LTN Discussion

[Rockets]

If they are this is a good thing as, even with those islands, it is tough to cross the road there. Are they going to be able to do anything about the EDG and LL junction (which is a lot worse since the LTNs went in) and the Grove Tavern junction - which has always been hellish to try and cross?

[Rockets]

Would funding for this not come from the cash-cow, sorry cash-pile Southwark has accumulated from the LTN cameras in the Village? If so, could that be what Cllr Leeming is referring to and .....'ing about in his missive - he does love a bit of trolling!? ;-)

[kissthisguy]

Thanks @legalalien.

@rockets agreed and if it were me I would tackle the Grove Tavern jct and the EDG/LL one before this.

legalalien Wrote:

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

> I don't think the Devolved Highways funding (which

> I think this is) works in quite the same way as

> the Neighbourhoods Fund funding. Whereas the

> latter is essentially ?10 per councillor, there

> seems to be more of a pooled approach o the

> former. See

> https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s1055

> 33/DHB%20South%20Decision%20Making%2022-23%20FINAL

> .pdf.

[heartblock]

London Assembly - questions to the Mayor

What have been the NO2 levels of East Dulwich Grove for every month since January 2019?

Answer

Dulwich Village Junction LTN (4)

Answered By:

The Mayor

Date:

Tuesday, 25th January 2022

The London Borough of Southwark monitors nitrogen dioxide by diffusion tube at two sites in the vicinity of East Dulwich Grove ? SD10 at 2 Village Way and SD152 on Townley Road.

2021 data has not yet been reported.

All of Southwark?s air quality monitoring results are available on their website https://www.southwark.gov.uk/environment/air-quality/air-quality-monitoring-data

So NOx is not being measured on ED Grove by Southwark and 2021 data has not been released?

[northernmonkey]

I didn?t think that zebras without beacons had been approved for use in London though?

[alice]

Yes i just checked, that's right. Interestingly there are lots of companies that make belisha beacons but all are very discreet about pricing.

[Bic Basher]

Sadly the Grove Tavern junction is managed by TfL who have their own budgeting issues, but hopefully once they get a longer term deal with the Department for Transport, that junction can be sorted out.

As for the proposed zebra crossing at the Court Lane junction, I wonder if they'd then remove the traffic island by Upland Road as that will be well used by residents who live in Upland, Friern and Mount Adon Park to access Court Lane and the park than the present island.

But as mentioned, there is a crossing at the junction of Overhill and LL along with the traffic island, so it does seem a bit OTT to add that in addition unless they remove the existing traffic island.

[northernmonkey]

My understanding is they cost way more than you?d expect. There has been a push to have continuous crossings etc without Belisha beacons but DFT haven?t approved. There was some talk of a trial somewhere (maybe Bristol or Mcr) but not sure where that got to.

Anyway, upshot is that crossings cost quite a bit!

alice Wrote:

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

> Yes i just checked, that's right. Interestingly

> there are lots of companies that make belisha

> beacons but all are very discreet about pricing.

[alice]

Article is in October 21 edition of Highways magazine. Manchester are asking the DFE permission to use Zebra crossings on their own. They have just completed a 2 year study. So let?s wait and see. (Cost as stated above)

[alice]

Back on subject: Looks like Libdems are now against Dulwich LTNs. Good.

[Metallic]

alice Wrote:

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

> Back on subject: Looks like Libdems are now

> against Dulwich LTNs. Good.

Don't be naive. Their Southwark policy will not allow them to do what they are claiming. Look at the northern Southwark LibDems!

[diable rouge]

Metallic Wrote:

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

> Does anyone know p3girl, because it looks as if

> they have been effectively accused of making a

> fake application for council funds which has

> Councillor Leeming in a dither.

If you haven't seen it already, Admin has posted about P3girl being the latest banned incarnation of a well-known troll/multi-account user on the Forum, so it wouldn't surprise me to hear they might be involved in other unscrupulous activities.

