Jump to content

Recommended Posts

 

  On 23/03/2024 at 16:01, ab29 said:

Where they are introduced, councils should regularly review LTNs, ensuring they keep meeting their objectives, aren’t adversely affecting other areas, and are locally supported. The Dulwich LTNs fail on all these points. 

Expand  

I do wonder if the reason the monitoring strips have suddenly re-appeared all over Dulwich is as the council tries to satiate the above - given Cllr McAsh clearly stated that the LTNs can only be considered a success if they reduce traffic for everyone and given he now has ultimate responsibility for the LTNs and whether the council meeting the governments new guidance on them  I do wonder if they are trying to "prove" they are working. How they manage to prove they are supported locally in light of new guidance on how they run consultations is a massive challenge for them - they can't fall back on previous consultations because they don't pass the new bar and if they run a new consultation they will have to add a yes/no response and that didn't work out too well for them over the CPZs.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
  • 3 weeks later...

One Dulwich

 

Campaign Update | 13 Apr

Southwark to close Calton Avenue to emergency vehicles…again

Emergency vehicles arriving from all over London need access through the Dulwich Village junction, which is the quickest connecting route in the Dulwich area.

This was recognised in 2022, when the junction was reopened to the emergency services. Indeed, the design that went out for public consultation in December last year showed Calton Avenue as a ‘cycles and emergency services route’.

Now, however, Southwark Council has decided once again to block off this arm of the junction, leaving just Court Lane open to emergency vehicles.

This is clearly unworkable. The LAS has previously highlighted the dangers of closing a road at this junction saying that “emergency vehicles will be forced to take long detours around congested and narrow side streets… that could further delay an emergency response” for a “critically ill or injured patient”.

The Council says it wants to block off Calton Avenue because a small number of non-emergency vehicles drive through the junction. In our view, this is down to poor signage – a straightforward traffic management issue.

The London Ambulance Service (LAS) was pressured into accepting the blockage at a meeting with the Council in February. However, according to a recent FOI, the London Fire Brigade confirmed “we have had no confirmation of this proposal or communications regarding this”.

Why is the safety of local residents being put at risk in this way?

Please email us at onedulwich@gmail.com if you experience delays from the emergency services, and please continue to send us photos of emergency vehicles doing three-point turns or reversing out of side streets because of 24/7 road closures anywhere in the Dulwich area.

So who are OneDulwich and who funds them? They purport to be a community organisation, but no one on these threads knows who they actually are, or if they do, are unwilling to share the information. But they still post their press releases - this I find baffling in the light of the accountability these posters demand of people whose views they don't share.

Some of the names I've gleaned potentially associated with One Dulwich appear to be engaged in extending their influence into the Dulwich Society at the next AGM on 20th May. Of course, it is always hard to know exactly who One Dulwich are, as their leadership and structures are completely opaque, so this 'grouping' may or may not be formally One Dulwich. 

Measures proposed by the current Dulwich Society leadership which this 'grouping' appears to be resisting include the ability to have online AGM's, which is a modern step to allow older people/ people working away to vote, and also they appear to be resisting anonymity for Dulwich Society members taking part in committees looking at traffic issues.

The reason why Dulwich Society wants this anonymity is so that the chance of such members getting trolled online is diminished. Given the abject personalisation of some local issues on these threads, and the real-life intimidation of some pro-LTN people by persons unknown in the past, Dulwich Society's current stance on this looks reasonable to me. You would have to question why someone wouldn't want it.   

  • Agree 2

DVR, lots of smears or attempted smears there. One Dulwich posts have the ring of truth about them. Rather than bang on about shadowy, opaque organisations why not address the content OD put out with some really convincing rebuttals.

What say you to this bit?

 

"The Council says it wants to block off Calton Avenue because a small number of non-emergency vehicles drive through the junction. In our view, this is down to poor signage – a straightforward traffic management issue.

