LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Rockets]

Ex- you're saying equitable solutions for all don't exist - so is that an admission that someone will always have to lose out - that for some residents to have quiet streets and cleaner air then someone else has to have busier streets and more polluted air?

And I remind you that no-one wanted to vote for having the LTNs returned to their original state (no-one is saying that return everything to normal and come up with a schools programme and all is fixed) - the council gave people nothing in the way of an alternative option to put their weight behind. If you're living on a street with increased pollution you don't want to "kick the can down the road" indefinitely whilst the council comes up with and installs their Plan B amendments.

And to your point on data from traffic journeys I remind you that 68% of local journeys in Dulwich were already being conducted on foot or bike so just who are the people doing these short journeys in the area? This goes to very clearly demonstrate my point - the council don't know if the vehicles in Dulwich are doing short journeys or long journeys - they are just guessing they are (probably because some lobbyist told them they are! ;-)).

[alice]

Who are the people who drive their children to school? Aren?t most people at work then? Walking to a state primary is usually less than five min walk judging by local catchment areas.

[BellendenBear]

Do you think that ED parents drive their kids to Kingsdale? I don?t think that?s the case. My 12 year old daughter goes there and all her friends cycle or use public transport. Her primary school friends ended up at 6 or 7 different secondary schools and the ones at state schools all walk, cycle or use public transport.

The LTNs, while not being perfect, make it safer for many kids to cycle to lots of schools. I have been walking and cycling through Greendale to drop kids at primary school for the past 8 years and the number of secondary school kids and families with primary school kids cycling to school has increased massively since the LTNs on Champion Hill and in Dulwich Village were introduced. I don?t live in or next to an LTN, but the benefits of them are felt more widely than for a few wealthy people in Dulwich village. Some people seem to use the idea of the LTNs only benefitting a privileged few as a worthy narrative for their cause rather than being honest that they don?t want to make changes to their behaviour.

[Abe_froeman]

This is boneheaded.

"I have no idea either but you don't need to know the start point, end point, purpose and journey distance of every single car on the road.... there are too many cars doing too many short journeys "

[Nigello]

I don't udnerstand why Melbourne and two parallel streets all get to be stopped to motor traffic - how come it is not just one, or even two? Is it a case of - well, if we just put one in then all that traffic will go down the parallel street, so we must put one there, and then, oh dear, that would mean even more traffic down the one next to that, so let's block that one.

[alice]

BB Agree Greendale us a great route. But don?t assume motives for not wanting LTNs in that particular Dulwich location.

[Rockets]

Nigello - yes it's called chasing the displacement tsunami - traffic doesn't evaporate it moves to another street. So unless you ringfence and close the whole of Dulwich with LTNs someone will always have to live with the displacement - it's the major Achilles heal of all of these measures and one few on the pro-LTN side will acknowledge.

There isn't an LTN programme anywhere that has delivered more than an overall 10% reduction in car use (most are low single figure % decreases) - in fact often modal shift is from within active travel groups (walking to cycling etc) and whilst 10% is significant it is not enough to prevent displacement issues elsewhere.

[ab29]

"traffic doesn't evaporate it moves to another street" - exactly that; repeated about a million times here and still does not sink in with some.

I would start from restricting car ownership to one per household (with some valid exceptions)- I'm pretty sure it would make a difference right away.

[spider69]

Many people would lose their Job. Will you pay their wages?

[alice]

BB Agree Greendale us a great route. But don?t assume others motives for not wanting LTNs in that particular Dulwich location.

[LTN BooHoo]

BellendenBear Wrote:

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

> Do you think that ED parents drive their kids to

> Kingsdale? I don?t think that?s the case. My 12

> year old daughter goes there and all her friends

> cycle or use public transport. Her primary school

> friends ended up at 6 or 7 different secondary

> schools and the ones at state schools all walk,

> cycle or use public transport.

>

> The LTNs, while not being perfect, make it safer

> for many kids to cycle to lots of schools. I have

> been walking and cycling through Greendale to drop

> kids at primary school for the past 8 years and

> the number of secondary school kids and families

> with primary school kids cycling to school has

> increased massively since the LTNs on Champion

> Hill and in Dulwich Village were introduced. I

> don?t live in or next to an LTN, but the benefits

> of them are felt more widely than for a few

> wealthy people in Dulwich village. Some people

> seem to use the idea of the LTNs only benefitting

> a privileged few as a worthy narrative for their

> cause rather than being honest that they don?t

> want to make changes to their behaviour.

You are spot on and I hope you let your local councillors know your thoughts.

