LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[heartblock]

as shown here -sorry file too big

[legalalien]

Out of interest Goldilocks how is it that you have the October data? Are

you involved with the council, is the council making it available to a select group, or is it publicly available and you could send us all a link?

I say that as I?ve been keen all along for the council to make raw data available to all at the same time and without curation. I?m as much concerned about process as outcome as process issues apply to a much wider range of things.

[heartblock]

Had to cut sadly..

[Rockets]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Out of interest Goldilocks how is it that you have

> the October data? Are

> you involved with the council, is the council

> making it available to a select group, or is it

> publicly available and you could send us all a

> link?

>

> I say that as I?ve been keen all along for the

> council to make raw data available to all at the

> same time and without curation. I?m as much

> concerned about process as outcome as process

> issues apply to a much wider range of things.

Maybe there is some truth to the rumours that selective briefings from the council have been given to pro-LTN groups.

[goldilocks]

Oh god - again with the conspiracy theories.

I have the data because the council released it in the main report and I read it.

legalalien Wrote:

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

> Out of interest Goldilocks how is it that you have

> the October data? Are

> you involved with the council, is the council

> making it available to a select group, or is it

> publicly available and you could send us all a

> link?

>

> I say that as I?ve been keen all along for the

> council to make raw data available to all at the

> same time and without curation. I?m as much

> concerned about process as outcome as process

> issues apply to a much wider range of things.

[goldilocks]

It would be clear if you were looking at the right graph.

You're quoting the East Dulwich Grove East graph - there's a handy picture on the page above showing the count point.

You need to look at 'East Dulwich Grove Central' - you'll spot it as its the one where traffic has fallen!

heartblock Wrote:

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

> How much clearer can you get than Southwark's own

> graph shown here?

[legalalien]

Isn?t that September data? I?ll have to read again properly. Sorry for any inappropriate aspersion - I thought the monitoring report was a September one. Is

Is the October data referenced in the decision report and council haven?t released the underlying data yet? (Not expecting you to check - I?ll have a look when I get a chance!)

[heartblock]

... central 'This is a new site for data collection, having started in September 2021' - so where is that pre-LTN data from...hmmmmmmm?

[Earl Aelfheah]

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> The latest data is really encouraging. What?s even

> more clear is that in the section of east dulwich

> grove where there is charter east dulwich /

> children walking to school, traffic has actually

> fallen 20 % year on year. This really is excellent

> and shows how much difference the measures have

> made.

Yep - not to mention the number of kids walking and cycling to school along Melbourne Grove and Calton Avenue. It's a really positive change.

[legalalien]

Confused now. The only main report I can see online is September data and not October. Maybe I am missing something.

The updated EqIA is here in case anyone is interested.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/77418/Equality-Impact-Assessment-Final-_CAE_Dulwich-Streetspace_Nov-2021.pdf

Loving this caveat:

?Note: CAE are not legal experts and, as such, this review is not a definitive legal view but rather an interpretation of whether the Streetspace measures impact on any of the protected characteristics under the Equality Act.?

It?s an interesting read. Many things ?have the potential? to be positive/ the ?intended impact? will do x versus a number of things actually reported to be negative.

Selective (!) quote:

?Negative impact:

? Poor public transport: All expressed need for better public transport services.

? Older residents are more likely to favour outright removal of the scheme rather than

modification of the measures or a different measure. The data indicates support for the ?Streets for People? aims and filter at Dulwich Village broadly declines with the age of the respondent.

? Older people and people with disabilities were moderately more interested in changing the overall scheme ? with permit access or reducing timed closures ? than in improving kerbs and crossings.

? People of Black and Asian and Minority Ethnic backgrounds tended to be more strongly against the measures and disagree with the ?Streets for People? aims. It is unclear from the data what the cause of this trend is ? it could relate to the location, age profile or employment profile of respondents ? this should be further investigated.

? The majority of young people (aged 16-24 years) report negative impact of the schemes.

? School survey of 196 school children indicated majority opposition to the scheme, many

more (46%) did not like the changes compared to 29% who do.

Positive impact

? The majority of pregnant women and those with new babies felt they were positively impacted by the changes.

? The majority of children and young people aged 16 years or under report positive impact.

? Results from the school survey of 196 school children: some reported they found it easier to walk and cycle to school, with levels of walking and cycling going up 26% and use of car to travel to school dropping by 19%, and easier to cross the road,?

[northernmonkey]

Yes you?re missing something - but you?re probably looking at the wrong document as there are a few. Was just looking at this myself to understand what?s going on with the different numbers. Just to also add that it talks about September but then in the table also has figures for October which isn?t intuitive.

The main report - think it?s page 29 has a table and shows October.

[goldilocks]

I've been through this several times above, but its a site that had previous counts already. In addition to the council ones that they used, there were also DFT manual counts at that site so the numbers can also be corroborated for reasonableness.

The site is 'new' for September and October because it wasn't included in the previous monitoring for the Streetspace programme of monitoring. Not necessarily that it had never been a monitoring site before now.

The monitoring shows a 20% year on year fall in all traffic on the central section of East Dulwich Grove which is great news for people attending the Health Centre, children walking to the charter school ED and those using the new MUGA.

