LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Penguin68]

But ex- wouldn't it be nice if the council put as much effort into trying to change the mush larger sources of emissions and pollution beyond cars - they seem to be focussing an unprecented level of energy and attention on the private car and private car owner when much bigger issues remain - 79% of the problem comes from buildings.

To be fair to the council - that figure is about CO2 emissions and greenhouse gases and not about the emissions which directly cause ill-health. Two entirely separate issues are contained here - 'clean breathable air' - which is what I think the traffic restrictions are on about - even where the actions are wholly misplaced and even counter productive - forcing more polluted air into areas already badly polluted - whereas the 'statistic' about houses addresses a different problem - global warming which may be long term bad for health but which is not a short term issue for the council. CO2 is necessary (even vital) to life as we know it - without it we would have no vegetation - and, breathed in as part of normal circulating air it is entirely harmless to health. We breathe out CO2 naturally. CO2 in and of itself is not a pollutant - it is its effect as a greenhouse gas (nothing really to do with the air we breathe) which is the issue here.

Houses are a 'source' of CO2 because of the power needed to heat them. If we had entirely nuclear sourced power that wouldn't be nearly so much an issue, as that power is 'CO2 clean' energy.

[Rockets]

I know the other thread has been locked but interesting that the East Dulwich Grove Residents Association did their own research, via a 3rd party, to poll residents on their views on the closures.

I am also aware something similar has been done on roads like Beauval, Woodwarde, Dovercourt and, again, the results are overwhelming against the closures.

The fact residents are having to do this suggests that there is zero confidence that the council are going to be fair and transparent with their review.

[DuncanW]

Is there also the risk that it's a self-selecting cohort so not representative of the wider community? Residents of EDG undoubtedly deserve to have their voices heard, but I note that over half are either in favour or indifferent to the closures, or didn't feel strongly enough to participate in the survey (=indifferent?)

It's not compelling stuff!

[Penguin68]

Is there also the risk that it's a self-selecting cohort so not representative of the wider community?

Absolutely none of the 'surveys' or 'consultations' undertaken for this particular cause, from either or any side, would meet the criteria for sample selection for market, social or academic research. Or unbiased questions, or analysis, or scrutiny (probably).

The data collections and presentation throughout is political flim-flam to prove (or at least to shout) a point.

(Even where some, perhaps, of the other surveys prayed-in-aid to support cases were better designed and executed).

[Bicknell]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Is there also the risk that it's a self-selecting

> cohort so not representative of the wider

> community? Residents of EDG undoubtedly deserve to

> have their voices heard, but I note that over half

> are either in favour or indifferent to the

> closures, or didn't feel strongly enough to

> participate in the survey (=indifferent?)

>

> It's not compelling stuff!

maybe some people too frightened to take part. so much bad feeling you cant blame them.

at least good balance to what southwrk comes up with

dont think meant to be wider comunity -just what teh road thinks

agree @penguin68 but people trying to do thier best. no confidence in council anymore

[DuncanW]

To the point that some may feel too frightened to participate in the survey, Siduhe posted on the now locked thread that responses were gathered either on the doorstep, by email, online questionnaire or by returning on a postcard.

I struggle to believe that 111 households were too frightened to fill out an online questionnaire - that would seem unlikely, no?

[legalalien]

The reconstituted Environment Scrutiny Commission meets next Tuesday, will be interesting to see whether the dynamic changes with new personnel ( will they continue to co-opt Living Streets? Jeremy Leach and allow him such a strong voice at the table (perhaps not, given the shift in focus for this year?s work plan). One of the tasks is to finalise part 2 of the Air Quality Report, will be interesting to see whether the outgoing chair (Cllr Ochere)?s comments at the last meeting that he didn?t think the committee could include things without evidence will hold sway.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7159

They?re focusing on community energy this year which I guess explains Cllr Newens chairmanship as she is involved in local community energy company SE24. https://www.se24.co.uk/.

[edg2016]

125 responses out of 236 households represents a 90% confidence level. I imagine this is a higher response rate and confidence level than the Council?s consultation will receive.