The London Ambulance Service (LAS) was pressured into accepting the blockage at a meeting with the Council in February. However, according to a recent FOI, the London Fire Brigade confirmed “we have had no confirmation of this proposal or communications regarding this”.

Why is the safety of local residents being put at risk in this way?

DulvilleRes - that's the best post...honestly - never have I seen more perfect example of the over-riding problem here...was it posted as a joke?

The fact that some, who clearly come from the pro-LTN side of the argument, are so vexed by what One Dulwich puts out there shows what a great job One Dulwich are doing to ensure both sides of the argument are heard and that is the very essence of democracy at play - the fact some are trying to demonise them for doing so speaks volumes.

Do elements of the Dulwich Society fear that One Dulwich are going to mount a coup and turn Dulwich Village into a multi-storey car park.....or maybe it's more a case that One Dulwich are, in fact (and this will probably vex a few people), a community action group run by local Dulwich residents who are interested in a range of wider issues covered by the Dulwich Society?

 

Edited by Rockets
  • Haha 1
  On 16/04/2024 at 08:09, Rockets said:

The London Ambulance Service (LAS) was pressured into accepting the blockage at a meeting with the Council in February.

Expand  

This is quite a serious allegation. What evidence is there of this? Pressured how and by whom? This is quite a spin on ‘it’s been agreed with the emergency services’.

  On 16/04/2024 at 08:09, Rockets said:

The Council says it wants to block off Calton Avenue because a small number of non-emergency vehicles drive through the junction. In our view, this is down to poor signage – a straightforward traffic management issue.

Expand  

They think the vehicles pictured driving through with partially covered plates are the result of ‘poor signage’ 🤔 

If it is as they say ‘small numbers’ driving through the square, that doesn’t suggest that the signage is unclear. I mean who honestly believes it’s possible to drive through there without noticing the signs / planters (assuming you’re driving with due care and attention)?! 🤨 

Also, haven’t ‘One’ opposed any improvements to the layout / landscaping and signage proposed by Southwark? It’s all a bit desperate.

  On 22/04/2024 at 08:15, DulvilleRes said:

So who are OneDulwich and who funds them? They purport to be a community organisation, but no one on these threads knows who they actually are, or if they do, are unwilling to share the information.

Expand  

At the height of the LTN ‘controversy’ a number of co-ordinated ‘One’ groups popped up across London. It doesn’t feel like a local grassroots movement, but has all the hallmarks of astroturfing. The lack of transparency about it’s funding / sponsorship and structure does not help with this impression. 

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Agree 2

@Earl,

Be assured, it is purely a local group. In fact it is a genteel group of Dulwich area residents, mostly ladies , who are a little  reluctant to publish their individual names as they do not wish to be targets for hostility from internet trolls.

Local residents who attended the anti-LTN gatherings in Dulwich would have easily recognised the active members of the group.

Should you have any queries about funding, it is quite easy to send them an email.

Ha ha, some people really don't like an opinion that differs to theirs do they!

Bravo One Dulwich - you're magnificently rattling the cages of people who don't want to hear a differing opinion and the fact they get so irate about it is the icing on the cake! Some spend so much emotional energy trying to convince themselves One Dulwich is some shadowy, agitator state-funded lobby group when all they are is a group of local residents giving a voice to the majority of residents impacted by the measures.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

I am faintly amused by the cries of horror when the overtly political actions of Southwark Council Labour (their car hatred does after all form part of their manifesto) is countered by what might possibly be political action of others (although there is some evidence to support it being a groundswell of purely local and not party-affiliated activity).

Who is behind Southwark Labour party one might ask - is it Militant Trotskyites? From where are they being funded? The Kremlin, Beijing?

I have no doubt that local people are genuinely involved (and personally can understand their not wanting to publicise their involvement). That said the proliferation of One groups across London and the degree of co-ordination suggests it is more than just a local grassroots group. I’m not really that interested, except that many of their supporters do bang on about transparency and accountability.

