LTN Discussion

[diable rouge]

I suspect it will continue for some time.

T-minus 58 days.

Every cloud etc...

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

heartblock Wrote:

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

>

> Maybe kids who travel actively or by PT pay lower

> fees than those chauffeured to school in the

> Porsche Cayenne or the BMW X7... in these times I

> find spending 100 grand on a car pretty

> disgusting, especially when parked illegally on

> EDG with the engine running..

On one hand, it's just not true that "Dulwich traffic is just private schoolkids' fault". (Heartblock - not saying you say this- just saying that this exists as a meme). It's not just schoolkids, and it's not just private schoolkids.

On the other hand, I have zero sympathy for people who have 15 grand a year for school fees and 70 grand for a big diesel SUV, but buying a cargo bike for the school run or paying a childminder to take the kid on the bus is just too, too expensive... (To be fair, there may not be a large number of these people, but they're the most obvious example of everything that's wrong...)

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Angelina Wrote:

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

> I am going to miss the forum for conversations

> such as this

If I can't waste my time bickering about traffic with monomaniacs, I'll probably just have to go back to curing cancer or bringing peace to the Middle East or something...

[Spartacus]

Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote:

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

> Angelina Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I am going to miss the forum for conversations

> > such as this

>

> If I can't waste my time bickering about traffic

> with monomaniacs, I'll probably just have to go

> back to curing cancer or bringing peace to the

> Middle East or something...

OMG

It is you Tony, how's Cherie ?

[ab29]

All the LTN has achieved so far is to redirect traffic from quiet roads to already very busy roads.

It is a complete disaster.

Sending your traffic to your neighbours roads does not solve anything.

Only because you cannot see the traffic anymore it does not mean it has disappeared - it has moved TO YOUR NEIGHBOURS' ROAD.

[Rockets]

And the data is starting to show that very clearly - which is probably why some are happily counting down the days to the end of the forum so some of us cannot remind them of the negative impact.....;-)

[ab29]

On that note: all impacted by LTN please do keep sending feedback to Southwark Council. No one there gives a shit but at least you know you have done something.

I hope one day people responsible for LTN will be held to account.

[Waseley]

There are some interesting wider issues to discuss worthy of their own threads. But on LTNs it's all been said.

There are those that hate and those that dislike LTNs, and similarly those who feel the other way. I expect there are far stronger views on this thread against LTNs with some experiencing the worst effects. People like me who may be mildly inconvenienced and at times benefit see restrictions as a necessity and have seen many schemes in the past just labelled as anti rat runs rather than the new acronym. Similarly CPZs for example with more driving from the outer boroughs once the Overground came in for cheaper travel. I know this from friends close to HOP station.

It's good to debate, become better informed and allow your views to mature. This thread has moved beyond this, the number crunching had got obsessive and repetitive. Final straw was taking data from the national travel survey and bringing out a new interpretation. There are professionals in government who understand this data far better than most here. Rigour may be needed as ministers for example may put their own spin. But the forensic unpicking is daft.

I think I have provided a good summary and for my own sanity need to move onto other things.

May you live in interesting times.

first mate Wrote:

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

> Waseley, absolutely no requirement for you to

continue reading or participating in this thread,so curious why you feel the need to close it? I

suspect it will continue for some time.

> Waseley Wrote:

> -----

> > I think that we have reached an understanding from

both sides, that the issue is too much traffic,and the main reason being that many drivers arenot prepared to change their habits, eg cuttingout unnecessary journeys, lift sharing or switching to other modes. Where we disagree ishow

this is best achieved, in particular the role of

LTNs and if and where they should be applied. I doubt whether there is much more we can debateso

perhaps time for the thread to end. Not that I have the authority to do so! Sweet dreams all.

[first mate]

Great, see you around on other threads.

[Rockets]

Waseley, if you don't scratch beneath the surface you often don't find out what's actually going on. I, for one, am glad people are taking time to dissect the numbers the council is putting out to justify the "success" of their LTNs because it is clear they are painting a picture that isn't actually happening in reality. And if it wasn't for outlets like this forum a lot of people would be completely oblivious to the spin the council is putting out in support of their LTNs.

