Jump to content

Recommended Posts

And Snowy thinks a 4x carbon footprint is funny....well that speaks volumes doesn't it....? They laugh when the council does things that do more to harm the environment...amazingly hypocritical but not at all surprising. It does make you wonder about some on the pro-side doesn't it.....

On 10/10/2024 at 11:13, Earl Aelfheah said:

Why ask? Do you really care what the data says? On one hand you quote it (where you think you can spin it to support your prejudice) and on the other you rubbish it as unreliable (exactly as OneDulwich does repeatedly). You do the same with all research on LTNs, on the impact of the ULEZ, with cycling data from Tfl etc... 

You've openly admitted that you only consider information relevant where it conforms to your predetermined view.

But, so as not to be accused of avoiding the question: One claim that the data collected by Southwark Council shows that "...the Dulwich LTNs have not reduced traffic but simply displaced it." This is not what the data shows.

Yes, there has been different impacts across different streets, including some displacement, but the data shows an overall reduction in traffic. To say that it hasn't reduced traffic (at least based on the data they're quoting) is untrue.

 

Apologies if this has been covered elsewhere, but please can you tell me how this is measured - the 'overall reduction' in traffic? How wide is the potential grid that is measured for possible displaced traffic?

Let me put it another way  -  if someone used to drive through Dulwich to get to the South Circular and onwards to Catford and the M2, but  they now use Old Kent Road, New Cross and Blackheath route, will the data count them as 'displaced' traffic?

Edited by Forest Hill Climber

The short answer is that the council don't monitor displacement. In their world traffic "evaporates". Now, they did do some monitoring and claimed that traffic was "reduced across the whole" but that monitoring was massively flawed because it did no monitoring on displacement routes such as Underhill Road, Crystal Palace Road, Barry Road or the A205. Remember, the council originally only monitored on the streets within the LTN which shows their motivation for doing robust monitoring of displaced traffic - they really didn't want to have to and were forced to.

 

Bottom-line is LTNs do nothing to remove traffic from roads - they only move it from one road to another - it passes the problem to someone else.

 

13 hours ago, Forest Hill Climber said:

Let me put it another way  -  if someone used to drive through Dulwich to get to the South Circular and onwards to Catford and the M2, but  they now use Old Kent Road, New Cross and Blackheath route, will the data count them as 'displaced' traffic?

No it won't but this will be considered a win for the council as it stops the traffic going through Dulwich. 

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

The short answer is that the council don't monitor displacement. In their world traffic "evaporates". Now, they did do some monitoring and claimed that traffic was "reduced across the whole" but that monitoring was massively flawed because it did no monitoring on displacement routes such as Underhill Road, Crystal Palace Road, Barry Road or the A205. Remember, the council originally only monitored on the streets within the LTN which shows their motivation for doing robust monitoring of displaced traffic - they really didn't want to have to and were forced to.

 

Bottom-line is LTNs do nothing to remove traffic from roads - they only move it from one road to another - it passes the problem to someone else.

 

No it won't but this will be considered a win for the council as it stops the traffic going through Dulwich. 

OK so if traffic is displaced into nearby Borough of Lewisham, then it is measured by Southwark as traffic reduction. Very clever. Southwark has become expert at dumping traffic into Lewisham - especially around Forest Hill.

  • Agree 1
On 26/10/2024 at 07:45, first mate said:

Spot on. We need councillors who are interested in serving the area rather than using their role to earn brownie points with their party at national level. The partisan nature of local politics is a problem.

Quite apart from the above, the street blocking planters local to me are now beginning to look a complete mess and really shabby.

Indeed they are. It’s like those glazed info boards that stood, shattered and tagged for years at Elephant and other parts of Southwark, with no attempt to repair or remove them. A “good” idea is “actioned”, backs are patted, and then the actioners forget all about it and move on to spend money elsewhere.  

  • Agree 1

The ones I see are never used as seating, have weeds sprouting at all angles and look like something a child would knock up from old, rotting pallet wood. It really is not a great look and in such contrast to lovely Dulwich Square, with its (Shhh, India-sourced) sandstone paving.

Edited by first mate
  • Like 1

Presume you’re referring to the temporary planters near East Dulwich station, which I agree are looking tatty. The good news is East Dulwich is getting public realm improvements too, surely you didn’t miss the consultation? https://services.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/street-improvements/east-dulwich-streets-for-people
 

Edited by march46
Add link
  • Thanks 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I remember halfpennies. Farthings had gone by my time. 2/6 (half a crown) that looked very similar to 2s.  
    • Looks like moths have been at it!
    • "They sold everyone, directly or indirectly, on the notion that Covid, the energy crisis and the war in Ukraine had nothing to do with the sorry state of the UK and that it was 14 years of Tory rule and Truss' nightmare budget that was the source of all the country's woes. " This simply isn't true. Global issues all play their own parts (as they do with other countries) but the UK govt had  been especially abject for years. Improvements could not be made with them in power. That's not to say everything is all roses when they go To claim parties shouldn't try and sell themselves in an election is absurd - but if labour did overpromise or dig into specifics (which they partly couldn't because they didn't have their hands on the books) then we live in a country where a population and media is happy to punch on them and relect the shabby last govt I mean if any argument I made was supported by some posters I would rethink it but thats just me
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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