LTN Discussion

[legalalien]

I?m on team crackdown on home deliveries. Get rid of unlimited delivery per month charges as opposed to per delivery charges for a start. The charge for each delivery should approximate the cost of that delivery.

[Metallic]

I asked Goldilocks if they lived in an LTN - no answer.

[goldilocks]

Play the ball, not the player Metallic!

[Waseley]

I've just done a quick Google search in home deliveries. There is a little about freight consolidation, and last mile zero emission deliveries, in gov clean air zone framework. But I didn't find anything about reducing home deliveries. It's a free market and retailers will charge accordingly. The authorities don't like intervening. There either lacks the political will, market will and/or public will to take up more creative solutions.

[march46]

There?s a lot going on in this space @Wasely, cargo bikes are everywhere delivering where once cars or vans did. The potential to reduce polluting vehicle journeys is huge.

[Waseley]

In deed, I'm a fan and great to see the thread on cargo bikes. Part of the solution....

[legalalien]

For info, proposed changes to Bellenden Road as part of the continued roll out of the Southwark Spine.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50028535

Good to see the council splitting out residents? responses from out of area responses and acknowledging the latter are likely to have been in response to Southwark Cyclists soliciting responses (which they are of course entitled to do). I suspect those responses may be a key contributor to the fairly skewed age and ethnicity profiles of respondents.

[exdulwicher]

I've just done a quick Google search in home deliveries. There is a little about freight consolidation, and last mile zero emission deliveries, in gov clean air zone framework. But I didn't find anything about reducing home deliveries. It's a free market and retailers will charge accordingly. The authorities don't like intervening. There either lacks the political will, market will and/or public will to take up more creative solutions.

There was a page or so on this topic buried in amongst the 300 pages in the previous (now closed) LTN thread.

Retailers want to offer the best customer service so will offer next or even same-day delivery. The quicker the delivery, the less efficient it usually is since there's less chance of a van being able to fill up and do multiple drops in an area. If you order something at 10am on same-day, the retailer simply won't have the volume of orders to fill a van so you end up with a van having a couple of items on it rushing from depot to door in the space of a 4-6hr window. Much less efficient than one that can load up fully and do 40 drops in the area.

They often don't put the price on the delivery since that puts people off ordering. They'll either do it Amazon style where you pay a fixed fee per month for Prime which includes "free" next day delivery or simply hike the price of everything to cover it. Much like supermarkets run loss-leader items - artificially cheap bread, milk etc gets customers in the door and they'll invariably spend more once in there.

"Free" delivery tempts the same sort of behaviour in certain retail areas; the customer buys a few extra items - they may as well because it's free delivery, they can try them on and then send them back (more van journeys!) for free if they don't like them.

You also have situations where the customer is out and the parcel gets returned to depot for another delivery attempt the next day - another van journey.

Retailers don't want to address it for fear of losing customers. After all if they don't offer free next day, someone else will. The Government doesn't want to address it because it's market forces. The consumer - well some people genuinely do care and avoid places like Amazon but there aren't enough people like that to offset the ones who do order that thing they *need* same day. And I get that that exists, there are times when it's justified like if your fridge/freezer breaks down and you get onto [retailer of choice] and have a new one brought in urgently before all your food goes to waste. But it's not like that explains all the vans charging around the place!

[Waseley]

I want it and I want it now culture. Microdeliveries, I've run out of toilet paper so I will get some delivered in 20 mins . Even if this is by bicycle it is still not efficient. I run out of stuff but that is what the convenience store is for. Good point on Amazon, I do avoid but occasionally for a Niche product and it makes Xmas pressies so convenient.

[legalalien]

And let?s not forget the practice that has developed of ordering loads of clothes online, trying them on, and sending the ones you don?t want back. I don?t do this but you do see loads of people queued up at the post office seemingly returning goods.

[DulvilleRes]

Rockets wrote: 'But it is clear there are people who come on here to laud the benefits of the LTNs who live on the roads benefitting most from the closures. And that's before we even address the long-banned souls like LTNBooHoo and Manatee who came on here to troll anyone with a view that opposed theirs - and many suspected such posters were existing members setting up new accounts'

You seem to have overlooked the poster from the anti LTN lobby, who the administrator in banning them hilariously told him/ her to stop having weird multiple conversations with themselves in different identities! But don't let the full facts get in the way of a good story.

