LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[legalalien]

Interesting read - report on a proposed decision to adjust/ replace the experimental orders for the LTN around Great Suffolk Street in the north of the borough. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s94599/Report%20-%20Great%20Suffolk%20Street.pdf. Looks as though the local (LD) councillors have been talking to residents and pushing for tweaks. Gives an idea of council's general approach I guess. Emergency services pressing for cameras, not roadblocks, as they've indicated elsewhere. consultation seems to be commonplace plus some unspecified more detailed consultation.

Still interesting that the council rely on their general Equality Impact Assessment in their Movement Plan rather than anything specific to this scheme. I guess the CA might give more guidance as to whether a general or more specific analysis is needed when the TfL / taxi thing comes before them. Must re-read the EqIA for the Movement Plan at some point....

[Spartacus]

There are some bus routes, not local , that aren't running due to a strike today.

If the move is to use public transport more, and to drive car ownership and usage down then imagine the chaos a strike by any or all of the transport unions would cause.

Whilst the overall goal is to increase public transport usage, there has to be viable alternatives available. Just look at the issues caused by road works on the ED roundabout this week where buses were terminating early. One solution doesn't fit all.

[Nigello]

LTN featuring on R2, Vine show, 1--2pm.

[alice]

There are some narrow streets between Peckham road and the old Kent road that are now part of ltns. This looks great there was never enough room for cars to pass Whilly different from the broad avenues of dulwich village.

[legalalien]

So, I gather Southwark have been taking in ?? from the Dulwich LTNs..according to Twitter, quoting an FOI response revealed on radio - nearly 22.5k penalty notices in a seven week period in Jan/Feb. Apparently we have guerilla road user charging... maybe the signage isn?t very good?

[Rockets]

Legal - what would our Labour councillors be saying about that if the Tories or Lib Dems were the ones pushing these LTNs on the community?

22.5k in just over a month is shocking and the council should be forced to review the signage.

[legalalien]

Agenda for next Environmental Scrutiny Commission now up (no parking related documents this time - they are ?to follow?).

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6957&x=1

There are some council answers to specific traffic related questions asked by the Commission including this:

?Answer -During the last year the council has used experimental traffic orders to introduce several Low Traffic Neighbourhoods with complementary modal change improvements to walking and cycling, bringing forward certain cycle lane improvements (e.g. light segregation Cycle Superhighway 7 ? Southwark Bridge Road), work with TfL and Guy?s and St Thomas Trust Charity, and introduce a large number of School Streets.

All these schemes have responded to the Covid- 19 pandemic and requirements regarding social distancing, together with other public health and air quality priorities. They also support other highways measures to reduce traffic and encouraged modal shift. But it will require a sustained period of monitoring and evaluation to assess their full effect as they take time to ?bed in? and because of fluctuating traffic levels due to lockdowns, school closures, the backlog of utility works, etc.?

Looks like more ?bedding in? and blaming of utility works. They do realise that utility works in general aren?t going to evaporate? It?s now pretty obvious that the Croxted crisis was not caused by the bridge works at Herne Hill.

Meanwhile, the tension between the Commission?s recommendation to limit the use of electric vehicles, and the Council policy of encouraging the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles, continues...

[legalalien]

Our local councillors would say exactly what the Southwark Labour whip told them to say, presumably. Still don?t approve of the whipping arrangements in local govt (or generally). (Just googled and saw this as an example - but must not derail the thread! https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/labour-councillors-break-from-party-in-brexit-vote/)

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Legal - what would our Labour councillors be

> saying about that if the Tories or Lib Dems were

> the ones pushing these LTNs on the community?

>

> 22.5k in just over a month is shocking and the

> council should be forced to review the signage.

[Spartacus]

Not sure this is the best thread to add this to.

Just read that grants for switching to electric cars have been changed

BBC News - Grants to buy electric cars to be cut to ?2,500

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56441639

Doesn't make it easy to move from fossil to ev as the cost of electric cars is potentially a limiting factor.

[n dulwich northerner]

Is the DLH end of Melbourne Grove supposed to be open again? I walked past half an hour ago and the planters had all been neatly moved to the side.

[FredMarsh]

Can you believe it ! They are resurfacing Melbourne Grove even though it's closed to through traffic. Surely there must be other open roads in need of attention.

[Nigello]

Spartacus - maybe the reduced grant is to make people think twice over buying any vehicle.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

FredMarsh Wrote:

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

> Can you believe it ! They are resurfacing

> Melbourne Grove even though it's closed to through

> traffic. Surely there must be other open roads in

> need of attention.

Ah, that explains why the planters have been moved. This tells you all you need to know about Southwark and the lobbyists that they support. What an insane waste of money.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

Roky Erickson Wrote:

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

> Why would traffic passing over sleeping policemen

> cause potential

> damage to homes ?

>

>

> ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

> -----

> >

> > Seems though that 'some' residents are more

> > worried about the potential damage that traffic

> > passing over these sleeping policemen will

> cause

> > to their homes (& house prices 'natch) than

> speedy

> > access for the emergency services.

> >

> > LAS must think that all of Dulwich has gone

> stark

> > raving mad.

