis (be that by public transport or cars). The cycling lobby say this is because more infrastructure is needed; opponents say it's because London is a megacity and too sprawling and the weather too unpredictable to entice the majority to switch to bikes. We get pitched examples from Amsterdam about how cities can become cycling friendly but Amsterdam is a fraction of the size of London. As someone who has commuted long distances on a bike to and from work in London I can tell you that some days it was utterly diabolical, especially in the winter. It's why the majority of those who do commute in London on bikes are an extension of the Mamil tribe - hardy souls who love cycling more than they love being comfortable or able to feel their extremities! ;-)

For all the people posting celebratory pics of the DV closures and their children cycling and lauding what a victory it was I can guarantee you than none of them got on a bike today in the rain if they had to go somewhere! Nor will the majority of them be encouraging their kids in February to hop on their bikes to get to school and then cycle home in the dark.

We all agree that more has to be done to combat pollution and to enable different modes of transportation more effectively but you don't manage that without a cohesive and well-thought out area wide plan that is inclusive and cognisant of all transport modes - chucking a few planters in roads is not a sensible approach and has been shown time and time again to create more congestion and pollution - see Loughborough Junction for a very local example.

And given the numbers of households signing up for One Dulwich (800+ and counting from all across the area) it looks as if a lot of people are lusting for a more sanguine and balanced approach. For all our sakes, I very much hope they prevail.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Dulres3 Wrote:

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

> > Oh for crying out loud - a couple of roads have

> been opened up to people.

OK... have been closed off to through traffic so as to create a better environment for people - going a small way to reducing the dominance of cars and improve the environment for pedestrians and cyclists.

> The roads have always been open to people. As far

> as I?m aware there have never been marauding bands

> of motor vehicles roaming the streets of East

> Dulwich looking for their next victim.

There has been a complete dominance of vehicles which do create thousands of victims every year. I wouldn't suggest that the cars themselves are sentient or have malicious intent.

> > I do have a car and I do use a car.

>

> > Motor vehicles get a completely disproportionate

> amount of space,

> > funding and general deference thrown their way,

> > despite creating injuries, deaths and

> pollution.

>

> Sounds like you?re part of the problem that you

> wish to solve. Why not get rid of the car and be

> logically and morally consistent?

I am not calling for a ban on cars. Just that maybe they shouldn't completely dominate all public space. It's a matter of proportionality - something which has been completely lost in the hysterical response to a couple roads being opened up to bikes and pedestrians for probably what, 20 metres?

[Earl Aelfheah]

We all agree something has to be done about pollution... but not if it makes driving more difficult. 🤔

[Siduhe]

Re travelling direct to Rye Lane Station by bus - you can?t stop directly outside - It?s closed to buses too.

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> We all agree something has to be done about

> pollution... but not if it makes driving more

> difficult. 🤔

Err no, not if it makes driving more polluting....remember the last DV alterations led to a ?moderate? increase in pollution.....

[Siduhe]

redpost Wrote:

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

> Why would it have a negative impact? you can't

> park on rye lane anyway, although quite a lot

> ignore this and therefore endanger cyclists and

> pedestrians plus delay buses.

>

> There is parking at morrisons, the back of ASDA

> and quite a few pay and displays less than 100m

> away.

>

> People will probably linger and shop longer now

> there is less traffic.

I don?t know. And it?s only been a few days so I?m cautious about making any big statements - but a lot of people travel there by bus and I can see the (short) walk might put some people off. But I agree people adapt quickly, so reserving judgment. It was just massively noticeable both times I cycled down today compared to other weeks.

[srisky]

(Posted twice in error)

[srisky]

I don?t think anyone denies that something needs to be done but the process has been conducted without transparency and with blatant disregard for the impact on surrounding areas and within Village (residents and businesses). Transport links to facilitate crossing the Village have not been addressed. ULEZ will be in effect soon. There was no need to rush this through.

Lastly, don?t bite the hand that feeds you - one of the big attractions of Dulwich are the schools (state and private) - the schools may run into problems with staff recruitment and retention; fancy carrying 30 exercise books on your back as you cycle home in the rain to somewhere you can afford to live? The nature of the private schools, which inflate the house prices, often mean that siblings are at different schools so even if you live locally, you may not be able to drop two young children at opposite ends of the village and get to work on time if travelling by foot/bike.

[Earl Aelfheah]

This is ridiculous. Now we?re suggesting the schools won?t be able to recruit teachers, because of a 5 min diversion.

[andrewc]

Driving is convenient, which is why it is so popular. Making driving more difficult or expensive will reduce car use. Decision time!