I await with interest One Dulwich's interrogation of the prospective local council elections candidates as to their stance on the LTNs. I do hope it is rigorous enough to include

- Given that One Dulwich shares Southwark Council's objectives to reduce traffic, improve air quality and enable safe cycling and walking, how do you think you are realistically going to achieve this across the entire area? Can you set out some detailed and feasible plans?

if you are campaigning on a platform of accountability, do those principles of accountability extend across the actions of your entire political party?

- is your focus on the LTN's as a campaigning issue - if it is at the expense of other issues such as the profound impact rule breaking at the highest levels of government had at a local level - opportunistic?

[Waseley]

National politics is an important factor. We've had a Tory government full of gesture politics, yet have been taken to task by the Supreme Court for failing to achieve air quality. They give local authorities blunt instruments to tackle this, meanwhile failing to increase fuel duty and perversely reducing air passenger duty for short haul.

[legalalien]

I don't think that One Dulwich and the Conservative Party is, as you suggest, one and the same. Undoubtedly there is and will be some overlap. If you mean the Conservative Party, just say that?

Given the LTNs are a conservative-initiated policy, it's a strange situation where you can vote Conservative locally and actually be voting against Team Gilligan at Conservative HQ. So maybe voting Conservative locally is actually an anti-Boris vote :)

Still not sure who I am going to vote for. Accountability I see as an individual thing, and it's very hard to tell who is going to step up to the plate until you see them in office. In terms of traffic reduction objectives, I'm more focused on "do no harm" than whether a viable plan is presented. It's quite possible that Southwark council can't, on its own, do much to fix the problem.

[DulvilleRes]

Legalalien - I should have been clearer. One Dulwich have released a statement saying they are apolitical, and are going to ask all the prospective councillors for their views on LTN's, and then report back to their supporters/ the community. My questions are ones I would hope they ask all councillors. The final question would be most relevant to the Conservatives.

Whilst I don't know enough about, and can't speak for the respective parties, I would imagine Labour would have clear views on reducing traffic/ promoting active travel, and it would be interesting to hear the Lib Dems on this. I think both parties would have a clear and transparent view on accountability. This I think is important, as fundamentally I think politicians as an entity should, as far as possible, be demonstrably trustworthy, and accountability has formed a part of the campaigning so far of at least one of the prospective parties.

What the Conservatives, given their current track record at a national level, would say is less clear to me on any of the questions. If One Dulwich is apolitical, as they say they are, I would hope they ask searching questions of all of the candidates without fear or favour.

[legalalien]

Got it!

Based on my brief discussion with the LD chap who came to the door, I got the impression that while the LDs are in favour of LTNs generally, the local candidates have been given some scope to oppose this particular one. I'm not exactly sure what that means at a practical level, so will be interested to hear the outcome of any One Dulwich interrogation.

Completely agree that the questions need to be searching and quite granular, otherwise we'll just get platitudes/ ambiguous statements that try to appeal to as many people as possible.

[Rockets]

I am glad One Dulwich are doing an assessment of all candidates. This is local democracy in action - One Dulwich are a local action group who, by the fact they have over 2,000 members, have to be taken seriously by all the candidates. At a time when the council and councillors are refusing to answer questions about the LTNs it creates a platform to understand their stance and also that of the other candidates for the seats.

I suspect a lot of people will be deciding where their votes go on the basis of what the responses are to groups like One Dulwich - many have already decided they are voting against Labour but will use this to decide who gets their vote.

DulvilleRes - On the questions being asked maybe One Dulwich will run a consultation and just ignore the responses from anyone who doesn't agree with their view!!! ;-)

Waseley - means-tested road pricing can work. Means-testing is used in many parts of Scandinavia to determine traffic fines: https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland-home-of-the-103000-speeding-ticket/387484/

March cargo bikes - I am a big fan of them too but they won't be replacing Ocado or Currys deliveries anytime soon. That needs to be addressed by significant intervention by authorities to encourage electric vehicle use for deliveries.

