LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[northernmonkey]

Ok - so lets assume that the ULEZ makes a huge difference to emissions. Suspending any comments on that, how would it help with creating safe routes for walking and cycling?

[Penguin68]

Pavements are safe routes for walking. The huge widths instituted at the height of the pandemic are almost certainly unnecessary on health grounds. Release road widths back to vehicle, from pedestrian, usage and there's probably space enough for cycles. The idea that LTN areas provide a 'cycle route' that leads anywhere is very moot. They aren't really linked in that way.

[ab29]

NorthernMonkey.

WHERE exactly do you want these 'safe routes for walking...' to be created? This is zone 3 in central London and space is rather limited.

I work at GSTT and I used to walk to the hospital - 2 hrs one way roughly so 4 hrs walking per day - no roads had to be closed for me to do so.

I worked from home today (7-3 and I spent most of the day in my bathroom because of the noise (meetings) - the traffic has been much, much worst ever since the so-called "LTNs" were introduced; although; it's ben a little bit better recently because of the summer holiday (Thursday and weekends are hell though).

You clearly live in a parallel universe - you are welcome to come to my place to see what coping with the road closures really means.

[northernmonkey]

Where do i want safe routes for walking - well ideally everywhere, but specifically around schools and providing alternative routes through neighborhoods. I also want safe routes for cycling.

I agree there isn't much space because so much of our public space has been given over to a minority who drive over the years. We need to roll back a position where we have made driving in private vehicles the most convenient option for people within cities.

[ab29]

And what is a plan for the "meantime', while we await these "everywhere walking spaces"?(I do not mention cyclists as I truly despise them because of the LTNS) - gassing people that happen to live on LL, Croxted, EDG etc to death with extra car fumes?

[northernmonkey]

I don't think that having an ongoing conversation with someone who claims to 'despise' an entire group of people who chose to travel in a particular way is helpful. Why despise cyclists - its the drivers going past your home which seem to be the problem!

Also - if you feelings towards cyclists have reached 'despise' please seek help / counselling and I sincerely hope you don't drive a car.

[ab29]

NorthernMonkey: as I said before - you clearly live in a parallel universe; - you are welcome to come to my place to see what coping with the road closures introduced by the Southwark Council really means.

Lol. Many of my friends cycle and I cycle too (although not in London).

I have never owned a car - I do not even have a driving licence. Although, with what the Southwark Council has done (=LTN), I am very close to say " to hell with it all" and start driving - and believe me, many other people are too.

And this question still stands: what is a plan for the "meantime', while we await these "everywhere walking & cycling spaces"?

Gassing people that happen to live on LL, Croxted, EDG etc to death with extra car fumes?

Ghandi said that "The measure of a civilization is how it treats its weakest members.? - well, this certainly is not the Southwark council policy.

[northernmonkey]

Ghandi probably had some words about people claiming to 'despise' an entire group of people based on one particular characteristic too...

Anyway, back on topic. Monitoring data showed an overall fall on Lordship Lane. More data expected in coming weeks hopefully split out in a more detailed way.

[legalalien]

This is what is so odd. I don?t drive either, and have mainly walked (and sometimes cycled) during the nearly 15 years I?ve been here - including school runs on some of the roads now being filtered - without any problem at all. Which I guess is why I don?t appreciate the upside of LTNs as much as some others who are making behavioural change. The walking experience locally has worsened overall for me due to air pollution/ noise/ traffic and cycles on pavements on key walking routes, so am with ab29 on that.

[heartblock]

The 3 friends who I know that cycle to work ... all at different London Hospitals say they feel their commute to and from work is more dangerous and more polluted since the LTNs went in.....

[ab29]

@NorthernMonkey: but I live on Lordship Lane - I have been in my current place for about seven years. I have all the data I need - before the LTNs and after (windows in my flat through which I can see and hear the traffic; and my own eyes & ears(obviously)).

Do you live on Lordship Lane, Croxted Road, East Dulwich Grove, Underhill Road, Melford Road?

As I said before, I am happy to meet in person; happy to organise a meeting with people in the area (in case you thought I am biased), if you really want to know what the residents of Lordship Lane really think about the road closures.

[KidKruger]

Why are they monitoring only main road routes when much of the traffic has found workarounds to (try to) avoid the increased congestion ?

'Less traffic' could literally be down to the congestion forcing drivers off the main routes !

The sample set is far from complete if the intention is to identify what has happened to the traffic.

