LTN Discussion

[Rockets]

Legal - was the electric bike in question that green electric bike delivery monster truck that jumped the red lights at Turney and shot up the hill - I didn't catch which company it was but they should know that their riders are driving recklessly - a number of people commented on it as he was going at an unsafe speed and driving through the junction without a care for anyone else using it? Far too many times I see cyclists, whether lycra-clad weekend Olympic road warriors on their £10k bikes or electric bikes bombing through that junction - anyone who walks that way knows that fear of dread when you hear the ominous sound of an expensive gear train on a carbon-fibre bike approaching at speed! ;-)

The school issue is a big one that is not going away and I do then chuckle to myself when I see posts like the one below from people who were no doubt complaining that too many people were driving to drop their children at Alleyn's and now the children are using coaches still aren't happy.....

[legalalien]

It was green, yes, and it seemed to come out of nowhere, wasn’t aware it had jumped the light. I think it might have had a name that started with “urb…” as the idea of something like urban sprang to mind, but I was a bit startled and can’t remember- old age!

[heartblock]

I have to dodge bikes both human driven and electric ..plus scooters every day walking to Herne Hill station...also, how much is the square of shame pretty-ing up going to cost?

I would have though that the Village has access to huge swathes of parkland and that this money might be better spent on providing free school meals for children in the borough that are not residents of one of the wealthiest areas of the UK.

[malumbu]

Summary: it would help your arguments if you made posts shorter.

when I praised Rah Rah's post for being short I was not being sarcastic. I'd love to understand better the counter argument against LTNs but there is so much resentment here most posts just go into a stream of consciousness. Worse stll go on an anti-cycling rant. At least try to summarise your 'argument in the first line or two. I'm on a laptop with a decent screen so easier to read posts. When I am on my mobie I just lose the will to live/read

[Bic Basher]

I've recently got back into cycling and North Cross Road is perfectly safe as it is even with cars doing 15-20mph.

On the whole, the back roads which haven't been closed to through traffic I feel perfectly safe riding along such as Crystal Palace Road, Goodrich Road, Pellatt Road (where car drivers have given me right of way) etc.

It's main roads that need more cycling provision, the cycle lanes on Peckham Road are wonderful despite buses, cars and lorries thundering past. I also felt safe turning off the junction of Peckham Road to Lyndhurst Way, but on LL I don't feel particularly safe except for the bus lane sections towards The Grove in the Forest Hill direction.

[Rockets]

One Dulwich latest update - seems like the Turney closure came as a surprise to even those who have been granted an audience with the council - one wonders who was lobbying for it then and why the council didn't mention it to anyone.....

Campaign Update | 11 Oct

URGENT ACTION NEEDED

Southwark updated its ‘Dulwich Village – streets for people’ website with two design ideas for the Dulwich Village junction yesterday, 10 October. To everyone’s astonishment, both designs include the closure of Turney Road at the Dulwich Village end.

This has never been raised before, and wasn’t mentioned at One Dulwich’s online meeting last week. The Council has provided no information at all on the likely effects of the Turney Road closure on a) access for local residents or people working in Dulwich, or b) the displacement of traffic and congestion on to surrounding roads and in the Dulwich area as a whole.

Consultation/engagement closes on 30 October, meaning that there are now just 19 days left to respond.

PLEASE ACT NOW

We are asking you to take five urgent actions:

1. Comment on the design proposals here. It takes only a few minutes.

Question 2 We suggest you answer ‘Don’t support’, as no evidence has been provided to suggest that any of the core objectives could be delivered.

Question 3 Please ask the Council to allow access for Blue Badge holders, GPs, community nurses and midwives, SEND transport and social care workers so that the most vulnerable in the community are looked after.

Question 4 Please object to the closure of Turney Road because there is no information about the likely impact on access or traffic displacement.

Question 5 cannot be answered, because there is no way of rejecting both design proposals and Questions 6 and 7 are irrelevant. We suggest you leave all these blank.

