rch

Apologies if this has been posted somewhere else, but this is the latest formal traffic study for the Dulwich area, published in April 2018:- https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/6887/Dulwich-TMS-SDG-Full-Report-Final-April-2018-.pdf There?s a lot of intriguing data presented in a dubious context, in my opinion, but perhaps we can discuss/analyse on another thread?

Also very interesting is the Investigative and Conclusions section of Appendix 3 which legalalien notes disses the most recent iteration of the junction. The main problem with this dysfunctional junction design was the staggered crossing along Dulwich Village, which caused pedestrians (including me!) to regularly divert around the junction to cross along Court Lane and Calton, hence obstructing traffic flow. This is exactly what I pointed out would happen when I attended the public meetings, but was gagged. After allowing the dysfunctional new junction to ?settle in? for a couple of years, the council launched a Streetspace style ?consultation?, which I took part in... and the largest number of logged complaints were about the staggered crossing which caused everyone to walk around Court Lane and Calton to circumvent it. I also noticed that there were a number of requests to close the junction in order to address these concerns, which was worrying. But, my observation was that addressing the staggered crossing by making it a direct crossing had a higher number of supporters. Hence my comments that tweaking the junction would be a more simple option overall. The reason why staggered crossings are popular with junction designers is that it increases the motor traffic flow through the junction (thereby reducing traffic queues) by breaking up the pedestrian light timings into two phases. But for an area with a high number of pedestrians, this is very unpopular. The supreme irony with the Covid junction closure is that pedestrians are still crossing over the staggered junction as well as across Court Lane and Calton because the cyclists and e-scooters are riding directly through the junction now, which makes it feel unsafe to walk. I experience this so often now that I haven?t walked down to the Village for ages as it?s very unpleasant. It?s also difficult to walk on the pavement in front of the shops because of the cyclists. So, this is why I stress that some kind of logic would need to be imposed if the closed junction was to be made permanent, but I don?t think the proposed layout that I?ve seen is very appealing. Lastly, also be aware that the diagram on the Appendix 3 notes is incorrect... it?s actually the previous junction, not the recent dysfunctional junction, which is extremely misleading. Edited to stress that this council administration actually used free Quietway funding to create a dysfunctional junction that was so bad that they have now used free Covid funding to circumvent the poor design that they created.

Yep. Edited to clarify that I was saying yep to Rockets post.

I can see where you?re coming from, ex, but comparing your photo and the Dulwich diagram, the dynamic looks completely different. The DV double roundabout accommodated 5 offset roads and 3 pedestrian crossings in a much smaller space. The roundabout concept works really well in our area, possibly because both DV and ED were both converted from farmland... Calton Avenue was a plough track until the mid 1800s, it wasn?t even a through road. Also, the roads are frustratingly narrow, which creates other issues (long story, I can type for hours about how many times I tried to create cycle lanes in various roads). But the roundabout at the other end of DV works well and the Goose Green roundabout worked better until a councillor put a pedestrian crossing in the wrong location, thereby causing traffic backups that create other problems. There are other advantages that would have worked out well and it would have been much more cost effective as TfL?s traffic lights cost a fortune and take forever to reprogram. But, even the traffic light junction that we finally agreed and consulted on would have worked much better than the defective junction that exists now. Just to add... ironically, as a pedestrian, I really hate walking into Dulwich Village now as I?m constantly dodging cyclists and e-scooters and other pedestrians walking four abreast. So, in my opinion, if the DV junction stays closed, there?s going to have to be some kind of logic incorporated into the layout. There are also a lot of weird displacement problems at my end of Melbourne South caused by the barriers at the top of the road, which is another discussion. Basically, from my perspective, I wouldn?t call them ?Healthy? streets. I?m personally not against cycling and I like the idea of balancing various forms of active travel, but there needs to be a lot more creative thinking. And the bottom line is that if you really want to get people out of their cars, you need to improve public transportation in our area. Full stop.

Just saw your reply Rockets. Yes, everyone knew that the new junction was a mess, but no one wants to use internal funding to tweak it, so we keep getting directed to different schemes funded by free government money. I would be curious to see how the double roundabout scheme would work out... the Sustrans report that I posted above cites a triple roundabout scheme, but I?m not convinced with that alternative. Bear in mind that I?m a dedicated pedestrian and highway geek... the council highway engineers spent years training me when I was a councillor, so I can tell you multiple stories about every junction in the area!

