LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[malumbu]

Pleased to see so much interest in cycling amongst you posting on this thread. I know Rocks has a bike, what about the rest of you? As I have posted elsewhere once organised trips start again you should come out on a social ride with Southwark Cyclists one Saturday morning. Advertised on the What's On part of this site.

It was good to do some commuting last week for the first time for ages last week. I was concerned of course that there would be massive congestion - but Underhill was relatively quiet, and the Rye no worse than pre-lockdown.

So all in all very positive.

[first mate]

I wonder if skateboard wheels are counted too? It would be useful to find out for sure what the monitoring strips on Melbourne are for?

[northernmonkey]

Reopen Melbourne has an agenda and along with One Dulwich, discrediting any upcoming data in case its not supportive of their aims helps this agenda.

I've no idea if the strips on the roads count bikes as effectively as cars, sure someone else will know but the fact there aren't any inside 'Dulwich Square' indicates perhaps not?

The 'evidence' posted by Grove Reopen seemed to be some people cycling on Grove Vale and turning into Melbourne Grove. Even they didn't claim that there were groups of cyclists travelling over 'several times' as is being stated above.

Also @legalalien - the strips are down for a set period - so there isn't a 'count day' as far as I know.

Finally - I'm a member of LCC (mainly for the public liability insurance / legal assistance you get when you join as I cycle on the road with my kids). Perhaps I missed the call to arms to cycle round the strips, perhaps it was a set group or perhaps it just never happened?

[Rockets]

And I can't imagine anyone would be foolish enough to think that cycling over a monitoring strip repeatedly would be able to influence what is a motor vehicle count. At the end of the day it doesn't matter if 1 million bikes cycled over it - if the count determines that cars are being displaced and congestion and pollution have increased on the roads around the LTNs then it doesn't matter how many bike journeys are being made.

It is going to be really interesting to see how the council presents the data it is currently collating.

I do think it is ironic that the council claimed they could not afford to monitor when these closures went in (well except the monitoring they put in place within the LTN area) yet now, with lockdown starting to lift, they have been able to carpet bomb monitoring strips all over the area. It will be fascinating to see the monitoring period they present in the report. Schools are starting to close now for Easter - so it will be interesting to see how selective the council is in the time periods presented.

[northernmonkey]

'when you hear hooves, think horse, not zebra'

Whilst I don't disagree that the monitoring strips process has been chaotic, I'm not sure I can jump to deliberate misinformation by the council. General chaotic processes more likely.

[malumbu]

Northermonkey, no need to defend being a member of LCC. Most people in membership organisations are passive, but LCC has hardly been taken over by the Red Brigade or Baader Meninhof. LCC and its regional groups are pretty transparent. Although maybe they are using thought waves to summon up a rentamob of cyclists. Can others posting here get real?

[alice]

The are real concerns about LCC.

[exdulwicher]

Maybe Ex- can confirm but do those monitoring strips register cyclists, I thought they would only be triggered by something as heavy as a car.

Yes, there's a fair bit of stuff online about their use - they can differentiate between bicycles and other vehicles. Depending on the exact model of the counter being used and the weight / speed of the bike going over it they may sometimes undercount but that can be corrected by doing a manual count over a defined period and comparing it to the automated count and then applying a correction factor.

There were reports on Twitter of groups of cyclists repeatedly cycling over the monitor strips (they were doubling back on themselves several times)

This urban myth is popular amongst cab drivers too, not a surprise that the various One... groups have picked up on it.

[alice]

but equally couldnt the myth be that permanent modal change has happened because of LTNs.

Covid changed everything,

[Spartacus]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

>

> There were reports on Twitter of groups of

> cyclists repeatedly cycling over the monitor

> strips (they were doubling back on themselves

> several times)

>

> This urban myth is popular amongst cab drivers

> too, not a surprise that the various One... groups

> have picked up on it.

This is one of the tweets that I think is being discussed about cyclists trying to "adjust" the count.