Crystal Palace Rd for instance is worse than before LTNs and is actually dangerous during 'rough hours'.

Where did this increase originate from ?

[tomszekeres]

@ab29 - I live on Lordship Lane too, also seven years, and when I look out my window, to me the traffic is the same as it was before the pandemic. It's gone back to normal as far as I can tell (which is still too much, in my humble opinion).

Maybe I'm wrong though.

Or maybe you're wrong.

This is why we need proper, robust data to tell us what has *actually* happened. Not anecdotes from individuals, with all our biases, no offence to either you or me. :)

And using that data, the comparison we make have to be between what has happened here, and what happened in similar places that either don't have an LTN, or where an LTN got introduced and then withdrawn. That's the only meaningful comparison that can be made, really.

[ab29]

I am not wrong - please speak for yourself.

I'm close to Grove Tavern; the traffc has been much worst since the introduction of the so-called LTNs, with exception of half-terms and other holidays. As I said, I am happy to meet and/or organise a meeting with people in the area to discuss / get opinions.

[Bicknell]

tomszekeres Wrote:

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

> @ab29 - I live on Lordship Lane too, also seven

> years, and when I look out my window, to me the

> traffic is the same as it was before the pandemic.

> It's gone back to normal as far as I can tell

> (which is still too much, in my humble opinion).

>

> Maybe I'm wrong though.

>

> Or maybe you're wrong.

>

> This is why we need proper, robust data to tell us

> what has *actually* happened. Not anecdotes from

> individuals, with all our biases, no offence to

> either you or me. :)

>

> And using that data, the comparison we make have

> to be between what has happened here, and what

> happened in similar places that either don't have

> an LTN, or where an LTN got introduced and then

> withdrawn. That's the only meaningful comparison

> that can be made, really.

one of teh problems is that southwark has not given raw data or methodogy. so not easy for people to make up thier minds if they agree. you can present fgures in diffrent ways

also @tomszekeres dont compare duwlich to other areas unless public trnsport the same. An area wiyth eg a tube cannot be cmpared with dlwich.

[ab29]

It really infuriates me - this omnipresent dictate of 'data'! People who have no idea about others experience feel entitled to reprimand them from the depths of their armchairs - because of 'data'!

How about we start listen to people and their experience for a change.

[malumbu]

Lebanums Wrote:

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

> I don't believe the answer is to make it difficult for private car ownership. Make other options more

> attractive. There is no longer direct access to a train station for those of us who live away from

> LL or on the Peckham Rye side. The request to extend the 63 to Honor Oak Park has been requested

> for years, but nothing has happened, there is no longer access to Peckham Rye. What are we supposed

> to do?

>

Sadly you do have to have harsher measures to discourage drivers as for many this is what it takes to reduce the number of journeys. That's not to say improved public transport, safer walking and cycling aren't important, or that current measures are perfect (not commenting on the current LTN).

In 2017 the nudge unit aka Behavioural Insights Team did some work with the Heathrow estates team (Heathrow is like a town in its own right and there are a wide number of businesses that go beyond aviation). You have a fairly well defined shift pattern, but most commute in a single occupancy vehicle. Interventions included making car sharing more convenient, but in terms of pick ups but going as far as whether you drove with the radio on, and what station.

Results were pretty disappointing. "A range of light touch interventions were trialled, and many of them did not yield a significant effect. This highlights the complex challenge of increasing sustainable travel of staff, using low cost behavioural measures" [my further comment, some measures weren financially attractive]

Discouraging driving can be seen as financial incentives to those reducing their carbon footprint/pollution emissions in paying less to the government than currently through vehicle excise duty (road user charging). There could be sweeteners/rewards but not sure who should pay for these, as those who don't drive would essentially be subsidising this.

It's a long and detailed report but here is one of the interesting conclusions:

The divergence between stated preferences and observed behaviour

This project provided further evidence of the gap between attitudes and observed behaviours and

should reaffirm to practitioners that they should not to take self-reported opinions, especially those

reported to employers, at face value when devising transport interventions. The gap between stated

preferences and observed behaviour is a well-documented phenomenon which was reaffirmed by

this project the magnitude of difference surprised us.

Despite nearly the majority of drivers expressing that they would car share if they could find

someone with a similar shift pattern who lives near them, registration rates for the car sharing

scheme were unexpectedly low.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/586376/sustainable-travel-evaluation-of-low-cost-workplace-interventions.pdf

Interventions included a free bus pass, but this had limited uptake, and few continued to use the bus after the offer ended.

