LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[DulwichCentral]

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote:

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

> Traffic backed up beyond the picture house, 12.30

> on Friday.

Correct me if I'm wrong - but those pictures show the other end of Lordship Lane?

[Dulwichgirl82]

Other end from what?

They show goose green end, I walked from there to the post office. Traffic the whole way.

DulwichCentral Wrote:

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

> Dulwichgirl82 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Traffic backed up beyond the picture house,

> 12.30

> > on Friday.

>

> Correct me if I'm wrong - but those pictures show

> the other end of Lordship Lane?

[DulwichCentral]

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote:

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

> Other end from what?

>

> They show goose green end, I walked from there to

> the post office. Traffic the whole way.

> > > Traffic backed up beyond the picture house,

> > 12.30

> > > on Friday.

> >

> > Correct me if I'm wrong - but those pictures

> show

> > the other end of Lordship Lane?

Oh right. Just thought it would show traffic up to picture house as you said in your post

[Dulwichgirl82]

No I just showed the first two photos I took walking, it continued up past there but I didn?t walk any further. Was there when I walked back half an hour or so later.

[Metallic]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> I agree with you Nigello. The big risk of walking

> locally is not so much a traffic risk as a mugging

> risk, for younger secondary age children in

> particular and during the winter months with dark

> evenings - I know this puts a lot of parents off

> allowing their children to walk to school. Not

> exactly sure of the solution - walking bus,

> monitored safe points, better CCTV, but would be

> very interested in getting behind some of these

> things. With quieter areas in the closed off areas

> I think looking at these things is important...

Those closed streets are quite spooky in the dark.

[enpointe]

roywj Wrote:

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

> Surprising how many drivers are still going

> through the Village and Townley road during the

> closure times. I wonder how much each fine costs

> and how many have been fined already.

I?m not sure there are any cameras despite signs that there are - I haven?t seen any when I?ve walked through the village near the top of Gallery Road. A friend drove through a couple of weeks during the restricted times and hasn?t received a fine.

[tradingfiddle]

Definitely cameras up but they are not that obvious and positioned further back. I heard that they started issuing fines from 1 December

enpointe Wrote:

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

> roywj Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Surprising how many drivers are still going

> > through the Village and Townley road during the

> > closure times. I wonder how much each fine

> costs

> > and how many have been fined already.

>

>

> I?m not sure there are any cameras despite signs

> that there are - I haven?t seen any when I?ve

> walked through the village near the top of Gallery

> Road. A friend drove through a couple of weeks

> during the restricted times and hasn?t received a

> fine.

[Rockets]

I noticed the council had put up some temporary free-standing signs on the approach to the Burbage junction with Gallery Road as the signage on poles is obscured as you approach the roundabout. I think drivers might have a case as there is insufficient signage to warn of the bus gate on Burbage. People are seeing the sign closing Dulwich Village and swinging left with no idea that there is one there too.

I was in an Uber recently and the driver was having a proper rant about the council (he put me to shame) and he said that he had had 5 LTN tickets in two weeks and the council had let him off two of them (not in Dulwich) as their own picture (of the infringement occurring) showed that the signage was obscured.

[tiddles]

Late morning today Lordy lane approach to the harvester - it?s a mess. Also yesterday Crystal Palace was gridlocked - admittedly it was rush hour (5.30 pm) but it was completely stationary and we had to close all the vents as the pollution was awful. I have no idea what the cause was but it was pretty grim. Then we had the south circular queue down lordship lane in the other direction. I do hope the council are monitoring all this as I would be extremely concerned if I had to live on these congested roads. As we are all so partisan in our experiences it would be extremely useful to have proper recorded feedback from bus drivers who are familiar with the local routes and cab drivers and the black cab drivers.

[Rockets]

I am not sure the council are monitoring. Seems they are going to rely on modelling....

BTW surprised no-one from the pro-lobby has yet to flag that piece Rachel Aldred wrote about the Waltham Forest LTNs leading to a 6% reduction in car ownership in two years.

[exdulwicher]

I am not sure the council are monitoring. Seems they are going to rely on modelling....

Modelling sort of relies on monitoring too. I mean, it's kind of helpful to have data either to base the models on or to further develop them later on.

Various ways of doing that of course, most of them relying on a period of time to gather said data but modelling and monitoring are related.

[malumbu]

I drove to Barnes about 15 years ago. The South Circular was gridlocked. Clearly it was a mixture of cyclists and Southwark's fault. Nothing to do with a major accident on the M25. That's the way it feels to me. Many of you are becoming rather obsesses. Sorry to lob a grenade in but you seem to be beyond a rational discussion.

[first mate]

Eh?

[ab29]

first mate Wrote:

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

> Eh?

My thought exactly ;)

[DulwichCentral]

ab29 Wrote:

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

> first mate Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Eh?

>

It's quite clear what Malumbu is saying isn't it? It seems lots of people are blaming small road closures for everything. While ignoring the fact that car journeys have gone up in general all over London (as reported in the Times -even with people working from home because they nip down the shops in the car).