Here?s the link to the survey results for those who may have missed it on the now locked thread: https://eastdulwichgrove.com

The results of the independent survey show that the residents of EDG are overwhelmingly against making the temporary road closures and traffic restrictions in Dulwich permanent. Not at all surprising given that the LTNs have displaced traffic and therefore increased pollution on the road.

[northernmonkey]

Unfortunately your website also mentions 'queueing traffic night and day' so its hard to take it as an objective view at all.

I agree that there are certain times of day that traffic is queueing on East Dulwich Grove. On the section between Lordship Lane and Townley this has always been the case around 8-8:30 and that continues. By 8:30/45 most days it is clear. There are similar peaks in the evening. The rest of the day speeding is more of an issue than queueing traffic.

I have no opinion on the section between Townley and Red Post Hill as I don't have experience of walking along there at rush hours.

[Earl Aelfheah]

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Unfortunately your website also mentions 'queueing

> traffic night and day' so its hard to take it as

> an objective view at all.

>

> I agree that there are certain times of day that

> traffic is queueing on East Dulwich Grove. On the

> section between Lordship Lane and Townley this has

> always been the case around 8-8:30 and that

> continues. By 8:30/45 most days it is clear.

> There are similar peaks in the evening. The rest

> of the day speeding is more of an issue than

> queueing traffic.

>

> I have no opinion on the section between Townley

> and Red Post Hill as I don't have experience of

> walking along there at rush hours.

This ^

[Earl Aelfheah]

But if you encourage cars everywhere it ensures 'clean air for all' right?

[alice]

Everybody knows the Dulwich LTNs are unfair. They place the burden of displaced traffic in the roads least able to carry it because of bus routes.

[Rockets]

I see "interim" the monitoring data has been published by the council.....should make some interesting weekend reading. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

I think even the most ardent supporter of the LTNs might even be tempted to question the council's numbers......Lordship Lane traffic down 22% and Croxted Road traffic down 14% apparently...........

And apparently traffic on internal roads around the whole of East Dulwich is down 79%....

Cycling is up (not surprisingly) but the claim of an increase of 1,160 cycles per day along Calton/Dulwich Village probably needs closer scrutiny as it seems very high.

What is the council smoking.......?

[Spartacus]

Just received this

Dear all,

Thank you for your continued engagement with our Review of the road schemes in Dulwich Village, East Dulwich and Champion Hill.

Thousands of residents have already completed the consultation which can be found at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/dulwichstreetspacereview We want to allow some extra time for those who have not yet completed it, so we are extending the deadline to Sunday 18th July.

We have also published a report on the monitoring data that we have obtained over the past couple of months. You can view this at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/dulwichstreetspacereview . We are going to hold an extra community meeting to discuss the data and what it tells us about the road schemes, on Tuesday 13th July 6pm.

This will be an online meeting ? to register for the meeting please go to https://dulwichreviewdata.eventbrite.co.uk

Kind regards,

Southwark Highways

[heartblock]

Back...for one comment..so it isn't my PERCEPTION! from data by pro-LTN Southwark......

"Increases in flows have been observed on East Dulwich Grove, Burbage Road, Zenoria Street and Dovercourt Road, the largest of these being +27% on East Dulwich Grove (East). These increases are higher than those recorded in March 2020 at the same sites"

but..but...but Dulwich Clean Air...and others said it was my perception.. I didn't know what I was talking about and from one Twitter account I was 'vile'

[heartblock]

Forgive me one more from Southwark's monitoring data.....Bus transit time - Increased in both directions on East Dulwich Grove.

So maybe all the posters and all the responses from EDG residents is actually in reaction to increases in car pollution and poor bus services because of the 5 LTNs pouring traffic onto our school, health centre and residential road.

[heartblock]

Oh...look! More traffic... yet.. CAD said I was lying!

[legalalien]

only had a preliminary look but I have a question as to exactly how pre-implementation data has mysteriously been "adjusted" to April 2019 levels when in some cases there is no pre-implementation data. Also why compare winter school term time in Calton with spring Easter holiday time?

