LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[malumbu]

Wow, I'm trying not to be emotional but Rocks what a closed mind you have. I see public transport as being pretty good (a relative term) you choose to see it as not pretty good. I'm happy to point to family members who don't feel the need to learn to drive as they can get around most of London fairly easily. To them the car is not liberating as it was when I was a teenager.

And Slarti you just fling mud. Impressed that Ex can handle him/herself. You should be concerned about the post above.

Back to a history lesson. Blair's government stated so well and then that unholy alliance of hauliers and truckers took it back to the dark side freezing fuel duty and not perusing road user charging. The coalition made some positive noises about the environment, but were too laisez faire, continuing to freeze fuel duty, not pushing for a national framework of low emission zones (that was on the cards in 2010), then the Cameron government was successfully taken to court for not meeting air quality standards. Ironic that Tory Mayor stated the process off for an ultra low emission zone (Khan just brought this, and the extension, forward).

So it is then left to the local authorities. I hope we can look back in a few years time and congratulate the braver ones. Reading much of the posts its as if congestion and pollution only appeared in the last few months. I expect that vast swathes have been congested long before the internal combustion engine. London has been congested in my lifetime.

So back to my post of a few hours ago, do we all agree that there should be a reduction in driving or am I talking to a brick wall?

And whilst I have had a swipe at various administrations, hats off to the UK for having a Climate Change Act and carbon targets/budges enshrined in law. Let's see how serious we are in Cop 26. Transport is the only UK sector where carbon emissions have risen in recent years. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Act_2008

[Rockets]

Malumbu - regardless of how you think how good public transport is the official measure says it is poor in Dulwich - do you know what PTAL scores are?

Ex- could you explain it to Malumbu please as I think it is not in fact me who has the closed mind...;-)

P.S. I do believe a reduction in traffic is a good/urgently needed thing...I just don't think LTNs are sophisticated enough to deliver it and actually cause much more harm than good.

[slarti b]

@ExDulwicher,

Thank you for admitting that my quotation of your views was correct. But don't try and wriggle out by saying my quote was selective. I quoted your main accusation that the "One" groups are a mix of UKIP and various petrolhead groups. You did then add the your patronising get out about them being misled local residents before reverting to accusing then of being bots.

But lets gets specific and relevant. Are you accusing OneDulwich of being a very opaque mix of LTDA (no idea who they are), UKIP and Twitter camapigns? Do you think we are all bots? Did you look at the map of where OneDulwich supporters live as I have suggested before?

And as for astro-turfing, how about the local pressure groups that have such influence with the Council and claim to speak for local residents eg:

- Southwark Cyclists, 12 people at their AGM was it ? And they are of course the local branch of London Cycling Campaign, chief activist Simon Still, just suspended for racist posts and Twitter harassment. Is it really true that his position was funded by TfL?

- Clean Air Dulwich: an anonymous facebook group,

- Mums for lungs: looking at photos, "Anna" from Dulwich etc , looks to be a big overlap with one above. btw Anna is clearly someone who has very strong views on closing DV junction. Fair enough, but not the sort of person to rely on for objective analysis of traffic schemes.

- Safe Routes to (Private) Schools, seems to be a couple of high profile activists who use a wider talking shop to pursue their own agenda. Very surprised that the local schools allow this to happen, given their impact on the local residents.

But lets go back to looking at the actual measures and I will repeat a question I have asked you before. The closure of Calton Avenue and the lengthy timed closures of DV etc will result in displaced traffic (as stated by Southwark) Which streets will the displaced traffic use and do you think it fair that they suffer the increased congestion and pollution while Calton Avenue and teh lower end of Court Lane rub their hands at the prospect of higher house prices?

[slarti b]

@Malumbu.

I thought I was just highlighting previous posts but, if I was flinging mud as you suggest, it seems that is has stuck. ExDulwicher has admitted he has been caught out fibbing about his previous posts. But he then tries to justify it by suggesting that all "One" groups, including OneDulwich, as well as being UKIP supporting petrol heads, are Vote Leave supporting manipulators.

