LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[heartblock]

There is no baseline data, but also the dangerous particulates that are caused by vehicles (including electric cars) have never been measured by Southwark council.

These particulates have now been implicated by research healthcare scientists, as causal factors for cancers, heart disease and developmental lung disorders due to inflammatory processes. So I plan to move from EDG as soon as I can, as Southwark appears to not give a flying shit about the health of residents living outside of the nice, cosy LTNs.

[apbremer]

If DE ,or which ever wretched dozy builder who now still owns the old abandoned petrol station site in DV, would only remove the totally unnecessary and useless green hoarding blocking access to Gilkes Crescent, EDG traffic could again filter right and hence avoid the highly polluting and infuriatingly lengthy queues at the traffic lights. GC residents would not like it but,hey, for the good of the community we all have a cross to bear.

[alice]

Stealth LTN

[malumbu]

heartblock - rather an ignorant (unaware rather than stupid) comment. We've had particulates in our air since the world was formed. We've had anthropogenic pollution ever since we've discovered fire. There was pollution pre and post industrial revolution. It didn't start in 2020 with LTNs. Worth having a read of this https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/emissions-of-air-pollutants/emissions-of-air-pollutants-in-the-uk-1970-to-2018-particulate-matter-pm10-and-pm25

As a society we decide what is acceptable in terms of the balance between quality of life (including the basics of food and shelter) as well as mobility, and the health risks that this presents. There is no such thing as perfect air quality as there is a background from natural sources. We legislate (as we can't achieve this must through good citizenship) to reduce pollution including the Clean Air Acts of the 1950s, removal of lead and sulphur from road fuels from the 1980s, caps on total emissions from different sources, maximum roadside concentrations of pollutants, and pollution reducing technology including vehicles, energy and industry.

Even if you moved to an agrigarian way of living you would still get pollution from animal waste and someone would still have to smelt iron for your horse shoes, and the nails and implements to build your houses and harvest your crops.

I'm happy to see less vehicles on the road as it improves my life in many other ways, and if that is a bit of a inconvenience to some I feel that this is a price worth paying.

To say that Southwark don't care about your health is just absurd. Southwark have to monitor air quality and take action by law and have pollution monitoring on the OKR and E&C - I expect as these are the busiest roads in the borough https://www.southwark.gov.uk/environment/air-quality/air-quality-monitoring-data Closest national monitoring station is Honor Oak, which I expect would be a good proxy for LL. https://uk-air.defra.gov.uk/networks/site-info?site_id=HP1&view=View

Separately we've met legal limits for streetside particulates for a number of years in the UK. We're also blessed with predominantly westerly winds bring in clean air from the Atlantic rather than polluted air (coal burning and heavy industry) from central Europe. Latest levels of PM10 = 27 microgrammes per metre cubed https://www.iqair.com/uk/england/catford/london-honor-oak-park - against the maximum (mean) of 40. For the UK to be more ambitious you need to ban the most polluting vehicles - which the ULEZ will do (in addition to the strengthening of the Low Emission Zone for heavy vehicles) and address other sources in particular by banning burning of all wood and liquid/solid fossil fuels in the home

[Abe_froeman]

malumbu you've said on another thread that you don't even live in this borough.

Presumably that also means you have barely ever been to East Dulwich Grove since these closures - lockdown prohibits that.

[legalalien]

Hi all, quick heads up about the Cabinet meeting on 19 January that will consider the allocation of CIL funding for the Dulwich and Camberwell wards - link to report here: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s92946/Report%20Allocation%20of%20local%20CIL%20Southwark%20-%20Phase%202.pdf

Several things that are probably of interest to those on this thread:

- bulk of Camberwell funding going to a feasibility study and projects relating to cycling and pedestrian routes in Camberwell

- Dulwich Hill funding for

(I) Installation of on street cycle hangars in the Dulwich Hill ward, subject to final confirmation of locations to including Peckham Rye / Forest Hill Road / adjoining roads (sounds like one for Rockets to follow up!)

(Ii)

Introduction of traffic calming measures on residential roads between Forest Hill Road and Underhill, including St Aidan?s Road, St Dunstans Road and Ryedale, with a view to introducing resident access- only restrictions and/or one-way operation, subject to feasibility and local consultation.

Most of the Dulwich Village funding is going to the somewhat vaguely expressed ?initial feasibility and design work into potential projects to support the implementation of active travel opportunities such as walking and cycling, reducing traffic volume, improving air quality and making streets safer and healthier.

Establish a network of safe walking and cycling route which connect with similar in neighboring wards, supporting active travel and preventing increase of traffic and pollution; Addressing commuter parking, and monitoring air pollution levels.?

Goose Green funding for

(1)

Feasibility study into the potential to create safe cycle lanes on the East Dulwich Road / East Dulwich Grove (A2214) and beyond.

(2) Feasibility and initial design work to a potential to improve the area outside East Dulwich station, establishing a public square with improved pedestrian and cycle routes. Options to be considered include:

- Raised & realigned pedestrian crossing;

- Raised loading bays;

- Decluttering the public realm, including removing pedestrian guard rails, relocating bins and cycle parking;

- Improving pedestrian and cycle routes in the vicinity including around Vale End, Melbourne Grove and Railway Rise.

