Closure of Melbourne Grove to through traffic - new petition

[first mate]

RCH,

Yes, you have a point in theory but common sense dictates that major changes on traffic flow impacts all the areas not just the individual ward and so eAch ward expects their local councillor to represent them as vigorously as possible. There is a sense that, for whatever reason, this is not happening. But yes, ward boundaries are a useful excuse, when expedient.

[Zebedee Tring]

I am well aware that James Barber is a East Dulwich Ward Councillor. But he is a member of the DCC and as such was part of the decision to go ahead with the scheme at the March meeting.

He has also been copied into numerous emails to Southwark officers and the Cabinet Member complaining about the recent lack of consultation on the scheme. But from Cllr Barber, there has been not a whisper .... at least not as far as I am aware (and I have been copied into those numerous emails).

Perhaps Mr Barber would like to comment.

I used to work as a local government officer in a senior position. If I had failed to consult local Councillors in the way that this has happened in the Townley Road case, I would have been hung, drawn and quartered (metaphorically at least).

[James Barber]

Hi ZT,FM,

WRT Townley Road/EDG junction I promoted the issue widely, chased when things would come to DCC. Explained deputations and petitions to several groups and generally made a public and private fuss. I explained why I was doing this due to impacts on East Dulwich ward traffic. But the junction is relatively small well into a neighbouring ward. I felt morally limited as a councillor from getting truly 'stuck-in' as I would hope other councillors would when the same happens in East Dulwich ward.

[Zebedee Tring]

"Morally limited"? That's an interesting phrase, though I don't think I know what it means. It would be interesting to see someone using the phrase as a plea in mitigation if they were being prosecuted.

Perhaps I am being na?ve but if the DCC made a controversial decision relating to the East Dulwich Ward and its members were told that they would be consulted further, I would expect Village Ward Councillors to get "stuck in" if necessary.

In any case what happens at the Townley Road junction could have an impact on your Ward, so you're perfectly entitled to get involved if there is a possibility of the Townley scheme being fouled up.

[first mate]

If issues like traffic are only dealt with on a ward by ward basis it is easy to see how bad decisions will arise. An overview and sense of the big picture is vital. I cannot see that James should feel limited in any way (limits of human energy aside) in getting "stuck in" on our behalf. Go James go.

[first mate]

To get back on thread, what does James propose to do about, as former councillor and colleague RCH calls it " the madness of the barrier" on Melbourne Grove?

[rch]

Bear in mind that I am "colleagues" with a lot of people and will work with anyone who is interested in improving the community, regardless of political affiliation.

And I totally agree that there needs to be joined up thinking with regards to traffic movements across the area, not necessarily delineated by wards. We need for the whole community - young and old, drivers, pedestrians and cyclists - to be able to use our streets easily and safely.

Maybe we need to start a new campaign with petition signatures to this effect, calling for a comprehensive traffic management study, in order to draw councillors attention to the bigger picture beyond the Barrier Madness??

[intexasatthe moment]

Good posts from rch .especially this

"This isn't helped by the fact that the cllr position is still only a part-time role split between three elected members per ward who don't necessarily communicate with each other... while this might have worked back in the 50s and 60s, the whole system really needs to be reviewed, in my opinion, with a view towards cllrs becoming a full time role with proper compensation and a support system rather than a "volunteer" role limited to hands off "representation" and scrutiny, which can be fobbed off by an administration based five miles away. "

Can someone tell me - has a decision been made re a barrier in Melbourne Grove ? I thought we were still at the investigation stage . But I've been away without internet so may have missed something while trying to catch up .

[James Barber]

Hi ITATM,

Yes, a decision to fund a study of the issues reported has been taken. No more no less.

Latest I've heard is that this study is now likely to get underway in October and report back to the Dulwich Community Council early 2016. My hunch would be the 27 January meeting. THe meeting papers would be issued a week to 10 days before hand.

Recommendations may be do nothing, consult on closing or other options. IF consulting on something and the DCC agrees then that would take place the consultation late Spring for a decision around July 2016 time.

[ED_moots]

Hi James

Can you share any details about this study? What is the exact premise or questions to be answered? What is the brief?

Do you know who conducts the study and what it consists of? 10 grand should fund something quite comprehensive but depends entirely on the terms of reference.

For example, will further traffic surveys be carried out? Is there some sort of 'traffic simulator' or town planning guru that the council has acces too?