It?s a looong story, mal. The original junction that you're referring to was pretty bad, but in 2006/07 residents campaigned to close the junction completely (as it is now), so I consulted with highway engineers. They advised not to close it, as traffic would severely displace (as it is now), so they came up with three different junction designs combined with pinch points on the side roads, in order to fluidly redirect the traffic as well as making cycling and walking through the junction easier. The design that they most highly recommended was a double roundabout with cycle spaces around the edge, but also two other traffic light junctions. Certain politicians refused to consult on the double roundabout, so we consulted on the preferred junction scheme which actually had funding, but then politicians pulled the plug when the consultation was highly successful... although we managed to get some of the pinch points implemented. When the council administration changed in 2014, I tried the get the funding for the more popular junction scheme approved again, but rather than using internal council funding, the council applied for the government Quietway funding and then instructed Sustrans to conduct the consultation on the scheme that was implemented. But there are a lot of flaws in the scheme, which were causing problems (mostly with pedestrians), so there was another consultation... but rather than tweaking the flaws in the junction that were highlighted in the consultation, they closed the junction with more government funding.

Apologies, I?m trying to work out which Sustrans report you guys are referring to... the November 2015 Sustrans Dulwich Quietway ?consultation? was incredibly flawed:- https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/quietway-in-dulwich/supporting_documents/Dulwich%20Quietway%20Community%20Engagement%20Report%202.pdf This led to the implementation of the current flawed junction scheme connecting Dulwich Village/Calton/Court Lane which, in my opinion, triggered the campaign for the current closure of the junction, which had been rejected back in 2006/07. I attended two of the public meetings back in 2015, which were quite shocking to observe, as it was blatantly clear what would happen if the proposed flawed junction scheme was implemented.

You should drop by and say hi tomorrow while supporting the local shops, Abe. Intriguingly, the Highway Code is currently being updated in a way that will give greater priority to pedestrians over cyclists (and horses!):- https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/review-of-the-highway-code-to-improve-road-safety-for-cyclists-pedestrians-and-horse-riders/summary-of-the-consultation-proposals-on-a-review-of-the-highway-code

Alternatively, I would strongly encourage you to give bits to the council rubbish and recycling teams as a Christmas thank you for all the effort they have made to maintain regular collections during Covid. It can be a bit fiddly because you have to be around when they collect in order to hand the bottles over, but I?ve randomly given out bottles to the teams over the years and they are extremely grateful and feel that their efforts are appreciated. Also, street sweepers and posties are happy to accept. Residents tend to take rubbish collection services for granted, but these are human beings on quite low pay.

Sorry to have disappeared again... was going to post replies to some of the comments/questions about my past Green Bus campaign, but I?m now wondering if someone wants to start a new thread to discuss alternative solutions in general to the LTN/Healthy Streets issues so that we can try to move forwards in a productive manner as a community?

Quick update to let everyone know that the Goose Green SNT Police are doing another free Bike Register cycle marking event this Saturday, Dec 5th, staring at 10:30am in front of Franklin?s on Lordship Lane. This is an extremely popular event, so I would recommend arriving early with your bikes. Also, some of you may have seen the PlantLock bike racks outside Franklin?s/Mons and Moxon?s/Oddono?s so that cyclists can lock their bikes up quickly while visiting the local shops:- https://www.frontyardcompany.co.uk/products/plantlock-at-work Both the PlantLocks and the Bike Register kits were bought by the GG Safer Neighbourhood Team using Cleaner Greener Safer funding in an attempt to address the worrying number bike thefts along Lordship Lane. We also used CGS to buy a speed gun specifically for our team to monitor motor vehicle speeding in locations reported by ward residents. If you?re out shopping in Lordship on Saturday, come and say hi to the local police, who are always interested to hear residents? concerns.

