ab29

They worry that reopening Melbourne South would dump more traffic on Esat Dulwich Grove? Why, hasn't the council's own Department of Magic trumpeted that the traffic has simply disappeared? Ergo there should be nothing to 'dump' so why the worry? legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Indeed, here?s the final report for those who > haven?t seen it > https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s1035 > 97/Report%20Determination%20of%20Objections%20Dulw > ich%20Streetspace%20Review.pdf > > Melbourne South closure being retained under a > temporary traffic order ( under officer delegated > power), apparently due to a concern that reopening > would dump more traffic on East Dulwich Grove. ( I > assume that?s an order under section 14 of the > Act, can?t really see how that?s justified under > the statutory wording but let?s wait and see the > order. > https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/secti > on/14). Not letting regulatory requirements get in > the way of a good scheme seems to have been > something of a theme so far. > > Apparently Sept data shows a continued reduction > in traffic on boundary roads? > > Updated equalities assessment suggests ?that the > groups who are car dependent because of their > protected characteristic should be assisted by the > Council to mitigate any disadvantages they may > suffer. Officers are cognisant of these groups, > however on balance the benefits of the Dulwich > Streetspace schemes outweigh the harm that these > may cause.? > > First time I?ve seen rain gardens mentioned - I > reckon susdrains are coming our way.

LTN brought nothing but more pollution, dirt and noise for people living on the main roads and has made air pollution worst by creating miles of idling traffic. It is also one of the most socially unjust scheme ever invented.

From a perspective of someone who walks and uses buses in London, there often seems to be no planning nor consideration given to how the cycle lanes will affect pedestrians and buses. Just squeeze one everywhere, no matter that it will make the traffic worst or pavements for pedestrians narrower.

Agree. Precious space completely wasted on niche activity. Priority should be given to buses and walking. Spartacus Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just to throw into the arena > > BBC News - London congestion: Cycle lanes blamed > as city named most congested > https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-59559 > 863

like first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Or DIC.

Lordship Lane says 'no' too! LTN is a lie, a fraud and put lives of thousands of people at risk - predominantly those less off.

I'm prepared to vote Tories if they promise to remove the LTNs. High time the one party citadel on Tooley Street is shaken up.

Yet another example of how Southwark council ignores people https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/anti-infill-protesters-march-on-southwark-councils-tooley-street-offices-again/?fbclid=IwAR2GyPQaZR5hE0m_OkrMpypDfJEQFkbkPNbmKvSs750FDB9qErMPiQl5cTA

First and foremost, the brave politicians would listen to their people. When all this started I thought I was the only person noticing the increase in traffic post-road closures in the area and contacting the councillors; I then discovered than most of my neighbours have been doing exactly the same. The councillors should have come over, talk to people, listen, discuss, see what can be done. Instead, most of us have never received a reply and those who have, got a copy-and-paste emails full of ideological waffle.

This truly is a parallel universe. They've made their own constituents life worst by pushing more pollution, dirt and noise to the already busy and polluted roads, they've made air pollution worst by creating miles of idling traffic, they've been ignoring constituents concerns - and they are congratulating themselves on this?

Is there no sane person in this mutual adoration society? Shame on Southwark council and its councillors.

There will soon be nowhere safe for people who simply want to walk. Escooter is yet another gadget, another thing that is produced, need maintenance and will be thrown away in the end. It does nothing for health as people just stand on it and i'ts dangerous when misused - and that happens a lot.

One Dulwich should also put a request so they can tell the council how thousands of people on the boundary roads have to put up with more pollution, dirt and noise and how the idling traffic makes the air pollution worst. What a farce. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > An interesting list of deputation requests for > next week?s cabinet meeting, including a joint > request from Living Streets and Southwark Cyclists > to tell the Council what good stuff they have done > and what Council should do next. I bet they have a > better chance of being selected to speak than the > tenants group who want to discuss poor > consultation on infill housing or the leaseholders > suggesting that Southwark should refuse to engage > developers on new projects when they haven?t fixed > fire safety issues on existing ones. > > https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s1031 > 71/Report%20Deputations.pdf > > Hopefully they?ll choose the litter picking one as > would be interested to hear that. Also the guy > from the British Afghan Society.

Totally agree BB. The traffic that we experience now in the area during the day is of a volume that we used to see only during rush hours. And what about people living on South Circular? They've been double hit with HTN and now ULEZ. What has the council done or is planning to do to improve the air quality for them - or anyone who has to walk there or wait at the bus stops? Nothing. Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Penguin68 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > Our closest representatives are those we elect > > locally - and they should be fighting our > corner > > against the other groups, if their plans reduce > > our life quality. Not acting as if they didn't > > exist. > > And that's just it, I received an email from my > local Dulwich Wood Cllr who span the figures for > me and claimed ULEZ would improve issues. So > that's why at 2.30pm there was a queue from the > Dulwich Common junction of LL to just past Friern > Road.

