LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[eastdulwichlocal99]

.

[alice]

Your post does not make sense.

[LTN BooHoo]

alice Wrote:

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

> Your post does not make sense.

Yes it does. One Dulwich advocates for a permit system where residents can drive their cars when and where they wish. Permits will also be given to friends, family, service personnel, deliveries vans by the special permission of ?day permits?. It?s a great idea because SE21 residents don?t have to contribute the the health of our long-term environmental health or road safety at all. The problem is what happens when adjoining areas also want permits? Where do SE21 residents drive their SUVs to?

Answers on the back of an envelope please.

One Dulwich supporters like to discuss equality! Well a permit system certainly promotes fairness!

[first mate]

Crime rates in London are perceived to be higher than in Copenhagen. People feel safer to walk the streets alone at night than they do in London. Copenhagen has a lower population density.

It has been observed by a number of posters that the school run is a central contributing factor to traffic load at certain times of the day. That, it seems, is a nut still to be cracked. We can make an assumption that the majority of parents are likely to be young and in reasonable health, so what is stopping them either have their children cycle to and from school or cycle with their children to and from school?

[Nigello]

First Mate gets it - much of the early morning and mid-arvo traffic is made up of either coaches taking children back to the areas they live (better than lots of cars, I grant you) and parents/guardians taking one or two (usually one) child to a school or back. Lots of children do walk and cycle but not enough. I don't see why an LTN should pretend it is doing its job when at least some of what it is doing is displacing traffic that is there and still will be unless action - I know not what - is taken. So, really, it is a simple matter of personal responsibility, but nobody really wants to hear that because it is too distressing.

[Penguin68]

The metropolitan area of Copenhagen has a population of 2m - Greater London 9.3m. and the 'larger Urban zone' (EU Definition) 11.9m. London occupies 1,579 sq Km., Copenhagen 88.25 sq Kms. The highest elevation in Copenhagen is 91m. London has 21 hills over 100m, and the highest (Bromley) is 245 metres. Many of the highest hills (but not all) are broadly local to us.

If you have been to Copenhagen you will know they have many broad streets making the creation of safe cycling lanes relatively easy and not making a major impact on other road users.

I am fed up with people using cycling in Copenhagen (or indeed Amsterdam) as a template for what we could be doing in London. The distances, the heights, the traffic density are all very different.

[first mate]

I'm with you P68, it really is comparing apples and pears. The point about hills is also very important. The standard riposte is to get an e-bike. Again, with bike crime on the rise and the fact that e-bikes and their batteries are very heavy, I am not convinced these are the marvellous solution they are cracked up to be, at least not for elderly or less mobile. In Copenhagen, people can leave bikes out without it seems the same fear of theft. It is a different culture.

I return to the school issue. Many of these LTN and CPZ interventions are pegged to protecting children's lungs. Setting aside the fact that LTNs are making pollution worse in some areas, I still want to know what the plan is to solve the school run conundrum? Even in Denmark I gather around 25% of children cycle to school...so what happens with the remaining 75%.

[Nigello]

Maybe Danish kids take the bus or walk? There are more children walking to school than I used to see (but then again, there are now more schools). I blame the parents...

[Metallic]

eastdulwichlocal99 Wrote:

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

> Contrary to what the supporters of One Dulwich and

> the Dulwich Alliance think, any resident in

> SE21/22 without off street parking has no more

> right to use the roads in Dulwich than any other

> U.K. resident, they are public rights of way.

>

> Timed restrictions through camera enforcement

> creates a gated community - wrong on so many

> levels.

>

> The pictures of stationary traffic at rush hour

> are a statement of the obvious - it?s rush hour

> for a reason. Come back at 10am and the roads are

> dead.

>

> The pedestrianised areas on Dulwich Square and

> Melbourne Grove are brilliant. I really hope the

> council take the emotion out of their decision and

> are objective on the road traffic data.

>

> Just because One Dulwich et al shout the loudest

> does not make them right. They want a gated

> community which is even worse.

As I understand it, living in what is effectively a shut off street unless I want to sit in a traffic jam for 40 minutes, you are wrong. I don't think One Dulwich or their colleagues are after anything except opening the junction so stupidly christened Dulwich Square, and sharing the load of through traffic which unfortunately is what happens when you live on a main commuter route.

