Urgent: Help Reopen Closed Melbourne Grove and adjacent roads

[FairTgirl]

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049

This should work, just tested on laptop

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I cannot recall any occasion on which I have

> ever

> > heard a shopkeeper (including family members!)

> or

> > taxi driver say anything in favour of any

> proposed

> > change to traffic management. Not yellow lines,

> > not red routes, not the congestion charge, not

> > ULEZ, not CPZ, not school streets, and not

> LTNs.

> > Not in Dulwich, not anywhere else I've lived.

> > Perhaps this is a result of my own confirmation

> > bias.

>

>

> Definitely in favour of timed closures for school

> streets. So there you go, you have heard one.

Every day a new exciting experience!

How would you feel about Melbourne Grove being a school street?

[alice]

They?d have to build a school first.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

They did, didn't they? Jarvis Rd has a gate to the Charter School campus.

[Rockets]

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Spartacus Wrote:

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

> -----

> > There is a factor that the argument for road

> > closure fails to take into effect for

> businesses.

> >

> > I mentally call it the blues brother shopping

> mall

> > effect. In the original film they drove through

> a

> > shopping mall calling out the businesses in it.

> > Whilst it's not a shopping mall, cars

> traversing

> > through a shopping street can result in driver

> /

> > passenger spotting a business that they didn't

> > know existed there, thus encouraging them to

> stop

> > or return another day. This also has the

> opposite

> > effect of when cars don't pass the business it

> > becomes out of sight, out of mind !

> >

> > Don't get me wrong as pedestrians and cyclists

> > will have a similar effect however more often

> than

> > not car drivers that experience the phenomenon

> > will be from just outside of the area thus

> adding

> > to the trade a business will normal get.

> (Cyclist

> > and pedestrians are normally more local)

> >

> > Equally if an area is harder to get to or park

> in,

> > trade will naturally migrate to places that are

> > easier for drivers, it's the unintentional side

> > effect out of town shopping centres, retail

> parks

> > and large supermarkets had on business in town

> > centres from the 80s onwards.

> >

> > So before people say "but the road is

> accessible

> > from one end", think about what knock on effect

> it

> > has on businesses located on it from passing

> trade

> > and how it encourages people to shop elsewhere.

> >

> > As I said before, these closures need a proper

> > consultation and pre implementation study

> followed

> > by a full post implementation study rather than

> > the council rushing them in under the guise of

> > "the moneys there now but we will lose it if we

> > don't spend it" then spending more money when

> they

> > have to, like Wandsworth , do a u-turn !

>

>

> Thankyou Spartacus. So much of this is bang on.

> For the past weeks all the businesses have heard

> from customers is;

>

> 'It is too hard/takes too long to get to you' - -

> because of increased traffic on surrounding roads

> 'We can't park' --- as 1/3-1/2 parking spaces have

> gone at the same time to make room for road

> closure

> 'I would normally pop in on way back from

> Sainsburys (insert other shop) but too hard now' -

> as would have to go to Lordship Lane and turn

> right onto EDG and turn into MB Grove from the

> other end.

>

> All it takes is one very small barrier for people

> to not bother.

> It's why so many businesses have their doors open

> - it is well documented an open door is one less

> barrier to the customers and an invitation in.

>

>

> One business on Melbourne Grove says appointments

> are down 45% down in the past two weeks. They have

> been here for 24 years and never experienced such

> a sharp drop. This can't be purely coincidental.

>

> Yes, there is access from the other end of MG but

> what they are hearing is that those who do drive

> for very valid reasons, elderly, disabled, from

> further afield, or need car for a larger

> uncarryable load, multiple kids etc are not

> stopping any more.

>

> Customers are approaching the businesses of their

> own volition and saying, 'I am less likely to

> visit you'.

>

> We all agree car usage must go down, especially

> for short journeys but you need to make it easier

> for people to make the change - invest in an

> infrastructure that encourages active travel - put

> in some more cycle lanes, limit car owner ship,

> incentivise car share schemes, add in more useful

> bus routes, subsidise public transport further. If

> safety/speeding is the issue look at one ways,

> speed bumps, ANPR cameras, timed restrictions.

>

> Encourage people to use alternative methods with

> education and campaigning, but allow people the

> access they need when and where they need it, by

> car if they need to.

