Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I think CPR Dave is somewhat correct in this - people have enjoyed their own private 'carriage', that used to be only accessible to the very wealthy when it was under real 'horse-power', there is no going back from the freedom of movement given by a private car as a choice. I do choose PT over car travel in London, but I also have enjoyed the freedom to travel by car across the UK. Making PT cheap, comfortable, accessible and efficient is needed, but people will not give up the private car and this freedom to travel. While train travel remains exorbitant and in many cases awful, people will choose the car every time.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> I think CPR Dave is somewhat correct in this -

> people have enjoyed their own private 'carriage',

> that used to be only accessible to the very

> wealthy when it was under real 'horse-power',

> there is no going back from the freedom of

> movement given by a private car as a choice. I do

> choose PT over car travel in London, but I also

> have enjoyed the freedom to travel by car across

> the UK. Making PT cheap, comfortable, accessible

> and efficient is needed, but people will not give

> up the private car and this freedom to travel.

> While train travel remains exorbitant and in many

> cases awful, people will choose the car every

> time.


Rail is the real scandal here. Neither the old New Labour government or the Tories have resolved the issues around pricing, which is so complex for long distance journeys.


They're bringing back a national brand for the railways called Great British Railways from next year, but are keeping private companies running the services on behalf of the DfT for the foreseeable future. It's similar to TfL's model for London Overground, DLR and the Elizabeth line where fares and services are planned by TfL, but a private company pays the staff and maintains the trains etc.

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> The real solutions have to come from the motor

> industry by reducing emissions from petrol/diesel

> vehicles and speeding up the process of EV

> becoming the norm. Shell have converted some

> former petrol stations into EV charging stops.


Electric cars are very expensive - considering leasing or zipcar type use as an alternative as I hardly drive at all now.

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> The iPlayer copy of the LTN report will be deleted

> tomorrow, so have added a copy to YouTube for

> those who want to watch later.

>

>



Very balanced piece...I do love the bit where Cllr Williams says that LTNs are "one bit of the jigsaw" and then mentions ULEZ as another. He should have said that LTNs are, seemingly, the only bit of the jigsaw Southwark has! Anyway nice to see a Labour councillor admitting the existence of the LTNs (interesting they sent him to be interviewed) as it seems the DV incumbents are forgotten they exist - not a mention of them anywhere in their leaflets!


Someone should do some media training for Tristan - he should have asked to be filmed with the traffic behind him not the kids rolling out of school!!!

I thought Cllr Williams seemed quite nervous. TBF it would've made more sense for local cllrs who (whatever you think of the LTNs) did design them and cheerlead for them all the way along, to front the Labour interview. Agree on Tristan! Sincere but could do with some savvy too. Ho hum.

kissthisguy Wrote:

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

> I thought Cllr Williams seemed quite nervous. TBF

> it would've made more sense for local cllrs who

> (whatever you think of the LTNs) did design them

> and cheerlead for them all the way along, to front

> the Labour interview. Agree on Tristan! Sincere

> but could do with some savvy too. Ho hum.


I'm surprised Dickie didn't come out and represent Labour.

Just a reminder that latest data shows traffic is down at all monitored sites, compared with pre pandemic levels. The only exception is EDG East (between Melbourne Grove South and junction with LL, where traffic has been diverted away from a school entrance and now continues down the road before turning). Cycling and walking are up. Pollution has NOT increased. Despite the continual hyperbole, opinion and misinformation on this thread, the LTN has objectively succeeded in increasing active travel and reducing traffic and car use.

Rah x3 - have you been drinking from the council Kool-Aid fountain again?


https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/streetspace/traffic-data-analysis


And the chart goes a lot more red if you include the 15%+ area-wide decrease in traffic when comparing pre- and post-Covid numbers.

-3.5% in my part of Lordship Lane is nothing to brag about.


If the scheme was working properly, it'd be down across the board, but East Dulwich Grove is really feeling the pinch and I'd see how much it's working once Labour introduced their latest scheme in Herne Hill.

Note the times the traffic levels have peaked up to January 2022 in Lordship Lane S. I suspect it's now regularly peaking since then as well.


The school run is still bad along LL. There was traffic from past the Picturehouse to the roundabout at 3.45pm today, one day before the election and we're still being told it's working, but if it's not working at peak times when this scheme was designed to reduce car usage, it's not working.

