More ?Permeable Barriers?

[JohnL]

Rebs_ED Wrote:

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

> If roads like Derwent Grove are made effectively

> dead ends - what do things like the bin lorries

> do? Or delivery vans?

same as they do for Cul de Sacs (the posh name for dead ends)

[Rebs_ED]

JohnL Wrote:

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

> Rebs_ED Wrote:

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

> -----

> > If roads like Derwent Grove are made

> effectively

> > dead ends - what do things like the bin lorries

> > do? Or delivery vans?

>

>

> same as they do for Cul de Sacs (the posh name for

> dead ends)

cul de sacs often have turning circles, don't they? - no where for a bin lorry to turn in a narrow straight road.

[Rockets]

Rebs_ED Wrote:

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

> JohnL Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Rebs_ED Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > If roads like Derwent Grove are made

> > effectively

> > > dead ends - what do things like the bin

> lorries

> > > do? Or delivery vans?

> >

> >

> > same as they do for Cul de Sacs (the posh name

> for

> > dead ends)

>

> cul de sacs often have turning circles, don't

> they? - no where for a bin lorry to turn in a

> narrow straight road.

They will have to reverse the length of the roads after collecting the bins and then reverse out of the roads onto either Lordship Lane or East Dulwich Grove depending on which end the barriers are. Isn't that going to force them to perform an illegal driving maneuver of reversing onto busy roads? Also they can't be too pleased with having to reverse down the length of a road. Surely the council would need to do some sort of risk assessment?

[Serena2012]

To be fair, Derwent Grove is likely to be the most problematic in terms of turning.

At least with Elsie you could reverse half way down then use the junction with Tintagel to turn; and do something similar with Jarvis Road on Melbourne. Just to add, I don?t drive, and I?m not advocating these as safe manoeuvres, but I?m assuming this is what delivery vans etc would end up doing. Of course, in both cases, it involves using what is basically the entrance to a school (Charter ED and Goose Green) respectively as your turning circle, which is less than ideal for all sorts of reasons.

Out of interest, can anyone who is in favour of these closures please articulate to me why they are necessary? I walk down all four roads regularly and far from being rat runs, other than at school drop off and pick up on Elsie and Melbourne, they are in fact very quiet. Indeed, it is unusual for more than one vehicle to drive past in the entire time it takes me to walk down each street.

I can see the merit of school streets on Melbourne, Tintagel and to a lesser extent Elsie. However, other than forcing every single car owning resident of each of these streets; their delivery vans; their tradesmen etc onto EDG, what exactly are these changes hoping to achieve? I cannot help but think that in circumstances where the junction of EDG and Lordship Lane is already saturated and dangerous, heaping more cars onto it 24/7 is wholly disproportionate.

[Serena2012]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Rebs_ED Wrote:

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

> -----

> > JohnL Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > Rebs_ED Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > If roads like Derwent Grove are made

> > > effectively

> > > > dead ends - what do things like the bin

> > lorries

> > > > do? Or delivery vans?

> > >

> > >

> > > same as they do for Cul de Sacs (the posh

> name

> > for

> > > dead ends)

> >

> > cul de sacs often have turning circles, don't

> > they? - no where for a bin lorry to turn in a

> > narrow straight road.

>

> They will have to reverse the length of the roads

> after collecting the bins and then reverse out of

> the roads onto either Lordship Lane or East

> Dulwich Grove depending on which end the barriers

> are. Isn't that going to force them to perform an

> illegal driving maneuver of reversing onto busy

> roads? Also they can't be too pleased with having

> to reverse down the length of a road. Surely the

> council would need to do some sort of risk

> assessment?

Rockets - Just to clarify, the plan is to put the barriers at the Grove Vale end of each of these streets. I am assuming that this is to address the argument I (and no doubt others) made to the Goose Green councillors when this scheme was initially pitched, which is that the scheme would end up worsening air pollution on Grove Vale running past Goose Green school. The NO2 levels outside Goose Green school have previously been assessed as in breach of government and WHO guidelines (although I?m conscious the school has worked hard with green screen initiatives to try and mitigate this).

In practice however, even in Summer without school traffic, the Goose Green roundabout is already struggling to cope with the increased burden caused by road closures elsewhere, so much so that I?ve witnessed it at a standstill more than once. There is therefore in my view a very high probability that come Autumn, the combined impact of all these closures will cause queues of idling traffic outside Goose Green school, in circumstances where they did not exist previously.

[Abe_froeman]

"Out of interest, can anyone who is in favour of these closures please articulate to me why they are necessary?"

The dream is to make car ownership so unattractive that everyone sells their cars and takes chances with coronavirus on a local bus instead.

