LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[exdulwicher]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> I'm not sure the council cabinet reshuffle is

> going to help. One of the new appointees has the

> title Member for Low Traffic

Statutory post going forwards (it might not be that title in every council nationwide but they're all mandated to consider this now urgently).

Don't forget, this has come down directly from central Government with direct funding available. Councils (and this applies to most traffic schemes, not just LTNs and not just now) bid for funding and then have to use that funding to implement either what they're directed to do (like LTNs) or what they want to do (eg a council will bid for funding to, say, modify a junction, they receive funding and it then has to be spent on modifying that junction, it can't be re-directed elsewhere).

The problem is not LTNs - as a general rule, if they're well implemented and people are engaged with the process, they work, they deliver tangible benefits and this is well-known and well-modelled more or less worldwide, obviously with caveats around the various specifics like location, population (inc population density & demographics), the existing infrastructure and so on.

The problem, and I mentioned this earlier re Wandsworth, is poor local Government engagement and implementation. There are a few instances (not all but certainly a few) where councils have fallen over themselves to get money and spend money and in their haste they've sort of forgotten anything around engaging with residents and businesses. Now to be fair this isn't all on councils; central Government was pushing for rapid implementation and they could have done far more with explaining nationally why it was being done - in many respects they've simply left the councils to cop the flak which is very poor of them but they're busy trying to break international law so I doubt they care and the messaging around Covid / returning to work etc has been incredibly muddled and chaotic.

The critical thing (and hopefully this is where a specific role within council will come into play) is to trial the scheme properly under the existing legislation, model it, refine / amend it (there might be some that are removed, some that are altered etc), look at the data on it, refine it further and do that in conjunction with complementary "carrot" work - local mobility schemes, e-scooter hire, bike hire, walking buses, local home delivery services, providing information and advice to residents and businesses and so on. Many people on here have mentioned that it can't all be stick, there has to be some carrot and they're right.

But equally, engagement goes both ways - constructive criticism is fine but abuse and insults and vandalism are not.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> I'm not sure the council cabinet reshuffle is

> going to help. One of the new appointees has the

> title Member for Low Traffic

You never know - it might be like calling the person responsible for bombing other countries the "Defence Minister".

[Spartacus]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I'm not sure the council cabinet reshuffle is

> > going to help. One of the new appointees has

> the

> > title Member for Low Traffic

>

>

> You never know - it might be like calling the

> person responsible for bombing other countries the

> "Defence Minister".

Don't mention ze var hillbilly

[holymoly]

Ahh Mr Edwards ... latest sighting

[dougiefreeman]

Online petition is now live

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049

[Spartacus]

holymoly Wrote:

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

> Ahh Mr Edwards ... latest sighting

I had to look this up but I now see you are channelling your inner Laura Ingalls Wilder 😅

[Earl Aelfheah]

A lot more people cycling their kids to gymnastics in the Village. I?ve heard several comments along the lines of ?decided to cycle as it?s so much easier now?. I know it?s only anecdote and many will swear it?s made up, but it is what I?ve heard (including from one of the helpers there who also commented on how many more people cycling). Anyway, these are the types of changes in behaviour that take a little time but start feeding through.

[first mate]

Great. People who are able may well continue and more who are genuinely able to cycle everywhere may well start, however, for now, I am in favour of overturning street closures.

[Earl Aelfheah]

first mate Wrote:

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

> Great. People who are able may well continue and

> more who are genuinely able to cycle everywhere

> may well start, however, for now, I am in favour

> of overturning street closures.

You don?t want to encourage those who are able to cycle to do so?

[first mate]

If they can and really want to they will. At the moment there are other things to consider. There has to be balance.

[Earl Aelfheah]

first mate Wrote:

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

> If they can and really want to they will. At the

> moment there are other things to consider. There

> has to be balance.

You think the roads aren?t currently balanced towards driving? Really

[first mate]

I think you know that is not what I was alluding to.

[alice]

Ra3 If you are going to dulwich village gymnastics I presume you live there. What was stopping these children walking before. I?ve just walked the length of Melbourne grove and saw 0 cyclists. What do both stories mean? Virtually nothing.

[alice]

I cycled to Catford on Thursday - traffic solid a205 - haven?t been there for years. My point is those drivers didn?t find alternative route/mode. So why not?

[heartblock]

In today?s Observer. Healthier streets around the Oval.

Sam Cooray, who lives on the border of the scheme, claims the traffic that used to filter through the streets in the Oval triangle has ended up outside her home. ?I?m between two main roads so I?m in a cloud of pollution, and my children are in a cloud of pollution,? she says, sitting in a park cafe beside a busy road.

Cooray, 42, adds that the proponents of the scheme are drawn from a very narrow, privileged section of the local population. ?They are not representative of working classes, of BME communities, of the disabled, of local businesses,? Cooray claims.