I have read most of the comments here and, except for the barrier idea and some stats (which can be interpreted a number of ways depending on the answers you want to find), there is very little 'meat on the bones' of what is to be studied.

If you don't have this information now, will you please share it when it becomes available?

Thanks

[richard tudor]

It will all be done and dusted before you get this information.

[bels123]

.

[mockingbird]

There was a Traffic Survey done by the Metrolpolitan Police for Melbourne Grove in April 2015. Check back with the Met on emergency access assessed within that survey. Now Townley Road is also restricted as a result of the new road development which will slow traffic flow from Townley to ED Grove. This places even more importance on retaining access on the only remaining route emergency route - Melbourne Grove.

[mockingbird]

James

How do you read this Melbourne Traffic Study report? I am looking at the results page.

Study took place over 14 days - so I assumed that the average per day is

Northbound 13898/14 = 992

Southbound 15278/14 = 1091

This includes all residents movements (no idea how many residents on MG have vehicles)

These numbers are not broken down into the class of vehicle so they are totals for motorcycles, cars and small vans, larger vans and LGVs; Large LGVs.

The average speeds per class of vehicle are all under 20mph

The results quote the 85th percentile. As I understand this statistic, the 85th Percentile Speed is the speed that 85 percent of vehicles do not exceed. Another way of looking at this is that only 15 percent of vehicles go faster than this speed, and 85 percent go at or below this speed. The 85th percentile is used by traffic engineers and planners to guage problems in free flowing traffic conditions.

So it does not look like there is a 'speeding' problem according to this report, perhaps with the exception of motorcyles. Speeding checks always allow some margin (2% or so) of the limit.

I assume that Melbourne has only recently become 20mph. When was this out of interest? Before or after this survey date?

[Penguin68]

This has never been about excessive speeds - or about accidents or danger neither of which have actually been reported as an issue for Melbourne before on this forum - compared with reports from many other roads (e.g. Barry) with accidents happening to support these complaints - instead a cynic might see this is a nimby move to create a gated community and (no doubt) push house prices up (even) more.

We live in a town - some of us live in roads which connect with other roads with concomitant traffic - we all bought or rented at prices which factored this in - live with it or move to somewhere else which doesn't have traffic, if you hate it so much (this by the way does not alter my view that some roads are unsuitable for some types of traffic - such as very large lorries and articulated lorries - and could be well marked out as such with warnings). Very large HGVs (save for access) shouldn't be in residential streets, but 'normal' traffic (cars, bikes, vans, small lorries) should have every right.

[rch]

Bels123, I'm so glad that you've seen the TfL emergency bus diversion for yourself... I've brought this aspect up several times but it just goes in one ear and out the other, so I'm pleased that there are two of us now. Ever since the full width humps were installed on the north side of Melbourne, the southern end has become the emergency bus diversion route (which, as a bus user, I'm fine with). A barrier would have a significant knock on effect to emergency vehicles as well, which I see cutting through here quite regularly.

Mockingbird, you're a genius! Supporters of the barrier have been quoting 2000 vehicles per day, citing this as extreme for a residential road, but of course the total figure should be divided by 14, not 7... duh! I reckon that there are roughly 175-200 vehicles along here owned by residents themselves, which means that up to half of the 1000 movements a day could simply Melbourne residents going about their normal daily business, not even including the residents of the side streets.

Penguin, I completely agree with you. Furthermore, any HGV issues could be dealt with by implementing build outs at the Chesterfield junction, which would also act as speed calming measures if they are designed properly. Or maybe something as simple as a pedestrian island there would work. But it's really not that bad around here, so I can understand why the council hasn't wanted to spend the money.

[Penguin68]

I must admit I also find it interesting (assuming this is true, and I have understood things correctly) that a (or the) chief protagonist of this is not a long standing resident who has found circumstances deteriorating since they bought or rented long ago (who might thus be assumed to have chosen their residence under different circumstances) but someone who has moved in very recently, when the levels of traffic could already have been assessed and were (as I have said) presumably factored into the price of their dwelling.

[@Woodwarde]

rch Wrote:

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

...................

> Mockingbird, you're a genius! Supporters of the

> barrier have been quoting 2000 vehicles per day,

> citing this as extreme for a residential road, but

> of course the total figure should be divided by

> 14, not 7... duh! I reckon that there are roughly

> 175-200 vehicles along here owned by residents

> themselves, which means that up to half of the

> 1000 movements a day could simply Melbourne

> residents going about their normal daily business,

> not even including the residents of the side

> streets.

