LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[first mate]

Legal, did you mean to post a link?

legalalien Wrote:

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

> This book review by Prof Alfred back in 2008 is an

> interesting read and perhaps gives some insight

> into the Marxist perspective on car dominance (a

> partial driver of some current policy?) I?ll leave

> people to form their own views.

[legalalien]

I did indeed

http://isj.org.uk/slam-on-the-brakes/

[Bicknell]

bye bye dulwich shops

dont our councilors care about this?

https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/does-southwark-really-care-about-the-high-street

[Chris_1]

Makes for pretty depressing reading Bicknell

[Penguin68]

Bicknell Wrote:

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

> bye bye dulwich shops

>

> dont our councilors care about this?

>

> https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/does-southwark-real

> ly-care-about-the-high-street

No, all capitalism is theft. Don't you know that? Our councillors do.

[Bicknell]

but councilors should care if local shops say duwlich ltns are threatening thier business?

shouldnt they?

if not why not?

[northernmonkey]

I think that was the point of my comments. Metallic regularly resorts to rudeness and name calling that add nothing to the debate. I suspect (hope) that they might be less rude in real life. In any event they could stick to commenting on the topic or not speaking, but the snark and rudeness is unwarranted.

Interesting how those that disagree with the core on here are 'smug' or 'trolling' though.

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> Metallic Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Apparently I don't have any manners.

>

>

> I've got an album from Bad Manners, will that

> satisfy NorthernMonkeys comment that you have zero

> manners ?

>

> It's amazing how quickly people on here tackle the

> person (poster) and not ball (argument) when they

> are called out.

>

> Wait for DC to chime in that you've insulted them

> (I've had it a few times)

>

> Is this the rear guard action of a failing group

> of activists?

>

> Can we just have a sensible debate over an issue

> that has such wide effects on so many and not

> resort to name calling like 5 year olds in the

> playground ?

[northernmonkey]

Its true that if the LTNs threatened businesses then consideration should be given to what could be done. Its not clear though that the effects quoted are actually as a result of the LTN (a bunch of people against LTNs saying' its affected my business, definitely not the pandemic isn't the same thing as showing demonstrable reduction in trade). Also suspect that the wording has been carefully crafted to date - where some businesses like dry cleaners will be down lots, others less so.

Final point is that despite it being so apparently dreadful for businesses we are in a position were 3 businesses are opening up - one of them directly onto Dulwich Square. I'm going to assume that they did their due diligence before opening and considered that the location would be good - which does make the claims that LTNs are death to the high street difficult to reconcile. Whilst its clear that new businesses often get rent reductions / rent free periods, I'm also assuming that they've forcasted on a future rent paying basis.

Bicknell Wrote:

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

> but councilors should care if local shops say

> duwlich ltns are threatening thier business?

> shouldnt they?

> if not why not?

[Artemis]

It would be interesting to know on what data the new businesses have based their forecasts, and who provided that data. The fact that the opening of the new businesses is as a result of other businesses either failing or choosing to relocate could speak more than forecasts of businesses who have not yet experienced current conditions. Time will no doubt tell.

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Its true that if the LTNs threatened businesses

> then consideration should be given to what could

> be done. Its not clear though that the effects

> quoted are actually as a result of the LTN (a

> bunch of people against LTNs saying' its affected

> my business, definitely not the pandemic isn't the

> same thing as showing demonstrable reduction in

> trade). Also suspect that the wording has been

> carefully crafted to date - where some businesses

> like dry cleaners will be down lots, others less

> so.

>

> Final point is that despite it being so apparently

> dreadful for businesses we are in a position were

> 3 businesses are opening up - one of them directly

> onto Dulwich Square. I'm going to assume that

> they did their due diligence before opening and

> considered that the location would be good - which

> does make the claims that LTNs are death to the

> high street difficult to reconcile. Whilst its

> clear that new businesses often get rent

> reductions / rent free periods, I'm also assuming

> that they've forcasted on a future rent paying

> basis.

>

>

>

> Bicknell Wrote:

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

> -----

> > but councilors should care if local shops say

> > duwlich ltns are threatening thier business?

> > shouldnt they?

> > if not why not?

[Abe_froeman]

Maybe those new businesses have had some assurance that the LTNs won't be there in the long term.

[johnhinton]

But you do have the grace to support DougieFreeman's post, Metallica - and I agree with you, DF and Heartblock as well. I'd love to have a like button for many of the posts on the EDF, rather than clogging up the board with a MeToo.