I have invited him to clarify his view about OneDulwich. Lets see what he says.

But anyway, lets get back to discussing the specific issues of the the closure of DV junction.

[lameduck]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Funny you should mention gentrification, as the

> more council things you read or watch the more

> this comes up as an issue. I was reflecting

> yesterday on the contrast between the council?s

> proposals to take away community green space to

> put more houses on the Priory Court Estate (the

> one involved in the recent Cabinet member Twitter

> scandal), and its enthusiasm to create more

> community space in a wealthy area already

> well-endowed with parks, sports fields and

> gardens.

>

> Perhaps some infill housing on ?Dulwich Square?

> might be appropriate if the closure stays in? I

> doubt that has crossed anyone?s mind.

Looking at Priory Courts planning proposition

I have lived near here for years

and was told that apex Stuart and Cheltenham rds was a burial ground [ why it was never built upon ]

this may be a myth, but surely any traffic coming down Stuart road would literally have to pull into cheltenham rd

to see if road was clear, I think that is dangerous.

[Penguin68]

I see public transport as being pretty good (a relative term) you choose to see it as not pretty good.

I assume you have no occasion to travel East: West through/ out of ED? Travel into and out of the City is fine (North: South) - and this described the bulk of traffic pre-lockdown and WFH (although there was still quite a reasonable flow East West as people who lived south of the river in South East, South and South West London tried to communicate). The nature of the road closures has been to further restrict East West flow - so channelling traffic into the few roads left that feed into the South Circular - the only East West route left open. Hence the traffic nightmares in rush hour now in Underhill (when we are not in an obligatory lock-down). So we have little public transport East West of any use (a 12 minute car journey for me to see friends in Ladywell takes 90 minutes by the only circuitous hopper bus that reaches that destination - and that's not atypical). Oh, and with the hills between them and me, and my age and infirmity, cycling isn't an option.

[Metallic]

lameduck Wrote:

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

> legalalien Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Funny you should mention gentrification, as the

> > more council things you read or watch the more

> > this comes up as an issue. I was reflecting

> > yesterday on the contrast between the council?s

> > proposals to take away community green space to

> > put more houses on the Priory Court Estate (the

> > one involved in the recent Cabinet member

> Twitter

> > scandal), and its enthusiasm to create more

> > community space in a wealthy area already

> > well-endowed with parks, sports fields and

> > gardens.

> >

> > Perhaps some infill housing on ?Dulwich Square?

> > might be appropriate if the closure stays in? I

> > doubt that has crossed anyone?s mind.

>

> Looking at Priory Courts planning proposition

> I have lived near here for years

> and was told that apex Stuart and Cheltenham rds

> was a burial ground [ why it was never built upon

> ]

> this may be a myth, but surely any traffic coming

> down Stuart road would literally have to pull into

> cheltenham rd

> to see if road was clear, I think that is

> dangerous.

I saw on twitter that it is open land that has never had a ny building on it since the late 18th Century, at least.

[lameduck]

there is rumoured priests/ monks buried there

on the apex stuart/cheltenham rds

so i was told

[Bicknell]

i wonder where this review is. promised in february. march nearly here...

anyone got any news?

[malumbu]

Penguin, your post just sums up our different attitudes/perspectives. I can get out to friends in Harold Wood and Twickenham, and family near Harrow, in an hour or so, by public transport Usually quicker than driving, and definitely cheaper. According to TfL journey planner it was around 50 mins to Ladywell from East Dulwich. Much longer than your car drive but I take other factors into account.

I've taken choices to live in places with reasonable public transport to the places I most need to go to. I've welcomed the value and convenience of contactless, being joined to the tube through the Overground and changing buses at no additional cost. And then there are the things that I grumble about - that our Victorian forefathers did not connect many of the lines, that the rich landowners would not allow the building of a single London terminus station, that whilst London Bridge is no longer the grubby place it was, I don't need a cavernous shopping centre and my journey times via LB have lengthened since I first moved to London.