I can't vouch if it's true or not, but equally I can't dismissing as myth

[Rockets]

I think the two things everyone can agree on are this:

1) There are more cyclists on the roads at the moment (a good thing)

2) There is more congestion on roads surrounding the LTNs (a bad thing)

The question the council has to answer is how much the LTNs are contributing to both.

The most worrying thing for me is how the council's narrative on this has now changed in regard to traffic volume, displacement and pollution and a few things Cllr McAsh posted here that are a big red flag on the subtle, but incredibly important, change to their narrative.

His postings are below and notice the change in the last post.

Oct 14th 2020

The two key criteria are air pollution and traffic volume. Put simply, if these two measures are not reduced across the whole area then the scheme has failed. It is not enough to displace the traffic - we want to reduce it overall.

But even if air pollution and traffic volume decrease across the board, it matters how it is distributed. I want to see a social justice approach to the analysis. No matter what we do there will inevitably be some pollution and traffic. I want this to be shared equitably: protecting schools, nurseries and hospitals above all else; and not allowing the negative effects of air pollution to fall on those least able to bear them.

Feb 17th 2021

The LTNs are supposed to reduce traffic overall, by making cycling and walking safer and more pleasant and by making car journeys a little less convenient. The objective is not to shift traffic around, but to reduce its total volume. There's loads of evidence to support this approach but it's clear that the effects depend on local conditions. If indeed the schemes have led to increased traffic then they are not successful. That's what we need to know more about.

Feb 23rd 2021

In the scenario where traffic decreases overall (a key objective of the schemes) but at the cost of other problems (ie congestion on specific roads) we would need to weigh one against the other.

Has anyone seen the council share how they are going to assess the impact? Am I to presume that the delayed review they are now saying will be published in May will be the definitive "this was a success/was not a success" document. If so, does anyone know what the criteria for each are and should the council not be sharing that with us ahead of publication.

From Cllr McAsh's posts I wonder if the council has been, ahem, refining, the criteria for success?

BTW has anyone else been received the flyers for the review outside of the originally published review area? We haven't had ours yet.

[Metallic]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Northermonkey, no need to defend being a member of

> LCC. Most people in membership organisations are

> passive, but LCC has hardly been taken over by the

> Red Brigade or Baader Meninhof. LCC and its

> regional groups are pretty transparent. Although

> maybe they are using thought waves to summon up a

> rentamob of cyclists. Can others posting here get

> real?

You have to be joking! There is an inner group, you hear about it all the while. Simon Still may be out for the moment but there's plenty of others.

[northernmonkey]

That is genuinely a picture of someone cycling from Grove Vale to Melbourne Grove and a lot of conjecture without any actual evidence.

Not sure why looking at that would make you reach any conclusions at all?

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> -----

> >

> > There were reports on Twitter of groups of

> > cyclists repeatedly cycling over the monitor

> > strips (they were doubling back on themselves

> > several times)

> >

> > This urban myth is popular amongst cab drivers

> > too, not a surprise that the various One...

> groups

> > have picked up on it.

>

> This is one of the tweets that I think is being

> discussed about cyclists trying to "adjust" the

> count.

>

> https://twitter.com/GroveReopen/status/13757624616

> 47900674?s=19

>

> I can't vouch if it's true or not, but equally I

> can't dismissing as myth

[redpost]

Urgent message from Ministry of the Obvious:

Perhaps they just took a wrong turn or got lost?

That would explain the embarassed look

[Spartacus]

True , as I said it is one of the posts that are being discussed and as such can't confirm or dismiss how true it is, but equally I can't off hand (like some) say it's an urban myth

It does however, raise the question of how to validate the cyclist count when the council monitors the ltn roads.

If they use just strips then they can be tricked by riding back and forth

If visual counting, then this should be done on random days and times to ensure that false positives can't be drawn if the pro lobby know in advance and flood the area with out of area mates.