This troll always posts on certain threads on the Forum, this LTN thread being one of them, so worth keeping an eye out for them in the future and letting Admin know if you have suspicions they have returned...

[heartblock]

And back to LTNs.. does anyone know when Southwark will release any data on pollution levels (NOx and PM) - although the Mayor has answered a question about ED Grove pollution monitors, by indicating there is no direct monitoring on ED Grove - can this be confirmed?

[goldilocks]

How would this differ for the Conservative candidates in the village? At least the Lib Dems would be part of a wider group in the council rather than 1 or 2 lone Tories!

Metallic Wrote:

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

> alice Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Back on subject: Looks like Libdems are now

> > against Dulwich LTNs. Good.

>

> Don't be naive. Their Southwark policy will not

> allow them to do what they are claiming. Look at

> the northern Southwark LibDems!

[redpost]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> And back to LTNs.. does anyone know when Southwark

> will release any data on pollution levels (NOx and

> PM) - although the Mayor has answered a question

> about ED Grove pollution monitors, by indicating

> there is no direct monitoring on ED Grove - can

> this be confirmed?

Do you see a small shipping sized container construction on EDG? Because this is what a pollution monitor looks like, they cost hundreds of thousands to buy and tens/hundreds of thousands to run each year ... that's why there are only a handful in southwark, because pollution figures can be accurately extrapolated from traffic volumes.

[Penguin68]

that's why there are only a handful in southwark, because pollution figures can be accurately extrapolated from traffic volumes.

Because those two rubber strips on the road are sensitive enough to distinguish between petrol, electric and hybrid and diesel cars, ULEZ and non ULEZ compliant, between heavy and light vehicles, and between moving and queuing traffic. Obviously.

[Nigello]

Those strips can tell the difference, I was told by those installing one set, between heavy and light vehicles, two-wheels and four+ wheels, cyclist and pedestrian, etc. (They said a certain amount of air is sent down to a reader once the wires are compressed and the reading depends on weight, wheels, etc.)

[Spartacus]

But to follow up on penguins point

They can't tell what sort of engine the vehicle is using

If 100 hybrids or electric go over it on battery power for example, it still counts then as cars and therefore the calculated figures will be inaccurate.

Therefore "guestimated" figures based solely on volume not engine type are at best misleading at wirst just completely wrong.

[goldilocks]

Its true their could be some level of inaccuracy. However, Penguin's concern appears to be that electric cars will be counted as ICE cars - if so the modelled pollution will be overstated rather than anything else? I think though that the modelling will work on averages, and unless you had an area where there were way more EVs than the norm - eg a majority then this concern wouldn't be valid.

[redpost]

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> But to follow up on penguins point

>

> They can't tell what sort of engine the vehicle is

> using

> If 100 hybrids or electric go over it on battery

> power for example, it still counts then as cars

> and therefore the calculated figures will be

> inaccurate.

>

> Therefore "guestimated" figures based solely on

> volume not engine type are at best misleading at

> wirst just completely wrong.

yes, lets put a person on every street to do the counts, 24/7 x 365, shouldn't cost a lot

or we could look at waze/sat nav data, scoot data, local car registrations and the resulting data models built, back tested and refined over the past 40 years and rely on the fact that this can be correctly estimated within a couple of percent

[Metallic]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> How would this differ for the Conservative

> candidates in the village? At least the Lib Dems

> would be part of a wider group in the council

> rather than 1 or 2 lone Tories!

The Lib Dems won't do anything. The news that the Tories have put up a solicitor and an accountant could mean trouble for a few committees. And they have promised us on the doorstep that they will fight to get the junction re-opened - the bane of all our lives if you live kettled here. Unlike you, who I believe live in a motor free paradise apparently and who actively campaigned for the closures that have also caused so much pain..

