LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[heartblock]

Also, Croydon's traffic survey found that car ownership inside the LTNs is 87% - with traffic increases on residential roads with 20% car ownership. It would be interesting to conduct the same survey for the Village and East Dulwich LTNs.

[mr.chicken]

ab29 Wrote:

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

> You said: "So... they work then?"

>

> Pushing air pollution from one street to another

> does not reduce the overall air pollution

Exactly! I will sit for 30 minutes in heavy traffic before I walk for 15 minutes for the same trip. This is why the LTNs can never work, because nothing will get people out of their cars no matter the inconvenience and ease of alternatives.

Also please ignore @Rocket's claim that people drive for less distance because of the LTN. I am beginning to suspect that they are not one of us and in fact a crypto LTN-supporter, acting like they are anti-LTN but then every so often dropping pro LTN facts.

[Rockets]

alice Wrote:

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

> The puzzle always has been: Why was the centre of

> South Southwark deemed to be

> Calton/village/junction?

>

> I asked this at one of the zoom meetings and was

> asked whether i wanted the same measures on my

> road. Not an answer to the question.

It's because the folks of Calton/Court Lane/DV are considered differently than others - do you know, for example, that the council cleans their green, brown and blue bins every couple of weeks.....?

[heartblock]

To be fair, there are households in Calton and Village who do not see current LTNs working in the way that Southwark claims. Do they really get their bins washed?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I would be genuinely surprised if the reduction in road capacity hasn't lead to a reduction (at least to some extent) in the number of car journeys. I know that's not the only consideration, but on the narrow point about behaviour change - it's pretty clear to me that there has been some degree of 'modal shift'. This is important because, that first small change in behaviour is very difficult and tends to have a momentum that builds on itself.

[legalalien]

Rahrahrah - number of car journeys or number of vehicle journeys - is there really a benefit if I get something delivered rather than driving to get it?

I get the behavioural point, but still think that it?s critical to calculate miles driven, not just number of journeys. That?s important for the pollution / emissions point - I get that it doesn?t address active travel considerations. Measurements of the two things could usefully be considered separately, I think. You can only do a proper balancing act once you know exactly what you are dealing with.

[Rockets]

Rahx3 - it all comes back to what % of change needs to happen for it to have a material positive effect for everyone and that probably needs to be getting way over 50% of car reduction (and remember this is the council's stated objective - although they have backtracked quite a bit from that) and there isn't an LTN programme anywhere that has delivered anything beyond low single digit modal shift.

Why? Because the basic infrastructure needed to support wider modal shift is severely lacking - 50% of the residents in Dulwich do not have access to bike storage facilities.

So whilst Southwark bang on and on about the % of Southwark residents who don't have access to a car they miss the point entirely and seem to think that is the justification for these measures (I hasten to add a large % of Southwark's population lives close to a tube station in the north of the borough, which they always seem inclined to overlook).

[Nigello]

I agree that having stuff delivered (especially when you could walk or cycle or wheel to a local supermarket and back) could fill in the gaps left by fewer individual journeys. I do hope nobody on this forum is actually using the corner shop delivery services. If you are, please consider the consequences (apart from your almost instant satisfaction).

[mr.chicken]

Rockets Wrote:

>

> It's because the folks of Calton/Court Lane/DV are

> considered differently than others - do you know,

> for example, that the council cleans their green,

> brown and blue bins every couple of weeks.....?

Rockets my man, I appreciate your efforts against the LTN, I really do and stirring up hate against a small group is a very effective tactic. I applaud your effort, but unfortunately it only works if the things you invent are even vaguely credible. The VIP bin cleaning company has sadly for us nothing to do with the council.

It really doesn't help our cause if you paint the anti-LTNers in such a bad light.

[Earl Aelfheah]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Rahrahrah - number of car journeys or number of

> vehicle journeys - is there really a benefit if I

> get something delivered rather than driving to get

> it?

>

> I get the behavioural point, but still think that

> it?s critical to calculate miles driven, not just

> number of journeys. That?s important for the

> pollution / emissions point - I get that it

> doesn?t address active travel considerations.

> Measurements of the two things could usefully be

> considered separately, I think. You can only do a

> proper balancing act once you know exactly what

> you are dealing with.

I think there is probably an initial, small reduction in vehicle journeys as a result of modal shift which increases over time as a result of behaviour change. This seems to be what most studies suggests happens generally, at least in most cases (possibly not in any one specific case of course). Emissions are more complicated. Slow moving traffic may increase pollution (although there is a stop start nature of London driving regardless). The bigger issue I guess, is about where the pollution goes - is it more concentrated on main road than it ever was? People have strong views on this, but little data from what I can tell.

[alice]

If you have a 5 mile plus work commute what is more likely? a switch to bike or a switch to bus/train? or a flexible mix? Roads without cars should become bus and bike lanes. buses should take us to the station entrance. small things that make the changes more likely to be maintained.

