Dulwich LSP Phase 2 - No access for cars Townley Road to East Dulwich Road from 22 October

[KidKruger]

When I drove up Townley yesterday 2pm there was no signage/cameras I could see regarding restrictions on this street (though apparently restrictions are live now ?).

I also checked Southwark website before setting-off and there was nowt useful I could find regarding whether signage was up / confirmation of 'allowed' times.

Froglander Wrote:

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

> Can someone confirm that there aren?t any signs or

> cameras yet regarding Townley Road access to

> Dulwich Village? I could find the relevant notice

> on the Southwark website.

[Froglander]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> When I drove up Townley yesterday 2pm there was no

> signage/cameras I could see regarding restrictions

> on this street (though apparently restrictions are

> live now ?).

> I also checked Southwark website before

> setting-off and there was nowt useful I could find

> regarding whether signage was up / confirmation of

> 'allowed' times.

>

> Froglander Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Can someone confirm that there aren?t any signs

> or

> > cameras yet regarding Townley Road access to

> > Dulwich Village? I could find the relevant

> notice

> > on the Southwark website.

So bizarre. It?s like they are obfuscating deliberately.

[AylwardS]

Froglander See 2a and 2c of LSP Dulwich trial Phase 2 in the list of orders linked from the original post.

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/22829/LSP-Dulwich-trial-Phase-2-notice-dated-15-Oct-2020-.pdf

No signs when I walked through this morning

[Froglander]

AylwardS Wrote:

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

> Froglander See 2a and 2c of LSP Dulwich trial

> Phase 2 in the list of orders linked from the

> original post.

>

> https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/22829/L

> SP-Dulwich-trial-Phase-2-notice-dated-15-Oct-2020-

> .pdf

>

>

> No signs when I walked through this morning

Thank you.

[Bucky]

No signs or cameras? Is this in effect yet?

[Rockets]

Bucky Wrote:

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

> No signs or cameras? Is this in effect yet?

Nothing this morning when I ran through Dulwich Village.

[Judge]

Interestingly Waze seems to be diverting you around these points already

[Rockets]

Judge Wrote:

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

> Interestingly Waze seems to be diverting you

> around these points already

The algorithms will always win!

[AylwardS]

Looks like this hasn?t started yet. Signs are up in Calton Avenue but covered over. I didn?t see any cameras.

When the signs are uncovered it looks like there will be a large red sign and a round no turn sign.

[Rockets]

Going to be good business for the council when it all starts on Nov 17th. Lewisham made 3.1m from the LTN camera controlled closures in the first couple of months in Lee Green. A lot of people will be getting some very unpleasant lockdown mail from Southwark council in the coming weeks!

[malumbu]

I live in Lewisham and I am really happy that others are reducing the cost of my council tax. Funnily enough I have had a FPN (rather draconian) in the past from Lewisham so bitter irony there. My favourite fine was speedin in the Tyrol as they were a pleasure to do business with, the fine was not draconian, no points on my license and it didn't affect my insurance. I do try not to make a habit of getting tickets.

[Rockets]

Ah but it doesn?t reduce your council tax....it can only be reinvested in road infrastructure! ;-)

[roywj]

Hillsboro road being turned into a school street as well. Signs have gone up but partially covered

[mrwb]

The money for the roads would come from normal council tax if they didn't have the money from fines.

So the council could offset it and reduce council tax...

We all know that won't be happening though. All the cash will go to support salaries of the Tooley st fatcats on 6 figures ?

Law should be changed so they have to use fines to reduce it. Especially for poorer residents.

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Ah but it doesn?t reduce your council tax....it

> can only be reinvested in road infrastructure! ;-)

[Abe_froeman]

I would agree with that on condition that they also insisted cyclists were registered and licensed so they could be penalised for all the red light jumping and pavement cycling they do.

[KidKruger]

perhaps I'm missing something here...

road tax goes into a 'general taxation' fund for use by Govt as it wishes.

there is no compartmentalisation of road tax against other tax income streams, not since 1937 at least.

people do still think road tax goes to a fund for road maintenance. wrong, this income just gets lumped-in with other tax.

[Penguin68]

Local government fines etc associated with road use, fines for oarking,and CPZ revenues and fines for road traffic offences such as being caught static in boxed junctions, speeding etc can only be used by local government on roads and related works. That is, in effect, an hypothecated tax. Of course councils can use such revenues to mitigate expdenditure from general rates, so they could reduce the rates, but they don't.

[Rockets]

I think they would love to but, from what I understand, they are not allowed to. So they have to fritter a lot of money every year on road projects like the recent replacement of paving stones around many of the roads in East Dulwich - which when the councils are complaining about not having enough money from government for other more important needs seems utterly ludicrous.