Devil will be in the detail. Hopefully some people with better stats skills than me can tell me what is going on....

[legalalien]

Loads of questions from councillors at the upcoming Members? question time at the upcoming Council Assembly, some the kind of friendly questions you get from Tory back benchers at PMQs, others more challenging.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/b50013441/Supplemental%20Agenda%20No.%202%20Wednesday%2014-Jul-2021%2019.00%20Council%20Assembly.pdf?T=9

Cllr Leeming asking about air quality and Cllr Mills about cycle routes on Peckham Rye East, among others.

[legalalien]

Here?s the draft Air Quality scrutiny report Part 2 due to be considered / signed off at next week?s Commission meeting

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s100159/Air%20Quality%20Part%20Two%20scrutiny%20review%20report%20draft.pdf

[Peckham Park]

How the F**k in air quality report do they think they can ?Viability testing of the target to reduce traffic by 90% by 2030?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> I see "interim" the monitoring data has been

> published by the council.....should make some

> interesting weekend reading.

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/i

> mproving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

>

> I think even the most ardent supporter of the LTNs

> might even be tempted to question the council's

> numbers......Lordship Lane traffic down 22% and

> Croxted Road traffic down 14%

> apparently...........

>

> And apparently traffic on internal roads around

> the whole of East Dulwich is down 79%....

>

> Cycling is up (not surprisingly) but the claim of

> an increase of 1,160 cycles per day along

> Calton/Dulwich Village probably needs closer

> scrutiny as it seems very high.

>

> What is the council smoking.......?

Do you question the fact that cycling is up and traffic is down, or just the degree to which this is true?

You appear to have now accepted that removing cars from some areas does encourage cycling (?unsurprisingly?). Progress of sorts

[Earl Aelfheah]

Turns out that restricting car use does reduce car use and encourage active travel. Like almost every single study shows. Who?d have thunk it?

Let?s roll it all back and make driving around locally as easy as possible though. In the name of the environment.

[legalalien]

I think I?d find it more helpful to assess the timed closures if the council could split out the weekday traffic data (when the measures are in place) from the weekend data. I imagine the weekend data smooths out the peaks and troughs a bit? It would also help enable people to understand the breakdown between the increase in commuter and school travel by cycle and weekend leisure cycling.

[Rockets]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I see "interim" the monitoring data has been

> > published by the council.....should make some

> > interesting weekend reading.

> >

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/i

>

> >

> mproving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

> >

> > I think even the most ardent supporter of the

> LTNs

> > might even be tempted to question the council's

> > numbers......Lordship Lane traffic down 22% and

> > Croxted Road traffic down 14%

> > apparently...........

> >

> > And apparently traffic on internal roads around

> > the whole of East Dulwich is down 79%....

> >

> > Cycling is up (not surprisingly) but the claim

> of

> > an increase of 1,160 cycles per day along

> > Calton/Dulwich Village probably needs closer

> > scrutiny as it seems very high.

> >

> > What is the council smoking.......?

>

> Do you question the fact that cycling is up and

> traffic is down, or just the degree to which this

> is true?

>

> You appear to have now accepted that removing cars

> from some areas does encourage cycling

> (?unsurprisingly?). Progress of sorts

Rahx3 - yes I am questioning the numbers. Let me ask you this do you really that think traffic on Lordship Lane is down 22?

I know you won't give a straight answer (I am still awaiting a response to my question on Rachel Aldred and the clear conflict of interest) but no-one could really assert that traffic is down significantly on Lordship Lane or that 1,100 more cycle journeys are happening on Calton every day - wasn't the cycle count by Goodman about 300 and those numbers were counting back and forth journeys as children were taken to and from school?

That's some increase from those figures. It appears there is something odd going on here (not surprisingly).

Ex- perhaps you can take a look. BTW Ex- what impact does stationery traffic have on monitoring strips? I did hear that councils move them to places where there is queueing traffic so they are not triggered if they want lower numbers.