Forum Sponsors

https://www.gokayfitness.com/3-months-body-transformation

https://www.gokayfitness.com/class

www.dulwichcarpetcompany.co.uk

Advertise here

The East Dulwich Forum
The Bishop, The EDT, The Great Exhibition, the Actress or another?
Goto Page: Previous12345678910Next
Current Page: 4 of 10
messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Abe_froeman February 06, 12:03PM

Roywj, I think all the sports clubs and velodrome have parking but what use is it if they ckose off the acecss roads so you can;t get there in the first place?

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by exdulwicher February 06, 12:29PM

geh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> so it appears the implementation of a strategy
> that deliberately targets residents rather than
> longer journey commuters, and says 'to hell' with
> a joined up transport network is ok then?

TfL run the public transport. Not Southwark Council. If you want more/better buses or a tube line in SE London, or more frequent trains from North/East Dulwich stations or introduction of Santander Cycles to the area, that's TfL.

The theory is that any schemes that impact residents (such as closing roads) are done by looking at the existing (and potential new) public transport options, then working out what is possible, feasible, realistic & economically viable when combined with those.

The council is basically the go-between for TfL London-wide transport and local trips transport, the main aim being to get far more local trips done by public transport, bicycle and walking than car.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by geh February 06, 01:55PM

exdulwicher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> geh Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > so it appears the implementation of a strategy
> > that deliberately targets residents rather than
> > longer journey commuters, and says 'to hell'
> with
> > a joined up transport network is ok then?
>
> TfL run the public transport. Not Southwark
> Council. If you want more/better buses or a tube
> line in SE London, or more frequent trains from
> North/East Dulwich stations or introduction of
> Santander Cycles to the area, that's TfL.
>
> The theory is that any schemes that impact
> residents (such as closing roads) are done by
> looking at the existing (and potential new) public
> transport options, then working out what is
> possible, feasible, realistic & economically
> viable when combined with those.
>
> The council is basically the go-between for TfL
> London-wide transport and local trips transport,
> the main aim being to get far more local trips
> done by public transport, bicycle and walking than
> car.

Which is not James Barbers view on how it will work!

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Metallic February 07, 03:32PM

Have been talking to a few people who think the whole Our Healthy Streets plan, which will be expensive, should be subsidised some how by Dulwich College, Alleyn's and JAGS - they are the ones that bring the traffic in, and the parking, and it is easy to prove this - look at the streets during the school holidays (all) and after registration time in the mornings - calm rules. People like me with a youngish family do not want our children breathing in any fumes but more importantly, all these schools bring in traffic that clogs the roads and with many people who park and go once their kids are dropped off, which makes cycling and walking more hazardous for our local children. I saw some photos on twitter from Mumsforlungs contrasting Calton Avenue in term time and holidays. Why should our area be a car park for people who have no residential connection with the area? The schools should not be giving permission to sixth formers to come to school in cars.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by dbboy February 07, 03:54PM

You could argue, that All schools contribute to creating additional traffic and parking issues at school run/drop off times with so many children being driven to school, combined with the rush hour.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Cozza01 February 07, 04:33PM

I don’t see why JAGS, Alleyn’s and DC parents should be penalised. There are plenty of teachers and students who drive or get driven to both Charter’s and I have seen plenty of children picked up from Dulwich Village primary schools in the afternoon so I am going to assume they don’t all walk in the morning either.

Not sure why we can’t have all the proposed roads on flexible road closure but unsure why the closure has to be for such large time bands. 7.30 to 9.30 and 3.30 to 5.30 would surely solve most issues.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by slarti b February 07, 05:45PM

I can't speak for DC, but from my observations Alleyns and Jags certainly attract high volumes of car traffic, as confirmed by their school travel plans. The issue with these schools is they have a very wide catchment area, much wider than the state schools, and I suspect many parents are the type who prefer to ferry their kids to school in chelsea tractors rather than by bus.

However, I do agree with your comment about the time bands.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was february 07, 05:46pm by slarti b.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by holymoly February 07, 06:41PM

Going to the meeting tomorrow to say NO. Who on earth thought this up? I do not want to be 'kettled in' and the extent of the proposal is barmy. This causes traffic to divert via Court Lane, passing through Dovercourt and Beauval and creating a quiet parking spot for the private schools. It will cause serious concerns for access for emergency services in general. What are Southwark thinking? Or don't they think......