The best way to fight these closures is for everyone to object to the Traffic Order en masse:- https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/12765/LSP-Dulwich-Trials-notice-dated-18-June-2020-.pdf The more written objections that the council receives, the harder it will be for them to legally override the majority. In tandem, we should be suggesting positive alternatives that can achieve the overall objectives in a way that will benefit the community, which is the discussion that I?m trying to initiate. I realised that there was nothing we could do to stop the road closures that had been proposed and rejected in the past, so I?ve carefully watched as the situation in both Melbourne and Dulwich Village unfolded. As I walk everywhere and actually live on a closed road, I can see things from a completely different perspective based on my past highway geek experience. I actually agree that car use can decrease and that cycling is a beneficial option (in addition to improved public transportation)... and I love the concept of the ?15 Minute Village?, but I?ve spent almost 15 years trying to get elected representatives to understand the unique dynamics of the Dulwich area (both DV and ED). I?ve even tried talking to cycling groups and other resident groups, but they are also fixed in their opinions (which we can address separately). As I?m gagged at public meetings and consultations, I?m going to continue to post here. Just be aware that I?m in the middle of a completely difficult situation with severe damage caused by Thames Water to my house, which takes up a huge amount of time to fight. Will post more about the Green Bus concept when I have more time to type...

Bear in mind that the Lib Dem candidate listed in your link above owns a house directly behind the closed DV junction, which overlooks her front garden. I served as both a Tory and a Lib Dem councillor, crossing over out of frustration, but had serious issues with both manifestoes. However, I find the Lib Dems in the north of the borough to be more in tune with residents? views than those in the south. Hence, I also found Nick Johnson?s article intriguing. In my opinion, a split party government is the best way forward, as one party with a serious majority tends to railroad decisions through. Another option is to form an entirely separate new political party...

I?ll get around to discussing Barrier alternatives eventually, Rockets. Am in regular contact with the police, but they can?t speak out openly. One step at a time. Metallic, I flagged the Green Bus idea again because I?m curious to see what will happen with the RV1 issue in the north of the borough. The council always seems to find internal funding for the north of borough, but only wants to use free government funds for the south. Maybe we can set up a crowdfunding project and start our own local bus service?. Good try, first mate. Everybody stops me in the street and encourages me to stand again. But I genuinely hate the politics. I?d rather work within the community to make our area a genuinely better place. Maybe we can reconsider devolving into the People?s Republic of Dulwich again?? ;-)

I hear what you?re saying, spider... but, having spoken to park managers in person, I think that applying for a parking permit for Dulwich Park on ?health matters? is a genuinely viable way forward. There even used to be some leaflets about this option in the entrance of the Francis Peek Centre, but I haven?t been to Dulwich Park since Covid started, which is why I posted the Dulwich Park Friends link. And, it seems to be a regular political manoeuvre not to direct residents to other solutions, which is why this forum is so useful.

Yes, legalalien... non-compliance with government processes is basically what I am referring to as ?political machinations? in the past. The huge amount of public money that?s been decimated without solving the basic problems is outrageous! This is why I?m so glad to see so many of you sticking together...

Two immediate observations... Bear in mind that the new junction design that was built in Dulwich Village is incredibly flawed, which has contributed to a large amount of the active travel issues (it?s incredibly frustrating to use as a pedestrian). I pointed out some of the proposed flaws in the preliminary public consultation meetings and was shocked to see the flawed design implemented and ignored in some of the public consultations afterwards. So, from my perspective, there are some obvious tweaks that will need to be made to the DV junction design in the first instance, if the junction is reopened (as my understanding is that the ANPR solution isn?t viable)... but funding may not be immediately available for this. Secondly... as many of you have posted over and over, the only way to get a significant number of local residents in the area (Dulwich and East Dulwich) out of their cars, due to the geographical distances and age demographics, is to improve the low level of east-west public transportation issues. What most people don?t realise is that the council can actually fund a local bus service in tandem with TfL. Several years ago I came within a millimetre of getting council funding allocated to what I called a Green Bus... a digital bus that ran in a circle connecting Dulwich Village, Half Moon Lane, and Lordship Lane, including all the schools in between. But this also hit political dead ends. Then, over a year ago, I took part in a public meeting to discuss the ED CPZ consultation, whereupon I brought up the Green Bus solution again. The project manager chairing the meeting got visibly excited, stating that there was actually internal council funding that had been allocated for exactly this kind of solution - albeit in the north of the borough. I was hoping that this alternative would feature in the consultation report recommendations, but this solution went dead... presumably because this funding was intended to be allocated to replace the RV1 service in the north of the borough, which has been a huge political issue. I still think that a Green Bus connecting DV and ED would be one of the most pro-active solutions (in addition to cycling) to getting residents out of their cars for local journeys, but I suspect Covid will put this on hold. Yet, this option should definitely be flagged to councillors and cabinet members.

