LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[redpost]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> SUV as a term covers everything from Hummers to

> 'small' SUVs which effectively replace (and indeed

> many are smaller) than standard people carriers,

> formerly the go-to car for those with families -

> and much smaller then large estate cars. They have

> a very similar profile to vans, including driver

> height. For older people they are much easier to

> get in and out of (which believe me is an issue) -

> and they are also much easier to take move babies

> in and out of. There are luxury (and big) SUVs of

> course. If a 'proper' SUV they may have some off

> road capability (less use around town perhaps,

> although I have been grateful for 4WD on the few

> snow days around here). But I had to park up in a

> muddy field recently and 4WD was a boon. As it was

> recently on motorway driving in intense rain.

> Their rather stately profile additionally probably

> discourages 'boy racer' mentalities, which hot

> hatches certainly don't. 'SUV driver' is

> increasingly a short hand for 'people of a class I

> don't want to associate with' - and such a usage

> is a lazy shorthand for the class warriors that

> occasionally lurk on these pages.

"I had to park up in a muddy field recently and 4WD was a boon"

Or buy a normal car and park on the road?

Perhaps buy an 8 tonne hummer with balistic armour pack, just in case someone places an anti-tank mine on lordship lane?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> SUV as a term covers everything from Hummers to

> 'small' SUVs which effectively replace (and indeed

> many are smaller) than standard people carriers,

> formerly the go-to car for those with families -

> and much smaller then large estate cars. They have

> a very similar profile to vans, including driver

> height. For older people they are much easier to

> get in and out of (which believe me is an issue) -

> and they are also much easier to take move babies

> in and out of. There are luxury (and big) SUVs of

> course. If a 'proper' SUV they may have some off

> road capability (less use around town perhaps,

> although I have been grateful for 4WD on the few

> snow days around here). But I had to park up in a

> muddy field recently and 4WD was a boon. As it was

> recently on motorway driving in intense rain.

> Their rather stately profile additionally probably

> discourages 'boy racer' mentalities, which hot

> hatches certainly don't. 'SUV driver' is

> increasingly a short hand for 'people of a class I

> don't want to associate with' - and such a usage

> is a lazy shorthand for the class warriors that

> occasionally lurk on these pages.

This is not a class issue. They add to pollution, congestion and road injuries.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/cities/2019/oct/07/a-deadly-problem-should-we-ban-suvs-from-our-cities

? A person is 11% more likely to die in a crash inside an SUV than a regular saloon. Studies show they lull drivers into a false sense of security, encouraging them to take greater risks. Their height makes them twice as likely to roll in crashes and twice as likely to kill pedestrians by inflicting greater upper body and head injuries, as opposed to lower limb injuries people have a greater chance of surviving.?

[Earl Aelfheah]

But sure, huge off road vehicles in London are all about protecting pedestrians 🙄

[Penguin68]

Or buy a normal car and park on the road?

Curiously the National Trust house I was visiting only had parking in fields - I was unable to force them to build roads through the parkland I was visiting. Outside London and other major cities there are frequently insufficient roads (in the countryside) where it is safe or convenient to park. Particularly for 100s of visitors attracted there.

Once again, whilst there are luxury SUVs which of course no one should be allowed to buy as it upsets those who choose not to, but spend on other things, there are many SUVs which are small(er) and are marked more by their profile (high off the road) than either their width or weight (or length). No different from very many vans on the road. But less likely to be diesel powered. And (god forbid) comfortable to drive. Which is of course a sin, as cars should be screamingly uncomfortable so people don't use them. Perhaps mandatory spikes on the seat?

[Abe_froeman]

It's just more bluster.

None of this has anything to do with LTNs.

[Earl Aelfheah]

It's relevant in that the significant increase in vehicle size has a material impact on congestion, on danger to other road users (discouraging active travel) and on pollution levels.

[Abe_froeman]

Redpost that range rover sport actually has the shorter stopping distance. Its brake disc diameter is 320mm v only 260mm for the Nissan.

But still this all irrelevant to LTNs and is simply about petty jealousy.

The original complaint here about car sizes is that between 1968 and today they have got wider by the same width as a man's hand on each side of the car. It's a pathetic whinge.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> But still this all irrelevant to LTNs and is

> simply about petty jealousy

I love the idea that you think people are jealous of those driving around London in off road vehicles. Everyone would naturally chose to drive around in a dangerous, clownishly oversized vehicle - they just mustn't be able to afford it. Of course!

[Abe_froeman]

It's true. That's why they call them Chelsea tractors.

