LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[first mate]

Surely data should always be scoured, especially if the methodology is suspect? No true scientist should ever object to data being scoured nor robust questioning of the methodology, especially if that data is used to support apparently unpopular policy measures.

The charge is that those who object are 'sheeple' and of 'confirmation bias' a case of pots and kettles it would seem.

[Lebanums]

Do we feel the data is comparable? 2019 was pre pandemic, people were going about their daily lives no WFH. From 2020 onwards, people have been working from home and not required the use of their cars. I would love to fast forward a year or two when we are all back in offices, and those who are currently walking their kids to school resort to having to drop off again.

Most of us are not anti LTN, just anti the failed measures currently in place.

The council needs to look at improvements for all and consult the public on what is best, since we are the everyday users.

Also, TFL are reducing bus routes, and some trains have been cut. How is that helping reduce congestion?

[DuncanW]

I think 'Sheeple' was ironic - as in anyone who is foolish enough to belive in the data being offered by the council and the experts they employ is Sheeple - Only 'we'* with our tin foil hats firmly in place can see the through the matrix etc etc...

*you

[goldilocks]

Why do you assume that people who work in offices drive to school - how do all these people drive to work? I work in an office - i drop my kids and then continue to the train station. Walking to school isn't a 'lockdown hobby' for most people.

TFL have a funding crisis and are cutting services because of reduced demand - funnily enough driving is almost back to full pre pandemic demand whereas busses and trains are not. The latest wave of omicron is likely to increase that difference. The council do not have the ability to change public transport locally.

The measures have reduced traffic overall, including on boundary roads and increased active travel.

[Lebanums]

The roads get quieter when the schools are off...

I don't see that active travel has increased because of the LTN measures. I see it has increased because people have been working from home and able to get out walking or on their bike.

[goldilocks]

Ah - so you're seeing people taking their kids to school as an unsustainable hobby - ditto walking. There is a huge shift when independent schools are off as they have a wider catchment and even though there is lots of good work on active travel, even the small percentage who drive cause a large impact. Theres also an argument that parents tend to take holiday when their kids are off, so if they are driving to work, they will be more likely to be away in school holidays.

That said - assuming that people will change how they travel now once they return to work is a leap - both in that people who are working from home will return to work at the same level as before, but also that it will necessitate a shift in mode.

[Nigello]

Re schools - I emailed several schools, state and private, to ask what each was doing to encourage staff and parents to travel to and from school in a less environmentally damaging way, about five months ago. Only one replied.

Traffic and therefore pollution shrinks very noticeably during school holidays, ipso facto, people travelling to and from schools (or to and from schools whilst on longer journeys) are respsonsible for higher levels of congestion and pollution. Over to you, drivers...

[Lebanums]

The bottom line is that the LTN's were supposed to drive a change in behaviours, and that is not happening. Instead of trying to make it more difficult to drive, public transport should be more accessible and timely to other neighbourhoods/boroughs, not just the city, and the shift should happen naturally. I get there will always be people who do not want to give up their car, as has been said many times. But many of us want to make that shift without making it more difficult or unsafe for others.

[Metallic]

The stats are bent. That is why there is such a difference of opinion in here.

I will never believe anything Southwark Council says about their work on this matter, ever again.

[goldilocks]

But the monitoring does show a change in behaviour. Vehicle numbers are down - more so than Southwark norms and active travel is up.

[Lebanums]

Only because more of us are working from home and spending less days in the office. Only those who have to go to in to work have been doing so.

[Nigello]

Please explain how one's making a shift to greener transport can make it more difficult for others? How can an individual's decision to walk or cycle over driving be in any way more dangerous or harmful than taking a car? Whether or not there are LTNs is irrelevant to this question: it is possible to change one's mode of transport without its being linked to an LTN or cycle lane, etc. being established. One can make that shift even if one disagrees with the policy of LTN. There is no need to link the two and use the latter as a shield against making a positive change.

[Lebanums]

But the transport system is not easy to use if you are not based in the city. The lack of connections makes travel much longer than it needs to be. A few small changes, like extending the 63 to Honor Oak Park, say there is nowhere for the bus to turn, but there is the one-way system at the bottom of the road.

I was talking about the LTN's making it more harmful for others, pushing the pollution into other streets & around schools. Choosing who gets cleaner air & who doesn't has only divided the area. It is a right, not a privilege.

[heartblock]

For those unable to find the table that shows no ACTUAL measurement in Sept 2019 on ED Grove Central - which is the only 'count' used as a baseline to show the magical decrease of 20% - so the figure is just made up. So not scrabbling around at all, no need as table is published.

If you want to believe a made-up number then fine, personally I would much rather Southwark measures pollution on ED Grove - which it either hasn't so far, or it has and is not publishing.

Where is the air quality data? That is the question all those who support road closures should be asking - rather than gaslighting their neighbours - maybe start supporting us on boundary roads who have to put up with extra traffic and pollution - why do you care so little about us?