I would be interested in the substance of their latest missive. Who has been pressurising the emergency services and how? Who genuinely believes that people are partially covering their plates and driving through due to inadequate signage? Sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. It feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes tbh.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 1
  On 27/04/2024 at 07:05, Earl Aelfheah said:

They think the vehicles pictured driving through with partially covered plates are the result of ‘poor signage’ 🤔 

Expand  

But you have to assess whether these persistent drivers are creating more safety issues than diverting emergency vehicles on a longer route and clearly they are not. The fact members of the pro-closure lobby have built their argument on this actually shows how desperate, some would say selfish, they are to have the junction closed and just the way they want it. And unfortunately they seem to have the council over a barrel on something as the council weakly concedes to their position without hesitation.

  On 27/04/2024 at 13:46, Earl Aelfheah said:

Who has been pressurising the emergency services and how?

Expand  

Was this not borne from an FOI that said one of the emergency services confirmed that they had not been consulted on the new DV design that Cllr Leeming then said was actually a mistake by the emergency services - and then it's a case of whether you believe Cllr Leeming or not....and his track record is hardly unblemished when it comes to all things LTNs?

  On 27/04/2024 at 09:45, Penguin68 said:

I am faintly amused by the cries of horror when the overtly political actions of Southwark Council Labour (their car hatred does after all form part of their manifesto) is countered by what might possibly be political action of others (although there is some evidence to support it being a groundswell of purely local and not party-affiliated activity).

Expand  

Exactly! When the "small vocal minority" was given a mouthpiece that proved it was anything other than small then some have repeatedly tried to discredit the mouthpiece. 

The far-left has never been very good at accountability and One Dulwich is forcing our local councillors and council to be accountable to constituents and it wouldn't surprise me if the council are behind a lot of the depositioning activities as One Dulwich is stopping them from getting CPZs rolled out and must be seen as a huge thorn in the side of the idealogical plan they have. Southwark Labour has a long track record of trying to stifle constituents with a view that differs from theirs (see Cllr Leo Pollack for one example) or depositioning anyone trying to represent them (see Cllr Williams during the infamous Cllr Rose "mansplaining" episode.

But you know, some think it's One Dulwich that are the greatest threat to local democracy and should not be trusted! 😉

Edited by Rockets
  • Haha 1

You haven’t answered the question… who has been pressuring the emergency services and how exactly? We all know the answer of course.. no one.

As for anyone driving through Dulwich Square without realising that they’re not meant to - well they should t be behind a wheel at all frankly.

I have no idea what the ‘far left’ has to do with Dulwich LTN either 😂

 

  On 27/04/2024 at 17:57, Earl Aelfheah said:

I have no idea what the ‘far left’ has to do with Dulwich LTN either 😂

Expand  

Because the council responsible for it is far-left....

 

  On 27/04/2024 at 17:57, Earl Aelfheah said:

You haven’t answered the question… who has been pressuring the emergency services and how exactly? We all know the answer of course.. no one.

Expand  

And you haven't answered whether it is worth diverting emergency vehicles because a few cars drive through the LTN and why some lobby groups have been so desperate to close it to emergency vehicles. 

 

Emergency services hate non-permeable junctions as they lengthen response times....f you remember it's why the council had to redesign the DV junction because emergency services kept telling them they needed to be able to drive through it...but the council resisted and resisted until they finally relented because the emergency services said their LTN had increased response times....sorry if the truth gets in the way of a good story but those are facts. The council was putting lives at risk because they refused to open the junction to emergency services. Why? What could have been the motivation for that?

So, in fact, it was the emergency services who forced the council (kicking and screaming) to remove the permanent barriers and allow emergency services access.

So the council finally opened the junction to emergency services and is now coming back to re-close part of the junction.  Why? 