[Rockets]

Does anyone, on either side of the debate, really believe the council when they claim traffic has reduced by 22% on Lordship Lane? Are they just plucking numbers out of the air or have they manipulated the data collection to such an extent that it is delivering fantasy results and they think people are stupid enough to believe it? There is not a chance that traffic has reduced by nearly a quarter on Lordship Lane and even the most ardent pro-campaigner knows that.

And on the subject of safe routes I used to cycle to Hammersmith everyday, long before the cult of cycling took off, and I found very safe routes to do so. They are not hard to find. Granted we need to do more but cycle campaigners are going to have to understand that they are going to have to coexist with every other form of transport and are going to have to accept that cycling is not the only form of transportation in this city.

I do also think cycle campaigners may need to think about engaging some PR types as they do seem to be the new estate agents and are getting a pretty terrible reputation. Even cycle club members I know moan about other cyclists and their behaviour!

[spider69]

ab29 Wrote:

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

> It really infuriates me - this omnipresent dictate

> of 'data'! People who have no idea about others

> experience feel entitled to reprimand them from

> the depths of their armchairs - because of

> 'data'!

>

> How about we start listen to people and their

> experience for a change.

If they hear the truth their cosy little world and we know best will collapse

[Rockets]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Lebanums Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I don't believe the answer is to make it

> difficult for private car ownership. Make other

> options more

> > attractive. There is no longer direct access to

> a train station for those of us who live away

> from

> > LL or on the Peckham Rye side. The request to

> extend the 63 to Honor Oak Park has been

> requested

> > for years, but nothing has happened, there is no

> longer access to Peckham Rye. What are we

> supposed

> > to do?

> >

>

> Sadly you do have to have harsher measures to

> discourage drivers as for many this is what it

> takes to reduce the number of journeys. That's

> not to say improved public transport, safer

> walking and cycling aren't important, or that

> current measures are perfect (not commenting on

> the current LTN).

>

> In 2017 the nudge unit aka Behavioural Insights

> Team did some work with the Heathrow estates team

> (Heathrow is like a town in its own right and

> there are a wide number of businesses that go

> beyond aviation). You have a fairly well defined

> shift pattern, but most commute in a single

> occupancy vehicle. Interventions included making

> car sharing more convenient, but in terms of pick

> ups but going as far as whether you drove with the

> radio on, and what station.

>

> Results were pretty disappointing. "A range of

> light touch interventions were trialled, and many

> of them did not yield a significant effect. This

> highlights the complex challenge of increasing

> sustainable travel of staff, using low cost

> behavioural measures"

>

> Discouraging driving can be seen as financial

> incentives to those reducing their carbon

> footprint/pollution emissions in paying less to

> the government than currently through vehicle

> excise duty (road user charging). There could be

> sweeteners/rewards but not sure who should pay for

> these, as those who don't drive would essentially

> be subsidising this.

>

> It's a long and detailed report but here is one of

> the interesting conclusions:

>

> The divergence between stated preferences and

> observed behaviour

>

> This project provided further evidence of the gap

> between attitudes and observed behaviours and

> should reaffirm to practitioners that they should

> not to take self-reported opinions, especially

> those

> reported to employers, at face value when devising

> transport interventions. The gap between stated

> preferences and observed behaviour is a

> well-documented phenomenon which was reaffirmed

> by

> this project the magnitude of difference surprised

> us.

>

> Despite nearly the majority of drivers expressing

> that they would car share if they could find

> someone with a similar shift pattern who lives

> near them, registration rates for the car sharing

> scheme were unexpectedly low.

>

> https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/governmen

> t/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/5863

> 76/sustainable-travel-evaluation-of-low-cost-workp

> lace-interventions.pdf

>

> Interventions included a free bus pass, but this

> had limited uptake, and few continued to use the

> bus after the offer ended.

Malumbu - is there an example anywhere in the world where LTN nudge tactics like this have delivered on their stated goals?

[Rockets]

spider69 Wrote:

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

> ab29 Wrote:

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

> -----

> > It really infuriates me - this omnipresent

> dictate

> > of 'data'! People who have no idea about others

> > experience feel entitled to reprimand them from

> > the depths of their armchairs - because of

> > 'data'!

> >

> > How about we start listen to people and their

> > experience for a change.