>

> Don't grab some money, block off some roads, cross

> your fingers and hope for the best.

>

> I am sure there will be some snippy replies 'Who

> cares about X cafe/restaurant/shop/hairdresser etc

> business', or more calls to boycott them by some

> kind residents but seriously, have a heart! Many

> have been operating here for over 15 years, and

> there are some brand new ones just trying to find

> their feet. They've all just seen their

> livelihoods take a battering with lockdown,

> probably another on its way.

>

> Let's not forget they have been totally sidelined

> when it comes to this scheme on these roads. No

> conversation whatsoever.

>

> Why should they have to wait 6 months to see if

> this 'beds in' and what if it doesn't? 6 months of

> watching their business die over key Christmas

> trading periods thanks to unconsulted road

> closures with lockdowns going on around them.

>

> Is now really the time to be experimenting with

> livelihoods in this way?

>

> We should be supportive and rally around local

> businesses with initiatives like the brilliant

> raffle scheme not tear into any that say, quite

> rightly, 'This is not OK'.

I really don't think this council cares about the shops in East Dulwich. They have displayed a totally apathetic view to them during all consultations and have consistently tried to sideline their concerns.

I am still very interested to hear from Cllr McAsh about whether he is concerned about what is currently going on within his ward. His re-appearance on this forum seems to be have been short-lived - he has been too busy penning articles for Novaramedia.

[FairTgirl]

Speaking only for self here - there are many businesses on the road - who may have own specific opinions - but I would be very amenable to the school closing the road for short periods as it needed for pupil safety at school arrival/departure as an alternative to the current planters.

[march46]

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Speaking only for self here - there are many

> businesses on the road - who may have own

> specific opinions - but I would be very amenable

> to the school closing the road for short periods

> as it needed for pupil safety at school

> arrival/departure as an alternative to the current

> planters.

Interesting that you say there?s a range of views, as that?s what I?ve found speaking to the businesses along Melbourne Grove. Some are clearly worried by the change, some confidently say less traffic will be better for their business, some are indifferent and don?t see it will impact either way.

Important to note that both schools are very supportive of the current schemes.

[Serena2012]

The petition asking Southwark to reverse the closures in Dulwich Village and East Dulwich now has over 500 signatures. Linking again http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049

I?m with FairTgirl, in that school streets are to be supported. Arguably, this should include Melbourne North

and Whateley Road (in the case of Whateley, they could have a gate keeper similar to Elsie Road, which would allow buses through). However the closures in their current state are not proportionate, and seem to benefit certain streets, whilst causing significantly increased levels of pollution on others. This is not equitable, nor is it improving air quality.

[alice]

That school is on corner of Whateley and landcroft rds with exit/entry on landcroft.

[Serena2012]

Alice - It is, but if you were to apply the Elsie Road school street logic (whereby the entry and exit from Goose Green is on Tintagel Crescent), to Harris then you would put a gate keeper on Wheatley as well.

Ultimately, the current status quo which involves planters and the closure of a number of very affluent streets which don?t even have schools on them (and where student footfall is almost invariably lower than on EDG) definitely isn?t working, as it is causing huge volumes of congestion and therefore increased air pollution on the roads that house the majority of the area?s schools; whilst also (almost invariably) slowing down buses and emergency vehicles. Whilst we await the ULEZ, I suspect school streets which discourage driving to school, and make it safer for children to cross the road in the vicinity of their schools are a good middle ground.

[Rockets]

Serena2012 Wrote:

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

> Alice - It is, but if you were to apply the Elsie

> Road school street logic (whereby the entry and

> exit from Goose Green is on Tintagel Crescent), to

> Harris then you would put a gate keeper on

> Wheatley as well.

>

> Ultimately, the current status quo which involves

> planters and the closure of a number of very

> affluent streets which don?t even have schools on

> them (and where student footfall is almost

> invariably lower than on EDG) definitely isn?t

> working, as it is causing huge volumes of

> congestion and therefore increased air pollution

> on the roads that house the majority of the area?s

> schools; whilst also (almost invariably) slowing

> down buses and emergency vehicles. Whilst we await

> the ULEZ, I suspect school streets which

> discourage driving to school, and make it safer

> for children to cross the road in the vicinity of

> their schools are a good middle ground.