[legalalien]

Just to add a couple of things:

(1) worth reading the background and criteria in the report. I?m not entirely convinced all of these actually meet the stated criteria, particularly the idea that these should really be up front capital sums that ?Just need a one-off sum of money to get started (and not require

additional funding from the council in future)?...

(2) the ward councillors seem to be the ones who make the selection from the list of projects proposed.

(3) the deadline for public questions for matters raised in this meeting is midnight tomorrow, Weds 13 January.

Edited to add: as with many, many Southwark consultations this was another one I had never heard about. Have managed to find the commonplace site that was used and it seems few others had heard of it either.... not the most subscribed one ever! https://dulwichvillagecilmap.commonplace.is/comments

[Nigello]

Re public questions - how and where can you place these?

[legalalien]

Not sure will take a look...

Edited to add: details here

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/engagement-and-consultations/have-your-say/democracy-in-southwark/ask-a-question?chapter=3

Details of the Tuesday cabinet meeting which is at 11am are on this link, including details of the officers who I think questions need to be sent to (I?ve never sent a question so just going with what is on the website). http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=6665

[Earl Aelfheah]

'Feasibility study into the potential to create safe cycle lanes on the East Dulwich Road / East Dulwich Grove (A2214) and beyond.'

This would be great. A safe cycle lane linking up with the Railton LTN and Brixton station would be great.

[alice]

cycle lane, bus priority, other traffic all in road narrower than court lane.

hmm just thought of a solution

[heartblock]

Would love a cycle lane on EDG

[slarti b]

heartblock Wrote:

> Would love a cycle lane on EDG

Is that because of all the traffic that has been diverted onto EDG following the DV junction closure ? ;-)

[alice]

Yes cycle and separate(?) bus lane for the narrow edg then allow traffic to use the wider avenue of court lane.

[heartblock]

Cyclists currently use the pavement as well as the middle of the rd when the traffic is at a standstill on EDG during school rush (non lockdown) so it?s needed.

[slarti b]

heartblock Wrote:

> Cyclists currently use the pavement as well as the middle of the rd when the traffic is at a standstill on EDG during >school rush (non lockdown) so it?s needed.

OK. Would you see this as being between Lordship Lane and Townley Road where it would link up with Quietway 7 (or whatever it is called now)

Edited to add:

On a practical point, EDG is a TFL road (rather than Southwark) and I would expect them to be rather more stringent with their evaulation criteria and implementation. In particular, they are concerned about the effect of changes on bus times.

I think the section between Townley and Lordhip Lane could be difficult to implement a dedicated bike lane; there is a lot of on-street parking from the Dutch Estate and houses on EDG. I think the pavements are also quite busy at certain times because of the new CHarter School which limits options such as reducing footway width. Challenging.

[malumbu]

Wasn't really aware of Quietway 7, which is a shame as Q1 is pretty good. For others quietways link up existing quiet streets and don't need a lot of specific cycle infrastructure. They can be less of a race track than the superhighways and attract more leisure cycling. But the fact that I am ignorant shows they are failing if they are not well publicised and worse still have poor signage, which is very common on cycle routes. Sad that they are not on Google maps too. This is a TfL and government issue and third sector - Sustrans - less so the boroughs although Hammersmith and Fulham, and Wandsworth, tend to be the bad apples

[Abe_froeman]

Quietway 7 is a useful as is the new cycle route that goes from 148 Chinese restaurant to Kwik Fit.

[Spartacus]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> Quietway 7 is a useful as is the new cycle route

> that goes from 148 Chinese restaurant to Kwik Fit.

So you can eat enough to burst a tyre then get said tyre fixed after

I can see the song

You can't get fatter then a wonton fitter

[heartblock]

The Dutch estate parking at the back is always half empty and the on street parking has reduced since the parking fee, one of the street parking on one side of the road could easily be removed and the pavement widened to be a pedestrian/ cycle ?lane?, this lane could also go down Calton and Townley and the LTN at the top of Calton removed. The half used Dutch Estate parking could easily take some overflow from EDG resedential cars.

Encouraging cycling in this area is more helpful than diverting even more traffic on EDG as the LTNs currently do.

[Metallic]

Anyone had the leaflet from Dulwich Alliance through their door?

[Spartacus]

Metallic Wrote:

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

> Anyone had the leaflet from Dulwich Alliance

> through their door?

Can you scan / photo it and post it if you have ?

[Bicknell]

@Spartacus Its all on theewebsite www.dulwichalliance.org

[malumbu]

Disappointed that the alliance included this:

Are those against the current closures anti-cyclist and pro-car?

No. That?s just propaganda ? a way of trying to set up division. We are all in favour of reducing traffic and increasing safety for both cyclists and pedestrians across the area as a whole.

Some against LTNs will be anti bike. Don't think it helps the cause using the words above and ironically is divisive - which isn't the intention of the campaign.

[heartblock]

Can?t sign in to sign the petition, although I can sign into mySouthwark... so if that is happening to me there may be many who want to sign...who can?t.