2. Email streetspace@southwark.gov.uk to say that the online survey does not allow you to reject both design proposals, so you have left question 5 blank, but that you would like email confirmation by return that Southwark Council has recorded your rejection of both design proposals on the grounds that insufficient information has been provided about the impact of the closure to motorised vehicles of a) Turney Road and b) not one but two arms of the junction.

3. Email complaints@southwark.gov.uk to say (in your own words if possible, please) that the consultation process on the design of the Dulwich Village junction is deeply flawed because:

we have been given no data or modelling to show the likely impact of the closure to motorised vehicles of either a) Turney Road, or b) two out of the four arms of the junction;

we were promised that engagement would take place with local people (residents, businesses, campaign groups) BEFORE concept designs were presented (Phase 1 interviewed only a ‘representative sample’ – and didn’t ask where people lived – so did not capture the views of the community);

the deadline of 30 October gives us insufficient time to respond;

the online survey does not allow respondents to reject both design options;

no local councillor is willing to champion the needs of residents or businesses who object to the scheme;

no council officer is willing to act on legitimate concerns raised by local people about the lack of motorised access for those with protected characteristics, or for those who care for them.

4. Email Southwark’s chief executive althea.loderick@southwark.gov.uk to complain, using any or all of the above points, and adding your own personal perspective.

5. Sign the epetition (now working) on Southwark’s website (not our petition but we support its aims) asking the Council to ensure access through the junction for the most vulnerable.

Thank you for your support.

The One Dulwich Team

[Rockets]

  Bic Basher said:

I've recently got back into cycling and North Cross Road is perfectly safe as it is even with cars doing 15-20mph.

On the whole, the back roads which haven't been closed to through traffic I feel perfectly safe riding along such as Crystal Palace Road, Goodrich Road, Pellatt Road (where car drivers have given me right of way) etc.

It's main roads that need more cycling provision, the cycle lanes on Peckham Road are wonderful despite buses, cars and lorries thundering past. I also felt safe turning off the junction of Peckham Road to Lyndhurst Way, but on LL I don't feel particularly safe except for the bus lane sections towards The Grove in the Forest Hill direction.

 

Absolutely, side road or back street cycling has always been the safest option - I used to cycle to Hammersmith and only once or twice on the route needed to go on busier roads. But LTNs were built on the premise that side-road traffic was increasing - which it wasn't - that narrative was built on dodgy data that has since been corrected and now shows that traffic levels are decreasing and would decrease more if it was not for the get it now delivery culture that most are embracing that has led to an increase in van traffic.

LTNs were also built on the premise of a car-led recovery, which again, did not happen. They were also built on the promise of a modal shift to bikes which again, did not happen. But what has happened is that congestion has increased (particularly clear to anyone who spends anytime around Dulwich) around peak travel times as those fewer cars are being forced along fewer roads.

So we are left wondering why are council's continuing to pursue this ludicrous strategic initiative when it is clear it is not delivering and installing even more measures (Turney) that will put increased pressure on roads (and residents) around the Village and Croxted Road etc.

[Earl Aelfheah]

For those interested, the LTN traffic monitoring dashboard has been updated (cue lot's of nonsense about how the traffic counts are faked):

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

[Rockets]

The devil is very much in the detail isn't it.

Interesting that on a road like East Dulwich Grove parts of it are consistently breaking the pre-Covid levels yet traffic (according to the council) is still not at pre-Covid levels across the borough.

Also, does the council allow us to compare previous dashboards as, correct me if I am wrong, but more of the dashboard is turning orange and red than before?

What caused the drop in traffic on Lordship Lane Central in May as that looks like the chart has been corrected or altered given the previous trends.

[Dulwichgirl82]

There is a team taking feedback in Dulwich village today on the new proposals, from my brief foray it was no going well for them. A lot of angry people!

[Spartacus]

Whilst it's slightly off topic, this is a worrying development

BBC News - Speeding drivers to be fined by Wandsworth Council

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63322848

Anyone convinced that councils don't see drivers as mobile cash machines is delusional in my opinion.

[march46]

Yes it is off-topic, but interested to know exactly what is worrying about a council tackling dangerous speeding??