Perhaps you should be asking who is lobbying the council to close the junction or parts of it or why the council is happy to waste so much of our money on it - who are they representing as even their own consultation demonstrated they did not have support from the local community for the measures? The results showed the majority of local residents were against the measure...but they are going ahead with them anyway.

 

In time, I am sure the truth will come to light and those rewponsbile will be held accountable but you have to admit there is something very unusual going on with that junction - its the very definition of a (very expensive) white elephant.

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Agree 1
  On 27/04/2024 at 13:46, Earl Aelfheah said:

I have no doubt that local people are genuinely involved (and personally can understand their not wanting to publicise their involvement). That said the proliferation of One groups across London and the degree of co-ordination suggests it is more than just a local grassroots group. I’m not really that interested, except that many of their supporters do bang on about transparency and accountability.

 

Expand  

A bit like this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/27/tory-staff-running-network-of-anti-ulez-facebook-groups-riddled-with-racism-and-abuse

  • Agree 1
  On 27/04/2024 at 22:14, Rockets said:

Because the council responsible for it is far-left....

Expand  

LTNs were pushed by the Conservative government (as was ULEZ). They were one of several active travel measures which were a condition of the TFL funding settlement post Covid.  £69m of direct borough funding (per year) was also provided to support more localised investment in walking and cycling schemes across the city and to accelerate the roll-out of LTNs…but we all know that Boris Johnson and grant shapps are secret commies 🤣

  On 27/04/2024 at 22:14, Rockets said:

And you haven't answered whether it is worth diverting emergency vehicles because a few cars drive through the LTN and why some lobby groups have been so desperate to close it to emergency vehicles. 

Expand  

I’ve no idea. I do know that people are covering their plates and driving through, and that’s probably an accident waiting to happen (although clearly down to signage 🤣). The emergency services have agreed the changes, so I would assume that on balance they think it’s the right move.

Whilst ‘One’ are suggesting the emergency services have agreed the changes under pressure, they wont say what sort of pressure, or who it’s coming from 🤔. Perhaps it’s the commies again 🤣😂

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Agree 1

Rockets said:

"Perhaps you should be asking who is lobbying the council to close the junction or parts of it or why the council is happy to waste so much of our money on it - who are they representing as even their own consultation demonstrated they did not have support from the local community for the measures? The results showed the majority of local residents were against the measure...but they are going ahead with them anyway"

This. 

 

  On 28/04/2024 at 05:57, first mate said:

Rockets said:

"Perhaps you should be asking who is lobbying the council to close the junction or parts of it or why the council is happy to waste so much of our money on it - who are they representing as even their own consultation demonstrated they did not have support from the local community for the measures? The results showed the majority of local residents were against the measure...but they are going ahead with them anyway"

This. 

 

Expand  

Check the link I provided above. It gives a very full account of where the push for LTNs came from, (in brief, central government).

The consultation did not show that the majority of local residents were against the LTN. Not for the first time, you’ve confused a ‘consultation’ with a ‘referendum’.

The outcome of local elections (which many opposed to LTNs excitedly promoted as a referendum on the scheme at the time…until they lost), suggests they are actually quite popular.

All the polling on LTNs generally, also shows strong majority support across London.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Thanks 1

Okay Earl, of those 'consulted' how many voices were in favour of the junction and how many against? Were there more responses in favour or more against?

This local junction change is being driven by Southwark Labour Councillors- not as you assert by Central Govt.

Also, if consultations are so irrelevant as indicators of meaningful local support in the way you seem to imply, why do organisations like Southwark Cyclists constantly ask their members to respond to all and any consultation on LTN's and CPZ's?

 

Edited by first mate

I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷‍♂️ 

The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction.