I believe that their 'logic' is all the massive lorries, juggernauts, multi-trailer vehicles that routinely use and speed down this and other local roads (according to Nigello et al) will not slow down for the bumps and this in turn will shake their homes to pieces. It's all very tinfoil and flat earth.

Not sure why they couldn't just renew the red ones they had before. More delays for the emergency services and no doubt the same people will complain about that.

Good to see that Southwark are spending our millions wisely. Resurfacing apparently on Melbourne Grove so the road is even smoother for all the darlings to cycle on. SMH.

[malumbu]

I suggest only resurfacing the outer parts of roads so that drivers can have a similar experience to cyclists, having to dodge potholes, drain covers, detritus and enjoy the generally poor surface.

On a separate matter government funding should focus on electric vehicle infrastructure, not subsidies. Economies of scale will bring down costs of new EVs and there is a growing used EV market. Subsidies have been kept for political reasons and were far more relevant in the early days when there were so few EVs available and on the road to pump prime the market.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> I suggest only resurfacing the outer parts of

> roads so that drivers can have a similar

> experience to cyclists, having to dodge potholes,

> drain covers, detritus and enjoy the generally

> poor surface.

>

> On a separate matter government funding should

> focus on electric vehicle infrastructure, not

> subsidies. Economies of scale will bring down

> costs of new EVs and there is a growing used EV

> market. Subsidies have been kept for political

> reasons and were far more relevant in the early

> days when there were so few EVs available and on

> the road to pump prime the market.

As a driver, cyclist, public transport user and motorcyclist i can assure you that no matter what form of transport you use, we're all painfully aware of the poor quality of our roads that we pay through the nose for. If the roads were generally better then all our journeys would be smoother, more efficient and therefore greener.

Re your second point - we need more carrots and less stick. You can't try and force change when the alternatives are simply no good. When I changed my car last March I fully intended to go electric but living in Southwark without a driveway to have my own charger on, made it impossible. I spoke with Southwark and even then they were only taking down requests as an "expression of interest" so in the end I had to abandon the idea as it just wasn't a workable solution for my needs. Ironically, they converted one of the street lamps to be a charging post but didn't inform any of the residents on the street. You can only use it by signing up to a subscription service and there is no bay so its pot luck if you can park close enough to even use it. Another example of Southwark not putting their money where their mouth is while making money like they did flogging off parking spaces to car rental firms (AND AGAIN WITHOUT CONSULTATION)for the pension pots of all those in Tooley Street....

[malumbu]

Why are you so angry? Only made a genuine point about money needs to go into infrastructure rather than subsidising the cost of new cars. The stuff on road surfaces you deserved following your sarky comment.

What is your solution to perfect road surfaces? Increased taxation? A good start would be to raise fuel duty to the mid 00s rates and reintroduce the escalator. Yes I fully understand that fuel duty is general taxation and doesn't pay for the roads, but 10s of billions could have been raised for the good of the environment and the public.

[heartblock]

I think he is frustrated, he didn?t say he was angry. I think there is a lot of frustration that positive actions such as bike lanes, timed school road closures, car charging points, investment in a local public transport policy and action on school drop down and pick up are not being utilised by Southwark. Instead school roads with the majority of poorer housing, pedestrians, cyclists, less car ownership, bus routes, etc, now have more polluting idling traffic, terrible roads and poorly maintained pavements. I have lived on EDG for 30 years and the paving has never been upgraded, the road partially resurface once. When I walk....yes walk..or cycle I really notice LTN roads have lovely pavement, better road surfaces than EDG, Croxted and LL. Southwark just do not care about residents on the ?boundary? roads.

[legalalien]

Just found a link where you can sign up to receive information about the Dulwich, East Dulwich and Champion Hill LTN review when it becomes available:

https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/dulwich-review-registration-form/

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Why are you so angry? Only made a genuine point

> about money needs to go into infrastructure rather

> than subsidising the cost of new cars. The stuff

> on road surfaces you deserved following your sarky

> comment.

>

> What is your solution to perfect road surfaces?

> Increased taxation? A good start would be to raise

> fuel duty to the mid 00s rates and reintroduce the

> escalator. Yes I fully understand that fuel duty

> is general taxation and doesn't pay for the roads,

> but 10s of billions could have been raised for the

> good of the environment and the public.

Not angry or sarky. Fed up up with this madness, perhaps. Frustrated? Probably.

I find the level of discussion migraine inducing on this topic. Having to think down to understand the arguments proposed by the pro-LTN etc crowd.

[Rockets]

Perhaps the council knows Melbourne Grove might need to start functioning as an open road again soon so is preparing the surface with that in mind........#i'llgetmycoat......;-)

[alice]

It?s for the newer greener 185/176 route. Getting NHS staff to kings faster. And Yes its wide enough, if you doubt that check the 63 bus.

[alice]

Better bus routes = Fewer cars

[legalalien]

Just had a flyer with info about the review process through my letterbox. Will take some pics and post on other thread.

[Rockets]

What a surprise - the official review area consists of those roads benefitting from, and those immediately adjacent to, the closures....does that surprise anyone?

So residents who are living with the displacement on roads like Underhill have no voice. So much for the assurances that this would be area wide.

So plain to see what the council is doing here and the fact they think they can get away with it speaks volumes.