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by seenbeen February 07, 07:14PM

I live near Heber School and the roads around there are heaving in the morning- double parking etc. And if anyone has ever driven around Francesca Cabrini school at the 'wrong' time- it is ridiculous

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by holymoly February 07, 07:21PM

and these proposals will exacerbate that

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by JEG1 February 07, 09:05PM

slarti b Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I can't speak for DC, but from my observations
> Alleyns and Jags certainly attract high volumes of
> car traffic, as confirmed by their school travel
> plans. The issue with these schools is they have
> a very wide catchment area, much wider than the
> state schools, and I suspect many parents are the
> type who prefer to ferry their kids to school in
> chelsea tractors rather than by bus.
>
>

I imagine there are a fair few parents lucky enough to live in (or have an address in) the tiny catchment areas of the 'outstanding' Dulwich Village and Charter schools, who also own 'Chelsea tractors'. They might not drive their children to school in the morning, but I'm sure they drive them to swimming, piano, drama, tutors etc. It's easy to blame one 'type'.of people when everyone is as much to blame really, unless you don't own a car at all.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by holymoly February 07, 09:20PM

Vehicular traffic includes mobility scooters, waste disposal, post office, deliveries - many vital services. Trips to swimming, shops etc just as necessary for those who are reliant on modes of transport in specific circumstances. Southwark LBC and TfL are well aware that there are no regular public transport mechanisms east to west Dulwich and limited north to South. Southwark LBC 'should' but do not have holistic plans to create meaningful change. Their plans are politically motivated, impact the 'many' Dulwich residents and benefit the few. Shame on them.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was february 07, 09:21pm by holymoly.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Melihoople February 08, 07:33AM

holymoly Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vehicular traffic includes mobility scooters,
> waste disposal, post office, deliveries - many
> vital services. Trips to swimming, shops etc just
> as necessary for those who are reliant on modes of
> transport in specific circumstances. Southwark LBC
> and TfL are well aware that there are no regular
> public transport mechanisms east to west Dulwich
> and limited north to South. Southwark LBC
> 'should' but do not have holistic plans to create
> meaningful change. Their plans are politically
> motivated, impact the 'many' Dulwich residents and
> benefit the few. Shame on them.



I am deeply concerned by the lack of public transport & these plans.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by exdulwicher February 08, 08:43AM

Melihoople Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------
>
> I am deeply concerned by the lack of public
> transport & these plans.

Public transport runs as normal. P4 still goes through the village; 37 can still get from Goose Green up ED Grove and past ND station; the 176, 185 etc are unaffected on LL and the 12 can still wind its tortuous way through the back streets of Peckham to the library.

The council don't run the buses. They will however consider and accommodate bus routes in their road plans. Also if there's less traffic overall, bus times become much more reliable.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by holymoly February 08, 09:17AM

exdulwicher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Melihoople Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I am deeply concerned by the lack of public
> > transport & these plans.
>
> Public transport runs as normal. P4 still goes
> through the village; 37 can still get from Goose
> Green up ED Grove and past ND station; the 176,
> 185 etc are unaffected on LL and the 12 can still
> wind its tortuous way through the back streets of
> Peckham to the library.
>
> The council don't run the buses. They will however
> consider and accommodate bus routes in their road
> plans. Also if there's less traffic overall, bus
> times become much more reliable.


You miss the point. The closure stops necessary access across Dulwich, worsening the limited public transport (buses) that currently exist. The route across Dulwich would be closed. The traffic through Dulwich Village, South Circ and Lordship Lane would become unworkable, the existing buses impacted and more air pollution caused. Southwark have already been refused by TfL to make changes to the Barry rd waiting point for buses so this is the hair brained counter scheme. The scheme is pure madness along the lines of the Loughborough Junction debacle.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Melihoople February 08, 09:28AM

exdulwicher Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Melihoople Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------
> >
> > I am deeply concerned by the lack of public
> > transport & these plans.
>
> Public transport runs as normal. P4 still goes
> through the village; 37 can still get from Goose
> Green up ED Grove and past ND station; the 176,
> 185 etc are unaffected on LL and the 12 can still
> wind its tortuous way through the back streets of
> Peckham to the library.
>
> The council don't run the buses. They will however
> consider and accommodate bus routes in their road
> plans. Also if there's less traffic overall, bus
> times become much more reliable.