Just look at the volume of LTN fines Lewisham has issued to raise that ?3.1m in a couple of months - they say they have issued 8,248 warning notices and 46,917 penalty charge notices. 47,000 PCNs from 4 streets - that is utterly ludicrous and I bet you the large majority of those people are local residents - it is shameful.

Residents in Lewisham can no doubt look forward to nice new paving slabs on the basis of the ?3.1m. We also have this to look forward to as I suspect a lot of people will fall foul of the timed closures going in next week.

Good luck everyone!

[malumbu]

Oh dear, time to blame the cyclists. It's a bit like being in the playground.

I've been fined for everything, speeding, jumping a light, being a few microns in a bus lane, cycling, wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area (google that). Some fully deserved, others a bit over the top, and a few times told off and told not to do it again.

There is a whole argument about proportionality - sometimes I fully deserved it, other times it felt unnecessary and over the top. I am far more annoyed at inconsistency where there are some drivers who flout the law all the time, where as other's who are nice law abiding citizens get alienated for a minor transgression.

But I'd happily have average speed cameras everywhere, it would transform our whole attitude to speed. As coppers who let me off years ago racing from traffic lights on a motorbike said (it was brief bit of acceleration) - if you want to ride like that go onto the motorway (or race track, or go cart track, or get a road or mountain bike or other ways to get the adrenaline rush).

Anyway I thought that local authorities were supposed to issue a warning first, rather than go straight to a fine, for LTN transgressions. I wont find out as I wont be driving in these areas, but enjoying the peace when I cycle, particularly on Court Lane.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> I would agree with that on condition that they also insisted cyclists were registered and licensed so they could be penalised for all the red light jumping and pavement cycling they do.

PS as well as being unworkable what a bureaucratic nightmare licensing push bikes and their owners would be. Oh, wait a second, did I hear Farage is proposing this?

[legalalien]

I've never been fined for anything (except jaywalking on my second day in an Australian city - I had no idea there was such a thing)! I am so boring. But for the record I don't think that has any relevance to my views on the current council's failure to provide adequate /accurate data, consult fairly and properly (and possibly as required by law), provide a sufficient level of transparency/ attempt to engage with all members of its constituency on a fair and equal basis, or respond to criticisms that it is failing to meet its own stated criteria for the implementation of its LTN policy.

These issues are bigger than the question of whether or not LTNs are a good thing: if the council acts in this way on this particular issue, there's every chance they are acting the same way on other issues. Once you start scouting around the recesses of the council website you find all manner of things that never see any degree of public scrutiny. So it's potentially a problem for us all at some point.

And yes, it is true that we all have the ability to make ourselves engage more (I am trying to do that): but from my experience that requires a LOT of time, effort, lateral thought in terms of trying to find information - and it's not reasonable to expect everyone to do this, many people don't have the time/ resources (in terms of internet etc access) or skills.

And breathe.

[Rockets]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Oh dear, time to blame the cyclists. It's a bit

> like being in the playground.

>

> I've been fined for everything, speeding, jumping

> a light, being a few microns in a bus lane,

> cycling, wearing a loud shirt in a built-up area

> (google that). Some fully deserved, others a bit

> over the top, and a few times told off and told

> not to do it again.

>

> There is a whole argument about proportionality -

> sometimes I fully deserved it, other times it felt

> unnecessary and over the top. I am far more

> annoyed at inconsistency where there are some

> drivers who flout the law all the time, where as

> other's who are nice law abiding citizens get

> alienated for a minor transgression.

>

> But I'd happily have average speed cameras

> everywhere, it would transform our whole attitude

> to speed. As coppers who let me off years ago

> racing from traffic lights on a motorbike said (it

> was brief bit of acceleration) - if you want to

> ride like that go onto the motorway (or race

> track, or go cart track, or get a road or mountain

> bike or other ways to get the adrenaline rush).

>

> Anyway I thought that local authorities were

> supposed to issue a warning first, rather than go

> straight to a fine, for LTN transgressions. I

> wont find out as I wont be driving in these areas,

> but enjoying the peace when I cycle, particularly

> on Court Lane.

>

> Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I would agree with that on condition that they

> also insisted cyclists were registered and

> licensed so they could be penalised for all the

> red light jumping and pavement cycling they do.

>

>

> PS as well as being unworkable what a bureaucratic

> nightmare licensing push bikes and their owners

> would be. Oh, wait a second, did I hear Farage is

> proposing this?