[Spartacus]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> "Out of interest, can anyone who is in favour of

> these closures please articulate to me why they

> are necessary?"

>

> The dream is to make car ownership so unattractive

> that everyone sells their cars and takes chances

> with coronavirus on a local bus instead.

And if cars are so despised who can you sell them to.

[Serena2012]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> "Out of interest, can anyone who is in favour of

> these closures please articulate to me why they

> are necessary?"

>

> The dream is to make car ownership so unattractive

> that everyone sells their cars and takes chances

> with coronavirus on a local bus instead.

I totally get that this is no doubt Southwark?s aim

BUT unlike Court Lane and Calton Avenue these are very very short roads intersecting two main A roads, in close proximity to the station and the main shopping thoroughfare on Lordship Lane. Those residents who are able to do so no doubt walk journeys in the immediate vicinity already (anyone who knows this area well will know that parking is somewhat nightmarish, so I very much doubt the residents of these roads are regularly driving the 5 minutes to the station or M&S). For those wanting to undertake longer journeys/ who need to use their cars for whatever reason, blocking one end simply gives the residents the option of driving out the other end, which at most will increase their journey by 10 minutes. I just don?t understand how these measures will change behaviours. For those residents driving their kids to the local private schools, closing the Grove Vale end will make little difference as they were almost certainly going to be driving down EDG to do so anyway.

I totally get why you might want to implement school street closures on some of these roads, but anything beyond that seems to me to have everything to do with nimbyism and very little to do with active travel or attempting to reduce air pollution. With that in mind, I find the enthusiasm with which the Goose Green councillors supported this proposal to be completely bewildering.

[Rockets]

Serena2012 Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Rebs_ED Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > JohnL Wrote:

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Rebs_ED Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

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

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > > > If roads like Derwent Grove are made

> > > > effectively

> > > > > dead ends - what do things like the bin

> > > lorries

> > > > > do? Or delivery vans?

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > same as they do for Cul de Sacs (the posh

> > name

> > > for

> > > > dead ends)

> > >

> > > cul de sacs often have turning circles, don't

> > > they? - no where for a bin lorry to turn in a

> > > narrow straight road.

> >

> > They will have to reverse the length of the

> roads

> > after collecting the bins and then reverse out

> of

> > the roads onto either Lordship Lane or East

> > Dulwich Grove depending on which end the

> barriers

> > are. Isn't that going to force them to perform

> an

> > illegal driving maneuver of reversing onto busy

> > roads? Also they can't be too pleased with

> having

> > to reverse down the length of a road. Surely

> the

> > council would need to do some sort of risk

> > assessment?

>

> Rockets - Just to clarify, the plan is to put the

> barriers at the Grove Vale end of each of these

> streets. I am assuming that this is to address the

> argument I (and no doubt others) made to the Goose

> Green councillors when this scheme was initially

> pitched, which is that the scheme would end up

> worsening air pollution on Grove Vale running past

> Goose Green school. The NO2 levels outside Goose

> Green school have previously been assessed as in

> breach of government and WHO guidelines (although

> I?m conscious the school has worked hard with

> green screen initiatives to try and mitigate

> this).

>

> In practice however, even in Summer without school

> traffic, the Goose Green roundabout is already

> struggling to cope with the increased burden

> caused by road closures elsewhere, so much so that

> I?ve witnessed it at a standstill more than once.

> There is therefore in my view a very high

> probability that come Autumn, the combined impact

> of all these closures will cause queues of idling

> traffic outside Goose Green school, in

> circumstances where they did not exist previously.

So the bin lorries will need to reverse out onto East Dulwich Grove from each of the closed streets. Are they even permitted to do that - surely there an HSE person in the council having nightmares about that!

[rupert james]

There are no people working at the Council thay are all working from home.

[Abe_froeman]

It's more likely the bin lorries will reverse into the closed streets.

I've seen one doing this regularly at the junction of Lynton Road and Chaucer Drive in Bermondsey (which is a closed road with an actual cycle route on it).

The bin men act as banksman and give right of way to cyclists as the guide the lorry down the road backwards

[ED_moots]

On Melbourne Grove the proposal includes adding 30m of double yellow lines to allow turning, removing 6 parking spaces.

[Metallic]

Hell awaits us wherever we live in SE22 and SE21. Do these councillors think they will be returned at the next election? Maybe they don't care.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

Metallic Wrote:

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

> Hell awaits us wherever we live in SE22 and SE21.

> Do these councillors think they will be returned

> at the next election? Maybe they don't care.

