ab29

no idea who jmmywhathisname is and could not care less. The reality is that road cloures - so callled ltn or htn more like it - push traffic onto the already busy and polluted roads like Lordship Lane, poisoining people living and using these roads with even more pollution, dirt and noise. How is this compatible with labour principles?

Rockets,this is a lost cause (in many ways). Anyway. I've just cancelled my years long subscription of The Guardian - courtesy of Peter Walker - enough is enough. The Guardian think it is ok to advertise t-shirts for ?150, hotel stays for ?500 per night and plastic fruit bowls for ?200 just because they're 'designer' and yet they have no problem with trumpeting the LTNs as a solution to all that is wrong with the world (eco - wise), even though it is harming so many people! The hypocrisy is astounding!

Eh? Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tried not to post on this matter Mr/Mrs R but this > is another level of ridiculousness. Working in > London for many years an hour was a reasonable > commute. Many spent much longer. You just > manipulate everything to justify your immovable > views. Hopefully won't post again, but you may > put something down even more ludicrous.

For the council and ltn supporters it means shifting your shit to your neighbours' and feeling great because you don't see it on your doorstep anymore. Hence it has evaporated. In a meantime in the real world: half term - What A Bliss

On that note: all impacted by LTN please do keep sending feedback to Southwark Council. No one there gives a shit but at least you know you have done something. I hope one day people responsible for LTN will be held to account.

All the LTN has achieved so far is to redirect traffic from quiet roads to already very busy roads. It is a complete disaster. Sending your traffic to your neighbours roads does not solve anything. Only because you cannot see the traffic anymore it does not mean it has disappeared - it has moved TO YOUR NEIGHBOURS' ROAD.

Majority of people in Dulwich want LTN removed according to the council's own consultation which they chose to ignore. Many of my neighbours - sadly - voted labour, even though they are against LTN. What a complete failure this scheme is - pushing the traffic and all the dirt from your road to your neighbours', pretending it has disappeard. The height of selfishness.

The dog poo analogy sums up the LTN just perfectly.

Could not agree more. first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I second Rockets' post. We need a roads scheme > that works for all not just some.

The traffic in front of my place has not evaporated - on the contrary, since LTN were introduced, it is much worst. How long to wait for this miraculous evaporation? How long people living on the main roads / boundary roads are going to be treated with increased pollution, dirt and noise? The more roads closed, the heavier traffic on the remaining few.

What evaporation? There is no such thing - how can traffic simply disappear? Where to? Only because you don't see it near you, it doesn't mean others don't.

hpsaucey was told off many times before for login in as multiple users.

Hi Admin, the above is obviously a fake account.

Rockets, I have no illusions - four more years of arrogance and not listening to constituents.

It would be so much healthier to have different representation, not only in Southwark but London. Now not only Southwark is a one-party state, but an entire city.

Poor Londn. I wish people voted on local issues rather than trying to punish tories.

@Admin, if you benefit from the LTN it should not affect your judgement. You have archived / lounged the original LTN thread without a reason. Now you are policing / censoring this thread in a way you don't any others.

Vote Labour out. Not sure who they are representing - certainly not local residents.

I'm in Dulwich Wood and will be votng Tories - first tme ever. I hate LTN, it has made my area so much worst.

Anyone who actually lives in the area, especially on the roads impacted by the LTN can see an increase in traffic with their own eyes. heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh look.....20% more traffic on East Dulwich > Grove.... well obviously I wasn?t making it up! > https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/i > mproving-our-streets/live-projects/streetspace/tra > ffic-data-analysis > > Oh and also I was correct in this too ?No data > collected for East Dulwich Grove Central prior to > September 2021?

Fire engine delayed because of the closure of Dulwich Village junction. https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/chaotic-ltn-junction-brings-fire-engine-to-a-halt/?fbclid=IwAR07JrTnM5WaVZ8D6OwsGBQxkb97NEhywARFmbrS0zUiyBfQi0uGoRUzStM

@Admin, following on Rockets question may we please see the rules of this forum? Where do they come from? And how did I break it (following your comments after I posted One Dulwich update; many of which were posted here before)?

I will vote anyone who promises to remove LTN - unjust and harming vanity project that should have never ever been implemented.

I am confused - is this to do with me pasting the One Dulwich update? If so, do you care to elaborate? It is about LTN. Administrator Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Last warning. > > The subject is "LTN in East Dulwich Discussion"

One Dulwich update: "Local elections 5 May 2022 The countdown to the elections has begun, but only the Labour Party has so far declared candidates for all local wards. We should hear final news of all candidates by 5 April. Why the decision on the LTNs is unsafe Our latest News piece can be found here. National media focus on Dulwich fines On 30 March, Janice Turner in The Times highlighted the ?6.6 million raised in fines. ?I find it extraordinary that a revenue model, replicated across the country, can be introduced without consultation. ?Low Traffic Neighbourhoods? create winners and losers, quiet residential streets v congested bus routes. In Dulwich and elsewhere they will be a red-hot May election issue.? On 1 April, Harry Wallop in the Daily Mail wrote about LTNs across the country ? councils? bogus data, and the difficulties caused to residents with disabilities ? and Dulwich?s ?astonishing? fines again got a mention. Confusing signage On 31 March, a local resident tweeted a picture of an ambulance driver in Court Lane who refused to believe that the Dulwich Village junction was open to emergency vehicles. In response, Cllr Margy Newens tweeted that emergency vehicles can and do drive anywhere, but promised to ask Southwark Highways to alert the LAS to the new situation. ?Obvs LAS must update its systems and drivers.? Surely this is missing the point. Shouldn?t Southwark be putting more effort into improving signage at this confusing junction (something the LAS has already requested)? Or maybe ? thinking again about the ?6.6 million raised in fines ? the poor signage across Dulwich is actually because the Council doesn?t really want anything to be made clear at all?"