And then I have seen car occupancy fall, gone are the days when I used to car pool to work (not in London) and it seemed totally normal. Lets just fill our streets on rush hour with single occupancy vehicles and the school run (I used to get so wound up when having to drive on the South Circ in the morning, particularly round the private schools. And the times when you tried to sort out shared lifts for the kids for leisure activities but many parents weren't interested as they preferred just travelling with one other in the car (why would we want a lift when we have our own car?).

It's this sense of entitlement that gets me. You will no doubt have good reason to need a car (I'm not being facetious) but many others seem to consider there should be no curbs on usage. Hell, I an no longer drive through central London and try to beat my personal best for getting to J1 of the M1, due to the congestion charge and ULEZ. But I'll just accept it. The car gets used less and less to an extent that it would make more sense to Zipcar, Uber or hire when I need this convenience. Looking forward to the world where there are less cars parked up on our streets lying idle most of the time.

[Rockets]

Malumbu, as the council stated in their own report car ownership is high in Dulwich due to a number of factors, the most important of which is that the public transport in the area is poor - that is a measurable fact. A close second is the large number of families with children.

Do you still own a car or are you now car-less? If you do still have a car could you tell us what you use it for and what would the catalyst be for you to go car-less?

As I cycled along Court Lane today I did wonder whether anyone within the LTN area has actually jettisoned their car on the basis of the closures.

[heartblock]

I think on Calton Ave in an LTN car ownership is about 2 cars per household... a town run-around and a family car to take them to their 2nd home. I have one home on EDG and have driven twice in 2020 and not at all on 2021. I don?t want to breath the extra pollution due to 5 LTNs around EDG. Yet............... of course I?m the gas guzzling UKIP loving anti-green liar according to LCC campaigners on Twitter.Such is life for us older invisible residents that Southwark don?t give two ****s about.

[Bicknell]

@RM_Leeming (Richard Leming, one of the duwlich village ward councillors) having tough time on Twitter right now trying to defend dulwich ltn...

[malumbu]

Glad you are enjoying your cycle along Court Lane Rocks.

Here's an interesting article about decarbonising road transport, including technology and behaviour change. It doesn't discuss local measures as the main focus is on electrifying road transport. I'm not sure how 'poor public transport' is a 'measurable fact'. Surely it is all relative - we have better public transport than many of the metropolitan areas and worse, say, than Budapest. To radically improve public transport you either need a communist government or a good war when you can rebuild your transport infrastructure. Not sure if I agree with either.

https://www.transporttimes.co.uk/news.php/Why-Do-Some-Environmentalists-Oppose-Decarbonisation-of-Vehicles-616/?utm_source=Transport+Times&utm_campaign=93ec0d0636-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_30_11_03_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c0cafa3f39-93ec0d0636-250793593

As for catalysts to ditch the car, where there is a will there is a way. I've probably explained about how my perspective has changed - I'd marvel at those with young families that would not have a car, so don't accept that this is a must. On basic economics if you are down to say around 5000 miles a year, then it is costing you ?2000 - ?3000 a year. That's a lot of Ubers, Zip cars and public transport. Perhaps the ULEZ will lead to a step change when many round here face the decision of whether to replace the car - from casual looks down the street well over half the parked vehicles are not compliant.

Unsure if ULEZ is more or less divisive than LTNs. Another poster called for enforcement of 20mph zones, something I agree with but I can imagine the howls of protest.

[richard tudor]

How many of these people are OAP's on a pension or others that need a car for work

but cannot afford to replace their car.

In town I can accept but within the north and south circular roads, no.

"Perhaps the ULEZ will lead to a step change when many round here face the decision of whether to replace the car - from casual looks down the street well over half the parked vehicles are not compliant."

[malumbu]

Petrol cars are allowed up to around 16 years old for that purpose (ie those who can't afford a more recent compliant diesel). Could argue that they are just as polluting as other cars being taken off the road. That proposal was under the current PMs watch when he was Mayor.