Sadly, we're in one of the safest Labour seats in the country which is why they have the front to do these things while also holding consultations that they completely ignore the outcome of.

[Metallic]

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

> Metallic Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Hell awaits us wherever we live in SE22 and

> SE21.

> > Do these councillors think they will be

> returned

> > at the next election? Maybe they don't care.

>

>

> Sadly, we're in one of the safest Labour seats in

> the country which is why they have the front to do

> these things while also holding consultations that

> they completely ignore the outcome of.

Their vote will be split by independents. In my view anyway.

[Wil72]

Has anyone set up a petition yet? I can see that residents in Wandsworth have done one for the same reason on Change.org

Just found this on the Turney/Burgage Road Residents website- so please contact James Barber on here if you have experienced anything unsafe?

No doubt school children being chucked out of cars a mile away from schools as there is no longer anywhere to drop them safely will cause problems in a couple of weeks...

'The interventions are under the Emergency Traffic Act and can last up to 18 months and if they are to be made permanent a consultation process has to be carried out. Any intervention can be removed sooner if it is clear that it is unsafe.

[JohnL]

Wil72 Wrote:

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

> 'The interventions are under the Emergency Traffic

> Act and can last up to 18 months and if they are

> to be made permanent a consultation process has to

> be carried out. Any intervention can be removed

> sooner if it is clear that it is unsafe.

This government are getting rid of "red tape" like that - I'd double check it's not gone in one of the bills this year as boris doesn't do "consultation".

[Spartacus]

There isn't a petition set up yet, but if someone does then post details here and also make sure it covers the restrictions borough wide so as to include Peckham, Camberwell and the Walwortb road changes as you would get more signatures.

Sadly if I started it as Spartacus it would lead to a slave revolution !

[JohnL]

Mind some are saying the consultation process was that map you could enter comments in.

Islington for instance.

https://islingtonpeoplefriendlystreets.commonplace.is/

[andrewc]

Here is a recent study on the effect of school street closures.

https://www.napier.ac.uk/about-us/news/school-street-closures

[Serena2012]

andrewc Wrote:

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

> Here is a recent study on the effect of school

> street closures.

>

>

> https://www.napier.ac.uk/about-us/news/school-stre

> et-closures

I have to confess that I am supportive of school streets, which are in any event, not 24/7 closures, 365 days a year. However, what Southwark are implementing here goes way beyond school streets. Not least as many of the roads standing to benefit including, Burbage Road, the section of Turney proposed for closure, Calton Avenue, Court Lane, Melbourne South and Derwent Grove have no schools on them. In fact, it is clear that many of their proposals will worsen the air quality at the area?s schools.

[andrewc]

Studies indicate that on average, over-all traffic reduces by 11% (with a road closure). Is there any evidence that this drop in car use would not be a benefit to all local streets in terms of air quality?

[Metallic]

andrewc Wrote:

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

> Studies indicate that on average, over-all traffic

> reduces by 11% (with a road closure). Is there any

> evidence that this drop in car use would not be a

> benefit to all local streets in terms of air

> quality?

You know that research is 18 years old. Stop quoting it. A drop of even 11% leaves 89% plus displaced traffic from elsewhere.

[andrewc]

The Edinburgh Napier University Study is dated July 10 2020.

[Metallic]

Sorry for mix up.

Roads in SE21/SE22 are not school streets.

And also,

"On the nature, scale and coverage of the evidence

 We located 16 studies, all of which had not been peer reviewed although one was a Masters

dissertation

 The locations covered by the studies included Camden, Edinburgh, Solihull, Perth and

Kinross, East Lothian, Croydon, Southampton, and the region of Flanders, Belgium."

and Southwark creeps in extra to the "study"

"Supplementation of evidence by interview

The use of semi-structured interviews was an additional element to the project, not originally

planned at the bid submission stage. This was added, with approval of the funder, after it became

clear that the literature on SSCs was limited. The intention was to augment Council reports on SSCs

with up-to-date (as of March/April 2020) perspectives and access to newer evidence via direct

contact with local authority officers working on SSCs.

Requests were made in February and March for interviews by phone. Ten remote interview requests

were made and five interviews undertaken. Interviews were recorded for note taking purposes only

and subsequently destroyed. One recording failed to work and notes of that discussion relied solely

on notes taken. The Topic Guide with questions is provided in Annex 1. Interviewee names are not

reported. The local authorities participating were:

 London Borough of Camden

 London Borough of Croydon

 London Borough of Southwark

 Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council

 Southampton City Council."

Edinburgh study:

A key lesson learned from the pilots was the need for infrastructure provision: ensuring peripheral

streets can accommodate displaced traffic movements,..."