Rockets

Legal...ha ha...the process is robust, fair and inclusive...I think the council is trying to convince themselves it is... It probably isn't surprising that they aren't sharing any data at the meeting....everything they have done in this process has been shambolic. Alternatively maybe it is because they have to yet work out a way to cut the data to give them the outcome they want! ;-) Also the break-out rooms idea is absurd...what if you have an opinion on more than one of the subjects? Reeks of trying to divide and conquer if you ask me. This council is utterly out of their depth and seems to be making it all up as they go along.

I thought there must have been a protest/demo of some kind when I saw a big group of cyclists being led to Dulwich Square on Sunday - not, ahem, convinced that the headline is entirely accurate that it was all Dulwich families - not many of them seemed to know where they were going.....;-) https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/dulwich-families-get-on-their-bikes-to-show-support-for-safe-cycling-routes/

The issue is there were always traffic hot spots, and yes Calton junction with DV was one of them but that was more due to the meddling the council did to try and fix the problem and it just made it worse than it had ever been (and that was validated by their own monitoring that showed that after they made changes to the junction it was more polluted and more congested than it had been before). What I find so disingenuous about those types of twitter posts is that no-one wants traffic, no-one actively wants pollution and congestion - we all want less pollution and less congestion yet what those posts fail to acknowledge (and actually most pro-LTN lobby fail to acknowledge) is that removing traffic from one place and moving it somewhere else doesn't solve the problem it makes it worse. It's almost as if Clean Air Dulwich wants people to believe that since the closures went in EVERYWHERE is a car-free nirvana. It's not. They know that, we know that but they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge it. For every 2015 - 2019 video they produce someone on Croxted Road or East Dulwich Grove or Underhill or Lordship lane could produce one highlighting how much worse things are there since the arrival of the LTNs. I want less traffic for all - not a small section of our community and all those videos do is suggest groups like Clean Air Dulwich are concerned about is protecting the car-free nirvana they negotiated with the council at other people's expense....

I just finally got round to filling in the council questionnaire and it really saddened me to see the botched mess the council has made of a once in a lifetime opportunity to actually do something positive about pollution and climate change. As I waded through the myriad of leading questions desperately trying to garner my support for more measures and CPZs I couldn't help but think how did they get themselves into this mess where the only option I have is to register a vote to return the measures to their previous state. This is an abject lesson in how not to do things. The council have let us all down - they have failed everyone on both sides of the debate massively, divided our community and have created more pollution and congestion than ever before. I might write a book: Southwark Council and the LTN folly.....

MrsBoris - I hope you and your family are well and so sorry to hear about the ordeal you went through. I am very glad that the person is now in custody and I hope that you can take some small comfort from that. Thank you so much for you and your friend for alerting people to what happened - it's what forums like this are for and I am sure people were more vigilant as a result.

Heartblock - that document remains the most damning piece of evidence against the council and their foolhardy implementation of the LTNs - it really is the smoking gun to the ludicrousness of the decision to put these LTNs in. Their actions with the LTNs completely contradict and ignore their own advice and conclusions in that, and other, report/s. It begs the question why did they go ahead with it - who got in their ear and made them think this was a good idea - which lobby groups were involved and why and what influence/leverage did they exert on the council and councillors?

Does anyone know what the decision-making process is for the location of hangars? Some roads seem to have lots whilst others have none and like our road, not for a case of people not asking - all of our neighbours added their details to the council list years ago yet no hangars have been forthcoming yet a road around the corner has multiple hangars.

Ex- where are the moving it from or to? It's a bit chaotic around there at the moment as Court Lane is closed and Thames Water has turned up and closed the bottom of Woodwarde Road to re-dig the road they dug up a couple of months ago.

I see Court Lane seems to be being resurfaced today - is this in preparation for the grand re-opening.....;-)

Looks like there is a photo op taking place in Margy Square. There is a photographer there and a load of cyclists passed us one of whom was carrying a large More Safe Routes flag.