There are no workable East/West public transport options.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by rollflick February 08, 09:30AM

Many people in this thread are claiming that traffic is only a problem during school drop off/pick up times. But the traffic data gathered by the council clearly shows that traffic - and air pollution - levels are high into the evening. All the data is on the consultation page in the evidence report, here's a link for anyone who's not found it yet: [consultations.southwark.gov.uk]

If you think the council data is wrong, please tell us why. Otherwise shouldn't we move on to focus on facts?

In terms of public transport, the only credible way now to get improvements is to limit car traffic here. Doing that means fewer delays for buses (so the same number of buses can operate a faster, higher frequency service) and it will increase demand, creating a business case for TfL to invest in service improvements in our area. There's no space for major development in the area so no developer cash. The govt's new "Levelling up" agenda means London won't get more cash at the time when TfL's budget is going down the hole that is Crossrail. Lobbying TfL for more services will get nowhere.

The council has a clear mandate for change. For anyone still with misgivings about these proposals despite looking at the compelling evidence underpinning them, the effective way to influence them would be to come up with alternatives that would lead to similar improvements for air quality, cycling etc.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was february 08, 09:31am by rollflick.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by intexasatthe moment February 08, 12:13PM

holymoly - was the meeting informative ,good on you if you were there for the 9am presentation .

I see there are 2 more

Presentation and Workshop - Herne Hill Baptist Church
From 29 Feb 2020 at 09:00 to 29 Feb 2020 at 12:30

Presentation and Workshop - JAGS
From 4 Mar 2020 at 18:30 to 4 Mar 2020 at 21:00

[consultations.southwark.gov.uk]

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by sand12 February 08, 01:50PM

The presentation today at Alleyn’s was informative. I wasn’t able to stay for the QA afterward. The representatives from the council were doing their best to clarify and present the options under consideration. Some folks were eager to voice their objections, but it was unclear if they had taken enough time to listen or read through the documentation beforehand.

We have to address this issue collectively. Pollution and congestion are a health hazard for all- young/old, pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers. The area was not built to accommodate the level of thru traffic, commuters who park/ride, and the increase in pupil numbers at the private and state schools, the rise in household deliveries/couriers, or AI which redirects traffic to routes which shorten the journey, but cause harm to the local area. We need to address these issues collectively and with empathy. There are many reasons why each of us has cause to use a particular mode of transport, or not. We should listen to what those reasons are as well as share how those choices impact on others. Some measures will need to be trialed and revisited, but inaction is causing irreparable physical harm.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by holymoly February 08, 02:26PM

Southwark presentation this morning clarified that all the funding for this work is coming from TfL and not from Southwark. So as we have seen before, TfL as funding body will want specific outcomes - unclear what the range of specific outcomes will be. But for sure they will not want to permit any thing that impacts buses.

This is consultation on Phase 3 - responses to be in by 29th March. Form at: www.southwark.gov.uk/ohs-dulwich

The specifics of what is proposed are still contradictory on Southwark's own materials and so it was not possible to get informed answers to the access for residents for Area B and other Areas. We are described as ‘Permit Holders’. Andy Simmons stated that residents would get permission to access. He was not clear whether all residents in areas A, B and C get access to all areas or just their own. When specifically asked, he stated that Teachers would not be given permits. Not sure that this is correct as they would need them to get in to park in Alleyns, surely? He also stated that Plumbers, carers etc would be permitted but under some sort of yet to be clarified arrangement. No clarity has been given on whether these Permits are chargeable for residents and/or for others accessing. He also mentioned that that they wish to offer CPZ in these areas as well – so this all sounds chargeable access driven.
See the diagram on the Consultation link above and I am now referring to that and another A4 document available today that had more detail.

1. Junction East Dulwich Grove and Townley Road
Time restrictions here are proposed to be lengthy. 7-10am and 3-7pm with no turn into Townley from either direction, except cyclists. Not clear where the school buses will stop.
Outside these hours, access is for Residents and other ‘permit holders’ only. Not clear who this covers – whether all area A,B,C residents and which other categories of user.
2. Townley Road
There is access for residents (Areas not specified) and other permit holders who can exit onto EDG during the restricted hours.
The controls at Lordship Lane junction are not specified as restricted hours but permit residents in. They will permit non-permit holders in but these user cannot exit onto EDG and would have to go back out via Lordship Lane or Court lane.
3. Roundabout at Burbage Road and Dulwich Village
This is not shown on the consultation map but it is intended for there to be two cameras on the Dulwich Village entry and Burbage Rd entry from this roundabout, that will prevent College Rd and Gallery Rd traffic using those routes. Residents/Permit holders will be allowed to go through. Other users will have to return to the South Circ.