[hpsaucey]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> It's true. That's why they call them Chelsea

> tractors.

So = are you saying they're the choice of Dulwich aspiring-Chelsea wannabes? ... local variations in favourite car types here: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/chelsea-tractors-range-rover-really-is-the-most-popular-car-in-kensington-and-chelsea-a3626056.html

And a lovely definition of Chelsea tractor here: 'https://www.macmillandictionary.com/buzzword/entries/chelsea-tractor.html' Not something everyone would want to be associated with I'd have thought.

[northernmonkey]

I think that getting back on topic, the point originally raised in terms of whether there is space for cycling and cars on our roads and how the 'sharing the space' is going has been significantly impacted by the growth in vehicle size.

For all the comments of 'they're the same size as a normal car' - maybe in comparison to a monster truck, but i think in virtually all cases the SUV is considerably wider than the previous type of vehicle it replaces.

The height that is applauded for 'ease of getting babies in and out of the car' is the same thing that means that small children are invisible to drivers of these vehicles and also accounts for greater head injury to pedestrians.

The increased weight results in greater tyre wear and damage to roads - so more particulate matter and more cost and carbon cost re road upkeep.

Its clear that SUVs are nice to drive and be a passenger in so its unlikely that people en masse are going to stop buying them. The 'keeping me and my family safe' is often their selling point. However, what this does mean is that there need to be measures in cities to protect pedestrians and cyclists from increasing danger and filtering side streets, putting in segregated infrastructure on main roads, having better and greater enforcement of speeding etc is critical.

[hpsaucey]

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> I think that getting back on topic, the point

> originally raised in terms of whether there is

> space for cycling and cars on our roads and how

> the 'sharing the space' is going has been

> significantly impacted by the growth in vehicle

> size.

Whew - yes!

[Rockets]

Penguin - you make some very valid points - part of the issue as well is that people are getting bigger (taller) and so cars are too. Compare the original mini to the modern mini. Also, as you rightly point out bigger cars are favoured by people with families - car seats and their attachments are about as wide as the original mini!!

But the reaction on here when someone admits they use a 4WD or SUV (P.S. there are plenty of 4WD that aren't SUVs) is so depressingly predictable......

But, the fact remains, that calling people out or referring to people having a Chelsea Tractor doesn't seem to have done anything to diminish their appeal.

In the US I am not surprised SUVs are killing more people because a Ford F150 or Cadillac Escalade are beyond ludicrously and unnecessarily big and if one of those hits you you don't stand a chance because of the height of the engine grill. They make Range Rovers look small.

Bottom line is that we need to do as much as possible to protect all road users and reduce the amount of accidents and injuries. I sadly read that another cyclist died in London yesterday after an accident with a lorry - every death or injury is one too many.

[heartblock]

If you live in an LTN and are a very vocal LTN supporter, because you don?t want anyone driving down your nice road past you huge house with an enormous garden and huge garage and you own 3 vehicles, the town and private school run around, the nice car and the family SUV for travelling to your second home in the country....but you tell me that I?m the polluter, the dirty air for everybody, the petrol head, while living in my flat, with no huge front garden and no country second home.

I can only afford this busy road that you can drive on....that has had a 26-35% rise in traffic and high NOx levels....and I travel around by walking, PT and cycling and only drive to a small village in Lincolnshire to visit my 90 yr old Mum, because there are no trains and occasionally drive to Gloucestershire and Devon to visit my friends as the train costs ?200 for two of us...

What does that say about how we treat people and the lazy way to tackle pollution.

LTNs are a cheap and lazy bit of Green Washing at best and a Tory idea full of inequality at the worst. It is slowly dawning on individuals who can actually think about what is happening, rather than following the LCC dogma, that this isn?t the answer, it is actually an excellent way of pretending to do something, while public transport is decimated and huge road networks invested in.

If you are an LTN supporter, you are part of the problem, not the solution and being pleased with your private gated road and your small increase in house value, while having the wool pulled over your eyes by Boris and his mates is the dirty deal that they have given you.

[northernmonkey]

Is there too much traffic in Dulwich - yes, do we need to do something about it - also yes.

The increases you post are worrying re EDG- further monitoring could tell us whether they actually affect the whole stretch. Its clear that there are increase over the monitoring point by Lordship Lane. This doesn't necessarily mean there has been an increase on the section between Melbourne and Townley Road. In fact its possible that volumes may have fallen in that stretch as a result of the changes. This is why proper monitoring at different points is very important to understand what has happened as a result of these changes.