Not that, but I did hear that Court Lane was going to be made one-way as the council was acknowledging that there were problems being caused by the throttling of east/west routes by the closures. Maybe the two are linked?

jamesmcash Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I've never come across this being a problem in > Southwark. Planning regulations can vary and you > can imagine there being issues in, for instance, a > conservation area. But I would argue for a lenient > approach given the need to encourage cycling. > > Best wishes > James James, good stuff. Many thanks for your quick reply.

Cllr McAsh, whilst we wait to see whether we get a hangar what is the council's policy towards cycle storage units in front gardens? I saw a report on the BBC that Islington were telling householders to remove Asgard (and other similar bike storage structures) from front gardens as such "out buildings" were not permitted beyond back gardens. As someone who does not have a side return I have ordered an Asgard cycle storage unit for our small front garden. Does Southwark permit such units? The unit complies to all permitted development thresholds (but apparently so do the ones that councils like Islington seem to have a problem with when people out them into front gardens).

Talking about things dropping through your door that annoy people. This dropped through our door today and it absolutely incensed my wife for its blinkeredness (and she hasn't been easily riled by the LTNs). She met a friend today who had also received it and she also found it infuriating and had followed the link to the CleanAIrDulwich twitter feed as she wanted to comment only to find that the comments are locked to prevent people from leaving any feedback (I am sure CleanAirDulwich would say to prevent trolls but many interpret it as they get more people disagreeing with them than agreeing and so it helps to manage the narrative). Of course we all want "More of this" and no-one wants to go "Back to this" but if "More of This" means other people have to endure "More of that" then that doesn't seem right or fair. This is what so annoys people - this "well we're all right Jack" attitude and blind ignorance to what is happening as a result of these changes.

DulwichCentral Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rockets Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > But DC - many people are not yet back to their > > offices or places of work either so if there is > > increased congestion now it is not unreasonable > to > > suggest that it will only get worse. > > > I thought all the traffic is key workers, carers > and people making essential journeys? Thats the > rhetoric expressed on here in defence of people > driving. Can't have it both ways ;) Er DC....the rules have changed a bit since the beginning of lockdown on essential journeys...shops are open, people aren't restricted on where they travel to and from etc etc...what's happening is what many of us predicted would happen...;-)

DulwichCentral Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are more cars on the roads because people > still aren't using public transport. > > If increased public transport is, as is often > stated here, a preferred alternative to LTNs, then > it follows that the current *reduction* of public > transport usage is having a negative impact and > the actual results of experimental low-traffic > measures can't be properly assessed until public > transport is running at pre-pandemic levels. But DC - many people are not yet back to their offices or places of work either so if there is increased congestion now it is not unreasonable to suggest that it will only get worse. You could also say that given these measures have been in for a long time and traffic is still as bad as it was when they first went in then they are not having the impact needed and should be removed. BTW I notice that Underhill Road now has a lot of monitoring strips in at various points.

Rahx3 - apologies, I wasn't accusing you of focussing just on cars - it was more of a general observation. The war-on-cars seems to be waged by (self) interest groups and councils (who give too much weight to said (self) nterest groups) whilst seemingly deliberately ignoring the macro issues - probably no doubt because they have gas fired boilers etc! ;-)

Ex- and Ab - let's hope whatever they are doing is done quickly. Any time there is a problem on the A205 it makes the LTN impact 10 times worse. I was on my run this morning up past Dulwich College as well when I saw the temporary lights (and the horrible queue back past the college - even though it was 6.30am!)

I see the A205 has roadworks which is causing yet more chaos around the Dulwich area - has the watermain gone again?