There is a climate emergency and we all have to change our behaviour. Wealthy people own cars and tend to drive them because they can afford to. Once they leave their neighbourhood their driving through and polluting the poor areas they say they care about. I don?t get it. Most people in Southwark don?t own cars. As an outsider the local campaign appears somewhat hypocritical. Hopefully attitudes will change with time.

[alice]

LTNBH care to tell us your street name?

[legalalien]

So many messages to read through. I understand that Cllr in Chief Kieron Williams and Cllr Rose had a zoom call with reps of residents? associations last night. I?m not sure which RAs. I had a message from ours at 4:15pm about a meeting at 5:30pm and didn?t see it until later that evening so didn?t get a chance to pass on my views to those attending from our street. Apparently the meeting was to ?discuss the ongoing Dulwich Review process, the experiences of your members and your ideas for the future? - the full text of the letter from the council wasn?t sent through to us. Is anyone else aware of this meeting : able to give some insight on what was discussed? Haven?t had an update from our RA.

[Rockets]

LTN BooHoo Wrote:

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

> BellendenBear Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Do you think that ED parents drive their kids

> to

> > Kingsdale? I don?t think that?s the case. My 12

> > year old daughter goes there and all her

> friends

> > cycle or use public transport. Her primary

> school

> > friends ended up at 6 or 7 different secondary

> > schools and the ones at state schools all walk,

> > cycle or use public transport.

> >

> > The LTNs, while not being perfect, make it

> safer

> > for many kids to cycle to lots of schools. I

> have

> > been walking and cycling through Greendale to

> drop

> > kids at primary school for the past 8 years and

> > the number of secondary school kids and

> families

> > with primary school kids cycling to school has

> > increased massively since the LTNs on Champion

> > Hill and in Dulwich Village were introduced. I

> > don?t live in or next to an LTN, but the

> benefits

> > of them are felt more widely than for a few

> > wealthy people in Dulwich village. Some people

> > seem to use the idea of the LTNs only

> benefitting

> > a privileged few as a worthy narrative for

> their

> > cause rather than being honest that they don?t

> > want to make changes to their behaviour.

>

> You are spot on and I hope you let your local

> councillors know your thoughts.

>

> There is a climate emergency and we all have to

> change our behaviour. Wealthy people own cars and

> tend to drive them because they can afford to.

> Once they leave their neighbourhood their driving

> through and polluting the poor areas they say they

> care about. I don?t get it. Most people in

> Southwark don?t own cars. As an outsider the local

> campaign appears somewhat hypocritical. Hopefully

> attitudes will change with time.

But LTNBooHoo most people in Dulwich do own cars - in fact car ownership in Dulwich is some of the highest in the borough. Why? Because people in Dulwich don't have the same sort of access to transport infrastructure that those people who live in other parts of the borough do - in fact our PTAL scores are some of the lowest in the borough (and that, along with things like age and family size contribute massively to car ownership). There are reasons why people own cars. And there are reasons why the council's own advice was to only put LTNs in areas that have high PTAL scores and don't have high car ownership - putting them in Dulwich went completely contrary to their own advice. This is why it is backfiring because Dulwich was the worst place to put LTNs in - it was destined to fail from the get go - displacement was always going to be a huge issue.

[alice]

Absolutely spot on.

[heartblock]

As far as I know...ED Grove residents group is unaware of this meeting and as the road with low car ownership and an increase of 25-37% traffic and NOx off the acceptable scales..this is a huge injustice.

Yet again the Council acts like a feudal endeavour...we are just serfs...

[northernmonkey]

Not me - try to get it right when you 'tell people off' regardless of your attempts at 'tongue in cheek' humour.

Rockets Wrote:

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

> DuncanW Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Demand for school places reduces catchment area

> > size normally - not the other way round

> >

> > Some older children may travel further for

> schools

> > - but how many 13-15 yr old kids are being

> dropped

> > off by mummy in the mornings?? Most would

> rather

> > crawl over nails to get there, surely??

> >

> > Schools alongside councils have done a lot to

> try

> > to counter traffic issues - most visibly, the

> > school street closures that many primary

> schools

> > now have, but also via education and

> persuasion,

> > walking buses, active school travel days,

> > bikeability courses, improvements to cycle

> > infrastructure, greater enforcement of

> infractions

> > - sure they could do more still, but are you

> > seriously saying you're not aware of any of

> this

> > stuff

>

> Not entirely correct for Dulwich - the

> demographics skew it. Think back to 10 - 15 years

> ago Dulwich (particularly East Dulwich) was

> referred to as Nappy Valley as young couples were

> moving in their droves to the area to start

> families on the basis of the good primary schools

> and (cheaper) housing stock. Now many of those

> children are older and will no doubt be going to

> secondary schools further afield due to the

> relative lack of secondary schools.