Obviously though, as you have so clearly documented, even a 20% fall as compared to pre pandemic figures isn't enough and so more is needed on East Dulwich Grove to deter driving. I'd like to see parking removed, more space for cycling and an extension to the CPZ hours to cover 8-6 rather than 8:30-6:30 with enforcement of the zone to stop school drop offs. I think that these things would help.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> ... central 'This is a new site for data

> collection, having started in September 2021' - so

> where is that pre-LTN data from...hmmmmmmm?

[ab29]

Sure, how easy to come up with pro LTN stats while sitting in a comfy chair in a quiet house on a recently closed road.

Entirely different perspective when living on a boundery road where all your traffic is now redirected.

Just because you don't see something anymore it doesn't mean it stopped existing.

[legalalien]

Ok got it, Oct only features for EDG on page 39 and no October data for other sites? A bit odd and easy to miss in a section entitled sept data. Why are car/LGv numbers given for October but cycle numbers only given for September? Consistency would be better/ more reassuring?

[goldilocks]

Literally data presented by the council.

Using counters not eyes. Nothing to do with where you live or perspective. Just facts.

ab29 Wrote:

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

> Sure, how easy to come up with pro LTN stats while

> sitting in a comfy chair in a quiet house on a

> recently closed road.

>

> Entirely different perspective when living on a

> boundery road where all your traffic is now

> redirected.

>

> Just because you don't see something anymore it

> doesn't mean it stopped existing.

[ab29]

What I see from my windows is a traffic several times worst than what we had here before the LTN. No amount of magic data from the council and refusal to accept the reality from pro LTN crowd can alter it.

[Rockets]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> I've been through this several times above, but

> its a site that had previous counts already. In

> addition to the council ones that they used, there

> were also DFT manual counts at that site so the

> numbers can also be corroborated for

> reasonableness.

>

> The site is 'new' for September and October

> because it wasn't included in the previous

> monitoring for the Streetspace programme of

> monitoring. Not necessarily that it had never

> been a monitoring site before now.

>

> The monitoring shows a 20% year on year fall in

> all traffic on the central section of East Dulwich

> Grove which is great news for people attending the

> Health Centre, children walking to the charter

> school ED and those using the new MUGA.

>

> Obviously though, as you have so clearly

> documented, even a 20% fall as compared to pre

> pandemic figures isn't enough and so more is

> needed on East Dulwich Grove to deter driving.

> I'd like to see parking removed, more space for

> cycling and an extension to the CPZ hours to cover

> 8-6 rather than 8:30-6:30 with enforcement of the

> zone to stop school drop offs. I think that these

> things would help.

>

>

> heartblock Wrote:

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

> -----

> > ... central 'This is a new site for data

> > collection, having started in September 2021' -

> so

> > where is that pre-LTN data from...hmmmmmmm?

Why wasnt it monitored before Sept 21? Surely if the council had monitoring done there previously it would make sense to monitor during the LTN phase? This is why people are so sceptical, nothing the council is doing makes any sense. Like adding one set of October numbers in a report focussed on Sept.

Do they know what they are doing?

[Rockets]

ab29 Wrote:

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

> Sure, how easy to come up with pro LTN stats while

> sitting in a comfy chair in a quiet house on a

> recently closed road.

>

> Entirely different perspective when living on a

> boundery road where all your traffic is now

> redirected.

>

> Just because you don't see something anymore it

> doesn't mean it stopped existing.

Exactly this. No coincidence that so many who are so vocal in their support live on the closed roads. Goes some way to explain why so many object to what the council have done because they live with the fallout whilst tbe residents of roads like Melbourne live the "success" and come on here to herald the scheme as being great because their lives are made better on their tiny patch. Meanwhile they turn a blind eye to what is happening, quite literally, around the corner of their own street because of the measures that make their street "great".

Modern socialism is really quite disappointing.

[march46]

?We need data?

?No?not that data (it doesn?t suit my agenda)?

[ab29]

@march46 stop reading it then; or move in to East Dulwich Grove or LL and you will change your mind.

This truly is the age of 'me' - and nothing else matters.

[heartblock]

20% reduction from an invented number - there was no count in Sept 2019, they invented a number, which is why the actual counts show an increase of 28% traffic and the invented pre-LTN count in Central gives a reduction.

I'm so glad that none of these people work in medical research!

[northernmonkey]

Why are you so sure that the number for September isn?t actual?

[heartblock]

Because I read the small print. As someone once said to me - do your own research.

[andrewc]

The bus journey times look promising for those worried about the effect of LTNs on buses.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review?chapter=4

Also something is encouraging a huge increase in cycling. My guess is its part LTN and part the zeitgeist.

[Rockets]

AndrewC - are you actually looking at the data or just taking the councils propaganda and repeating it verbatim?

Look at the charts for most bus journey times, what's happening to tbe charts towards the right hand side? Most are on an upward trend aren't they? What does that mean? It means that since lifting of lockdown bus journey times are getting slower....why might that be?

Honestly, it's like dealing with brainwashed cult members....I might start a pro-LTN supporter intervention course to try and pull some of you back from the abyss....;-)