The LTNs don't work for a large section of the Dulwich community and do not resolve the traffic or pollution problems in this area. Over my 20 years here, I've seen much tinkering - largely incompetent and ill-thought through - to no avail. Maybe the substantial traffic increase would have overcome even the best interventions, but we have all been ill-served by the lack of open-minded discussion.

[northernmonkey]

Seems unlikely that the downfall of Aqua which by all accounts seemed to be a vanity project rather than a commercial enterprise would have any bearing whatsoever as to the success of the new cheese shop. The evolving nature of local retail really means that its increasingly difficult for those that can be undercut by online options, so that leaves specialist food retailers and coffee shops really.

Heritage looks really interesting and different - they look to do tasting events and wine too so it will be somewhere you would want to go in person.

Artemis Wrote:

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

> It would be interesting to know on what data the

> new businesses have based their forecasts, and who

> provided that data. The fact that the opening of

> the new businesses is as a result of other

> businesses either failing or choosing to relocate

> could speak more than forecasts of businesses who

> have not yet experienced current conditions. Time

> will no doubt tell.

>

> northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Its true that if the LTNs threatened businesses

> > then consideration should be given to what

> could

> > be done. Its not clear though that the effects

> > quoted are actually as a result of the LTN (a

> > bunch of people against LTNs saying' its

> affected

> > my business, definitely not the pandemic isn't

> the

> > same thing as showing demonstrable reduction in

> > trade). Also suspect that the wording has been

> > carefully crafted to date - where some

> businesses

> > like dry cleaners will be down lots, others

> less

> > so.

> >

> > Final point is that despite it being so

> apparently

> > dreadful for businesses we are in a position

> were

> > 3 businesses are opening up - one of them

> directly

> > onto Dulwich Square. I'm going to assume that

> > they did their due diligence before opening and

> > considered that the location would be good -

> which

> > does make the claims that LTNs are death to the

> > high street difficult to reconcile. Whilst its

> > clear that new businesses often get rent

> > reductions / rent free periods, I'm also

> assuming

> > that they've forcasted on a future rent paying

> > basis.

> >

> >

> >

> > Bicknell Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > but councilors should care if local shops say

> > > duwlich ltns are threatening thier business?

> > > shouldnt they?

> > > if not why not?

[Rockets]

I know it is One Dulwich article and the pro-LTN supporters will take it with a pinch of salt but given significant numbers of traders turned up to the meeting to vent their feelings on the issue and to all oppose the LTNs it will be putting Cllr Rose under a lot of pressure and it will be interesting to see what decision she, and the council, makes.

It is clear that there is overwhelming opposition from large swathes of the Dulwich community against these measures and no matter how many people the council manage to encourage to "have their say" in the review they have to start listening to their constituents.

We wait with baited breath to see whether they put ideology ahead of constituents.

[Rockets]

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Its true that if the LTNs threatened businesses

> then consideration should be given to what could

> be done. Its not clear though that the effects

> quoted are actually as a result of the LTN (a

> bunch of people against LTNs saying' its affected

> my business, definitely not the pandemic isn't the

> same thing as showing demonstrable reduction in

> trade). Also suspect that the wording has been

> carefully crafted to date - where some businesses

> like dry cleaners will be down lots, others less

> so.

>

> Final point is that despite it being so apparently

> dreadful for businesses we are in a position were

> 3 businesses are opening up - one of them directly

> onto Dulwich Square. I'm going to assume that

> they did their due diligence before opening and

> considered that the location would be good - which

> does make the claims that LTNs are death to the

> high street difficult to reconcile. Whilst its

> clear that new businesses often get rent

> reductions / rent free periods, I'm also assuming

> that they've forcasted on a future rent paying

> basis.

>

>

>

> Bicknell Wrote:

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

> -----

> > but councilors should care if local shops say

> > duwlich ltns are threatening thier business?

> > shouldnt they?

> > if not why not?

The new shop in "The Square" is a cheese shop. I like a bit of cheese but I did asked myself "really" does someone think that they can sustain a shop selling cheese in a location like that with such limited footfall? Even the cafes are struggling there (and that was before the new one opened) as when the sun isn't shining footfall drops to negligible levels.

It is interesting that some of the shopkeepers are saying that they have lost a lot of the destination shoppers. If I remember rightly the council's own research on Lordship Lane suggested that 22% of all shoppers were from outside the immediate area and had driven and it would be interesting to see if the council has, or is planning to do, a similar survey to determine what the combined impacts of the CPZ and LTNs have been on visitors now.

[legalalien]

It wouldn?t be increasingly difficult for those undercut by online options if we all did the right thing and tried to reduce our online shopping and deliveries. I personally think a tax on online deliveries would achieve a lot more than the LTNs (which I suspect encourage more online deliveries). Not something the council can legislate for, but they could encourage behavioural change as part of their remit to support local business?