I would love Southwark to do the same. The roads aren’t safe with drivers regularly ignoring and greatly exceeding the 20mph limit.

 

  Quote

Whilst it's slightly off topic, this is a worrying development

BBC News - Speeding drivers to be fined by Wandsworth Council

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-63322848

Anyone convinced that councils don't see drivers as mobile cash machines is delusional in my opinion.

[Spartacus]

  Quote

Yes it is off-topic, but interested to know exactly what is worrying about a council tackling dangerous speeding??

I would love Southwark to do the same. The roads aren’t safe with drivers regularly ignoring and greatly exceeding the 20mph limit.

 

Whilst speeding should be enforced, it should be enforced by the police and not local councils who then keep the fine. It encourages councils to treat cars and drivers as cash machines rather then enforcing to stop it happening again.

As the council won't be allowed to add penalty points then it's hardly a deterrent as points add up and remove dangerous drivers.

[malumbu]

Don't care if is the council or police that fine you for speeding. Don't care who keeps the money. Simply don't do it.

I would draw the line at private companies enforcing this.

As with all enforcement it needs to be proportional.

A job for central government to challenge car culture and this sense of entitlement. But none will due to it being likely vote loser. I was in Bromley today, It's crying out for 20 mph throughout.

[Bic Basher]

I rode tonight from Morrisons Peckham to LL. Considering it was dark and Bellenden Road was reasonably busy with cars, I did wonder if I'd be in any real danger?

Not really, the roads in that part of Peckham have are fine for bikes and there is some cycling provision on the one-way system and painted bike symbols on the roads there. Is there a LTN? Nope.

It's an area that could easily become one, it's the most affluent part of Peckham and yet the measures there for cycling are fine, so why didn't they do that in Dulwich Village?

[malumbu]

You've actually defeated your own arguments Peckham has a number of roads with special arrangements for cyclists. One ways and no through roads where cyclists are permitted and motorised transport not. They don't have cameras, are not called LTNs, Southwark do not issue fines, and the denizens of SE22 don't get all angry

But thanks to you and others for giving me some new material to comment on rather than the usual anti-LTN stuff.

There's a discussion on proportionality that I referred to earlier worthy of a separate thread on the Drawing Room.

[Bic Basher]

  Quote

You've actually defeated your own arguments Peckham has a number of roads with special arrangements for cyclists. One ways and no through roads where cyclists are permitted and motorised transport not. They don't have cameras, are not called LTNs, Southwark do not issue fines, and the denizens of SE22 don't get all angry

But thanks to you and others for giving me some new material to comment on rather than the usual anti-LTN stuff.

There's a discussion on proportionality that I referred to earlier worthy of a separate thread on the Drawing Room.

 

Hardly, the roads I used had shared access for cars and bikes. There's a segregated cycle lane on one part of the Bellenden one-way system and that was it.

All of the back roads I used in Peckham had humps to slow down cars which Court Lane also has and yet the Peckham roads and Crystal Palace Road allow cars which shows that it's not closing a whole road that needs to be done, but sensible cycling measures which could have been introduced instead of the LTN.

[malumbu]

Loads of points for discussion. Making active travel more appealing Vs discouraging short car journeys. Getting drivers out of their cars and using public transport. Improved cycle infrastructure - I don't routinely use CPR but it is chocka in the morning and doesn't feel cycle friendly. Sharing space, many drivers consider themselves superior to bikes, the highway code gives them equal priority. Speed control. More confident cyclists, many won't like cycling with traffic, and that extends to parents who cycle with their kids on what are fairly cycle friendly roads (eg Dulwich Village).

Eons ago on the previous LTN thread (and on Lounge threads), that government needs to take a greater lead, joining up health benefits, better air quality, climate change and improved urban environment. Spending time in Bromley yesterday reinforced this, where car culture is king.

[alice]

I always use that Bellenden stretch. It's very safe and pleasant unlike those speeding through rye lane [not stopping, not shopping]

but I have posted about this before.

[CPR Dave]

Crystal Palace Road never used to be chocka in the morning until they closed the roads of East Dulwich Grove. All the additional traffic that generated on Lordship Lane pushed more cars onto our road.