Indeed they are as they target specific issues at specific times of the day and yet allow free flow of movement at other times.

Interesting to read some of the comments to the school twitter posts. Once again, whilst some are happy others are not.

[first mate]

Serena2012 Wrote:

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

> The petition asking Southwark to reverse the

> closures in Dulwich Village and East Dulwich now

> has over 500 signatures. Linking again

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDispl

> ay.aspx?id=500000049

>

> I?m with FairTgirl, in that school streets are to

> be supported. Arguably, this should include

> Melbourne South and Whateley Road (in the case of

> Whateley, they could have a gate keeper similar to

> Elsie Road, which would allow buses through).

> However the closures in their current state are

> not proportionate, and seem to benefit certain

> streets, whilst causing significantly increased

> levels of pollution on others. This is not

> equitable, nor is it improving air quality.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?id=500000049

Now over 700 signatures.

[Rockets]

Wow, over 1300 signatures now....the council has to respond as they are now under real pressure as those numbers show what the sentiment towards these closures is.

[ianr]

> as those numbers show what the sentiment

> towards these closures is.

the sentiment?

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Interested to hear how the conspiracy theorists are going to reconcile "LTNs are driven by outsiders" with pushing the petition out to taxi drivers and groups from other areas on Twitter!

[Spartacus]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Interested to hear how the conspiracy theorists

> are going to reconcile "LTNs are driven by

> outsiders" with pushing the petition out to taxi

> drivers and groups from other areas on Twitter!

Maybe , shock horror, it's because taxi drivers not only live here but also need to drop residents off in the area.

Possibly no conspiracy at all but simple transfer of information via cab-witter 🤔

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

So will all the stuff about "local residents should decide, not outsiders" be binned now that London tax drivers are bulking out the petition? It was quite a strong OneDulwich talking point before.

[first mate]

Well, hitherto, consultations in favour of CPZ have been bulked out by cyclists well out of the area. Southwark cyclists and LCC actively encourage their members to participate in CPZ consultations much further afield.

[nxjen]

I believe it is only the views of those who live within the proposed CPZ area and receive a consultation document that are taken into consideration.

[first mate]

Not sure that is the case and if it was why would the extremely well informed SC urge members outside of borough consultation areas to get involved and submit?

[nxjen]

I think that anyone can comment during the initial consultation and changes may be made as a result but the final say is with the residents

[first mate]

Indeed, a final say like should the hours be time limited or all day but the fact that there will be CPZ at all is a result of all stages of consultation.

[nxjen]

The fact there will be a CPZ at all is because a resident has requested it

[first mate]

Yes, perhaps one or a handful of residents supported by pro CPZ campaigners from outside the area. My only point is that the ?interference? of outsiders charge cuts both ways.

[FairTgirl]

march46 Wrote:

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

> FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Speaking only for self here - there are many

> > businesses on the road - who may have own

> > specific opinions - but I would be very

> amenable

> > to the school closing the road for short

> periods

> > as it needed for pupil safety at school

> > arrival/departure as an alternative to the

> current

> > planters.

>

> Interesting that you say there?s a range of views,

> as that?s what I?ve found speaking to the

> businesses along Melbourne Grove. Some are clearly

> worried by the change, some confidently say less

> traffic will be better for their business, some

> are indifferent and don?t see it will impact

> either way.

>

That's not a correct interpretation I am afraid. I was asked directly by Dogkennelhillbilly specificially about how I would feel about school streets, to which I said I did not want to speak for other businesses opinions on school streets as I don't know what they all are.

I don't want to presume everyones opinions on that although I may be in favour.

However, when it comes to the planters business owners on both Melbourne Grove and Grove Vale are overwhemingly against them.

Even if they are unsure of what impact they may have on their business - eg their business location and accessibility is not necessarily a large factor on their business success - eg a solicitors - they are gravely concerned about the manner in which is has been done and the impacts for the surrounding roads, schools and nurseries.

I fear Rockets may be correct and Southwark do not care much about business. Perhaps they assume the business owners are not locals and don't vote? But we are and do. I seriously hope the new council leadership and team are committed to paying more attention to everyones concerns and greater equality in all forms.