Cargo bikes are great for a lot of things but they need to break out of the "artisan expensive local delivery" bracket or "too lazy to walk to the shops" bracket before they can have any impact on reducing vehicular journeys. I hear how some friends of mine use the delivery of coffee to their house and I am amazed how lazy it makes people.

I always see Freddie's Flowers being delivered on cargo bikes and that's all well and good but it's very niche (and expensively niche too).

[Waseley]

Rockets, some of your arguments are like anti-vaxxers. This is what I believe and now I will find the evidence. How you equate traffic offences with a road charging system I don't know. The UK courts can already issue fines based on salaries. A routine road charging system, would need to have facial recognition if it was to charge drivers, rather than owners. Even with our surveillance society that would be a step too far. Otherwise I'd get an elderly retired relative to register my car, so I'd pay less for road charging.

[heartblock]

Aaah the gaslighting is strong on this forum we are like 'anti-vexers' now. Well done for embedding my view.

[Waseley]

No, Rockets case for means based road charging was like my discussion with a neighbour. Every time I challenged them on their views on the vaccine they came up with phony science. I wasn't making a blanket accusation, and probably don't have time to find a similar proposal from you unless you wish to direct me accordingly.

Don't take that as a challenge 😉

[heartblock]

Aaah so now we are 'phony' ..do go on.. my view even more embedded on the 'gaslighting' have added 'phony' to 'anti-vaxer'.

I walked up to The Village today.. the junction is a hot mess...I'm not sure any of it makes any sense. Just open it, so we can employ our intellect and energy on real measures to reduce traffic and pollution rather than this diversion side-show, sent to please and massage the guilt of the the multi-car owning, 2-3 million pound house owning, sending kids to private school, my cleaner drives to my house, green-washing Tory-lite, NIMBY, second home owning, I bought a nice house, I bought a bike, but only ride at the weekend and when its sunny to prove a point and my home is now it's worth a few more thousand quid types.

[Rockets]

Waseley come on - you stated it couldn't work. I was merely pointing out that it can work and means-testing is made to work in Scandinavia and now you've gone off on a track likening me to an anti-vaxxer. But you do have previous in this regard after your "wow, you do have issues" statement to me on another thread. Honestly, if all you are doing is come on here is to pick a fight then maybe the forum isn't the right place for you. It gets combative here but people, in the main, keep it polite and are respectful of one another.

Means testing road pricing seems an infinitely better way to reduce vehicle miles than chucking in a load of roadblocks and trying to convince people that overall car use declines as a result. I am not sure you would need facial recognition - you merely would charge the car for the miles it did based on a means-test - they could link it to the tax-codes of the registered owner and insured driver of the car.

On the subject of ANPR cameras they are going up all over the place - in fact, today I noticed the new path finally cleared in the square for emergency vehicles - has new cameras (or cash epicentres as the council likes to call them ;-)) installed.

Also, I have to say the Calton Road approach looks really ugly now as they have a plethora of new no cars signs plastered everywhere and on new poles to warn drivers that despite there being a gap it is for emergency vehicles only. But overall I am glad to see that the council finally did a U-turn and listened to the emergency services about how their roadblocks were slowing response times and endangering lives. Only two years too late.

[ab29]

I fully agree with Rockets and Heartblock. LTN brought nothing but misery to people on the main and boundary roads, caused miles of idling traffic which worsten the air pollution and divided the community. It is a spectacular failure.

[Waseley]

So do you means test the owner or the driver? If the latter then you need facial recognition. It's not going to happen. This is a forum. We are having a discussion. If I've got to wrong then please tell me why. If means testing road charging is in anyone's manifesto then I'd love to see their case and how this will be delivered.

[Rockets]

Means test the registered keeper of the car and then charge for use accordingly - no facial recognition needed then.

Do you agree that road pricing (whether means tested or not - I just wanted to make it fair on everyone) would be a more effective way to combat the issue of too much traffic than LTNs?

There are plenty of other interventions suggested by many on this forum that were far more equitable and less damaging than the disastrous LTNs but unfortunately the council only listened to one set of lobbyists when determining what course of action to take during OHS and that ultimately delivered us to where we are today.

[legalalien]

Determination of Objections to North Peckham Streetspace scheme. The EQIA and response in the report are an interesting read.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50027107

Schemes now said to take 3-4 years to bed in.