It has to be done in such a way that the true usage figure is captured and not false peaks or troughs that could skew the data.

[exdulwicher]

It does however, raise the question of how to validate the cyclist count when the council monitors the ltn roads.

If they use just strips then they can be tricked by riding back and forth

That is just not happening. There are not squadrons of cyclists out there riding back and forth, up and down a road for the fairly simple reasons that people have far better things to do and most people barely even notice the tube counters never mind actively ride back and forth over them!

If visual counting, then this should be done on random days and times to ensure that false positives can't be drawn if the pro lobby know in advance and flood the area with out of area mates.

I have never heard of anywhere posting out info publicly to say: "we are going to be counting cars/bikes/trucks/people along this road between 10am and 11am on Thursday, feel free to pop along".

A lot of the time, counts are just done off CCTV - that way you can just pull footage for an hour, count it all up, repeat as often as needed. Some of the more modern systems will even identify vehicles / bikes for you and log it automatically. Easy work for the intern... ;-)

Occasionally you might have cause to go and put one of those council CCTV vans out there for an hour or (last resort) have someone sitting there with a pen and paper.

I can't believe I'm even replying to that level of conspiracy theory - the idea that someone from LCC or Southwark Cyclists is phoning all their mates going "quick, there's someone sitting on Calton Avenue counting bikes, get your lycra on, bring the kids, we'll ride up and down for an hour!"

[northernmonkey]

> It does however, raise the question of how to

> validate the cyclist count when the council

> monitors the ltn roads.

Really - it doesn't! Just because someone with an agenda posts a conspiracy theory doesn't mean anyone has to answer questions as to how to address the conspiracy that has been made up!

Can't believe I'm even trying to comment on the ridiculous Grove Reopen tweet, but Lane 8 on MG is a bit of a cyclist hang out in the mornings - and perhaps it wasn't open so someone cycled up and came straight back out? Or yes, potentially took a wrong turning!

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> True , as I said it is one of the posts that are

> being discussed and as such can't confirm or

> dismiss how true it is, but equally I can't off

> hand (like some) say it's an urban myth

>

> It does however, raise the question of how to

> validate the cyclist count when the council

> monitors the ltn roads.

>

> If they use just strips then they can be tricked

> by riding back and forth

>

> If visual counting, then this should be done on

> random days and times to ensure that false

> positives can't be drawn if the pro lobby know in

> advance and flood the area with out of area

> mates.

>

> It has to be done in such a way that the true

> usage figure is captured and not false peaks or

> troughs that could skew the data.

[alice]

The defensive posturing above is alarming.

Some LTNs have worked well but those in Dulwich have not.

For the benefits to outweigh the negatives there would have to be an improvement in public transport alongside a real permanent increase (?)in cycling.

[Spartacus]

Ex

I didn't say it was happening, what I am simply stating is that any count / monitoring has to be validated, open and not subject to abuse.

The council themselves state in their brochure on the ed ltn assessment that they will be counting cyclists and with enough warning the number of people cycling on count days could skew the results.

We've seen the defensive position of the pro lobby over this , including , but not limited to , calling for boycotting of shops that disagree with them so it appears nothing is off the table.

But your history on here suggests that you have an agenda and when it's questioned you accuse that poster of wearing a tin foil helmet in case cyclists are aliens (and yes that is tongue in cheek before you say I never said that) 😱

The simple other truth is we all saw how the council managed the data to implement the CPZ around the station so all that I'm asking for here is fair, validated and unmanipulated data. Otherwise if it's anything other there will be a public outcry

[malumbu]

Alice - what are your issues with LCC (and perhaps cyclists as a whole)? As a long time member of LCC I have yet to see a militant wing. If there was such a thing they'd haemorrhage members.