Heartblock, I remember you suggesting banning BBQs as air pollutant and someone replying that this country is not a dictatorship yet. Most people are not ready to sacrifice anything - they want to live on quiet roads, drive, have BBQs, order from amazon etc. They also don't have a problem with dumping dirt, pollution and noise on their neighbours' roads - see LTN aka HTN. heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Aah but I haven?t called anyone or anything a > dictatorship or one party state..I think you might > find that expression was used by someone else. > > I wouldn?t use that term, just saying what a silly > expression it is, I completely agree with you > DuncanW, so either I made a poor job of making my > point or you didn?t understand my response to a > previous post, criticising malumbu?s use of that > term. Either way, yes I agree with you.

The same on the pavements from Dulwich Library all the way to LL / Wood Vale - this is a stretch of the road that it's always forgotten. Some clearing took place yesterday but only on side of the road for some reason.

How about a six storey block on Court Lane instead? Or several? redpost Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ab29 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > But of course - squeeze in more people in > already > > busy area, take away whatever little green > space > > people have and add more noise (more people, > more > > cars etc) - just because you can! > > > > How about a six storey block on Court Lane > > instead? Or several? > > Yes, let's just keep people in temporary > accomodation instead

But of course - squeeze in more people in already busy area, take away whatever little green space people have and add more noise (more people, more cars etc) - just because you can! How about a six storey block on Court Lane instead? Or several?

Yesterday was awful: a traffic was building up all the way to Wood Vale and beyond and was hardly moving at times while before the LTN it would flow freely. This is how the weekends look like now.

Today is the last day to object to the Dulwich Streetspace traffic orders. There is no option to object to the scheme as a whole so a separate email needs to be sent for each traffic order. The orders (which can be found at www.southwark.gov.uk/trafficorders) are: Dulwich Streetspace: Calton Avenue area (TMO2122-015_DS Calton Avenue area) Dulwich Streetspace: Champion Hill (TMO2122-016_DS Champion Hill) Dulwich Streetspace: East Dulwich area (TMO2122-017_DS East Dulwich area) Dulwich Streetspace: Melbourne Grove south (TMO2122-018_DS Melbourne Grove south) Dulwich Streetspace: Timed bus, cycle and taxi only routes (TMO2122-019_DS bus cycle taxi routes) Please note that no. 3 covers Derwent Grove, Elsie Road, Grove Vale and Tintagel Crescent, and no. 5 covers Burbage Road, Dulwich Village, Townley Road and Turney Road. More at [www.onedulwich.uk]

"most people have taken a position and are sticking to it steadfastly, interpreting and choosing evidence that supports this." I have not 'taken position' - LTN and its consequences have been forced on me. As to evidence, I can see it form my windows. This has never been a discussion between two equal sides - how could it be? You have people who are not impacted in any way or benefit from the road closures and those who now have more pollution, dirt and noise on their doorstep.

Reminder to OBJECT to the Dulwich Streetspace traffic orders - the deadline is 11th of November. There is no option to object to the scheme as a whole - a separate email needs to be sent for each traffic order. The orders (which can be found at www.southwark.gov.uk/trafficorders) are: Dulwich Streetspace: Calton Avenue area (TMO2122-015_DS Calton Avenue area) Dulwich Streetspace: Champion Hill (TMO2122-016_DS Champion Hill) Dulwich Streetspace: East Dulwich area (TMO2122-017_DS East Dulwich area) Dulwich Streetspace: Melbourne Grove south (TMO2122-018_DS Melbourne Grove south) Dulwich Streetspace: Timed bus, cycle and taxi only routes (TMO2122-019_DS bus cycle taxi routes) Please note that no. 3 covers Derwent Grove, Elsie Road, Grove Vale and Tintagel Crescent, and no. 5 covers Burbage Road, Dulwich Village, Townley Road and Turney Road. - Send an email to [email protected], with the headline ?Dulwich Streetspace Statutory Consultation? - Number your objections if there is more than one - Give your name and address at the end More at https://www.onedulwich.uk/news/last-chance-to-object

This is true. South Circular has been double hit - first by LTN and now by ULEZ.

"if as a community we are serious about climate change, are coming down the track to change our relationship with the motorcar" - and once again, what about people living on the boundary roads which are now taking displaced traffic, which means having more air pollution and more noise on your doorstep? LTN might have moved the traffic away from your road, but it is affecting other roads very badly. Only because you do not see something anymore, it does not mean it simply stopped existing - you have only pushed the problem away from your home. You can parade up and down the closed roads all you want, imagining you are saving the world - it has nothing to do with reality.

If residents/constituents don't benefit from what Southwark council is doing who does?