[LTN BooHoo]

The protest in the Dulwich Square today was not well attended. Anyone know what happened?

[Metallic]

LTN BooHoo Wrote:

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

> The protest in the Dulwich Square today was not

> well attended. Anyone know what happened?

Who said it was a protest? Margy? Richard? The lady from Ash Cottage? It looked more like a photo opp to me.

[Earl Aelfheah]

If you create some quieter routes, more people choose to walk and cycle locally. You only need to look at Calton Avenue to see this happening. If you don't, more people will use the car. It's that simple.

Every decision has trade offs. We can make local car trips as convenient as possible and continue to allow cars to dominate every street, but let's not pretend that is going to solve the problem of pollution, inactivity, or car dependence.

[Rockets]

Rahx3 - do you think the "trade-offs" currently being experienced outside of the LTN are worth it? Hand on heart do you really think what is happening on East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane or any number of roads being impacted negatively by the displacement is worth it?

LTN Boo Hoo - I am glad you have stuck around and are actually engaging in debate - too many of your cohorts register for an account, fire off a few emails and then disappear (or maybe return to using their original handle...ahem....;-))

Was there a protest - I did see a few people with placards but given the weight of feeling against the closures I would have expected more people to turn out if there was a formal protest.

Just out of interest Boo Hoo - do you live within the LTN area? Are we also to assume that your handle is a swipe at anyone who doesn't agree with your view on LTNs?

[LTN BooHoo]

Metallic Wrote:

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

> LTN BooHoo Wrote:

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

> -----

> > The protest in the Dulwich Square today was not

> > well attended. Anyone know what happened?

>

>

> Who said it was a protest? Margy? Richard? The

> lady from Ash Cottage? It looked more like a

> photo opp to me.

Well when people turn up with posters on sticks and there are more posters on sticks than there are people, that to me looks like a protest gone wrong. ( no one told me I saw it with my own eyes while picking up my baby from the child minder) By the way the use of ?All Streets Matter? is just WRONG. Please respect the BLM movement.

[SE22_2020er]

Would it not be a better idea for people protesting against the LTNs to focus their attention on:

1. Protesting against the additional 110,080,000km driven per year on roads just in Southwark in the 6 years between 2013 and 2019 which is when we have published statistics. I'm not great with numbers, but 110 million kilometres is a long way!

and then when you've finished protesting about this increase in traffic, which brought the total to 843,200,000 million KM in 2019 in Southwark alone (and folks - note that is just Southwark) then please

2. Please protest about drivers who sit idle in the traffic jams they've made choking up the lungs of the their fellow Southwark residents. Maybe everyone who has posted on this thread would be willing to offer a couple of hours of their time each week to stand on East Dulwich Grove and hold a placard asking people to turn off their engines. This would be an effective way to make a difference. If anyone wants to PM me, I will start this rota - and I'm happy to take the first shift.

I just cannot fathom why we're all protesting against the wrong thing here people. I have not seen a dissenting voice from anyone who wants to reduce traffic (unless I've missed some posts from people saying that they want to see more car journeys and more pollution - apologies if I have). That means that we need to work together to reduce car journeys and get people out of their cars and if one tool to do this is by making it more attractive to cycle then this is a good thing.

At my childrens' school, there used to be 1 or 2 bikes in the playground 1 year ago - now there are over a hundred every day. Whether you like it or not, the LTNs are making a difference in how people travel.

If you want to do something positive to reduce traffic on EDG, Underhill Road, Croxted Road etc then please PM me and let's start positively protesting.

[LTN BooHoo]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Rahx3 - do you think the "trade-offs" currently

> being experienced outside of the LTN are worth it?

> Hand on heart do you really think what is

> happening on East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane or

> any number of roads being impacted negatively by

> the displacement is worth it?

>

> LTN Boo Hoo - I am glad you have stuck around and

> are actually engaging in debate - too many of your

> cohorts register for an account, fire off a few

> emails and then disappear (or maybe return to

> using their original handle...ahem....;-))

>

> Was there a protest - I did see a few people with

> placards but given the weight of feeling against

> the closures I would have expected more people to

> turn out if there was a formal protest.

