LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[malumbu]

I'm confused, I thought people moved here because the schools were so good. Perhaps if the schools are better elsewhere then parents will move from the area, making housing more affordable and as the majority of kids will then go to local schools less traffic in the morning. Would you really be that insane to drive your kids to Croydon and beyond each morning?

> Malumbu - you miss the point. Many of the

> independent schools that run bus services through

> the Dulwich area are schools much further afield

> than can be walked of cycled - schools like

> Trinity, Royal Russell, Whitgift, St Dunstan's and

> Colfes etc. The fact that some are considering

> cutting Dulwich from their routes should not be

> heralded as it will inevitably lead to more people

> using their cars.

[Metallic]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> I'm confused, I thought people moved here because

> the schools were so good. Perhaps if the schools

> are better elsewhere then parents will move from

> the area, making housing more affordable and as

> the majority of kids will then go to local schools

> less traffic in the morning. Would you really be

> that insane to drive your kids to Croydon and

> beyond each morning?

>

>

>

>

> > Malumbu - you miss the point. Many of the

> > independent schools that run bus services

> through

> > the Dulwich area are schools much further

> afield

> > than can be walked of cycled - schools like

> > Trinity, Royal Russell, Whitgift, St Dunstan's

> and

> > Colfes etc. The fact that some are considering

> > cutting Dulwich from their routes should not be

> > heralded as it will inevitably lead to more

> people

> > using their cars.

If your kids are educationally able, then of course life is perfect. But Royal Russell specialises in teaching dyslexic children. Trinity and Whitgift have good scholarship programmes. Not everyone wants to live in Croydon! And St Dunstan's is a good second choice if your child doesn't get in to the so-called elite Foundation Schools.

[Rockets]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> I'm confused, I thought people moved here because

> the schools were so good. Perhaps if the schools

> are better elsewhere then parents will move from

> the area, making housing more affordable and as

> the majority of kids will then go to local schools

> less traffic in the morning. Would you really be

> that insane to drive your kids to Croydon and

> beyond each morning?

>

>

>

>

> > Malumbu - you miss the point. Many of the

> > independent schools that run bus services

> through

> > the Dulwich area are schools much further

> afield

> > than can be walked of cycled - schools like

> > Trinity, Royal Russell, Whitgift, St Dunstan's

> and

> > Colfes etc. The fact that some are considering

> > cutting Dulwich from their routes should not be

> > heralded as it will inevitably lead to more

> people

> > using their cars.

People may have to if the school buses get cancelled because they can't negotiate the nonsense congestion around Dulwich caused by these closures......all a bit self-defeating don't you think!?

[heartblock]

Another morning of idling traffic, pollution and misery on EDG...children, joggers, cyclists and residents all enjoying the fumes, pollution, noise and the misery courtesy of Southwark Council.

[KidKruger]

Aaah... but how are they doing over in Elsie, Melbourne, Carlton, Court, etc ?

[Spartacus]

OneEaling have launched a legal challenge and crowd funding page.

One to watch and possibly emulate to put pressure on councils across London!

[Effra]

Massive tail-backs in Dulwich village since road was narrowed, a few days ago, to create a cycle lane at the DV/EDG/RPH junction.

The traffic approaching the lights from DV can no longer form two lanes and so the right turning traffic blocks the vehicles wanting to go straight ahead.

The simple expedient of relocating the pedestrian island where the traffic light is, would enable two lanes to be re-established and allow a continuous traffic going straight on.

See the attached images and please forgive my photo editing skills where I have relocated the traffic light.

[sally buying]

It seems there must be a child with red felt pen just drawing lines on road maps that Southwark then think is a good idea with no thought and executes into being

Bellenden Road left turn into Choumert Road by the bookshop has suddenly had poles,bricks inserted into the road for some reason reducing the road turning space.

Quite why they have done this is a mystery as it serves no purpose and the road/pavement was fine before and must have cost a lot of money.

It is getting very silly now.

[heartblock]

It?s almost as though Southwark Councillors in areas where there are LTNs have a private vanity project rather than a global view of the area. There is very little evidence that LTNs improve pollution across the borough, in fact idling traffic creates more. Unfortunately they really have made up their minds and are unable to listen to any one else.