[Earl Aelfheah]

alice Wrote:

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

> If you have a 5 mile plus work commute what is

> more likely? a switch to bike or a switch to

> bus/train? or a flexible mix? Roads without cars

> should become bus and bike lanes. buses should

> take us to the station entrance. small things that

> make the changes more likely to be maintained.

Yeah, agree with all this. More 'last mile' options too, such as electric hire bikes and scooters.

[first mate]

Plus, in very bad weather people will be less likely to cycle (especially with those hills at either end of ED) so a decent public transport system, with buses where we need them, is key; without that cannot see how any of this is ever going to work, not with our local terrain.

[Earl Aelfheah]

That said, 5 miles on a bike is a lot quicker than the bus.

[Droid]

I am sure that the LTN measures has not reduced the number of actual journeys car users are making.

The people I know locally still make the same number of trips however they just time them so that the do not get caught by the timed exclusion arrangements or whatever they are called. So if it's a weekly shop at Sainsbo's they will make it between 10am and 3pm.

So all this does is move the pollution to a different time of the day

[devs]

Has anyone noticed night time road works on LL or other main roads? There was extreme drilling the other night near the Plough which went on all night. My poor son had an exam the next day. I am presuming that road works on main roads during the day would cause complete grid lock as there is nowhere else for traffic to disperse to. Because of the LTNs. So they're having to do it at night.

[alice]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> That said, 5 miles on a bike is a lot quicker than

> the bus.

it may not be if a] you are not superfit and b] theres a bus only lane.

[alice]

but hey rah, never ever thought you'd agree with me

[heartblock]

Good local transport, bike and bus lanes are the real solution....LTNs just shift a problem elsewhere, but not to areas where there is such excessive wealth, one can pay a private company to clean ones bins......

[Tilt]

164 pages and still going strong.

Clearly there is a need to address the climate crisis and fewer cars on the roads and quieter streets would be lovely. Quite how people think this is achievable with LTNs is utterly beyond me. You only have to look at this thread to see how divisive the scheme is. I don't drive but there is considerably more traffic on the route I use regularly. I simply don't understand how people cannot see that it's just moving the problem around; perhaps it's willful ignorance. To be honest if my street was blocked off I'd be campaigning pretty hard to keep it that way.

The sad thing is I desperately want to fight the climate crisis but putting in schemes like this with no consultation that are so divisive only alienates the people that we need to take along with us. Big failure by whoever thinks this is a good idea.

[heartblock]

Tilt 👍🏽 yes this is the point. Thank you.

[Rockets]

Tilt - I agree, wilful ignorance or a complete dereliction of duty. Unfortunately, this is what happens when there is no opposition to a dominant party - they start doing what they please, when they want, how they want - regardless of what anyone thinks - and then instead of course-correcting they dig in their defences and battle it out to the last. By which time they have done the over-riding strategic objective huge harm - then they'll start looking for someone else to blame for the debacle.

[Earl Aelfheah]

164 pages? You?re forgetting about the other 10 or more threads 😂

[mr.chicken]

Tilt Wrote:

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

>

> with no consultation that are so divisive only

It's amazing they would choose something like this that's divisive: the situation before was loved by everyone, and there were no divisions over that at all. I think we should go back to exactly how things were two years ago, that was perfection.

[legalalien]

The lack of data is a problem for both sides of this debate. I wish we?d done the whole thing with more advance planning and before and after data collection. Maybe this is something everyone might agree on? If someone could produce reliable data to show that there is no increased pollution (air, noise) on the boundary roads I?d be prepared to reconsider my position, but the quality of data to date has been poor and I do trust the evidence of my own eyes.

How would people on both sides of the debate feel about a reduction in the hours of the timed restrictions and limitation to term time?

(I personally still think Court Lane needs to be reopened, but we all need to discuss options that we think are imperfect- ?getting to yes? and all that.)

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> legalalien Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Rahrahrah - number of car journeys or number of

> > vehicle journeys - is there really a benefit if

> I

> > get something delivered rather than driving to

> get

> > it?

> >

> > I get the behavioural point, but still think

> that

> > it?s critical to calculate miles driven, not

> just

> > number of journeys. That?s important for the

> > pollution / emissions point - I get that it

> > doesn?t address active travel considerations.

> > Measurements of the two things could usefully

> be

> > considered separately, I think. You can only do

> a

> > proper balancing act once you know exactly what

> > you are dealing with.

>

> I think there is probably an initial, small

> reduction in vehicle journeys as a result of modal

> shift which increases over time as a result of

> behaviour change. This seems to be what most

> studies suggests happens generally, at least in

> most cases (possibly not in any one specific case

> of course). Emissions are more complicated. Slow

> moving traffic may increase pollution (although

> there is a stop start nature of London driving

> regardless). The bigger issue I guess, is about

> where the pollution goes - is it more concentrated

> on main road than it ever was? People have strong

> views on this, but little data from what I can

> tell.