>

> Just out of interest Boo Hoo - do you live within

> the LTN area? Are we also to assume that your

> handle is a swipe at anyone who doesn't agree with

> your view on LTNs?

Everyone lives near or in an LTN and few are unaffected.

I?ve made a few comments here and have asked what the alternative is. No one has come back with anything that makes any sense. Foe example a recent post suggest the modal filters should be just a term time! How does that work?

Why would I ?swipe? at anyone who disagrees if they have a viable, long-term alternative solution that fully addresses climate change, congestion, and our health crises?

I?m the laziest person around. I use to drive to work (3 miles), drive to East Dulwich (2 miles) Kings, Sainsbury?s, the garden centre and so on. But that has now changed because I understand the need and the benefits. If I walk or ride a bike/scooter then people who really need to drive will be able to.

I?m afraid I don?t have much time for disinformation (eg ?Dulwich has Spoken? or the LTNs are preventing people from getting their vaccination/ emergency services are being delayed. This along with the entitlement that goes hand in hand with the DA permit proposal. We ALL need to change the way we move around this great city of ours - not for us, for our grandchildren and their children.

You will say it?s not working! Oh course it?s not working and that?s because we need to do more to encourage modal shift and to get people to think about alternatives eg car sharing.

For the record I don?t know or have any cohorts and as for sticking around I think people just get bored because of the intractable position anti LTNers take. This issues won?t be decided here or on Twitter. It will be decided on policy first and foremost and adopted policy in my view is currently against supporting free and easy vehicle movement.

Come out of the darkness and into the light. We need to reshape our environment so human-scale movement becomes the norm, the obvious thing to do. Big ideas are important so what?s yours?

PS For anyone who is interested in exploring what modal shift feels like there?s a beginner cycle ride being organised for women, starting in the Square to Dulwich Park and through quiet roads. There are also commuter rides, where guides take you via quiet routes from Dulwich to the city and/or

Westminster. Get in touch with Joyriders.com if interested.

[ab29]

Everyone is being impacted by these closures yet only a very small group is benefiting. The scheme mostly benefits wealthy streets to the detriment of the poorest roads, which now have to deal with more traffic and in consequence increased levels of noise and pollution. LTN seems like a private vanity project - the only intention of the pro-closures groups seem to be reducing traffic outside their own homes without thinking what happens to everyone else. It does not help to lower pollution - in fact, idling traffic creates more.

Public transport needs to be improved in the area to start with - what has been done in the recent years? Nothing, on the contrary e.g. bus nr 40 was redirected from London Bridge to Blackfriars (utterly useless). Nr 40 was used by many people working at Guy's hospital, useful later at night (no need to change at Elephant&Castle)or when trains were not running (often). What are the plans to improve the said public transport? No one knows.

How anyone can be so without even basic empathy to understand how the so-called LTNs are negatively impacting people is beyond me.

[alice]

Anyone know who organised this ?protest? ? Nothing much on twitter.

[alice]

Pathetic- a cycle ride for women.

[Raeburn]

alice Wrote:

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

> Pathetic- a cycle ride for women.

What do you mean by this Alice? Genuinely interested to understand your perspective.

[northernmonkey]

I think 'alice' is commenting on 'joyriders' which is indeed a movement trying to encourage more women and especially those from BAME backgrounds to cycle.

Getting people to discover / rediscover cycling is really only the first step but its an important one. The next is to discover that many of the local journeys you typically do by car (eg dropping the kids at ballet / football / rugby / swimming) etc could easily be done by bike.

We are really lucky locally too that Wheels for Wellbeing do fabulous sessions at Herne Hill Velodrome to showcase the huge range of adapted bikes that exist and how cycling can work for many more people than you would traditionally think - Isabelle Clement is a great advocate for this group.

People don't just suddenly decide to get on their bikes when they've been happily driving round - they need things like safe infrastructure and help to realise that its do-able, only then will people realise how much better local cycling is than local driving for so many people.

[Rockets]

LTN BooHoo Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Rahx3 - do you think the "trade-offs" currently

> > being experienced outside of the LTN are worth

> it?

> > Hand on heart do you really think what is

> > happening on East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane

> or

> > any number of roads being impacted negatively

> by

> > the displacement is worth it?

