Earl Aelfheah

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Denise Johnson, Manchester Soul... > > Great tune 👌

mancity68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Not ED, but I was delighted to see a seal in the > Thames between Tower Bridge and HMS Belfast today. > Bobbing around eating eels. Wow, do they often come up the river that far?

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I would love to know what are the success (and > perhaps more importantly the failure) criteria for > this traffic experiment. Of course, we never will > know, and indeed I'd be prepared to bet that none > have yet (perhaps will ever) be set. > > There will be no way, for instance, based on the > timing, to differentiate reduction in pollution > because of the Ulez, and because of this - each > will no doubt claim 100% of any success in that > area. But I doubt whether a figure has even been > set for a forecast outcome. Probably of either. > > And indeed - what base-lines will be being used? > > And, based on Southwark's very fast and loose > attitude to statistics and measurement - why would > we ever believe a word they said? This is a big problem.

Alan Medic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > diable rouge Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Boris Johnson savaged by Ed Milliband in HoC > > debate, he won't even make it to Christmas at > this > > rate... > > That was so enjoyable to watch. Waffle outsmarted > by facts. I wonder how his demise will unfold? They'll keep him on for a while yet. When the brexshambles really unfolds, they'll need him as a fall guy. I give him until next summer, maybe a little longer.

It's good to hear that a special exemption is being granted to people hunting with guns. They can meet in groups up to 30. 😒

The ULEZ next year, should also help air pollution generally, and may even reduce the amount of traffic on main roads.

Traffic has gone up all over London following the pandemic. Let's see what happens in Tooting where they have removed the planters. So far, it doesn't appear to have done anything to reduce congestion on the main roads, but perhaps it will change in time.

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But I think what you are wanting to offset is > other people?s homes and lives. It?s a nursery > which has increased levels of pollution, a > playground and park. > > Also I think for me the ultimate issue is that > this doesn?t feel like a low traffic neighbourhood > it?s a few low traffic streets, with busy roads at > either end of them. if something would genuinely > reduce the overall car use of be thrilled. I think this is where we disagree though. A nursery on a busy main road is likely to suffer from pollution. I'm not saying that's a good idea of course, but it's a separate issue. I don't believe that removing the planters will improve the situation on those main roads, certinaly not for more than a few weeks. What it will do, is expose people (including nursery aged children) living on residential side roads to higher and higher levels of pollution over time as well. And it's not just about pollution, it's also the experience of growing up on a street with speeding cars, excessive noise of motorbikes, the disinsentive to walk and cycle, the loss of community that comes from a road dominated by traffic etc. etc. Again, the arguement in favour of high traffic neighbourhoods is one for levelling down.

There are some links to studies on the effects of LTNs here: https://londonlivingstreets.com/2019/07/11/evaporating-traffic-impact-of-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-on-main-roads/ I do accept the LTNs are not a panacea - there will be some issues and some displacement (particularly in the immediate term). But this has to be offset against the improvements to residential / side streets, the increase in walking and associated health impacts and the alternative of doing nothing / allowing traffic to slowly take over every street.

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I guess what I want to ask is do you think the > traffic which uses these roads only appears and > disappears if they are open or not? Otherwise if > the same(ish) traffic is either using 5 roads or 1 > road then clearly > There would be less congestion using 5 though I?d > imagine not evenly distributed. > I don?t think Closing these roads has made the > cars which used them previously disappear, so they > logically have been diverted onto other roads to > the detriment of those living and using those > them. It is easy to underestimate the number of short journeys ("rather than walk, why don't I drop you off at the station" for example). If you open up the side streets, more people use them for short journeys, they might otherwise have walked. There is so much evidence of this. Small increases in road capacity lead to more car journeys and make almost no difference to levels of congestion, in a very little time.

If you remove the planters, I think there will be a small increase in traffic as people are more tempted to make shorter journeys by car / discouraged from walking. The small extra capacity created by reopening a few side streets will quickly be filled. This is what happens time and again (yes, induced demand). Congestion will not improve at all. Neither will pollution. But at least traffic won't just be contained to the main roads, so I guess it will be more equal in the sense of levelling down.

Fair enough (although they didn't give the LTNs the same chance). But make an educated guess. What do you think @dulwichfolk - Do you think that the congestion is going to significantly improve now in Tooting?