?Wait until it?s bedded in? , ?it?s because there are roadworks?

Only solution is a campaign and the courts. Sue Southwark for making certain roads toxic to residents and endangering health.

[dulwichfolk]

You just need to look at the notes for the Southwark environmental scrutiny report (kindly posted in another thread about the meeting today) it talks there about LTN and how they are proven(!) to show reduced traffic/etc.... the people making the decisions are reading this stuff and going along with it...and ignoring the circumstances in dulwich and actually what they see with their eyes. Backed by the same few cycle enthusiasts who know this is the ideal/only opportunity to push through whatever they want and be relevant..

[Rockets]

The "proof" is very very questionable and does not bear up to any kind of detailed scrutiny. Apparently a lot of the "great" experiences of the Waltham Forest LTN are based on computer modelling and not any kind of definitive monitoring.

My biggest concern is that it seems increasingly as if Southwark are going to base their proof of success (or otherwise) on modelling and not any actual monitoring - which surely has to be a minimum pre-requisite for these projects.

@littleninjaUK on twitter is well worth a follow as he looks into a lot of the data provided as facts by the pro-closure lobby and councils and much of it is paper thin. The consensus though is that what people can definitively say is that LTNs create increases in traffic on surrounding roads which does not dissipate over time. Even the council in Waltham Forest admitted that a road 3.1 miles away from the LTN saw a consistent 28& increase in traffic after the LTNs went in.

[heartblock]

We need to do this

[Metallic]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> It?s almost as though Southwark Councillors in

> areas where there are LTNs have a private vanity

> project rather than a global view of the area.

> There is very little evidence that LTNs improve

> pollution across the borough, in fact idling

> traffic creates more. Unfortunately they really

> have made up their minds and are unable to listen

> to any one else.

>

> ?Wait until it?s bedded in? , ?it?s because there

> are roadworks?

>

> Only solution is a campaign and the courts. Sue

> Southwark for making certain roads toxic to

> residents and endangering health.

There is always an excuse. I am totally against the schemes because of the traffic displacement and resulting pollution - WHEREVER it is. These small minded people who are advocating all these changes are basically parochial. They have no vision of others having bigger lives than shops 500 metres away, the doctor round the corner, the mini supermarket a kilometre away.

These people need to wake up. This is part of a city, not some village surrounded by farmland. I'm sorry to say that any communities blighted by LTNs or displacement will all suffer when the businesses they depend on go to the wall. In Dulwich Village we could all eat a tile or a house because those two sorts of businesses will survive and Simply Fresh will fail - no loading area, no parking 5 hours a day for drive through customers, and their stock being even worse than it already is.

[Penguin68]

Well, my street, Underhill Road, has been decidedly unhealthy, with queueing traffic for well over 2 hours in the 'evening' 'rush' (so not) hour(s). And I don't believe, pace recent reports in the Daily Mail, these were all people rushing to be in their country pads before lockdown. Just poor suckers trying to find and use one of the few east west routes still open to us. Journeys now on roads, whether by public or private transport (other than bicycles, no doubt) are taking twice (or more) as long now, which means twice as many exhausts and fumes over any given stretch of road. More, of course as much more traffic is funnelled into far fewer roads.

Should anyone now fall ill with respiratory illness in one of the new misery miles created by Southwark they should consider suing the council (or the relevant member of the council 'cabinet') for grievous bodily harm - or perhaps contributory negligence - or reckless behaviour. Maybe only lawsuits will bring these dangerous individuals to their senses.

Until we get access to a ballot box - if ever.

[Rockets]

If you believe the councillors and the pro-closure lobby what we are all seeing happen in front of our eyes is not really there. Nope, isn't happening - there is no displacement and the cars are evaporating!

We are, according to the councillors and their friends, the small vocal minority....!

I would implore people to document evidence of this happening and send those pictures to your councillors (make sure Cllr Kieron Williams is added too) - I think it is the only way they are going to sit up and take note that what they are doing is making things a hell of a lot worse.