And perhaps you are missing some of the point of LTNs - reducing traffic - and this includes bringing in some inconvenience. So eventually some will change their behaviour. We are stuck with this government for some time, so I don't see any about turn in policy in taking greater leadership and making some difficult, and no doubt unpopular decisions, in reducing emissions and reversing car culture.

A general plea is can people stop throwing round terms like 'defensive'. Accusations that rentacycle (that's my take on the term rentamob, those who turn up at protests to cause havoc) just appear ludicrous. That's hardly me being defensive.

[Rockets]

I think this thread quite aptly demonstrates the monster the council has created for itself and how tough this is for them to manage now. The problems are born from their lack of proper communication and engagement on the LTNs and their historical cosy relationship with lobby groups in favour of the closures.

And let me be clear, I don't for one minute think there are organised groups of cyclists repeatedly riding over monitoring strips in the hope that they will convince the council to keep the LTNs. If there are individual cyclists doing so then they are only fooling themselves and opening themselves and the council's process up for further scrutiny - all you need is a video of a cyclist doing so and it massively undermines the credibility of any data on cycle use collected by the council during the whole of the monitoring process.

I do, however, think that the council, and councillors, have realised that there is something other than a small vocal minority (their words not mine) who oppose these measures across the area and are now having to play the political balancing act of trying to appease 1) the advocates who they actively engaged with to get this thing moving 2) those who oppose the measures and may cost them their seats in the next council election 3) their own party's (or at least local leadership of the party) ideology and strategic plan.

Throw into the mix the fact that their every move is now being watched and scrutinised by many local residents, (because trust has been eroded), and you can see that they have created a complete mess for themselves. The whole they have dug for themselves gets deeper every time they do or say something.

At the end of the day they won't be able to keep everyone happy - so something will have to budge.

[ab29]

I would not be surprised at all if cyclists are riding back and forth to make an impression that there are plenty of them.

This whole LTN idea is so utterly stupid that it is beyond comprehension - a handful of people who live on roads such as Calton Av benefit from it and thousands are being punished. Southwark council has completely lost touch with their constituents, pandering to a small group of (predominantly) middle age males obsessed with cycling who think(as always) they can dictated how everyone else should live. What is it that the council get out of it - money? Other forms of support?

I'm so fed up that I will vote anyone who promises to remove this atrocious scheme - even f it its a Tory.

[Otto2]

Middle aged men, lycra, LCC members...

The most joyous thing I have seen during this pandemic is a huge surge in all kinds of cyclists outside of the above. Most especially love the over 50's women I see buzzing about. And of course, the children. There are so many different types of cyclists now -- most relevant to this conversation is the big increase in parents who are cycling and walking their children to school. As a parent that traversed Calton Avenue with school children with lots of cars backed up pre-ltn, I can only say it is a wonderful street to have opened up for both walkers and cyclists - whether for a school run or to just go down to the park. It does not just benefit those who live there by any means.

[DulwichCentral]

Otto I agree - what I see is loads more kids cycling to school, even really tiny children, and people cycling through the area - a real mix of people all ages shapes and sizes. It's the same in central London. On the Mall the other day I saw a group all with toddlers on their bikes singing and the toddlers were laughing. Every bike lane was full of people on bikes - bike traffic jams at the lights! It's great :)

[ab29]

And what about everyone else - people living on Lordship Lane for instance, like me - why do you think it is ok to treat me and my family like second class citizens? Why do you think it is ok for me and my family to put up with more noise and more air pollution? Because you are not affected then everything is ok - right?

This complete lack of empathy and the ability to put yourself in someone else's shoes - it is what is really so very sad on this thread here.

DulwichCentral Wrote:

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

> Otto I agree - what I see is loads more kids

> cycling to school, even really tiny children, and

> people cycling through the area - a real mix of

> people all ages shapes and sizes. It's the same in

> central London. On the Mall the other day I saw a

> group all with toddlers on their bikes singing and

> the toddlers were laughing. Every bike lane was

> full of people on bikes - bike traffic jams at the

> lights! It's great :)