[heartblock]

If people had bothered to ?dissect? the effects of thalidomide, or the Bristol TGA switch surgery many deformities and deaths may have been avoided. Why wouldn?t anyone want data scrutinised.... seems very lazy and rather dim to me.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Scrutinising data is fine. It's the barrack room statistifying based on speculation, "common sense" and cobblers, then wondering why it's "confusing" that was unhelpful. The "disagreeing with definition of trip because it doesn't suit my prejudices" was just one example of that.

[Rockets]

DKHB - who was arguing over the definition of a trip?

[Rockets]

Does anyone know when the council will be updating their monitoring dashboard for data recorded after January - there has definitely been an upward trend in all the monitoring and I suspect the true impact of the LTNs will be seen in the next batch of data?

It was interesting the council posted this on their dashboard (https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/streetspace/traffic-data-analysis):

Volumes of traffic in December 2021 were likely decreased by both Christmas and the emergence of the Omicron variant.

[first mate]

Once the ED forum is closed how will this info be shared?

[heartblock]

The 'dashboard' is 4 months old...it probably will never be updated and pollution and traffic monitoring will cease as now apparently the pro-LTN closed road lobby have 'won' and 'victory' is theirs. I return from a break, to my road and immediately have an asthma attack... glory be the Unicorn of evaporating traffic on ED Grove.

[Rockets]

I love it when journalists do a "why this article is not accurate" piece on other journalists' work and never actually apply the same rigour to their own articles....

https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1528651576314839040?t=gOQOx5fNKnxXp5y8QznsOA&s=19

.

[ed_pete]

Here - 31/1 to 6/2

Week 04.xlsx

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Does anyone know when the council will be updating

> their monitoring dashboard for data recorded after

> January - there has definitely been an upward

> trend in all the monitoring and I suspect the true

> impact of the LTNs will be seen in the next batch

> of data?

>

> It was interesting the council posted this on

> their dashboard

> (https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/

> improving-our-streets/live-projects/streetspace/tr

> affic-data-analysis):

>

> Volumes of traffic in December 2021 were likely

> decreased by both Christmas and the emergence of

> the Omicron variant.

[heartblock]

This isn?t the dashboard it?s just an ATC report from one point on EDG for Jan. I?m not sure now they have ?victory? over people living on polluted boundary roads, that Southwark will bother to report on pollution and congested traffic. I write this while looking at queuing, polluting traffic outside of my home.

[Rockets]

That data is from the infamous East Dulwich Grove Central and it does show another increase in traffic levels - in fact, the weekly average is now the highest for that point that it has been since Sept 21's figures on the council's dashboard.

It will be very interesting to see the data for all sites in February, March and April as I very much sense the true impact of the LTNs will be seen in the numbers as overall traffic is now climbing back up towards the pre-Covid levels.

It is starting to feel very congested again, especially on the boundary roads that are taking the LTN displacement and I very much suspect that will be validated by the monitoring data.

Does anyone know when we can expect the council to update the dashboard?

[first mate]

Rockets, you don't understand, now we know the data is unreliable we cannot be certain that traffic has increased. LTNs are a great idea because we have to do something to try to reduce traffic. Just because they have not reduced traffic on this road yet it does not mean they never will. We just have to give it all time to 'bed in'. Am I right?

[Spartacus]

Rockets and Firstmate, Evaporation obviously means something else to the council and supporters of LTNs as well

[ab29]

For the council and ltn supporters it means shifting your shit to your neighbours' and feeling great because you don't see it on your doorstep anymore. Hence it has evaporated.

In a meantime in the real world: half term - What A Bliss

[Rockets]

Anyone else notice how bad the traffic coming down Lordship Lane towards Dulwich Library was the last few days due to the works to replace the traffic lights at the junction? It was tailing back all the way up Sydenham Hill and causing chaos on the A205.

[heartblock]

It was crap on ED Grove...smelly pollution all the way down...and Labour/Councillors have magically disappeared....