> >

> > LTN Boo Hoo - I am glad you have stuck around

> and

> > are actually engaging in debate - too many of

> your

> > cohorts register for an account, fire off a few

> > emails and then disappear (or maybe return to

> > using their original handle...ahem....;-))

> >

> > Was there a protest - I did see a few people

> with

> > placards but given the weight of feeling

> against

> > the closures I would have expected more people

> to

> > turn out if there was a formal protest.

> >

> > Just out of interest Boo Hoo - do you live

> within

> > the LTN area? Are we also to assume that your

> > handle is a swipe at anyone who doesn't agree

> with

> > your view on LTNs?

>

> Everyone lives near or in an LTN and few are

> unaffected.

>

> I?ve made a few comments here and have asked what

> the alternative is. No one has come back with

> anything that makes any sense. Foe example a

> recent post suggest the modal filters should be

> just a term time! How does that work?

>

> Why would I ?swipe? at anyone who disagrees if

> they have a viable, long-term alternative solution

> that fully addresses climate change, congestion,

> and our health crises?

>

> I?m the laziest person around. I use to drive to

> work (3 miles), drive to East Dulwich (2 miles)

> Kings, Sainsbury?s, the garden centre and so on.

> But that has now changed because I understand the

> need and the benefits. If I walk or ride a

> bike/scooter then people who really need to drive

> will be able to.

>

> I?m afraid I don?t have much time for

> disinformation (eg ?Dulwich has Spoken? or the

> LTNs are preventing people from getting their

> vaccination/ emergency services are being delayed.

> This along with the entitlement that goes hand in

> hand with the DA permit proposal. We ALL need to

> change the way we move around this great city of

> ours - not for us, for our grandchildren and their

> children.

>

> You will say it?s not working! Oh course it?s not

> working and that?s because we need to do more to

> encourage modal shift and to get people to think

> about alternatives eg car sharing.

>

> For the record I don?t know or have any cohorts

> and as for sticking around I think people just get

> bored because of the intractable position anti

> LTNers take. This issues won?t be decided here or

> on Twitter. It will be decided on policy first and

> foremost and adopted policy in my view is

> currently against supporting free and easy vehicle

> movement.

>

> Come out of the darkness and into the light. We

> need to reshape our environment so human-scale

> movement becomes the norm, the obvious thing to

> do. Big ideas are important so what?s yours?

>

> PS For anyone who is interested in exploring what

> modal shift feels like there?s a beginner cycle

> ride being organised for women, starting in the

> Square to Dulwich Park and through quiet roads.

> There are also commuter rides, where guides take

> you via quiet routes from Dulwich to the city

> and/or

> Westminster. Get in touch with Joyriders.com if

> interested.

Boo Hoo - you make some good points and many of us have made numerous suggestions on how the council should be tackling the issues in a more equitable and less damaging way - we often see people joining the debate late saying that they see no alternatives....then some of us post alternatives and the pro-LTN lobby ignores them! ;-)

The point we anti-LTNers (as you pigeon-hole us) are making is that the way the council has gone about this is causing more problems than it solves - it does nothing to deal with the issue - it just moves the problem somewhere else. There isn't an LTN in the country that hasn't created an increase in traffic on the surrounding roads. Do you think it is fair that whilst someone benefits on Court Lane that someone else loses on Lordship Lane or East Dulwich Grove.

Why? Because LTNs are a blunt instrument, implemented locally (often as councillor vanity projects) and in isolation that are not part of a co-ordinated strategic plan to tackle the issues relevant to that area. Without that strategic plan they have been doomed to failure since the outset.

Southwark Council, along with the various lobby groups that have jumped on the bandwagon, have said, quite rightly, that car use needs to reduce. But they have implemented LTNs in areas that, by their own admission should not be considered for LTNs (poor PTAL scores, high car ownership caused by high proportions of young and old in the local demographic). One has to ask why they ignored their own advice?

Are they just taking a punt that the measures will magically work despite their own counsel that they won't? They told us give them time to bed in - we have and there is zero improvement. In fact, as life begins to return to normality so the inevitable is happening - things are getting worse.