No one pro LTNs is suggesting they are all of the solution - we need much more funding for active travel and public transport, much less road funding, but also need to be aware of what is within the remit of local council's to do. National government must do much more.

[Spartacus]

The rise of the SUV is an interesting discussion point.

Is it the public's fault for being brainwashed by advertisers for wanting one ?

Is it the manufacturer's fault for building them in the first place ?

Or is it a combination of manufactures and the public both believing it's what the other wants ?

It's crazy in an age where we are trying to make better use of the road space for all and more fuel efficient transport, that the government allows the sales of large SUVs and advertising pushes them (at least 25% of car adverts seem to be for a SUV).

Maybe there needs to be a push from central government to make large SUVs less attractive and at the same time make sure that those who need off road capacity (farmers, life guards ....) can get it.

Oh and the argument above to return to car designs of the 60s, at least they had style and character rather than being jelly mould shapes. (My opinion is purely based on looks not functionality or safety features)

[heartblock]

I live between Melbourne and Townley, the idling traffic on school days is horrific. I have lived here for over 30 years. I can see, smell and hear the nearly at a standstill traffic...I dread the September School return. It was always a busy flow, but was never at a standstill. The 37 bus delayed and traffic increased. What a complete and utter pollution disaster. LTNs...pollution generators.

[northernmonkey]

It?s interesting Heartblock, that your recollection is that the traffic was never at a standstill pre LTN. I guess it?s possible that you don?t recall it being like that, that you used to go to work at a different time or something.

My recollection is of constant queueing traffic westbound each morning in rush hour and I?ve seen video footage from others backing this up.

The thing that is hard to reconcile is that your own posting history on this forum includes ?there is either long queues of traffic at rush hour or speeding traffic at other times? . So which one isn?t true?

[heartblock]

i have never seen idling traffic as bad as this before the LTNs and yes cars do travel at speed at quieter times, well above the 20mph speed limit - as measured every fortnight. So yes both awful traffic issues exist on EDG. I think maybe you are intimidating in your post that I am being untruthful...quite why you would think there is any reason I should be do is beyond me. I?m just reporting my lived experience and the data as collected by Southwark and independent speed data.

[malumbu]

Back to the SUV chat, really should be lounged but hey ho. The car manufacturers are selling you a dream. For most drivers in towns and cities who mainly do urban driving no need for the full size ones. Momentum/laws of physics - a 2 1/2 tonne vehicle will do more damage both to the human body, and a lighter car irrespective of the crash standards.

I've hired a few, not on purpose, but the one in British Columbia made some sense - ironically two accidents, a stone chip smashed the window on an unmade road, and some poor deer ran out in front of me..... On Friday 13th too. I've also used some of the mini/smaller SUVs for work, I didn't rush out to buy one. Having said that I doubt if I will ever buy another car.

Those I know who have one say they could never go back to a smaller car. The questioning them why they have one/need one gets nowhere!

[ab29]

The arrogance of people who have no idea what it means to live on a main road and how this has worsened post LTN and yet they feel entitled to question others experience - unparalelled.

[heartblock]

It is the story of LTNs. Put them in and then ignore the increases in traffic and pollution on main residential roads and claim success because closed roads are quieter. Then gaslight those who flag up the negative impacts.

[legalalien]

Just looking t this month?s forward plan. It?s still showing a decision on the Dulwich experimental measures as due in September 2021. There?s also a new item called ?Determination of Objections? in relation to the measures, described as ? Consider objections made during statutory consultation for Dulwich Streetspace review measures?, due in November 2021.

See https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgListPlanItems.aspx?PlanId=674

Not quite sure how the two timeframes fit together. Surely the Council consider the objections before making the decision? It could be a reference to anticipated objections made after/ in response to the September decision? But that?s not how it is worded?

[heartblock]

I like the towards a community model

?Proposals to enable residents and communities to take more responsibility and have more say in the decisions that affect their lives?

Hmmm

[DulwichCentral]

@heartblock you say 'between Melbourne and Townley... It was always a busy flow, but was never at a standstill.'

I've posted this here a number of times so it's pretty tedious. I lived in Camberwell for some time in 2016 and drove back and forth via Melbourne Grove and EDG daily at school run times and other times. Almost without fail at peak times I got stuck in traffic on the stretch between Melbourne and Townley. Melbourne Grove was a gridlocked nightmare.

Looking back now that I don't drive those short journeys and cycle instead, it seems ridiculous I repeatedly got stuck in traffic day after day after day - furious with 'the traffic' which of course I was part of!

More needs to be done on EDG. But to say it **was never at a standstill** before the LTNs just isn't true.