>

> If they hear the truth their cosy little world and

> we know best will collapse

Unfortunately, it seems listening to people is becoming a continuing problem for Labour - they seem to favour pushing their own ideology over listening to what their constituents think, feel or need. It?s why they got trashed at the last election and gave us this Tory regime - they failed to listen to or engage with the people who were supposed to vote for them (they felt having a load of middle class Glastonbury goers parachuting in from Islington for a long weekend in June and singing Corbyns name at the festival was a sign that people loved him when nationally the opposite was true). It?s happening at every level and what is happening in Dulwich is merely a reflection of the terrible state of the Labour party. They have lost touch and show no interest in those that they are supposed to represent and put their own ideology ahead of the wants and needs of the people.

[malumbu]

Rocks, this was not LTN, it predates these, this was simply trying to get people to car share or travel by alternative means. Please step back, and look wider!

The study had nothing to do with Labour and was funded by a Conservative government who rightly know they need to tackle carbon emissions.

Although we haven't discussed lanes that are only for car sharers, quite big in the States. You will of course need a dual carriageway for that which I don't think we have round here!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-occupancy_vehicle_lane

Edited to correct duel with dual, to confirm I wasn't asking anyone out for a sword fight to settle our differences

[Rockets]

Malumbu - I wasn't talking about that study I meant more generally whether there was an LTN that had delivered anything close to the goals set out for them?

[exdulwicher]

There are two fundamentally opposing points here.

You're calling for data - interim data, raw data, pollution, traffic, baselines, comparisons. That's fair enough, it's only right and proper that everything gets monitored and recorded.

But then when that data is presented, it's rubbished, challenged, dismissed and in some cases personal attacks are made on the authors accusing them of bias. Accusations are made of rigging the system including ridiculous assertions that cyclists are riding round and round in circles to trip the counters.

This is in spite of the fact that the vast majority of LTN-style interventions around the world show fairly similar patterns.

The opposite, once all that data has been rubbished, is then to say that you don't need data, you can see what is happening with your own eyes. The problem with that approach is that you might see solid traffic along a road and assume it's all the fault of those LTNs but around the corner could be an accident, a badly parked or broken down car, a delivery van stopped in the middle of the road etc - something that could easily jam up traffic in a few seconds yet never be noticed as the actual cause. When that taxi went into the wall at the top of DKH, it absolutely screwed traffic for a mile or more in all directions - back to Goose Green, down to KCH... Yet anyone sat in a queue wondering why it was terrible won't have known anything about that one single incident (at least, not at the time and it only made local news very briefly).

Same applies for things like roadworks which might not be known about outside of the immediate area but could have a very wide reaching effect. Easy to sit there, look at the traffic and moan about LTNs when it might not be that at all. The only thing that tells you that is data.

Lived experience is fine as a back-up to the actual data but as the key metric for determining success or failure, it's terrible.

The data is a snapshot over a period of time that can be compared to similar times in the past. Broad trends can be picked out fairly easily, further monitoring to check and test, adjustments made to the LTN where required etc.

But you can't have it both ways - either you want the data, in which case you can of course challenge it and ask for more but you can't just dismiss it because of your opinions.

LL was terrible on Wednesday therefore the data gathered 2 months ago and presented to me now is rubbish - that's not a valid argument.

Malumbu - I wasn't talking about that study I meant more generally whether there was an LTN that had delivered anything close to the goals set out for them?

Loads of traffic schemes never deliver on the promises set out initially. A very common reason to build a new road or widen an existing one is that journey times / congestion will decrease - when they don't, do you ask for the scheme to be reversed?

So far, the data is showing a broadly positive trend - sure there's some more that can be done especially around EDG and Croxted but undoing the whole lot is not really a sensible answer. Like saying that the smoking section is really unpleasant so we'll bin off the non-smoking bit and allow the pollution to be shared equally. The answer is to bin off the smoking section and have no smoke at all.*

*analogy dating back a bit to when smoking was allowed indoors.

[Rockets]

But Ex- do you really believe the numbers being presented? A 22% drop in traffic on Lordship Lane - really????.

That?s a huge drop that I don?t think anyone who spends any time on Lordship Lane is seeing. And if traffic has dropped so much why are bus journey times along Lordship Lane increasing?

Why has the council moved the monitoring strips from close to Court Lane (which were there around Oct/Nov last year) to close to Milford Road for the review?

BTW, from your expertise below what speed do monitoring strips become useless? Is it 5mph?