>

> I have no idea how many 13-15 year olds are being

> dropped off by mummy (or daddy - tsk, tsk

> Northern) but the point is nor does the council as

> they have no idea who and what is causing the

> traffic in the area as they have never done the

> proper research to find out.

[northernmonkey]

On the section of ED Grove between RPH and Townley I struggle to think of a house that doesn't have 3 cars on the driveway.

The Dutch estate, rather than being the social housing enclave people like to claim for this argument has extensive (and free) off street parking for residents plus garages. The amount of cars parked there is massive.

Then you have the section on the bend where every frontage bar one is paved over and has 2 cars on it, behind which is a mews with yet more off street parking. The houses on the right have full residents parking outside them.

Not sure where this 'East Dulwich Grove low car narrative comes from really.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> As far as I know...ED Grove residents group is

> unaware of this meeting and as the road with low

> car ownership and an increase of 25-37% traffic

> and NOx off the acceptable scales..this is a huge

> injustice.

>

> Yet again the Council acts like a feudal

> endeavour...we are just serfs...

[LTN BooHoo]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> LTN BooHoo Wrote:

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

> -----

> > BellendenBear Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Do you think that ED parents drive their kids

> > to

> > > Kingsdale? I don?t think that?s the case. My

> 12

> > > year old daughter goes there and all her

> > friends

> > > cycle or use public transport. Her primary

> > school

> > > friends ended up at 6 or 7 different

> secondary

> > > schools and the ones at state schools all

> walk,

> > > cycle or use public transport.

> > >

> > > The LTNs, while not being perfect, make it

> > safer

> > > for many kids to cycle to lots of schools. I

> > have

> > > been walking and cycling through Greendale to

> > drop

> > > kids at primary school for the past 8 years

> and

> > > the number of secondary school kids and

> > families

> > > with primary school kids cycling to school

> has

> > > increased massively since the LTNs on

> Champion

> > > Hill and in Dulwich Village were introduced.

> I

> > > don?t live in or next to an LTN, but the

> > benefits

> > > of them are felt more widely than for a few

> > > wealthy people in Dulwich village. Some

> people

> > > seem to use the idea of the LTNs only

> > benefitting

> > > a privileged few as a worthy narrative for

> > their

> > > cause rather than being honest that they

> don?t

> > > want to make changes to their behaviour.

> >

> > You are spot on and I hope you let your local

> > councillors know your thoughts.

> >

> > There is a climate emergency and we all have to

> > change our behaviour. Wealthy people own cars

> and

> > tend to drive them because they can afford to.

> > Once they leave their neighbourhood their

> driving

> > through and polluting the poor areas they say

> they

> > care about. I don?t get it. Most people in

> > Southwark don?t own cars. As an outsider the

> local

> > campaign appears somewhat hypocritical.

> Hopefully

> > attitudes will change with time.

>

>

> But LTNBooHoo most people in Dulwich do own cars -

> in fact car ownership in Dulwich is some of the

> highest in the borough. Why? Because people in

> Dulwich don't have the same sort of access to

> transport infrastructure that those people who

> live in other parts of the borough do - in fact

> our PTAL scores are some of the lowest in the

> borough (and that, along with things like age and

> family size contribute massively to car

> ownership). There are reasons why people own cars.

> And there are reasons why the council's own advice

> was to only put LTNs in areas that have high PTAL

> scores and don't have high car ownership - putting

> them in Dulwich went completely contrary to their

> own advice. This is why it is backfiring because

> Dulwich was the worst place to put LTNs in - it

> was destined to fail from the get go -

> displacement was always going to be a huge issue.

You really need to read up on the subject. Start with

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-many-cars-are-there-in-london.pdf

A PTAL rate of 2 does not justify owning more than 1 car per household and doesn?t get residents off the hook in making sustainable travel choices. Your argument is baseless and frankly demonstrates breathtaking ignorance.

[Artemis]

Yet some of the highest car ownership is within the LTN roads - just take a walk down Calton Avenue or Court Lane. Yes, I completely agree that everyone should take individual responsibility for sustainable travel choices. But my question is: how is the current state of affairs encouraging residents, and in particular the residents of the LTN roads to make ?sustainable travel choices?? I appreciate that that?s the intention, but is it working? I use the bus as my main form of transport, and it now takes much longer than it used to to get anywhere, as is demonstrated by the published figures. Roads I regularly need to walk down are now jammed with traffic and are less pleasant to walk down because of pollution. I make sustainable travel choices (and always have). The LTNs are not working for me. They may be for you, LTN BooHoo and northernmonkey, and you?re very fortunate in that, and presumably fighting hard to maintain your good fortune, which is understandable. But please, rather than aggressively shouting down anyone who does not share your view, recognise that there are others whose lives have been made significantly worse as a result of the LTNs. And Rockets - you talk a massive amount of sense.

