LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[northernmonkey]

See these tweets for amazing singing on Rye Lane.

Also- for everyone commenting about people not being able to get through on bikes- it looked like only one side of the junction was being used so plenty of space for cyclists to pass.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Life's not fair though is it ? It's competitive

> and capitalistic. I'm sure some of the outlets in

> Rye Lane could do with a hand . Hard to weigh up

> needs but I bet Dulwich Square haven't assessed

> individual retailers and targeted those most in

> need .

[Abe_froeman]

"all retail is having a rocky ride which is likely to get worse and I can?t really be against an initiative that might increase footfall to the area"

Not even if that initiative forces traffic and congestion on the roads in east dulwich making our retail spaces less attracctive and more polluted causing a decrease in footfall for our local shops?

[nxjen]

It is not the ?Dulwich Square? initiative that is forcing traffic elsewhere, like that it is the RESULT of the road closure.

[JohnL]

I think we can expect other initiatives to reduce road traffic sooner or later

TFL have hired Capita (laugh if you want) for an array of projects

"These projects are vital to cleaning up London's toxic air, encouraging people to make more sustainable travel choices and keeping people safe on the capital's roads.

"The expansion of the ULEZ to the North and South Circular will be transformational, reducing road transport NOx (nitrogen oxides) emissions by around 30% and improving air quality for millions of Londoners.

"We have extended Capita's contracts to deliver these services over the next five years and will continue to work with them to deliver value for money, and to maintain and improve customer services."

[Spartacus]

I still fail to understand how TfL / the mayor can afford to expand the ULEZ at a time when he's going to the government cap in hand to ask for money to stop TfL from failing due to poor financial management and lack of customers.

It does strike me that maybe (pure speculation) the mayors predicted cut in police and fire budgets is being done to fund the ULEZ.

I have no evidence or seen any documents on this but it does seem strange that TfL are able to mysteriously find funding to expand the scheme, rehire capita at a higher contract value (capita incidentally are hiring a further 500 people to implement the scheme which shows how much they are adding to their bill) and obviously have funds to install all the new cameras needed to monitor roads yet still be running a deficit that needs government funding.

As Elvis sang "suspicious minds"

[exdulwicher]

They can't afford NOT to expand ULEZ!

TfL is about half funded from fares. The grant from Government ceased a few years ago and there's the political games of having a Conservative Government and a Labour Mayor.

Covid has opened up a massive black hole where the fares used to be and there's no easy way of getting that back. The Government bail-out was on the condition of bringing back the (temporarily lifted) Congestion Charge and raising it to ?15. That was Government, not the Mayor.

Hiring Capita is nothing new, it's standard procurement. TfL use dozens of partners, contractors etc to deliver schemes, it's certainly not all in-house.

You can read about their funding breakdown here: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/how-we-work/how-we-are-funded

Congestion Charge and ULEZ (pre-Covid) amounted to ?1.2bn of income. Expanding it = more income.

[Spartacus]

I understand the reason of expanding to bring in more income but the question remains where are they getting the upfront capital needed to implement it and pay a new 5 Year expanded contract to capita

That's the bit that I'm not seeing as TfL are basically broke at the moment.

[Abe_froeman]

Seems to be ?335m over 5 years and I guess they hope the money taps turn on immediately in October 2021 so maybe the upfront cash required isn't that much or is on Capita's account to start with?

https://www.capita.com/news/capita-contracts-extended-by-tfl

[exdulwicher]

Pre-existing / pre-allocated funds. The ULEZ expansion has been in the pipeline for years.

There are massive legal headaches involved in re-allocating funding with transport (in fact within a lot of Government). The money has been allocated, preliminary work (planning, design, installation timelines, software rollout and so on) will already be going on so to pull the scheme and try to re-allocate the money elsewhere to shore up suddenly collapsed finances just leaves you in a legal battle that you'll lose.

[JohnL]

"TFL have hired Capita (laugh if you want)"

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

>

> Hiring Capita is nothing new, it's standard

> procurement. TfL use dozens of partners,

> contractors etc to deliver schemes, it's certainly

> not all in-house.

Sorry, in the 1990s an R was always added after the C by unhappy outsourced staff and customers and I never really got over the joke.

[mr.chicken]

northernmonkey Wrote:

>

> Also- for everyone commenting about people not

> being able to get through on bikes- it looked like

> only one side of the junction was being used so

> plenty of space for cyclists to pass.

"WoN't SoMeOnE tHiNk Of ThE bIcYcLeS".

I have a new proposal (let's call it Two Dulwich because it's even better). I think we should repopen all the roads, and increase the speed limits to whatever drivers feel is appropriate given the conditions. For example at 2am when the roads are empty and there's no traffic it's safe to tare along Calton Ave at 60 mph at least. We should also let drivers cut across the pavements if traffic is backed up and they're in a hurry. Also drivers have invested a lot in their cars so they should be able to recoup the value by being able to park anywhere. Double yellow lines in particular should be reserved for drivers who have something important they need to get to. Sounding the horn will legally give a driver right of way.

