Latest One Dulwich update

[Rockets]

 

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. 

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.

[Rockets]

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 [email protected] 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.

[DulvilleRes]

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.   

[alice]

So the anonymity of one group is to be criticised, but the anonymity of another group is to be praised. Glad you’ve cleared that up

[first mate]

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?

[Spartacus]

Regardless who is behind them, both groups do a good job of raising public awareness which is something the council seem to be more secretive about IMHO 🤔

[Rockets]

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 April 22 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

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

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

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 09:09, 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.

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 09:15, 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.

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 April 28 by Earl Aelfheah

[vladi]

@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.

[Rockets]

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.

[Penguin68]

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?

[Spartacus]

Finally, top secret filming has revealed the face behind the shadow of one dulwich

Be afraid, be very afraid because V is coming for you in your nightmares 

[Earl Aelfheah]

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 April 27 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

9 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

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

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.

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Who has been pressurising the emergency services and how?

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?

6 hours ago, 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).

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 April 27 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

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 😂

 

[alice]

There is no Dulwich Square. 
It’s a roadblock. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Right. A roadblock that attentive drivers might accidentally miss 😂

[alice]

A Roadblock that a civilised society wouldn’t allow. 

[Rockets]

3 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

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

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

 

3 hours ago, 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.

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.

 

 

[snowy]

8 hours ago, 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.

 

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

[Earl Aelfheah]

7 hours ago, Rockets said:

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

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 🤣

7 hours ago, 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. 

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 April 28 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

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. 

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, 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. 

 

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 April 28 by Earl Aelfheah

[first mate]

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 April 28 by first mate

[Earl Aelfheah]

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 April 28 by Earl Aelfheah