>

> Penguin, I completely agree with you. Furthermore,

> any HGV issues could be dealt with by implementing

> build outs at the Chesterfield junction, which

> would also act as speed calming measures if they

> are designed properly. Or maybe something as

> simple as a pedestrian island there would work.

> But it's really not that bad around here, so I can

> understand why the council hasn't wanted to spend

> the money.

RCH, you are probably correct.

At an average of 1000 vehicles per day, are there some 1200 plus properties on Melbourne and immediate connected roads?

If so, then say at a low end assumption of 20% of those vehicles moving in the day, that could mean 240 vehicles moving (so 480 (240x2) vehicle movements registered per day) which would reduce this vehicle count by 50% to approx 500 vehicles.

[rch]

Hi, Woodward. Yep, exactly. The way traffic engineers estimate vehicle ownership on a road is to do a vehicle count at around 6am on a Tuesday morning (doing it on a weekend isn't accurate as many residents go away for a weekend and sometimes go straight to work on a Monday morning, so it's best to do it before work early to mid week).

I'm too lazy to do a 6am count, but I've counted 160 vehicles on a Sunday morning at around 9am, so I'm guessing that this would probably be 175-200 on a 6am Tues count.

The other roads to count would be Playfield and Lytcott, which are "landlocked" in that they have no direct access out to Lordship... then we have Colwell, Blackwater, Chesterfield, and Ashbourne, all of which exit onto Lordship, but which would run along Melbourne at least part of the time to get to EDG in order to go east-west or maybe bypass the Lordship backlog to get to Grove Vale.

[rch]

Peng, to be fair, there is a very small group of long term residents who have been banging on about this for some time... this is exactly WHY there have already been TWO consultations between 2004-2009.

I have also spoken to some other new residents who have been brought on board with the barrier campaign, but some of them have admitted that they don't understand the implications and the fact that we have already been through this twice and therefore it's not really a great use of public funding to commission yet another study which will cite exactly the same data stats.

[spider69]

Why can't all the ED Cllrs stand up and present all the above facts and say it is a waste of time as we have been there before.

You never hear a word except from one Cllr who's leaning is well known

[rch]

Oh hang on... I've just looked at the report, the vehicle count is split separately, so the count IS actually around 2000 vehicles per day if you count in both directions.

So, movements of local vehicles would be about a quarter of that total or maybe up to a third or half of that if you include the side streets.

[James Barber]

Hi Mockingbird,

15% of those cars are going at excessive - or at least that is the interpretation local police have given to local residents.

Hi P68,

Residents were asking originally for better traffic calming - initially full road width humps. When they met councillors - not me or Rosie - those councillors suggested a number of measures to achieve the main one being closing the road. So I do not think residents started with this idea. it has been suggested to them as the one likely to have the most desired effect. I personally think it's a good idea in theory but we haven't had a study report back whether it would work or not or a public consultation about it.

'Chief protagonist' at the Dulwich Community Council a number of people spoke for this with one main speaker. They explained that between them they had people who had lived in the area for a couple of years through to 40+ years.

Hi rch,

Any proposed change would involve emergency services who are statutory consultees.

Hi Woodwarde,

Melbourne Grove doesn't have 1200 properties.

The study will go through all this and quite possibly will invove and orginigation and destination element to inform us.

[@Woodwarde]

James Barber Wrote:

> Hi Woodwarde,

> Melbourne Grove doesn't have 1200 properties.

> The study will go through all this and quite

> possibly will invove and orginigation and

> destination element to inform us.

I am misquoted. I referred to the property count across Melbourne and connected roads. Some such as Playfield have to exit onto Melbourne. The traffic count includes any movements by local residents of which there would be outbound and return journeys.

Some idea of house counts here as a starting point:

southwark.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/3022/r14_neighbourhood_area_lordship_lane

Can be refined by seeing which are divided into flats rather than single properties.

I will ask the local estate agents and check with the Council unless a helpful Councillor wants to offer this data for each road.

[rch]

But James, the local police are telling me something completely different, so I don't know where this concept of "excessive speeding" is coming from. It may be that 15% of the vehicles are going over 25mph, but 26 mph isn't really overly excessive in a road where is the overall average speed is under 20mph.

But I don't think it's right for me to cut and paste from an email discussion with the relevant sergeant, so I've asked the sergeants of both relevant wards to request for an official police statement about the Melbourne Grove traffic monitoring stats to be issued before the next DCC.