[march46]

This article is a good read - https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2020/sep/20/the-new-road-rage-bitter-rows-break-out-over-uks-low-traffic-neighbourhoods?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&__twitter_impression=true

[exdulwicher]

I cycled to Catford on Thursday - traffic solid a205 - haven?t been there for years. My point is those drivers didn?t find alternative route/mode. So why not?

Thursday was when that car went into the wall at the top of DKH. Junction was closed for ages and it wrecked traffic in Camberwell, Peckham, all along LL out to Forest Hill...

Not really a fair comparison to say that traffic was awful therefore it's the fault of the permeable streets. It's why I don't really bother with the anecdotes (from either side) with a still photo and a story of "I was travelling along [road] and traffic was free-flowing / gridlocked therefore..." because there are far more factors at play than just the permeable streets that someone walking along an individual road is unlikely to be aware of at first (like an accident/road closure somewhere else, a broken set of traffic lights, a badly parked lorry etc).

[matthew123]

I don't think it'll matter what the local councils in London do they will by their half baked ideologies more often than not screw it up. Social media types will by their nature throw a hissy fit what ever decisions are made. Instead of speed bumps and purpose built cycle lanes (which cyclists avoid) that actually increase pollution, our money would have been better spent on speed cameras / cctv on every street in the capital with law enforcement to back it all up.

[Rockets]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> I cycled to Catford on Thursday - traffic solid

> a205 - haven?t been there for years. My point is

> those drivers didn?t find alternative route/mode.

> So why not?

>

> Thursday was when that car went into the wall at

> the top of DKH. Junction was closed for ages and

> it wrecked traffic in Camberwell, Peckham, all

> along LL out to Forest Hill...

>

> Not really a fair comparison to say that traffic

> was awful therefore it's the fault of the

> permeable streets. It's why I don't really bother

> with the anecdotes (from either side) with a still

> photo and a story of "I was travelling along and

> traffic was free-flowing / gridlocked

> therefore..." because there are far more factors

> at play than just the permeable streets that

> someone walking along an individual road is

> unlikely to be aware of at first (like an

> accident/road closure somewhere else, a broken set

> of traffic lights, a badly parked lorry etc).

But Ex- anyone who walks down Lordship Lane can see the congestion is a lot worse than before as the EDG junction and Goose Green roundabout struggles with the increase in traffic. That increase could have nothing to do with the road closures but the narrative becomes automatically that it is.

To be honest I think the big issue is the closure of DV and without that the Melbourne Grove closure would be less impactful but combined it is causing a big problem.

If we all had one vote on this I would vote to remove the DV closure and let Melbourne Grove stay but the way things are going at the moment I think it is more likely they all get withdrawn en masse.

[heartblock]

I think you are right Rockets the DV closure is causing the main issues. Returning back from West Sussex on Friday through the main road in DV was the worst part of the journey. I pity all the people eating outside in the Village breathing in the fumes from idling traffic. EDG is impacted by both DV and side road closures, as an EDG resident who hates the increase in traffic I dislike both closures, but DV is definitely the main culprit.

[Metallic]

"Posted by rahrahrah Yesterday, 02:19PM

A lot more people cycling their kids to gymnastics in the Village. I?ve heard several comments along the lines of ?decided to cycle as it?s so much easier now?. I know it?s only anecdote and many will swear it?s made up, but it is what I?ve heard (including from one of the helpers there who also commented on how many more people cycling). Anyway, these are the types of changes in behaviour that take a little time but start feeding through."

All these stories of people cycling to the gym, or the cafe - nothing to do with real life, unless you live in a Village bubble and want nothing to do with the great world outside it. I expect you and your kids could cycle to Greenwich Park but it would exhaust them for coming back here, for example. Or a museum.......

Oh and forget the small businesses who come to repair your roof, electrics, washing machine, or do your garden because obviously you will have a little help (!!) or your mum's carers etc. They are not in your bubble are they? Just Au Ciel and that wretched piece of ground called Dulwich Square.

Just open that block at Court lane and let traffic spread out a little, relieve all the bottlenecks on East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane, at a stroke.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

"All these stories of people cycling to the gym, or the cafe - nothing to do with real life"

Yes. No-one outside Dulwich Village goes to gyms or cafes.

[Metallic]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> "All these stories of people cycling to the gym,

> or the cafe - nothing to do with real life"

>

> Yes. No-one outside Dulwich Village goes to gyms

> or cafes.

Well they stay local. Who knows anyone who goes to a gym further than a mile away and certainly not "up the hill". And why can't these gyms have members who have to drive to them from further afield?

[alice]

My point about the packed road to Catford was to, hopefully, show that over years traffic has not ?displaced? on that route.

[Metallic]

It occurred to me last week that many of the cycling families taking their children to school won't have time to do it when they have to start their own work commute again. It will be back to unwilling nannies and au pairs round in SE21/SE22 until it gets too wet and cold, and dark.