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I can?t speak for everyone but I rarely drive, I?m > usually a pedestrian often with small > Children and due to where we live the closures > don?t really effect my journey times. So from a > selfish perspective (which we all have) my > concern is for the pollution in the ?communal > areas? such as lordship lane and goose green where > I take my children which I feel is worse since the > closures . However I also dislike seeing > inequality and this feels sadly the case. I would > love to reduce car use over the borough, for > everyone, but I don?t think helping some and > making it much worse for others is fair. > I actually think we are roughly on the same side > regarding car use but possibly not in the respect > of what is fair. Fair enough. I just wonder how much difference it would really make if we were to remove all the planters. Traffic levels have increased all over london since we came out of lockdown, even in the outer boroughs. In Tooting, where they've reversed all the changes, congestion hasn't improved, it's just made side roads more dangerous and polluted too.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The trials are for hireable ones so people?s > details will be traceable and insurance is > provided by the hire firm. It stresses they?re to > be used on roads only. This is sensible. > > Where you can use a trial e-scooter > You may use a trial e-scooter on the road (except > motorways) and in cycle lanes. > > You must not use an e-scooter on the pavement. Yeah, definitely shouldn't be used on the pavement.

Mrs D Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the issue in EDG is more due to the > Dulwich Village junction being closed at Carlton > avenue and cars now going via EDG. Cars also go > down Townley but due to traffic light phasing, I > think more people now drive the long way around on > LL and then EDG. They do need to look at the phasing. There are queues looking to turn on to an empty EDG at the junction with the Village.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do people really want to see traffic funnelled > down roads like Melbourne Grove? Do people really > believe that if you do, EDG will suddenly become > free of congestion? > They've removed all the planters in Tooting and > it's made no difference at all, except now there > is congestion everywhere, not just the main roads. Because I don't believe it. I think that in the majority of cases, people are just frustrated that they can't take the most direct route to where they're going / drive where they want. It's nothing to do with their concern for pollution, BAME communities, the elderly, or congestion. You cannot get rid of congestion by encouraging more car journeys. I dunno, I'm sure some of these concerns are genuine in some cases, but there are a lot of people who really just don't want any impediment to their driving wherever they want imo. If you remove all the planters, within a couple of weeks, the congestion will be right back to where it was before. It will make no difference, except side roads will also fill up.

Do people really want to see traffic funnelled down roads like Melbourne Grove? Do people really believe that if you do, EDG will suddenly become free of congestion? They've removed all the planters in Tooting and it's made no difference at all, except now there is congestion everywhere, not just the main roads.

Dulwichgirl82 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What I don?t understand is those that live on the > closed roads claim traffic isn?t worse on the > roads it?s been diverted to, however this doesn?t > really make sense as either: > 1) they believe the traffic that previously used > their roads (Apparently bad) has entirely > disappeared in the last 2 weeks which seems > incredibly unlikely or > 2) there wasn?t that much traffic on their roads > anyway and hence why has it been closed? Or some people may have switched to walking / cycling (for example, instead of dropping a partner off at the station in the car, they might now decide to walk instead). If you both make it both less convenient to drive and more pleasant to walk / cycle, then you will see some behaviour change. Many car journeys in London are very short.

People in cars should look over their shoulder at the empty three seater sofa behind them, before complaining cyclists riding two abreast are taking up too much room 🤔

@Rockets I ah e always said that I disagreed with the council?s approach. But now the LTNs have been created, I believe we should support them, at least for the length of the trial. My personal view is that we need to start allocating more space to pedestrians and cyclists to make it easier for people to chose those options for short journeys. Continuing with total car dominance Over every street is going to get us nowhere.

If the R rate continues to rise significantly, does anyone think Johnson will try to impose full lockdown again, or would it just be too politically difficult now?

Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It looks like the redevelopment will be very > attractive - much better than what is there now. > > https://ayleshamcentreconsultation.co.uk/ What's with all the palm trees in this animation? It looks like LA more than SE London

Trials going on at the moment apparently: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/e-scooter-trials-guidance-for-users

devinsgirl Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Prices taking a big piss at Olly's indeed! Sea > Master is one of our favs as well. Just can't go > wrong with those guys. > > Good cooked fish & crispy chips is my you can also > say - comfort food. > > Cafcax Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Love an Olly's but I agree with an earlier > poster: > > prices taking the piss! > > > > Ken's good too but we've become big fans of Sea > > Master near the Rye for the crispy chips & > freshly > > cooked fish. Worth a go. Another vote for Sea Master