[Penguin68]

yes, lets put a person on every street to do the counts, 24/7 x 365, shouldn't cost a lot

You don't need a census when there are perfectly good and valid sampling methodologies. The rubber strip traffic counts are good at estimating the number of vehicles passing on a road, and were designed for issues such as congestion, but they offer nothing to pollution studies. It is quite wrong to suppose that any general view of different types of traffic across London (diesel, petrol, plug-in hybrid, self generating hybrid, full electric) would apply to a particular locale and time.

And air quality sampling does not require the sort of very large and costly equipment hypothesised here. Sampling devices can be hand-held (they do not need to be permanently installed and ruggedised) - so long as the sampling programme properly covers key times and is repeatable. And although most of the monitors below are for indoors use, sampling changes of indoor levels is acceptable if what you are tracking is change - which is what is key when you are looking at the impact of traffic rules changes. [And I do know that these bits of kit cover a wide range of pollutants and gases, but do include those areas most are interested in].

https://www.architecturelab.net/best-air-quality-test-kit/

https://www.pce-instruments.com/english/measuring-instruments/test-meters/air-quality-meter-kat_150925.htm

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Air-Pollution-Monitor/s?k=Air+Pollution+Monitor

[Rockets]

Spartacus Wrote:

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

> But to follow up on penguins point

>

> They can't tell what sort of engine the vehicle is

> using

> If 100 hybrids or electric go over it on battery

> power for example, it still counts then as cars

> and therefore the calculated figures will be

> inaccurate.

>

> Therefore "guestimated" figures based solely on

> volume not engine type are at best misleading at

> wirst just completely wrong.

The strips also struggle when cars move slowly over them which is why those wanting to demonstrate a reduction in vehicles tend to place them close to congestion points.

The council has never properly explained, ahem, why they moved the strips from Lordship Lane near the Court Lane junction down to close to Melford Road.....one does have to wonder why that might have been....;-)

[heartblock]

"Do you see a small shipping sized container construction on EDG? Because this is what a pollution monitor looks like, they cost hundreds of thousands to buy and tens/hundreds of thousands to run each year ... that's why there are only a handful in southwark, because pollution figures can be accurately extrapolated from traffic volumes."

I know exactly where all the ATCs are on ED Grove by sight and by inspecting the raw data sets, I even know that dates that measurements were taken by scrutinising the data.

Traffic counts do not equate to pollution levels as idling and slow moving traffic can produce up to twice as many exhaust emissions as an engine in motion.

Therefore 20 fast moving vehicles will produce about half the amount of idling engines.

Southwark promised that pollution levels would be monitored on ED Grove and the data published.

[first mate]

In which case, there have always been volunteers to do speed testing with handheld devices, why not pollution monitoring?

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> yes, lets put a person on every street to do the

> counts, 24/7 x 365, shouldn't cost a lot

>

> You don't need a census when there are perfectly

> good and valid sampling methodologies. The rubber

> strip traffic counts are good at estimating the

> number of vehicles passing on a road, and were

> designed for issues such as congestion, but they

> offer nothing to pollution studies. It is quite

> wrong to suppose that any general view of

> different types of traffic across London (diesel,

> petrol, plug-in hybrid, self generating hybrid,

> full electric) would apply to a particular locale

> and time.

>

> And air quality sampling does not require the sort

> of very large and costly equipment hypothesised

> here. Sampling devices can be hand-held (they do

> not need to be permanently installed and

> ruggedised) - so long as the sampling programme

> properly covers key times and is repeatable. And

> although most of the monitors below are for

> indoors use, sampling changes of indoor levels is

> acceptable if what you are tracking is change -

> which is what is key when you are looking at the

> impact of traffic rules changes. .

>

> https://www.architecturelab.net/best-air-quality-t

> est-kit/

>

> https://www.pce-instruments.com/english/measuring-

> instruments/test-meters/air-quality-meter-kat_1509

> 25.htm

>

> https://www.amazon.co.uk/Air-Pollution-Monitor/s?k

> =Air+Pollution+Monitor