You are absolutely right that we all need to make changes but LTNs don't help everyone - they help those who are within the LTN areas to make modal shift (and my personal criticism is that it is all well and good for the council to encourage model shift in areas where people own large houses and side-returns but they are doing nothing to deliver infrastructure to those not in that position).

Let me ask you this - do you believe that the LTNs have caused displacement and, if so, what are your suggested solutions to manage that so that everyone can benefit? I have asked this of many pro-LTN supporters and their answers are always, inevitably, the same - more LTNs.

You may have no time for what you refer to as disinformation (and I agree that there is a lot of hyperbole employed as people try to make their point) but what a lot of those not supportive of LTNs are tired of is the way that pro-supporters and lobbyists steadfastly refuse to admit that the LTNs are causing any problems.

Whilst you plead for people to come out of the darkness into the light what many of us want is for the pro-closure lobby to come and meet us halfway - find a solution that is not only good for them but good for people at the end of their road too. Otherwise the blinkered approach by the pro-LTN lobby runs the real risk of setting the climate debate back years. It's time to admit they are not working and to find an equitable solution that benefits all.

[exdulwicher]

Why? Because LTNs are a blunt instrument, implemented locally (often as councillor vanity projects) and in isolation that are not part of a co-ordinated strategic plan to tackle the issues relevant to that area. Without that strategic plan they have been doomed to failure since the outset.

Yes and no.

Most housing developments in the last 30 years or so have been on the basic principles of LTNs: things like cul-de-sacs with half a dozen houses down each one, one way in and out via a central roundabout or similar. You can see it on any A-Z or city map, there'll be loads of examples to varying degrees. It works there because it's designed in from the start. To "undesign" a street that people have been used to driving down for years takes a bit more doing but LTNs are a simple, cheap and easy way of testing things out. Put them in using an Experimental Traffic Order, monitor, modify, resolve.

That process takes a few months and it needs quality engagement (which is primarily where the trust has broken down here, it's been far better done elsewhere).

You may have no time for what you refer to as disinformation (and I agree that there is a lot of hyperbole employed as people try to make their point) but what a lot of those not supportive of LTNs are tired of is the way that pro-supporters and lobbyists steadfastly refuse to admit that the LTNs are causing any problems.

I don't think anyone has ever said that they're perfect. Most aren't (at least not at first), they take time to bed in, they take time for the major issues to show up in a consistent manner (far too many people are very quick to blame any traffic jam on a nearby LTN rather than actually examining the causes and any "hidden" issues like a broken down bus blocking a road a mile away for example). Most people will accept that they will need some alterations - that might be filtering an additional street, it might be replacing a planter with an ANPR gate, it might be moving a planter from X to Y or it might be removing it altogether. The point is, it's on an Experimental Order so lets experiment! It's far quicker and cheaper than digging up a junction, remodelling the entire thing and only then realising that it's caused an issue over there. It's easier to drive change, engage with people, gather the data etc while it's in place than it is to consult, modify, consult etc then do a big expensive permanent change.

Whilst you plead for people to come out of the darkness into the light what many of us want is for the pro-closure lobby to come and meet us halfway - find a solution that is not only good for them but good for people at the end of their road too.

Ultimately, the ONLY solution that benefits everyone is driving less. How you get people to drive less is a combination of making it more expensive (not very equal), making it more difficult (affects everyone to some degree) and/or making the alternatives more attractive (benefits everyone, even those who still need to drive).

The 2nd and 3rd go hand in hand because as mentioned above, if you make it more difficult to drive you automatically create better conditions for other options like walking and cycling. Sadly @Rockets, the "making it more difficult to drive" IS the halfway house that you're after...

[Bicknell]

agree with replacing planters at dulwich vllg junction with cameras @exdulwicher, so does london ambulance. trouble is that southwark isnt that keen on any changes to its experimental orders

[alex_b]

Bicknell Wrote:

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

> agree with replacing planters at dulwich vllg

> junction with cameras @exdulwicher, so does london

> ambulance. trouble is that southwark isnt that

> keen on any changes to its experimental orders

But there are currently 6 different threads complaining about people being fined because of camera controlled closures. If they switch to cameras the anti-LTN folk will be disingenuously claiming its a money raising exercise.