[FairTgirl]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> If you believe the councillors and the pro-closure

> lobby what we are all seeing happen in front of

> our eyes is not really there. Nope, isn't

> happening - there is no displacement and the cars

> are evaporating!

>

> We are, according to the councillors and their

> friends, the small vocal minority....!

>

> I would implore people to document evidence of

> this happening and send those pictures to your

> councillors (make sure Cllr Kieron Williams is

> added too) - I think it is the only way they are

> going to sit up and take note that what they are

> doing is making things a hell of a lot worse.

It quite patently is, and agree, send everything you see to the Cllrs.

They keep referring to this as kickback from a vocal minority of car users. Many of us don't have or use cars and are already very eco and care passionately about climate change but are kicking back as we represent a majority who are now seeing (and hearing from the admissions of the Head of Transport for Southwark in the meeting last night which I am just watching) that they had and have little or no monitoring in place, we also know they took no impact assessments, or equality asssessments, did not discuss with business, did not consult properly with London Fire Brigade, we know waste removal were not consulted on ED Phase 2 as they told us as much... and we are all seeing and recording the displacement and thus increased air pollution results outside schools/nurseries/houses and high streets, onto already illegally polluted roads in a public health crisis linked to.... air pollution.

[Rockets]

They have made a complete mess of these projects. The call last night really demonstrated the hash the council has made of this.

Lucy Saunders from the charity really exposed the council. I was so impressed with her presentation and the fact their approach was professional, measurable and accountable. It really shone a light on how amateurish the council's ham-fisted attempts have been.

If they had followed the more transparent path the charity is taking we probably wouldn't be in this mess the council has left us in.

[exdulwicher]

There's further info from DfT (published yesterday) about their Inclusive Transport Strategy here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/inclusive-transport-strategy-year-2-update

Primarily aimed at making travel easier for disabled users, it does also touch on Shared Space (and by extension, LTNs); the direct link to the letter is below but the whole link (above) is worth reading for info about the policies that DfT are pushing to councils for them to implement.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/749116/ministerial-letter-about-shared_space.pdf

[n dulwich northerner]

Thanks to Southwark's foggy-minded road closure schemes, this morning the tailback in Dulwich Village extended from the northern set of lights to those in the centre.

[Nigello]

Thanks to too many people making journeys that could be made on foot or on a bicycle, this morning.....

[Rockets]

Nigello Wrote:

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

> Thanks to too many people making journeys that

> could be made on foot or on a bicycle, this

> morning.....

Or alternatively...caused by the council closing major routes across Dulwich thus forcing those cars doing journeys not able to be done on a bike or by foot along an ever decreasing number of routes thus causing congestion.

Additionally at that junction you could also suggest:

caused by the council putting wands in to create a dedicated cycle lane thereby reducing the road to a single lane width, thus creating huge congestion as cars backlog trying to clear the right filter.

And in relation to the Goodrich/Dunstans morning gridlock you could say:

Caused by an ever increasing number of cars that are trying to find routes around the congestion caused by the council's closure of roads in Dulwich Village which has created long lines of congestion along Lordship Lane southbound leading drivers to try and find an easterly route away from the gridlock.

[n dulwich northerner]

People just don't sit in traffic like that if they could walk or cycle.

[Nigello]

Whatever you say, Mr(s) R, whatever you say. You?ve a bigger axe to grind than I have and it shows. I own no car so I?m putting my money where my mouth is. People in vehicles cause congestion, not councils.

[n dulwich northerner]

Southwark Council caused this congestion by closing Calton Ave and pushing the traffic along Dulwich Village north, then botching the northern end traffic lights by limiting the left lane to cyclists. Specifics, not banalities....

[Rockets]

Nigello Wrote:

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

> Whatever you say, Mr(s) R, whatever you say.

> You?ve a bigger axe to grind than I have and it

> shows. I own no car so I?m putting my money where

> my mouth is. People in vehicles cause congestion,

> not councils.

People who are made to drive down fewer and fewer roads cause congestion. Congestion only happens when demand outstrips supply. The council restricts supply so, vis-a-vis, demand increases = congestion. Quite simple.