[ab29]

Well said Artemis and very politely too; agree 100%.

Rockets, how about becoming our councillor ;)

[malumbu]

I expect councillors have more than one interest. Over to you Rocks.....

[heartblock]

Northern if you are going to talk about where I live, then some accuracy would be helpful. I know my corner..17 residences as only one house the rest are flats both owned and rented. Between the 34 adults there are only 5 cars owned and only 6 parking spaces. They are not ?paved over? they were built as shops in 1886, with housing above the shop and never had gardens. The mews used to be a storage company, but has limited parking. The Dutch Estate has parking only on one side and is a high density Estate that does now have private ownership.

The ?posher? end in Village Ward does have higher car ownership and the Lordship Lane end very low car ownership.

The fact still remains that Southwark invites residents from inside LTNs to give opinion to inform future policy, but does not ask EDG Croxted or LL for opinion in private conversations.

Why?

[LTN BooHoo]

Artemis Wrote:

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

> Yet some of the highest car ownership is within

> the LTN roads - just take a walk down Calton

> Avenue or Court Lane. Yes, I completely agree

> that everyone should take individual

> responsibility for sustainable travel choices.

> But my question is: how is the current state of

> affairs encouraging residents, and in particular

> the residents of the LTN roads to make

> ?sustainable travel choices?? I appreciate that

> that?s the intention, but is it working? I use

> the bus as my main form of transport, and it now

> takes much longer than it used to to get anywhere,

> as is demonstrated by the published figures.

> Roads I regularly need to walk down are now jammed

> with traffic and are less pleasant to walk down

> because of pollution. I make sustainable travel

> choices (and always have). The LTNs are not

> working for me. They may be for you, LTN BooHoo

> and northernmonkey, and you?re very fortunate in

> that, and presumably fighting hard to maintain

> your good fortune, which is understandable. But

> please, rather than aggressively shouting down

> anyone who does not share your view, recognise

> that there are others whose lives have been made

> significantly worse as a result of the LTNs. And

> Rockets - you talk a massive amount of sense.

Now that you have read the first link I copied Rocks in on here?s another.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/qftfp2uq34z2u76/Burke%20CHANGE%20OPINIONS%20pdf%20download.pdf?dl=0

The key point Burke makes is that traffic volumes on main roads has actually fallen over the past decade and residential roads have absorbed the traffic. This has happened due to satnavs. Again there is data to support this.

Is it working you ask? Not yet is the answer but it is starting to. We need to do more not less. We need to introduce more bus lanes and make cycling safer so more are encouraged to try it. Cycling is up. I see more cargo bikes and children on bikes than ever before. We need to limit off street and end user parking as well as CPZs. We need to discourage short journeys. How many people drive from the Village to the golf course? Ahh but they have heavy kit and there?s no bus! Well the golf course could triple their storage facilities and it?s not far to walk or cycle there. I am fast approaching 60 and typically cycle 60 km a week. I don?t expect others to do that but is 2-3km asking too much? The idea is that if some make appropriate travel choices this leaves room for people who really need to use their cars.

Heavy traffic is not welcomed anywhere so we all need to work together. Affluent people own and drive cars because they can afford to. There are plenty of areas in Southwark with a low PTAL Score that is home to people on very low incomes who don?t have access to a car. Affluent people drive through these areas. People who live above shops can?t open their windows and it?s SUVs, delivery vans and yes buses stuck in traffic below.

I don?t shout down anyone but I am increasingly frustrated by the moaning and misinformation. (Eg Heartblock above saying people who live on Croxted, EDG or LL have not been consulted. Not true)

We have a climate emergency as so aptly demonstrated by the heat waves and flooding we are experiencing with increasing frequency. I just hope that the debate will turn away from ?I can?t? to ?together we can?.

[northernmonkey]

Without getting into this too much - that's not correct.

On the Dutch Estate the last 2 bed I saw on there was over 600k, and it has extensive and free parking as well as garages on both sides of the estate. On the South side it is accessed via Hillsboro or Thorncombe Road and on the North side the masses of parking are accessed via Greendale.

The mews has limited parking if you consider limited to be one car per household. There is also garaging behind the newer properties between Tell and Melbourne Grove and the resident only permit parking along that stretch between Lordship and Townley is always full (apart from the bit in front of the houses with garages and OSP).