[h3+]

Nope

The volume to me is of an less of an issue than the speed. It would be nice if they would even attempt to enforce the law. The speed limit is 20 mph on the road but the law speed survey i saw had an average speed of around 30 mph.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> > We all agree something has to be done about

> > pollution... but not if it makes driving more

> > difficult. 🤔

>

>

> Err no, not if it makes driving more

> polluting....remember the last DV alterations led

> to a ?moderate? increase in pollution.....

I would be amazed if the latest changes don?t Lead to a reduction in traffic.L and pollution. But we can find out fairly soon.

[tiddles]

But it?s not a 5 min diversion

[srisky]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> This is ridiculous. Now we?re suggesting the

> schools won?t be able to recruit teachers, because

> of a 5 min diversion.

You are deliberately missing the point - easing traffic within the village needs to be addressed in tandem with improved transport links. Otherwise there will be increased pollution, as is happening now.

Secondly, it?s not a 5min diversion - it?s taking people over 20min to cross the village at peak times, others are unable to pull in/out of their driveways due to queues. It?ll be worse if/when Burbage is closed and Townley is made a school road. Some won?t have a choice about driving and this includes many teachers, because the links are so poor & existing bus routes are being severely delayed. I hope I am wrong about teacher recruitment but it will negatively impact the state & private schools, which are of considerable added value to the area.

[Clutterqueen]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> This is ridiculous. Now we?re suggesting the

> schools won?t be able to recruit teachers, because

> of a 5 min diversion.

But it's not a 5 minute diversion. Public transport in the area has been greatly affected because of the ridiculous sudden decision to close off the left and right turn area into the corner of Dulwich Village.

The P4 and 42 bus schedule for key workers has been greatly affected by this.

Wasn't there a big scheme to re-make the area easier for cyclists and school issues about a year ago? That was a disaster with concrete islands placed in wrong area for pedestrians and also bike and car users.

[andrewc]

It's weird to think that Leicester Square was once a roundabout.

[Clutterqueen]

Wasn't that in the 1920s?

[katgod]

Surely a bus stop can be put on Copeland Road. Madness to have a big station like Peckham Rye with no bus stop near by??

[Earl Aelfheah]

andrewc Wrote:

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

> Driving is convenient, which is why it is so

> popular. Making driving more difficult or

> expensive will reduce car use. Decision time!

Exactly this. It is totally illogical to say one is in favour of reducing car use, but also for cars to dominate our streets and to be as easy and convenient as it is now.

[Earl Aelfheah]

andrewc Wrote:

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

> It's weird to think that Leicester Square was once

> a roundabout.

And trafalgar square

[Earl Aelfheah]

@Rockets - TFL are not responsible for all London roads, or the costs of the damage cars cause. The amount of money spent on cars (and cleaning up after cars), is huge and far greater than infrastructure for walking or cycling. I can?t believe it?s even something you?d honestly challenge

[first mate]

I don?t understand how anyone can fervently support the current measures and yet still own a car and continue to drive when they feel like it.

It seems likely a lot of traffic is generated by school runs but we keep being told how vital it is to reduce pollution and make roads safe, especially for children and schools. What are school governors and parent groups doing to change this from inside the schools? Again, it is simply unbelievable that children are allowed to drive themselves to school, seemingly with the schools' and the parents? blessing.

Does something about the school system need to change, where students attend schools many miles away from where they live? If they live close by then walking in groups is perhaps an option. Nonetheless, I do not believe that many parents will allow young children to walk or cycle in the dark, no matter how close to home, so we are back to square one for school terms outside of summer months.

[first mate]

You are extremely lucky and privileged that you are able to now live your life car free. When did you sell yours and at what point did you make the transition to a car free life?

eastdulwichhenry Wrote:

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

> I've just taken my first walk up Melbourne Grove

> since the restrictions came in, and it's made such

> a difference. Hardly any traffic, peace and quiet,

> this is long overdue. I just hope the council has

> the guts to face down the petrol heads and apply

> more of these pinch points. I've been as guilty as

> anyone of overusing the car for local journeys,

> but our streets are just too clogged and polluted

> and unsafe right now and frankly this is long

> overdue. Thank you Southwark and London authority.

[andrewc]

I used to drive into central London to go to the theatre but its too much hassle now and I use the bus. I used to have my favourite routes and parking spaces which, year by year, got harder to use.

I still own a car but use it less because the authorities have deliberately and consistently over many years made it less convenient. The privilege of using the car to get into town became the opposite, a pain in the arse.

All over London, over many years, car use has become less convenient.

I still own a car. I still like my car. I use it less.