The major access restriction at Dulwich Village blocks access to all.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by slarti b February 08, 02:53PM

exdulwicher Wrote:

> Public transport runs as normal. P4 still goes through the village; 37 can still get from Goose
> Green up ED Grove and past ND station; the 176 185 etc are unaffected on LL and the 12 can still
> wind its tortuous way through the back streets of Peckham to the library.
> ...
> Also if there's less traffic overall, bus times become much more reliable.

I dont think you have considered the knock on effects of the proposals.

EDG and, especially, LL will end up with far more traffic. This will delay the 185\176\42, all highly important North South bus routes,along LL. More traffic on EDG will make the already erratic 37 even less reliable. The P4 is the only route likely to benefit.

A scheme that displaces traffic and worsens public transport will not benefit wide public health.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by mockingbird February 08, 06:26PM

sand12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The presentation today at Alleyn’s was
> informative. I wasn’t able to stay for the QA
> afterward. The representatives from the council
> were doing their best to clarify and present the
> options under consideration. Some folks were eager
> to voice their objections, but it was unclear if
> they had taken enough time to listen or read
> through the documentation beforehand.
>
> We have to address this issue collectively.
> Pollution and congestion are a health hazard for
> all- young/old, pedestrians, cyclists, and
> drivers. The area was not built to accommodate the
> level of thru traffic, commuters who park/ride,
> and the increase in pupil numbers at the private
> and state schools, the rise in household
> deliveries/couriers, or AI which redirects traffic
> to routes which shorten the journey, but cause
> harm to the local area. We need to address these
> issues collectively and with empathy. There are
> many reasons why each of us has cause to use a
> particular mode of transport, or not. We should
> listen to what those reasons are as well as share
> how those choices impact on others. Some measures
> will need to be trialed and revisited, but
> inaction is causing irreparable physical harm.

Yes we need to understand and take action.

However the presentation was not very clear in fact, many questions went unanswered about the timing and scope of past traffic and air monitoring and no honest conversation to admit any limitations. The Council representative was clear to note that they wanted to understand 'unintended' consequences - but none were put forward as considered already by Council. In the very limited time allowed for the breakout sessions after the 3 hour meeting, the Officers indicated there is no intention to allow for a pilot and plan to move straight to construction and post build monitoring.

Personally I consider that this approach is not acceptable and commits considerable spend before the scheme is properly tested and unintended consequences understood. I would be prepared to work with a trial but not straight to construction for such a major set of works. I think it is unreasonable for our Council to expect to be able to operate in this way with taxpayers' money.

I encourage you to attend (and go prepared with questions) to one of the remaining two meetings. Perhaps ask for the extra material distributed in advance, so that you have time to look at it properly and can tailor your questions accordingly.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by dbboy February 08, 08:17PM

From what has been stated so far it appears to be TfL monies, not Southwark Council monies.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Serena2012 February 08, 09:50PM

Excellent post Mockingbird. I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. The lack of a trial is particularly concerning, because although there was some acknowledgment from the council that they could look to make tweaks once any zone was in place, there is a real risk that it will be very difficult to make wholesale changes once the horse has bolted, even in circumstances where the unintended consequences are grave.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by goldilocks February 08, 09:56PM

Just to reiterate - there is loads of material online on the council website. The healthy streets weblink has been shared upthread but otherwise typing 'healthy streets Dulwich' will find it. There is detailed discussions on the proposals, as well as additional / optional wider areas. In addition people should review the 'evidence pack' for an understanding of the data that has driven the options as outlined.

It would be great if people could take some time to understand really what is proposed by looking through this data - it may also help make the consultations more useful for people.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by mockingbird February 08, 10:14PM

Serena2012 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Excellent post Mockingbird. I agree wholeheartedly
> with your comments. The lack of a trial is
> particularly concerning, because although there
> was some acknowledgment from the council that they
> could look to make tweaks once any zone was in
> place, there is a real risk that it will be very
> difficult to make wholesale changes once the horse
> has bolted, even in circumstances where the
> unintended consequences are grave.

Thank you - A pilot is essential in my view



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was february 08, 10:28pm by mockingbird.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by alice February 09, 01:20AM

Are there not computer programs that can model the effects of different road closures?