Rahx3 - the report you link to demonstrates how you cannot narrow the focus to just cars and that the problem is far greater than that - and actually those that do focus solely on cars probably do so due to their own confirmation bias (and I do include TFL in that). Look at what the report says: Firstly..... Research has shown that around 75 per cent of particulate matter pollution in Greater London is estimated to come from outside the city. And then the graphs show that in terms of NO2 and PM3. Look at NO2: Road Transport - 50% But within 50% that the worst offender is the diesel car with 24% After that the TFL bus fleet is the next largest contributor at 20% Then Rigid HGVs at 15% Van and mini bus 12% Petrol car 12% Outside of the 50% for road transport... Domestic Gas - 12% Commercial gas -8% Industry 7% So the continued use of domestic gas is as damaging as the use of the petrol car. And then when you look at PM3 sources: 53% comes from road transport.... ..of which taxis are the biggest contributor - 26% Van and mini bus - 17% Diesel car and petrol car on 14% each TFL bus fleet - 13% etc etc.... So you can see that we need to tackle this holistically and need to stop making it a war against the car as it is far bigger than that and the way councils, and the lobby groups, try to focus solely on private car use is a folly and actually diverts attention from the wider issues. And maybe, just maybe, for groups like TFL focusing on the car deflects attention away from their role in the problems as those charts show (and I appreciate they are from 2013) that TFL has oversight on a big part of the problem - the bus fleet and taxis. If we don't approach this with a clear-eye view of everything going on (domestic gas use, transport etc etc) you will never crack the problem.

Yes we are hoping we get one in the next wave of installs! It's been a good four or five year wait for us so let's hope we win the lottery this time! ;-)

If you don't want your slightly too small bike hangars we'll have them on our road we've been asking for them for years.....#bethankfulyouhaveone ;-)

Also, ensure you don't focus this solely on the car. Yes cars need addressing but there are many of here who blindly obsess about the cars' negative impact - often motivated by their own obsession with two-wheeled modes of transport! ;-) Cars account for 18% of emissions so there is a whopping 82% of emission sources that often get overlooked. I am glad you are looking at wood burning stoves etc but you need to take it further. You need to be discussing how each individual needs to assess their own impact beyond the car and wood-burner cause celebres. Often what happens is that those who have dumped the car, or don't (for example) use a wood burning stove, are happy to castigate those that do and it narrows the debate too much towards those areas of transgression. Broaden the debate about creating a consciousness around the continued use of fossil-fuel boilers or the reliance on products made on the other side of the world and shipped on huge cargo ships that in one journey pollute more than all of the cars in a single country.

I agree that sunny days wandering through quiet streets are lovely and days like the sunny weekend they really come into their own. I was walking through the DV junction during the wet days preceding the sunny weather and there wasn't a soul in sight. Now the schools are back, even on a sunny day like today, there are, outside the school drop-off and pick-up time, very few people around - very few cyclists, very few pedestrians. So, the question you have to ask yourself is whether the devastation being felt outside of the LTN areas is worth it for those idyllic moments and I am not sure it is, because every time I enjoy Dulwich Village I am torn because I know and understand what is happening to Lordship Lane (for example). If there is a magical way to create that feeling across the whole of Dulwich then sign me up but I have yet to see any suggestions that don't create a nirvana for some and a living hell for others. P.S. Whilst walking (and choking) down Lordship Lane at the weekend I noticed that some of the idiotic wing of the pro-LTN lobby have taken a leaf out of the idiotic wing of the anti-LTN lobby by graffitiing "love LTN" signs (LTN within a heart shape) at a few locations on Lordship Lane.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I?m not accusing everyone who has issues with the > current LTN as wanting to maintain the status quo. > But One Dulwich as an organisation are literally > campaigning to ?return things to how they were?. > This is what is so disappointing Rahx3 - but they have no option. Your ire should actually be aimed at the council for organising such a manipulative review. To be fair, if more of the pro-LTN lobby had stood-up and reviewed what was happening objectively then we would not be where we are but many were happy to go along with the council's lopsided and biased implementation of these measures. Surely you can acknowledge that the review is skewed massively towards getting the result the council wants and is not at all balanced?