LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[alice]

Lordship lane estate is directly affected by the traffic in both lordship and the south circular. Stagnant traffic creates the most fumes.

[Rockets]

DuncanW - really, come on. Those estates are not LTNs - that's a narrative many of the pro-lobby have tried to sell but no-one is buying it.

If you heard the testimony from Luciana, the lady who joined the Dulwich Hill ward virtual meeting some months ago from the Lordship Lane estate, and heard the hugely negative impact the congestion caused by the LTNs outside her flat was having on her and her family I would hope you would take a different view. Even some of the councillors on the call looked shocked when she recounted her son's health problems and how bad the congestion was due to the displacement from the LTNs.

And you're right, next May seems to be the only opportunity for those who think these measures are unfair to have their voices (finally) heard by the council. It will be interesting to see what happens but if they do loose some seats it won't be the only time in recent history that Labour has lost seats on the basis of them failing to listen to the people who vote for them and ploughing their own, misguided, furrow.

[DuncanW]

Fair point.

Though I think it?s true to say congestion at that junction predates the recently introduced LTNs.

[heartblock]

The unplanned LTNs brought into Dulwich are in very wealthy, very white, high income and high car ownership areas.

With the exception of Gilkes which is gated due to a temporary closure becoming permanent to please residents in 2 mill houses as a very wealthy residents association the ?LTN?s you mention are traffic free areas built as such in a planned and consulted way and were not forced upon residents via an emergency order.

East Dulwich Grove, Grove Vale and LL all have high density residential buildings and represent a mixed community. Why were Court, Calton, Melbourne picked, why is Gilkes a gated road.

This conflating of estates with the Covid LTNs is a way of excusing the fact that LTNs benefit the wealthiest in Dulwich and East Dulwich.

Actually the way a Council works does become a dictatorship...do you think your councillor has a vote on every issue or is policy decided by a small group?

[Rockets]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Fair point.

> Though I think it?s true to say congestion at that

> junction predates the recently introduced LTNs.

It's a lot worse since the LTNs went in but, according to our councillors, that's what the A roads were designed to do - soak up the traffic and pollution others don't want.

[heartblock]

According to the councillor I voted for in Goose Green Ward, if traffic and pollution is not reduced over all of Dulwich the LTN experiment has failed and ?Nurseries, schools and hospitals should be considered ?vulnerable hubs? which we prioritise for protection from pollution?

ED Grove, 3 schools, 1 health centre, 2 nurseries.

Southwark?s own monitoring

ED Grove has an increase in traffic of 25-36%

Independent monitoring ED Grove 59ug NOx way above the WHO safety limit.

So...it?s going well then?

[DuncanW]

I?m not conflating anything. I?m arguing that your claim the communities living in Croxted, EDG and LL are the poorest in the borough, is false.

And the same about LB Southwark being a dictatorship. Of course there is a leadership group that steers the council. That doesn?t equate to dictatorship.

And the party may well lose seats, they haven?t always controlled this borough, even in recent times. That is how democracy works. You can?t have it both ways?

[heartblock]

Hey, Duncan out of interest where do you live? I live on ED Grove in a flat.

[DuncanW]

Sorry Heartblock, my mum told me not to give my details out to strangers on the Internet.

Not really sure what that?s got to do with the discussion points in hand either if I?m honest.

[Lordshiplads]

Trouble is all too often the chat descends in to 'well people just shouldn't drive' or 'get rid of your car' or whatever and by not saying you've got an interest in keeping your road quiet because it's closed, it's then disingenuous to argue with someone like heart block who says they live on east dulwich grove. We've all seen how bad the traffic can be now surely.

[andrewc]

Is it true to say that pollution from cars spreads around in an area?

Is there any data on this?

If so, then the way we discuss the issue would change.

[legalalien]

I'm not sure it would change that much tbh. As I see it (lived experience, yes, and in this particular area rather than a London wide thing), the increased journey time/congestion and resultant pollution locally more than offsets the few short journeys that might have been replaced by active travel (given previously high active travel in the area). I think overall/ net pollution has probably increased ( as opposed to an overall reduction, the idea that the increase on "boundary" roads is exceeded by the decrease by drivers based in "in-LTN roads"). So regardless of the inequity issue - not OK to pollute boundary roads at the expense of LTN roads (which I still feel strongly about - ), I still think there's a problem, and my approach to the discussion would be the same.

How do you think the discussion would change?

[andrewc]

Well if pollution from a busy road affects everyone in an area then...we are are all affected whichever road we live in.

So if pollution rises in total then we are all affected adversely and I guess the reverse would be true.

But I don't know how car fumes spread. I wouldn't like to guess.

[heartblock]

Everything Duncan..everything. So you live in an LTN, probably in a house with a garden and own at least one car I guess. Good on yer lad, it?s that way of thinking that has made Engerland the marvellous country it is today.

If you are wealthy you can move into an LTN, if you are poor ... you have no choice but to stay living on your polluted ?main? road.

[heartblock]

NOx does spread a bit, but unfortunately for children .... particulates which are incredibly dangerous (carcinogenic and infiltration) tend to stay around child height level.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN]

So I've been lurking a while, and I'd like to collect together my "favourite" anti LTN arguments to illustrate their sheer absurdity.

* Studying traffic for decades, reaching a conclusion and acting on that is biased (if it's not pro car). Academics are never allowed to make use of their knowledge.

* Washable chalk pavement drawings are as bad as engine oil in a planter, spraypaint graffiti covering legally binding road signs and other expensive vandalism

* Lordship lane was a low traffic near pollution free zone before LTNs.

* ...as was East Dulwich grove

* Cyclists are to be despised

* Whatever an anti-LTNer's current mood is completely outweighs all data because that's collected by the illuminati lizard men or some other conspirators.