[devs]

I think the problem should also be seen from the non driver, non cyclist point of view...ie the walker. The LTNs have made life worse. I walk everywhere and when walking ,inevitably walk on main roads....My most frequent journey being a walk up Lordship Lane (where I live) to the Horninan ( which is the quickest route.)Its awful now.The filing traffic fumes are horrendous. I also walk to the down Eynella and cross Court Lane to Dulwich Park, where cyclists now go much too fast and seem to have stopped looking out for pedestrians.

[heartblock]

Exactly devs... I?m a pedestrian living on EDG, I hardly ever drive ( a couple of times a year) and cycle on occasion, but I walk everywhere. LTNs have made pollution much, much worse for me. I dread the schools opening in March as EDG will again be awful for 3 hrs in the morning and 3 in the afternoon.... school run is horrific!

[Rockets]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Glad you are enjoying your cycle along Court Lane

> Rocks.

>

> Here's an interesting article about decarbonising

> road transport, including technology and behaviour

> change. It doesn't discuss local measures as the

> main focus is on electrifying road transport. I'm

> not sure how 'poor public transport' is a

> 'measurable fact'. Surely it is all relative - we

> have better public transport than many of the

> metropolitan areas and worse, say, than Budapest.

> To radically improve public transport you either

> need a communist government or a good war when you

> can rebuild your transport infrastructure. Not

> sure if I agree with either.

>

> https://www.transporttimes.co.uk/news.php/Why-Do-S

> ome-Environmentalists-Oppose-Decarbonisation-of-Ve

> hicles-616/?utm_source=Transport+Times&utm_campaig

> n=93ec0d0636-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_30_11_03_COPY_

> 01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c0cafa3f39-93ec0d06

> 36-250793593

>

> As for catalysts to ditch the car, where there is

> a will there is a way. I've probably explained

> about how my perspective has changed - I'd marvel

> at those with young families that would not have a

> car, so don't accept that this is a must. On basic

> economics if you are down to say around 5000 miles

> a year, then it is costing you ?2000 - ?3000 a

> year. That's a lot of Ubers, Zip cars and public

> transport. Perhaps the ULEZ will lead to a step

> change when many round here face the decision of

> whether to replace the car - from casual looks

> down the street well over half the parked vehicles

> are not compliant.

>

> Unsure if ULEZ is more or less divisive than LTNs.

> Another poster called for enforcement of 20mph

> zones, something I agree with but I can imagine

> the howls of protest.

It is a measurable fact via PTALs and here is an excerpt from Southwark's Dulwich Area Traffic Management Report. Open the link below, scroll to page 10 and it's there in black and white for you! ;-)

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Dulwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf

The report says:

PTAL is a measure of accessibility used by TfL based on distance and frequency of public transport. The areas

with a high level of public transport accessibility usually score 5, 6a or 6b on the PTAL scale, whilst areas with

very low levels of public transport accessibility will score 0, 1a or 1b.

The Dulwich area has a low level of public transport accessibility. Areas around the main stations only reach

a PTAL 3 and The Village a PTAL 2 whilst the main commercial area around East Dulwich has a PTAL 3. Other

parts of Dulwich, particularly those where schools are located have a level 2 of accessibility translating into a

higher use of car and coach for pupils outside of Dulwich.

This is confirmed also by more general DfT accessibility statistics which show that, in general the area has a

lower public transport accessibility level than the remainder of Southwark whilst by car it tends to be on par

with the other parts of the borough or somewhat higher for hospitals, particularly due to the proximity of Dulwich Community Hospital.

Pretty conclusive don't you think - and that's from Southwark themselves? It also goes on to say that Dulwich has an aging population and a larger percentage of people over the age of 65 and that that has to be taken into consideration.

You do still have your car then? Out of interest how are you using it? It is very interesting that both you and Rahx3 seem to still have cars - I am genuinely interested to understand how you use them and what you use them for?