They accuse pro-closure groups of being 'myopic' and selfish. I think its the other way round. Anti-closure people choose to ignore the big picture.

If the government and councils hadn't correctly predicted a massive increase in car use - because people not using public transport - and urgently put in a few piddly safe routes, then *every* road would be gridlocked. That's obvious isn't it?

So I'm sorry but resenting some emergency cycle routes for people who want to drive less seems selfish and myopic to me.

[Nigello]

People are likely tempted to use their own cars ratehr than public transport, plus it's winter and dark, so it is rational to say that it's likely vehicle use will be greater now. To disregard this suggests an unwillingness to deal with reality.

[Dulwichgirl82]

Yes obviously it?s multi factorial, which just means now is a terrible time to make the changes and be able to assess them at all.

I think the ?urgently put in - few piddling safe routes? ignores the facts that those are only for some, many people don?t use those routes but have to use the now heavily traffic routes such as EDG and lordship lane etc and experience increased pollution. Should those People have to accept negative impact on their children?s lives so some can have quieter cleaner roads? Should some children have worse pollution to protect others?

[heartblock]

My reality is across 35 years of living in the same street and flat. There was a noticeable difference in traffic on EDG after the LTNs. All I am asking is for Southwark to monitor the air quality on this road and other roads that now have more traffic, which regularly idles during the school run.

It is not about being disgruntled about car access to roads as I walk or use public transport, it about not subjecting vulnerable residents to elevated and illegal pollution. The hypocrisy of people who own more than one car, who live in a LTN, but call someone like me to be pro-car and not caring about the environment is astounding.

Rosamund Kissi-Debrah, who?s daughter Ella died of asthma is an activist and campaigner for cleaner air for Londoners - she believes that LTNs push traffic onto resedential roads with higher density housing and all the issues that accompany such housing. Southwark needs to start measuring and monitoring car exhaust pollution..no excuses.

[Spartacus]

And following on from Dulwich Girl

What about the elderly, disabled and less able to walk or cycle, should they also suffer because a few people benefit from quieter streets ?

[snathani]

I would be interested to see how the rise of the likes of Uber has contributed to traffic problems in the last few years. I remember sitting on a near-empty night bus a couple of years ago, coming down Brixton Rd, past a long queue of Toyota Prius minicabs, each one with a single passenger in the back. A few years before that, everyone would have been crammed on the nightbus. Now everyone is too posh to get the bus, it seems! Or the cabs are just more affordable now.

Anyway. My daily morning journey into Dulwich Village (from 5 or 6 miles away) now takes five minutes longer since the timed bus gates came in. This is still much quicker (and nicer) than getting the train or bus. It will have to get a lot worse than that to get me out of my car. I would even pay a few quid a day to drive in, if public transport links can't be improved.

Given that the roads in Dulwich Village are fine when the private schools are on holiday, I would say most of the traffic in the village is, like me, coming from much further than 1 or 2 miles away.

Nice to see more people on bikes in the village, though - definitely a lot more Niholas etc cruising around in the morning.

This is a good thread, BTW. Most entertaining.

[redpost]

yes, uber are part of the problem, in my view not because they are so popular and have displaced night buses/minicabs/black cabs, but because they use satnav that routes them down side streets just like a lot of other private traffic.

Let's not forget for those working nights/late or out at night, an uber is much safer than the nightbus, and for women probably safer than black cabs/mini cabs since you can share your journey progress and the app has an emergency button. I write this as someone who has seen plenty of unsavoury events on the nightbus.

[alex_b]

redpost Wrote:

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

> because they

> use satnav that routes them down side streets just

> like a lot of other private traffic.

I think this is a massive part of why side street traffic has risen so much in recent years and therefore why it?s entirely reasonable for Southwark to take some action.

[malumbu]

Ah Snathi, you are the sort of person that we need to target then! What would it take to get you to cycle those 6 miles. Good on you for your honesty though.

Uber get good utility out of the vehicles unlike most that are parked up most days. So good with respect to embedded carbon, not sure about the congestion side of things. There are political/social issues too ie pay and conditions. But probably better for the environment than 2 1/2 tonne black cabs, not sure how the new electric hybrid ones do on emissions. Always thought that we should scrap some regulations on Hackney cabs, but they, generally in the outer boroughs, are a strong lobby. Had very little bother with black cab drivers though, once they have done the knowledge (do they still go round on mopeds and the like doing this?)

[Rockets]

The pro-closure lobby will probably tell us this is because someone was selling Christmas trees somewhere in South London....

Another weekend of congestion along EDG and Lordship Lane.....how can people claim this isn't happening...?

[nxjen]

What though is causing the congestion at the weekend? It?s not down to the school run, and business trips would be far fewer. Could it be people circling around looking for parking spaces when in fact they could be using other forms of transport? Anyway, there was always a lot of traffic on LL on a Saturday prior to the road closures.\