* In fact, no hard data or science counts. Only stories. Preferable angry ones. But not from pro LTN people.

* Despite decades of study and observations in practice well known traffic enfineering effects like induced demand and its inverse don't actually exist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand#Reduced_demand_(the_inverse_effect)

* While nudges have a strong track record of failing to ever work, they're going to work this time. Because reasons

* We ought to go back to the way it was 18 months ago because the massive car growth over the last 40 years which shows no sign of slowing will some how sort itself out if we do nothing

* More traffic will lead to less pollution

* Why cut pollution? Just make everyone breathe their fair share.

* Whatever we had at the moment before lockdown happened was the peak of fairness and if we ever move a millimetre away from that for any time at all the it's clear we're all rich scum who hate poor people

* An LTN which applies to everyone from anywhere going to anywhere is a gated community but a residents permit system which excludes outsiders somehow is not. Lots of non car owning anti-LTNers seem to want residents driving permits.

* Quiet, traffic roads with ambulance gates are worse for emergency vehicles than the clogged roads we used to have

* You're not allowed an opinion if you have a car (I don't so I am I guess?)

* All old LTN measures are absolutely fine and no one minds them at all. I mean no one stated this, but there are ones dotted about but over very many messages, not a single anti-LTNer has suggested ripping up old road closures to increase traffic. So the message is clear.

* And my particular top pick because it's so astonishingly offensive that it's actually sickening (why yes I am Jewish) is that the plight of car drivers is just like the Jews in Germany in the 1930s:

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> That's worrying as it smacks of influencing young

> minds to be the councils voice.

>

> Last time I heard of this sort of behaviour was

> pre 1939 in Germany where school children were

> used to report non conformation to the party line

> ...

>

> Can't wait till the leader of the council

> publishes his book "My Fight"

Did I get them all?

[Rockets]

What an inspiring, if not slightly myopic, first post that is?.welcome to the forum Manatee!

[Bicknell]

ltnBooHoo

ohthehugemanateeLTN

i think their related

[heartblock]

I wonder how Rosamund Kissi-Debrah would react to be called absurd, but I agree Bicknell, feels very much 'related' or as we like to say in the trade a 'sock-puppet'.

Anyway, back to the thread.

[ab29]

I live on LL, the traffic has been much, much much worst after the LTNs were introduced, I do not own the car, I walk pretty much everywhere. Unless you've lived on one of the main roads long enough to compare the before and after the LTNs you really have no idea what you are talking about.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> What an inspiring, if not slightly myopic, first

> post that is?.welcome to the forum Manatee!

What's myopic about it Rockets?

Is it myopic to read what the anti-LTN people write and take them at their word?

Is it myopic to call out holocaust trivialisation?

Or is this more of a case of "the data doesn't count. Don't listen to science! If you cannot see it is because you are blind"?

ab29 Wrote:

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

> I live on LL, the traffic has been much, much much

> worst after the LTNs were introduced, I do not own

> the car, I walk pretty much everywhere. Unless

> you've lived on one of the main roads long enough

> to compare the before and after the LTNs you

> really have no idea what you are talking about.

The LTNs were introduced during the pandemic, at a point where traffic was incredibly low. The traffic would be higher now than just before, and moreso because people aren't using public transport as much due to covid. Even if your observations are accurate, your conclusions that LTNs are at fault is not necessarily correct.

But let's say it is, for sake of argument. Go on, propose something that will reduce car use. Not something vague, or impossible. Something real and concrete.

[geh]

don't use your car (which I think most people don't want to), use public transport (which is a good thing) oh...... https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,2222568,2222636#msg-2222636

[heartblock]

Why did the Goodman/Aldred report about drops in traffic injuries, conspicuously avoid any mention of the boroughs which do not have LTNs.

Because.....they had the same drop of injuries as the LTN boroughs over the same period.

Mmmhhhh could there be another reason over the 18 months?

[heartblock]

https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-lets-have-a-serious-new-debate-about-congestion-and-air-quality-in-london/

[Rockets]

ohthehugemanateeLTN Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> > What an inspiring, if not slightly myopic,

> first

> > post that is?.welcome to the forum Manatee!

>

>

> What's myopic about it Rockets?

>

> Is it myopic to read what the anti-LTN people

> write and take them at their word?

>

> Is it myopic to call out holocaust

> trivialisation?

>

> Or is this more of a case of "the data doesn't

> count. Don't listen to science! If you cannot see

> it is because you are blind"?

>

>

>

> ab29 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I live on LL, the traffic has been much, much

> much

> > worst after the LTNs were introduced, I do not

> own

> > the car, I walk pretty much everywhere. Unless

> > you've lived on one of the main roads long

> enough

> > to compare the before and after the LTNs you

> > really have no idea what you are talking about.

>

>

> The LTNs were introduced during the pandemic, at a

> point where traffic was incredibly low. The

> traffic would be higher now than just before, and

> moreso because people aren't using public

> transport as much due to covid. Even if your

> observations are accurate, your conclusions that

> LTNs are at fault is not necessarily correct.

>

> But let's say it is, for sake of argument. Go on,

> propose something that will reduce car use. Not

> something vague, or impossible. Something real and

> concrete.

It was very myopic - the usual blinkered pro-LTN narrative that many of us have been dissecting and depositioning for a very long time on here.

By all means feel free to join the debate but

you claim you have been lurking for a while so you will be well aware that many on the anti- side of the debate have provided their own suggestions for solutions and gone to great lengths to answer many of the questions you have posed. Maybe check back in the thread.

Out of interest, and in the interests of balance, is there anything from the pro-LTN that you think is absurd?