I would like to call on my fellow Two Dulwichers to help me explain to those unconvinced how this will make life better for everyone but especially bicycles.

[thebestnameshavegone]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Dear lord ,could these people not find better

> things to do with their time and energy .You know

> ,something that might contribute to the good of

> the less privileged .

Whining that you can't drive your expensive car where you like at all times is the very definition of privilege.

[Abe_froeman]

So now we get to the crux of this.

[tradingfiddle]

.

[andrewc]

I was curious to find out if road closures had a positive or negative effect. I found this study but there may be others that contradict this one.

https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng90/evidence/transport-evidence-review-pdf-172342130581

[andrewc]

This is interesting. The Braess Paradox, where extra roads increase journey time!

[Clutterqueen]

The sudden closure of the Dulwich Village junction to cars is something that Southwark Council will surely have to reverse? What was wrong with that road in the first place? Cars and cyclists were happy to turn right into it from Dulwich Village and also left into it from past North Dulwich train station.

The road has been functioning for over a hundred years with no problems so why create so many more problems onto local roads?

I feel for the many residents that are now more or less enclaved into the area. Also the P4 and 37 bus routes are held up in horrendous traffic queues.

Add to that the traffic going along the Half Moon Lane, meeting the traffic coming down from Denmark Hill.

[Garveyplumbing]

I?m so relieved to see that the road closures in Dulwich village have so much opposition. As a local business it has made my working day so much harder with increased traffic in all surrounding roads extending my journey time between jobs but more importantly DURING jobs, meaning when I dash off for materials my customers are paying for that journey time. When the schools go back and offices re-open fully it will be unbearable to motorists and the local residents.

They are making London impossible to work in. I?ve just spent ?28k on a brand new clean van and I still can?t drive it anywhere. What?s the point?

It?s all well and good making London for cyclists while penalising those who pay for these roads and pretending it?s about anything but revenue in fines but with increased travel time people like me will have no choice but to increase our charges.

[Dulres3]

> Our first project is

> a socially distanced micro arts festival which is

> running every Saturday throughout August

Sounds like utter cringe.

Whilst I don?t support the vandalism of monitoring equipment, I think it should come as no surprise. People outside of the bubble are genuinely hacked off with these changes and feel like there is no legitimate avenue for them to vent their frustration.

[Abe_froeman]

I'm not particularly convinced that the vandalism is perpetrated by people opposed to the schemes.

If the damaged monitors record no traffic that is evidence that the measures have worked and there has been no displacement of traffic - a green light for more closures...

[Penguin68]

This week's Private Eye picks up on the same issue, but in Lewisham, where 'Covid enabled' closures are forcing traffic away from wealthy and into more mixed neighbourhoods. They suggest it's a London-wide problem of over eager councils.

[JohnL]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> This week's Private Eye picks up on the same

> issue, but in Lewisham, where 'Covid enabled'

> closures are forcing traffic away from wealthy and

> into more mixed neighbourhoods. They suggest it's

> a London-wide problem of over eager councils.

This video from two years ago explained exactly what they were going to do and how they did it.

It isn't the council making rash decisions it's a social experiment across the UK and further afield. Notice how he repeats "playing with the streets".

[Penguin68]

It isn't the council making rash decisions it's a social experiment across the UK and further afield.

Most people who participate in 'experiments' get the option to decide (at least collectively) whether to participate; - numbers of councils have used the emergency Covid-19 legislation to force through 'experiments' which have either never been tested for acceptability with participants or which have been tested and previously rejected.

[Spartacus]

Still

The benefits of the scheme across the borough are clear https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/stumbling-blocks-confusion-reigns-over-walworth-road-redesign-amid-claims-flowerbeds-are-blocking-police-pursuits/ especially for criminals 😱

[exdulwicher]

I'm not particularly convinced that the vandalism is perpetrated by people opposed to the schemes.

If the damaged monitors record no traffic that is evidence that the measures have worked and there has been no displacement of traffic - a green light for more closures...

No, if they're damaged, they'll be replaced (at cost to the taxpayer) until the data is there. It'll just take longer to gather it. Whoever has damaged it (bored kids, angry locals, pro-closure, anti-closure - frankly I don't think throwing accusations and supposition around is at all helpful) hasn't thought through the repercussions because the answer will be one of two options: we'll keep repairing it until we can't afford it anymore and/or we have the required data or we were unable to gather any meaningful data therefore it's staying as is.

Either way, damaging equipment that you might later be able to rely on to tell the council why the measures haven't worked is a pointless and stupid thing to be doing.