[slarti b2]

Rockets Wrote:

> It is interesting that some of the shopkeepers are saying that they have lost a lot of the destination shoppers.

I have spoken to friends who live outside the local area, Clapham, Sydenham, New Cross, and they all say they avoid central Dulwich as much as possible nowadays, even at weekends, because of the risk of being fined. I would expect footfall in the afternoons to be drastically down so not surprising local businesses are suffering.

[DuncanW]

I'm not certain online grocery ordering increases congestion. If the routes are planned properly, I would have though the opposite would happen.

I would support a change in legislation to make it compulsory to charge delivery at cost (minimum) on orders less than ?100. It's far too easy to order small, low-value on Amazon Prime knowing they'll be delivered the next day with no charge.

[legalalien]

I tend to agree. I do a weekly online grocery shop. But have tried to cut down / avoid deliveries for small bits and pieces, takeaways etc. I don?t think the move to small on demand grocery deliveries is a good thing..(excluding cycle deliveries etc obvs).

If push came to shove I could probably do a few pedestrian shopping trips instead of having a delivery though. As I used to, with a giant backpack, in my 20s.

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> I'm not certain online grocery ordering increases

> congestion. If the routes are planned properly, I

> would have though the opposite would happen.

>

> I would support a change in legislation to make it

> compulsory to charge delivery at cost (minimum) on

> orders less than ?100. It's far too easy to order

> small, low-value on Amazon Prime knowing they'll

> be delivered the next day with no charge.

[northernmonkey]

I think that this is probably right - its not the weekly shop via ocado or equivalent thats necessarily a huge change in congestion - there have been things i've read in the past suggesting that the ability to plan routes etc cuts down on congestion and mileage vs each individual driving to and from the supermarket and also the deliveries from warehouse to supermarket from those online suppliers who deliver straight from delivery hubs.

The amazon issue is however huge. The ease of next day delivery, scrapping of minimum orders etc means that the number of vans delivering single items is an increasing problem even before the impact on the high street is considered. Shopping local where possible is usually a better option.

[malumbu]

Some general points

1. It would be helpful if you didn't quote the whole of a previous poster's message as it clogs up the thread

2. Neither do I go for the like/dislike a post suggestion to get round 1. If you don't have anything substantive to add then please consider the value of posting (oh "I agree with so and so's post")

3. Selectively quoting friends who live outside the area not traveling to SE22 is confirmation bias. I live slightly outside the area (two streets) and I still travel to the area therefore the LTN is justified. Of course if your friends are no longer traveling to SE22 that could be a good thing, showing that the LTN is doing its job - encouraging less unnecessary car journeys, people using public transport more, shopping and socialising locally. That is of course my confirmation bias.

4. Really good points on home deliveries. I detest the 'need it now' (rather than plan ahead) mentality being encouraged by Amazon Prime and some of the new micro-delivery sites. The latter can be a modern day butchers boy thing, which may be a good thing for small local businesses. But "I have no toilet paper and must order now" - for heavens sake, go to your local convenience store, knock on a neighbour's door or use your street whats app. I am sure we are all on one. A separate Lounge discussion I expect.

[slarti b2]

@Malumbu

re your point 3. The only comments I have received from my friends about the Dulwich\Calton road closures and lengthy timed restricions are totally negative. So I was not "selectively quoting" nor is it confirmation bias.

And avoiding Central Dulwich does not mean they are not making journeys. It means they are travelling round the boundary roads or, for shops, going elsewhere.

These badly planned road closures are not achieving their objectives, are damaging local businesses and and are making congestion and pollution worse on the boundary roads.

[Bicknell]

many shops in ED and duliwch village say half thier sales come from outside the area

about 50%

if access is hard, people stop coming

shops close

ask cclr rose and Ochere if data in this report is what they heard at teh meeting

were local cllrs there?

if not why not?

https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/does-southwark-really-care-about-the-high-street

[slarti b2]

Bicknell Wrote:

> ask cclr rose and Ochere if data in this report is what they heard at teh meeting were local cllrs there?

if not why not?

Our local c'llors seem to have disappeared. Or maybe they have just retreated into a tiny road-closure loving bubble with their handful of local activists rather than engaging with and representing their constituents?

[Rockets]

You would presume our local councillors would have been there - does anyone know?

[first mate]

This is the way our councillors seem to prefer to communicate-

https://www.jamesmcash.com/blog/faqs-on-goose-green-ltn-measures