…and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Like 1
  • Haha 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

    • Gone to the better hunting grounds during this local ongoing dry spell.
    • The Dreamliner has an impeccable service history, you are more likely to get mugged on the way to the airport than having any issue with your flight, that's how safe it is!  Have a great trip.
    • Maybe. Does that kill grass? If so, possibly the same dog that has left its poo outside my house - pretty sure it's not fox poo.
    • Here you are, intexasatthemoment (you seem to have been in Texas for a very long time!) We went to three of the recommended places yesterday,  as they were all in the same road (just near Wallington)  and I needed to give the car a run to avoid another slap on the wrist from my garage (and another new battery). Here's my findings. BARNES Parking We thought we would go here first as it was the earliest to close on a Sunday (3pm). There was no apparent entrance or anywhere to park. One notice said do not park on grass verge, and another one said staff cars only! Flittons was opposite but I'd already passed the entrance, so I had to drive down the road, turn round at the next available place (covered in signs saying do not park here) and park in Flittons car park! Plants Barnes  specialise in hardy perennials, so that was basically what they had, but an excellent selection, and many more unusual plants (or at least, plants you probably wouldn't find in a garden centre), eg Corydalis,  lots of different varieties of Epimediums, Trollius, some lovely Phygelius, lots of different ferns). The plants were divided into sections according to whether they needed sun or shade or could cope with both. They had a particularly good selection of  shade loving plants. There was really useful information above  each group of plants, which meant you didn't have to look at individual labels. All the plants looked in good health and  very well cared for. They don't produce a printed catalogue, but they  said their plant list was online (I haven't looked yet). I assume most of  the plants they have at any one time are when it's their flowering season (if they flower). I wasn't intending to buy anything, though was very tempted, but I'd definitely go here again once I've sorted out my overgrown garden. Other Stuff Don't think they sell pots, compost, etc. No cafe/tea room and I didn't see a loo, but Flittons is just over the road. FLITTONS  Parking Easy to park Plants Sorry, but mostly terrible. There was one section with vegetables and the rest was flowering plants. There was a general feeling of delapidation. Some of what was on display was actually dead (surely it would only take a minute to remove dead plants) and a lot of the rest was very poorly maintained, eg gone to seed, weedy, apparently unwatered, or with a lot of dead leaves. There was a notice asking for volunteers to work there, so I can only assume they can't afford to pay staff. Other stuff There was a notice to a play barn (?) saying invited people only, so I think they must host kids' parties or something. They redeemed themselves with a cosy little cafe with savoury stuff, nice cakes, iced chai and oat milk, and a loo. Also a selection of books and CDs on sale for charity. If you want an Andrews Sisters CD, you can find one here. There is a small shop with gift shop type stuff and a display of the history of Flittons, which apparently is family owned since the sixties (I think it was). I suspect that the arrival of Dobbies down the road must have greatly affected Flittons' fortunes, which is sad. DOBBIES  Parking Easy in theory once you had navigated a rather narrow entrance, but it was very busy so it took a while to find a space. Plants  Lots of plants, well maintained but I imagine their turnover is high. Lots of nice bedding plants for hanging baskets, window boxes etc  to cater for all tastes (ie some of it wasn't mine, but fine if you like those horrid little begonias (my opinion only) but they did have some nice (in my opinion) stuff as well. I was tempted but decided to buy from North Cross Road market. Fair selection of climbers, various different Clematis etc. I'd be happy to buy plants from here. The prices seemed reasonable and they were in good condition. Other stuff  It's a big garden centre with all that entails these days, so a large area selling garden furniture and storage, tools, animal collars, pots, all the usual stuff you would expect. Very helpful staff. There's a cafe which we didn't check out, charging points for electric cars, a Waitrose (no idea how big, we didn't look). Only on our way out did we see that there was a drive through "express section" for compost etc, which was annoying as I wanted compost and hadn't seen any anywhere,  but I was getting tired by that time. Just Down the Road A ten minute drive away is Wilderness Island, a nature reserve in Carshalton, which is well worth a visit. We heard eleven different kinds of bird (according to Merlin) and saw a Kingfisher flying down the tiny river!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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