[n dulwich northerner]

Rockets Wrote:

> You do still have your car then? Out of interest

> how are you using it? It is very interesting that

> both you and Rahx3 seem to still have cars - I am

> genuinely interested to understand how you use

> them and what you use them for?

So they can squeeze into their most ballcrushing lycra and have a Two Minute Hate when no-one's watching?

[malumbu]

Rocks - you surely must know about me by now, and a polite request to you and others that there is no need to fill up screens quoting earlier posts.

But just in case others have not picked up on my views.

Yes I have a driving license. Yes I have a (now rather old) car. The only relevance is that I can see things from the perspective of the driver, the cyclist, the public transport user, the walker, and through community work the abled and disabled. I also know shed loads about cars and technology so have happily challenged many of the myths about air quality.

Emissions have to be tackled if we want to meet climate change objectives. As many drivers will not respond to this environmental emergency, then there needs to be carrots and sticks. On the latter making it more inconvenient, and/or more expensive. I believe that road user charging is the best means, but when this was seriously considered in the 00s there was a massive backlash, which following on from the fuel protests of 2000 put the wind up successive governments.

Fast forward to now and we have relatively unsophisticated measures at a local level. Drivers can no longer be expected to drive when they want, how they want, where they want, without taking into account the environmental damage. If this means some level of inconvenience, to drivers including me, so be it. This can be fine tuned but there still needs to be measures that will cause you to think about car use. Road closures, traffic management and access charges have affected me in the past and will continue to in the future. Maybe more of you will think like me in months and years to come.

Northerner, not quite sure what you are getting at.

Devs - the bigger picture will eventually be less cars and a more pleasant experience walking. In decades to come less ownership which means devoting street space to other purposes. Can't get around the South part of Lordship Lane, it is grim, but it is a main road. I've gone through the park (Court Lane entrance) and come out at the telephone exchange to cut some of this out. Or up through Dawson Heights and then to the back entrance of Horniman Gardens.

To give you another example, Brenchley Gardens which does not have high volumes of traffic for much of the time. But what an unpleasant road, demonstrating the entitlement that most (not the majority, but most) drivers feel, where they have to put their foot down, at double the speed limit or more.

[Rockets]

Malumbu - but when do you use your car? I am genuinely interested because it is obvious you still feel the need to have access to one and retain one so what type of journeys do you need it for?

[legalalien]

Agenda now up for the Environment Scrutiny Commission on Tuesday 9 March, which will focus on LTNs. Southwark?s head of highways will be there to provide an update on the Dulwich LTNS and Cllr Rose will be interviewed by the committee, with Cllr Burgess also to attend. Usually they?re on YouTube but it doesn?t say so specifically, so probably worth emailing to ask for an invite if you want to attend. Full details here:

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6745&x=1

ETA there is also a paper on proposed CPZ roll out across the borough, which I haven?t read properly yet, but I note that the description of the proposed DV roll out in the Appendix says ?Separate to East Dulwich; public engagement to be carried out at same time as consultation on Dulwich Phase 1/2 Streetspace/LTN measures (June/July 21); go live 22/23?

So I guess the LTN consultation will be June/ July.

[Otto2]

Research on LTN's summarised by the author on twitter, with a link to the complete study and also, a Guardian article if anyone is interested.

[Bicknell]

Otto2 Wrote:

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

> Research on LTN's summarised by the author on

> twitter, with a link to the complete study and

> also, a Guardian article if anyone is interested.

>

> https://twitter.com/RachelAldred/status/1366678620

> 849209344?s=20

dont think I will thanks @Otto2. know what the bias will be.

dr rachel aldred, trustee of LCC (London cycling campaign) until a couple of years ago, funded by tfl (never says any of this in all her research papers) -pro LTn. and guardian article by peter walker, lives in champion hill, aslo never open about conflict of interest, advised southwark to put in modal filters (thats planters to you and me) and to reduce consultation to get changes done faster -see page 6 of minuites here:

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s87874/Minutes%204%20Dec%202019.pdf