It's supposed to be the cycle spine but it's actually safer cycling on Lordship Lane now.

[Bic Basher]

  Quote

I always use that Bellenden stretch. It's very safe and pleasant unlike those speeding through rye lane [not stopping, not shopping]

but I have posted about this before.

 

Bellenden into Maxted Road, Nutbrook Street and Adys Road are great to cycle on.

I still don't feel particularly comfortable cycling on LL except for the section southbound from Friern Road to Wood Vale which is largely a bus lane.

[heartblock]

So much money spent to make a few roads 'gated' and 'safe' while all the other roads remain, potholed, noisy, unsafe, polluted, bad for cyclists, pedestrians and drivers.

Well done Southwark and well done everyone that supported this ridiculous green-washing and extremely expensive exercise. I do hope you all enjoy the Morris Dancing in the square of shame though.

If only we had great public transport, pedestrian crossings where they are needed, mandatory private school transport or even better only local schools and no long-distance private schooling, local transport links and pedestrian/cycle lanes with some imagination and thought...

[malumbu]

Perhaps it is time to move on. There are many things wrong in life but apart from venting your frustration you won't change things on LTNs. Council elections show that this was not a big enough issue to sway

Perhaps contact the private schools and ask them what their sustainable transport policies are and could they do more to discourage parents driving kids to school, or at least make sure they had a car full.

I was surprised how empty the Village was last week at 3 30, Southwark schools had yet to break up so even with charter, Dulwich and Bessemer primaries most traffic appears to be private school parents. Dulwich college has no restrictions on parking near by.

[northernmonkey]

Whilst it is always quieter when private schools are off, last week Dulwich Hamlet and Infants and both Charters were also off

[ab29]

Update from One Dulwich below. Respond to the consultation – deadline 30 October.

Southwark labour councillors are just like Mistrust and Quasi: pure ideologists with no real data to support their claims and yet they are set on their destructive path.

Campaign Update | 26 Oct[/b]

1. Respond to the consultation – deadline 30 October: https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/posting.php?mode=reply&t=2254104

If you haven’t already done so, please give your views on the “Dulwich Village – streets for people” consultation as soon as possible. (You might want to consider some of the concerns raised in point 3, below.)

2. Sign the epetition: ePetition: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?HPID=6018417&ID=50000032&RPID=6018417

Not our petition, but we support its aims. Recurring technical difficulties have made it very difficult for people to sign. Please keep trying. You may have to change your password multiple times before you’re allowed to proceed.

3. Escalate your complaint

Many of you have got in touch to say that you emailed complaints@southwark.gov.uk[/b] and received a generic response from Head of Highways Dale Foden which you don’t feel answers any of the points you have made.

If this is the case, please take your complaint to the next level. Go to Southwark’s website: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/complaints-comments-and-compliments/making-a-complaint

and click on “Escalation to review stage form”. Your summary of the reasons why you are unhappy with the initial response could say that the concerns you raised have not been addressed because (include any of the following):

The Council has not considered the effect of closing two arms of the junction on surrounding roads in terms of traffic displacement;

The Council has not considered the needs of vulnerable road-users and those who care for them, especially Blue Badge holders, SEND transport, NHS workers like GPs, community nurses and midwives, and carers;

The Council has not considered the connectivity of the road network (as we see from the tailbacks and congestion whenever there is a burst water main or roadworks), even though it has a statutory network management duty to do so;

The Council has provided no evidence to show that its current proposals would improve safety for all road users;

The Council has gone back on its promise that engagement would take place with local people (residents, businesses and campaign groups) BEFORE concept designs were presented – Phase 1 was limited to interviewing a “representative sample” of those using the junction, and didn’t ask where people lived, so did not capture the views of the local community;

The online survey does not allow respondents to reject both design options.

4. Ask for a meeting

The Council says it is providing an extensive consultation process, and welcomes input from all local groups. If your local group or association hasn’t yet done so, please email streetspace@southwark.gov.uk to ask for a meeting.

Thank you for your support.

Best wishes,

The One Dulwich Team