Thanks for the reminder rahrahrah. I?m always amazed at the comments that there is increased pollution when there is zero evidence for it. People are entitled to their own opinions of course, but there is only one set of facts and as you say - active travel is up, vehicles journeys down.



rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Just a reminder that latest data shows traffic is

> down at all monitored sites, compared with pre

> pandemic levels. The only exception is EDG East

> (between Melbourne Grove South and junction with

> LL, where traffic has been diverted away from a

> school entrance and now continues down the road

> before turning). Cycling and walking are up.

> Pollution has NOT increased. Despite the continual

> hyperbole, opinion and misinformation on this

> thread, the LTN has objectively succeeded in

> increasing active travel and reducing traffic and

> car use.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> Just a reminder that latest data shows traffic is

> down at all monitored sites, compared with pre

> pandemic levels. The only exception is EDG East

> (between Melbourne Grove South and junction with

> LL, where traffic has been diverted away from a

> school entrance and now continues down the road

> before turning). Cycling and walking are up.

> Pollution has NOT increased. Despite the continual

> hyperbole, opinion and misinformation on this

> thread, the LTN has objectively succeeded in

> increasing active travel and reducing traffic and

> car use.


You would think with it being such a success labour would at least mention LTN in one of their seven or eight leaflets they keep delivering?..


Or maybe they do but only in the closed/restricted roads?maybe the cheerleaders for the scheme could confirm???

dulwichfolk Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Just a reminder that latest data shows traffic

> is

> > down at all monitored sites, compared with pre

> > pandemic levels. The only exception is EDG East

> > (between Melbourne Grove South and junction

> with

> > LL, where traffic has been diverted away from a

> > school entrance and now continues down the road

> > before turning). Cycling and walking are up.

> > Pollution has NOT increased. Despite the

> continual

> > hyperbole, opinion and misinformation on this

> > thread, the LTN has objectively succeeded in

> > increasing active travel and reducing traffic

> and

> > car use.

>

> You would think with it being such a success

> labour would at least mention LTN in one of their

> seven or eight leaflets they keep delivering?..

>

> Or maybe they do but only in the closed/restricted

> roads?maybe the cheerleaders for the scheme could

> confirm???



No, even on our road, which is supposedly benefitting from the closures, not a peep about LTNs in any leaflet from Labour. It was such a strange decision - pretending the LTNs weren't an election issue.

Waseley Wrote:

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

> It's good that Labour is trying to do something

> about reducing car journeys. The other two main

> parties seem to just talk about not doing things.

> At a national level the Tory/LD alliance were

> pretty useless on addressing increased pollution

> from road transport.



The data as it keeps getting stated on here showed the dulwich car number we?re reducing year on year (pre covid/LTNs) until they decide to use a count when their were temporary road works to try and push through this whole mess in the first place.

@dulwichfolk - that?s simply not true. All the data is on the website. Traffic is down on pre-covid levels. LTNs have reduced traffic, increased active travel and have not (despite claims on this thread), increased pollution. The data is clear. People can complain about the inconvenience to drivers, but it?s no longer sustainable to claim that the LTNs have not objectively succeeded against most of their objectives.
Labour win in Dulwich Village, in a contest widely touted by ?One? supporters as a referendum on LTNs. Hopefully we can now focus on making improvements to existing schemes rather than trying to scrap them in favour of more traffic, and look to make further improvements to local transport and environment.

Isn?t traffic down across the country even where LTN haven?t been forced upon the local community?


Where exactly is the pollution monitoring? Is it measured on the displacement roads or are you just talking about it being down on your closed road?..in which case I agree a closed road does show less pollution.



rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> @dulwichfolk - that?s simply not true. All the

> data is on the website. Traffic is down on

> pre-covid levels. LTNs have reduced traffic,

> increased active travel and have not (despite

> claims on this thread), increased pollution. The

> data is clear. People can complain about the

> inconvenience to drivers, but it?s no longer

> sustainable to claim that the LTNs have not

> objectively succeeded against most of their

> objectives.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Latest Discussions

    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
    • Another recommendation for Silvano. I echo everything the above post states. I passed first time this week with 3 minors despite not starting to learn until my mid-30s. Given the costs for lessons I have heard, he's also excellent value.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...