I don't think anyone is blaming cyclists - we all acknowledge that more has to be done to protect cyclists and also encourage people to cycle but the cycle lobby groups and the way they are used as a trojan horse by councils to help force these changes through create resentment. Also, many of the pro-cycle lobby are not pragmatists and view cars, and their drivers, as the enemy and treat them as such. Time and time again we have seen the usual suspects come on here and tell us everything is now being righted in the world by liberating roads from cars. If only the lobby groups and hardcore activists could take a more collegiate and collaborative approach we might actually get somewhere and see some progress.

Look at the nonsense of the cycle lane wands at the junction of DV and EDG - there are some on here who can't, or won't, acknowledge that it is causing a problem. As long as they can get into the cycle box without impediment then damn the consequences for anyone else. It's that selfish and blinkered attitude that gives cyclists a bad rap - and I speak as a cyclist from a family of cyclists who loves cycling.

[Rockets]

legalalien Wrote:

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

> I've never been fined for anything (except

> jaywalking on my second day in an Australian city

> - I had no idea there was such a thing)! I am so

> boring. But for the record I don't think that has

> any relevance to my views on the current council's

> failure to provide adequate /accurate data,

> consult fairly and properly (and possibly as

> required by law), provide a sufficient level of

> transparency/ attempt to engage with all members

> of its constituency on a fair and equal basis, or

> respond to criticisms that it is failing to meet

> its own stated criteria for the implementation of

> its LTN policy.

>

> These issues are bigger than the question of

> whether or not LTNs are a good thing: if the

> council acts in this way on this particular issue,

> there's every chance they are acting the same way

> on other issues. Once you start scouting around

> the recesses of the council website you find all

> manner of things that never see any degree of

> public scrutiny. So it's potentially a problem

> for us all at some point.

>

> And yes, it is true that we all have the ability

> to make ourselves engage more (I am trying to do

> that): but from my experience that requires a LOT

> of time, effort, lateral thought in terms of

> trying to find information - and it's not

> reasonable to expect everyone to do this, many

> people don't have the time/ resources (in terms of

> internet etc access) or skills.

>

> And breathe.

Indeed and the silver-lining to this issue is that people are going to now scrutinise everything the council does. They got away with it during the CPZ debacle and have now, by their actions, alerted a lot more people to how they behave, how they manipulate and gerrymander things their way. There is no hiding place for them now - they can't bury things or rely on people not caring. This will force them to have to be more accountable to their constituents. In the longrun I think they have just made their lives a lot worse for themselves and they may be regretting fast-tracking these closures through in such an amateurish way - remember how they tried to pin this on social distancing in the first weeks of lockdown - they have been treating the electorate with contempt for way too long.

[macutd]

let's sit down protest

[malumbu]

I'm still really struggling to see these militant cyclists. In the past I went on critical mass rides, and thought it would be fun to gridlock central London. But quickly realised how counterproductive this would be. I've ridden with Southwark cyclists who seem like a nice lot. The only cyclist I could criticise is some of the clubs that can block the Surrey or Kent roads on a Sunday. One may be based round here - anyone own a light blue cycle shirt???

Well at least there is a bit more debate on the subject. But to be blunt we aint meeting our legal carbon targets for transport and stuff will happen one way or another that you may not like. As this is driven from the top then how does your MP feel and will they write to DfT on your behalf re other ways of cutting CO2 from road transport. I've posted elsewhere about financially incentivising reduced private road transport. I'd prefer road pricing but that may be seen as a stick by some. Greenshield stamps for being environmentally aware? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Shield_Stamps

[legalalien]

Did anyone mention militant cyclists?

I think there's a strong tendency in all areas for the council just to speak to the "usual suspects". Take the climate emergency. The council's strategy papers are full of statements about the need to consult fully, engage, educate, bring everyone along for the ride. Yet so far they've set up a Partnerships Steering Group to act as an adviser / give input on the strategy - described as "a group of local residents, partners, interest groups and others with an interest and expertise in this area to provide advice to the Cabinet Member and the Council." Has anyone heard about this body being set up? I suspect few have. Does anyone know who is on it? I've spent some time googling without success, I will email the councillor. Then there's some consultation, including the online one I've posted to earlier that noone was told about. The decision was to "promote the online portal as part of our corporate communications through this period, we will also use known groups within the council such as those that work with young people, BAME groups, interest groups, community groups and others to promote the hub". Deliberately or not - this is not a conspiracy theory - the Council tends to consult and involve only those within its bubble. It might just be because it's cheaper and easier, but that doesn't make it OK. How hard would it be, for example, to post information on sites such as the EDF and get to a wider range of people?

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s89020/Additional%20Consultation%20Information%20Ltr%20from%20Cabinet%20Member%20for%20Environment%20Transport%20and%20the%20Clim.pdf