[Nigello]

Heartblock, the woman whose daughter's death was partly attributed to pollution now has a charity/lobby group. Perhaps she could help you do your own recording of pollution where you live?

http://ellaroberta.org/ella-roberta-family-foundation/

[heartblock]

She is a bit busy being the WHO advocate for health and air quality at present, but yes we are in communication due to some shared experiences already.

Southwark closed the 5 roads around ED Grove and they have a duty of care to their residents to measure the air quality consequences and to publish these before any consultation. As it stands a group of EDG residents have measured the air quality by self-funding, but these measurements are not 'official' measurement. So the 59-60 NOx figures (WHO - anything over 40 is a risk to health) are easily dismissed.

What you need to ask yourself is 'why isn't Southwark measuring our air quality' ?

[Rockets]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> For those unable to find the table that shows no

> ACTUAL measurement in Sept 2019 on ED Grove

> Central - which is the only 'count' used as a

> baseline to show the magical decrease of 20% - so

> the figure is just made up. So not scrabbling

> around at all, no need as table is published.

> If you want to believe a made-up number then fine,

> personally I would much rather Southwark measures

> pollution on ED Grove - which it either hasn't so

> far, or it has and is not publishing.

> Where is the air quality data? That is the

> question all those who support road closures

> should be asking - rather than gaslighting their

> neighbours - maybe start supporting us on boundary

> roads who have to put up with extra traffic and

> pollution - why do you care so little about us?

Heartblock - and there it is - the smoking gun. Despite the claims from Goldilocks to the contrary it is clear no data was ever collected for Sep 19 by the council. They took the Jan 19 numbers and magically added 3,000 or so journeys to arrive at the Sept 19 figure. They then suddenly decided to begin monitoring at the ED Central location and got figures that showed an increase on the Jan 19 figures - one wonders if this was the trigger for the ghost Sep 19 figures after the MG residents complained they didn't want the changes to the road layout Southwark suggested.

The only way Southwark could justify no change would be that they could demonstrate that the MG closures were working as is and, magically, those numbers appeared......call me a cynic but I smell a rat! ;-)

They are taking everyone for a ride.....and when people on here suggest we should not be analysing the data for holes I laugh to myself quite heartily at the idea that we should all just go about our business and turn a blind eye to corruption and manipulation of the democratic process.

Imagine if everyone just turned a blind eye - (on a different scale obviously but...) they'd be no Watergate, No Cash for Questions, No Tory party parties - hell we would all probably think that Chernobyl was an unexplained freakish act of nature!

Our council and councillors are supposed to be accountable to their constituents and at the moment Southwark and our local councillors are treating us with utter contempt and lying to us and refusing to engage with us because they are terrified of what we have uncovered as they know their process and output in relation to LTNs is as flawed at the LTNs themselves.

They got away with it for years over things like the CPZs but now they have a problem on their hands as everyone is aware of the issues around the LTNs and it appears far more people in the area hate them than like them and we are months away from a council vote where a few hundred votes against them ends their political careers - particularly problematic for any of them that harbour desires to progress within the Labour party.

[CPR Dave]

Who should we vote for to get them out?

[goldilocks]

From page 29 of the main monitoring report:

'for this site, DATA FOR A COMPARABLE LOCATION WAS COLLECTED IN BOTH JANUARY AND SEPTEMBER'

The caps section is bold in the report - didn't seem to be able to make my font on here bold.

Its not a 'smoking gun' at all.

Rockets Wrote:

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

> heartblock Wrote:

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

> -----

> > For those unable to find the table that shows

> no

> > ACTUAL measurement in Sept 2019 on ED Grove

> > Central - which is the only 'count' used as a

> > baseline to show the magical decrease of 20% -

> so

> > the figure is just made up. So not scrabbling

> > around at all, no need as table is published.

> > If you want to believe a made-up number then

> fine,

> > personally I would much rather Southwark

> measures

> > pollution on ED Grove - which it either hasn't

> so

> > far, or it has and is not publishing.

> > Where is the air quality data? That is the

> > question all those who support road closures

> > should be asking - rather than gaslighting

> their

> > neighbours - maybe start supporting us on

> boundary

> > roads who have to put up with extra traffic and

> > pollution - why do you care so little about us?

>

> Heartblock - and there it is - the smoking gun.

> Despite the claims from Goldilocks to the contrary

> it is clear no data was ever collected for Sep 19

> by the council. They took the Jan 19 numbers and

> magically added 3,000 or so journeys to arrive at

> the Sept 19 figure. They then suddenly decided to

> begin monitoring at the ED Central location and

> got figures that showed an increase on the Jan 19

> figures - one wonders if this was the trigger for

> the ghost Sep 19 figures after the MG residents

> complained they didn't want the changes to the

> road layout Southwark suggested.