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by mockingbird February 09, 09:55AM

I recommend that anyone going to the next meetings takes a look at the limited data modelling provided so far. Most of what is expressed on the Council consultation feedback documents and supporting documents is not clear on that.

Traffic:
We should request I suggest, the LinSig documents and other modelling that has been done for traffic flows with dates etc to be loaded on the Consultation website so that these can be looked at - not just the summaries that Southwark has chosen to present.

Air quality
The council presenter said yesterday that these are limited samples on street because the cost of detailed air quality monitoring is prohibitive (mentioned Google car and £500k running cost). Perhaps Google will let us have this data so that we can see it in context.

You can see the summary of the earlier consultations and the 'supporting' evidence at this link:
[www.southwark.gov.uk]

Worth a look at the final pages of the Summary of Feedback document. Understandable that Mums for Lungs and Clean Air for Dulwich have sent in their organisation's views but the Dulwich Society commenting on our behalf I do find unacceptable. I pay my subs but I certainly do not give them permission to represent me. Does Southwark treat them as a consultee?

The Dulwich Society, 12 December
Our Healthy Streets: Dulwich
The Dulwich Society responds as below to the consultation on phase 2. The Society has a membership of over 1,100
households, mainly in Dulwich and in the area affected by the potential solutions.
The Society has been active in encouraging its members to engage with the issues.
While the Society has not carried out a systematic survey of its members’ views, it appears clear that the membership
is in favour of radical solutions to the problems of:
• traffic generated air pollution;
• traffic congestion due to an excessive volume of vehicles using the roads and junctions;
• through traffic from outside the area in Dulwich Village and elsewhere;
• road safety, especially for pupils getting to and from school;
• inefficient use of the limited amount of car parking, partly because of all-day parking by commuters using the railway
stations;
• general impact on the public realm from domination by motor vehicles.
I attach a list of local stakeholders which we think the Council should consult. We can help you with contacts (subject to
their approval).
The Society believes that measures such as the first seven listed in the consultation leaflet would have the potential to
solve these problems.
The Society therefore supports the proposals you are working on.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Serena2012 February 09, 10:37AM

Alice - The council is proposing to undertake modelling once they have a more concrete proposal covering areas A, B and C. However, it was conceded at yesterday’s meeting that no modelling will ever be perfect (hence my strong preference for a trial).

In the context of the modelling, my concern, as a resident of one of the A roads which could bear the brunt of some of the “redistributed traffic” is that there is proper stress testing of the assumption that the A roads involved (many stretches of which are narrower, more densely populated and have properties closer to the road than other B roads in the area) can safely handle any increased volume of traffic, and the knock on impact on air quality on these roads (particularly given that these A roads house a large number of schools and young families).

It is imperative that this data is shared by the council in a comprehensive format, so that residents are fully informed on the potential repercussions and any unintended consequences before the statutory consultation takes place, and that the modelling isn’t simply part of a box ticking exercise/ one designed to only share “positive”/ “helpful” outcomes whilst failing to address the negatives.

Alice Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are there not computer programs that can model the
> effects of different road closures?



Edited 8 time(s). Last edit was february 09, 11:22am by Serena2012.

messageRe: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3
Posted by Metallic February 09, 10:57AM

slarti b Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> exdulwicher Wrote:
>
> > Public transport runs as normal. P4 still goes
> through the village; 37 can still get from Goose
> > Green up ED Grove and past ND station; the 176
> 185 etc are unaffected on LL and the 12 can still
> > wind its tortuous way through the back streets
> of Peckham to the library.
> > ...
> > Also if there's less traffic overall, bus times
> become much more reliable.
>
> I dont think you have considered the knock on
> effects of the proposals.
>
> EDG and, especially, LL will end up with far more
> traffic. This will delay the 185\176\42, all
> highly important North South bus routes,along LL.
> More traffic on EDG will make the already erratic
> 37 even less reliable. The P4 is the only route
> likely to benefit.
>
> A scheme that displaces traffic and worsens public
> transport will not benefit wide public health.

And it is only during certain hours, not 24/7. Although the longer evening traffic levels suggest that there should be more attention to be paid to this. The pollution levels are just as high long in to the evening.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit was february 09, 11:01am by Metallic.

Goto Page: Previous12345678910Next
Current Page: 4 of 10

Back to top of page
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Donate                   Terms of use                  Help & FAQs                   Advertise               RSS rss feed               Copyright 2006 - 2018 East Dulwich Forum