>

> The only way Southwark could justify no change

> would be that they could demonstrate that the MG

> closures were working as is and, magically, those

> numbers appeared......call me a cynic but I smell

> a rat! ;-)

>

> They are taking everyone for a ride.....and when

> people on here suggest we should not be analysing

> the data for holes I laugh to myself quite

> heartily at the idea that we should all just go

> about our business and turn a blind eye to

> corruption and manipulation of the democratic

> process.

>

> Imagine if everyone just turned a blind eye - (on

> a different scale obviously but...) they'd be no

> Watergate, No Cash for Questions, No Tory party

> parties - hell we would all probably think that

> Chernobyl was an unexplained freakish act of

> nature!

>

> Our council and councillors are supposed to be

> accountable to their constituents and at the

> moment Southwark and our local councillors are

> treating us with utter contempt and lying to us

> and refusing to engage with us because they are

> terrified of what we have uncovered as they know

> their process and output in relation to LTNs is as

> flawed at the LTNs themselves.

>

> They got away with it for years over things like

> the CPZs but now they have a problem on their

> hands as everyone is aware of the issues around

> the LTNs and it appears far more people in the

> area hate them than like them and we are months

> away from a council vote where a few hundred votes

> against them ends their political careers -

> particularly problematic for any of them that

> harbour desires to progress within the Labour

> party.

[ed_pete]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> She is a bit busy being the WHO advocate for

> health and air quality at present, but yes we are

> in communication due to some shared experiences

> already.

>

> Southwark closed the 5 roads around ED Grove and

> they have a duty of care to their residents to

> measure the air quality consequences and to

> publish these before any consultation. As it

> stands a group of EDG residents have measured the

> air quality by self-funding, but these

> measurements are not 'official' measurement. So

> the 59-60 NOx figures (WHO - anything over 40 is a

> risk to health) are easily dismissed.

> What you need to ask yourself is 'why isn't

> Southwark measuring our air quality' ?

Maybe take a look at my earlier post. https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,2092625,2250739#msg-2250739

I've read further into the report actually Southwark has measured the air quality on EDG using AQMesh pods - see page 15.

The report states:

Southwark Council provided hourly average measurements from AQMesh pods on East

Dulwich Grove from 18th May to 19th June 2017 and from 18th May to 24th July 2021.

Comparing the same periods in 2017 and 2021 shows average NO2 concentrations were 33

μg/m? in 2017 and 23 μg/m? in 2021. For these periods, the maximum hourly average

concentrations were 67 μg/m? and 52 μg/m?, in 2017 and 2021 respectively; over the two-month

period in 2021, the maximum hourly average concentration was 56 μg/m?. The change

in concentrations at this AQMesh pod location is in line with continuous monitor and diffusion

tube measurements.

[heartblock]

There was no count at ED Grove central in Sept 2019 - it is very simple, as the table shows.

Can you possibly explain what a 'comparable' site is and also why 300 cars were added to the actual Jan 2019 count?

I think this matters as the amazing and magical 20% reduction from 'actual factual data' is being twittered up as a positive 'result' by people living on nice closed roads. It is magical because it is a 25-28% increase at other sites on ED Grove (actual counts) and the HGV, Motorbike increases are huge - where did this 20% go?

[Rockets]

Ha ha... it doesn't seem the council is even sure themselves whether they collected the data or not...on one page of the report it says they didn't, on another it says it did. You'd expect more clarity and consistency and attention to detail from the council wouldn't you....it may not be a smoking gun but the gun has definitely been loaded don't you agree?

It is an amazing coincidence don't you think that the numbers that we are arguing about, and the numbers that the council isn't sure whether they collected or not, are the ones showing the biggest increase in numbers that allows you to claim what a rip roaring success the LTNs are on your street?

Funny that....

[heartblock]

Wow 56 that high - we measured above 60 - ED Grove is very polluted then. What was the PM2.5 and PM10 measurements - these are the carcinogenic and inflammatory pollutants that we don't want pedestrians with adult and children to breath in.

Yet again oh closed road supporters - when are you going to start thinking about your neighbours on boundary roads - do I hear any support for policy to lessen traffic and pollution on our roads - I'm listening....

[heartblock]

Travel in London - published today. TFL

1.The standout feature is the relative increase in weekend cycling ? typically doubling relative to pre-pandemic levels, although with large variation, emphasising the increase in ?leisure? cycling. Weekday cycling shows a different picture, typically close to pre-pandemic levels.

(What days of the week did Southwark measure cycling numbers?)

2.It is particularly important that air quality improves around schools and the number of state primary and secondary schools in areas exceeding the legal limit for NO2 fell from 455 in 2016 to 14 in 2019, a reduction of 97 per cent.

(Is ED Grove School street still one of those with high pollution - likely considering the above WHO measurement of 56NOx)

[Rockets]

It's going to be very interesting to see what happens to traffic flow numbers when the council reduces the operating hours. If modal shift has taken place then there should not be a huge increase. If all the LTNs have done is displace traffic elsewhere then you would expect an increase.