Apologies for disappearing again, but I?ve been following the discussions even though I haven?t been able to post. Well done to many regular posters for some of their observations Again, this is a hugely complicated, multiple layered issue so, because I don?t have time to type out all the layers, I?ll try to jump in and reply point by point when possible, so apologies for lack of continuity. As some of you know, I tried to address most of these issues when I was a ward councillor from 2006-2014, but many solutions were blocked by political machinations, which I found enormously frustrating. Back in 2006/07 there was a campaign by local Dulwich Village residents to close the junction in exactly the way it?s now been closed. Then, just four years ago, in 2015/16, there was also a campaign by East Dulwich residents to close the southern section of Melbourne Grove (where I have lived for over 30 years). So, none of this is new... In the case of the Dulwich Village junction closure, the council highway engineers spent MONTHS explaining to me why this would be such a bad idea... and now it?s totally surreal watching everything that they predicted happening, especially the intense displacement of traffic which is now causing problems in other locations. To address the volume of traffic in a more positive manner, the engineers came up with several different options, one of which we consulted on and had funding for, but this was blocked by politicians. In the case of the Melbourne Grove South Barrier, the engineers also came up with a different option, which has been buried. I actually have a copy of the feasibility study, which cost ?10,000 of council funding, here somewhere. From my perspective, I haven?t driven a car for over 20 years (including the entire time that I served as a councillor), so I?m actually practicing what most LTN campaigners are preaching. But ironically, having my feet on the ground every day has given me a different perspective. I?m not anti-cycling, although I can?t cycle for health reasons... and I?ve tried repeatedly to create ways that are more conducive to cycling, which have hit dead ends. As some of you know, I?ve been through every single road in the area and raised funding for highway and junction improvements wherever possible (which I?m still trying to do), working in tandem with council highway engineers... only to watch various solutions fall apart. So, bear in mind that I grasp a LOT of technicalities. So, to watch what?s happening now at a huge expense of public funding is incredibly frustrating... But, I genuinely believe that we need to stick together and move forwards, so I?m going to try to post some possible solutions which may still be viable.

This is another complicated discussion, but the short version is that I managed to get the Dulwich Park car parking charges put on hold when I was a councillor (lobbying the cabinet member in tandem with the Dulwich Park Friends) although I was told that the issue would definitely resurface (as it has). I then went to one of the open public consultation meetings a year or two ago, whereupon I suggested that residents who found it too difficult to walk or take public transport to the park would rather pay a fixed annual fee for a parking permit and the councillor said that they might consider this option in the future. By coincidence, I spoke to the park managers just before the new charges came in and they told me that they have a permit system in place for people with health problems to be granted a free parking permit if a doctor?s letter could confirm the relevant health issues. The criteria states that the person has to be over 64 years old and have mobility issues, but the managers told me that they could override the age criteria and even the mobility issues if the case was convincing enough. It?s frustrating that this information isn?t being made more openly available, and I would encourage anyone with health problems to pursue the ?mobility? permit option, so here?s more information on the Dulwich Park Friends website, including a phone number to call (but be aware that this may take some time due to Covid):- https://dulwichparkfriends.org.uk/the-park/location-travel/ I would also suggest that residents could lobby the new cabinet members to consider for an annual parking permit to be made available to Southwark residents, rather than having to pay ?2 for every visit.

Just to update. The Bike Register session went well to begin with (at least 20 bikes got marked and registered), but the heavy rain prevailed in the end, so they had to shut down early. They?re trying to do a public event at least once a month, so will post when the next session is scheduled.

It sounds like you might have the same system, but here?s a link:- https://www.bikeregister.com/ The reason why the police support this system is because everything is listed on a police accessible computer database. So, if they find a warehouse full of stolen bikes, like they did in Hackney a couple of months ago, it makes it easier to track down the owners. Maybe you should drop by and say hi to the guys tomorrow anyway? It?s the closest thing to a panel meeting that we can have!

Just a quick attempt to see if my new log in is working, as I haven?t been able to post on the forum for months and I?ve been truly appreciative of some of the intriguing discussions that I?ve been following. As some of you know, I have a substantial amount of personal experience in the Dulwich Village Junction closure logistics, which the council Highway engineers talked me out of implementing back in 2006/07 when I was a Dulwich Village Ward councillor and also when I coached local ED residents on how to object to the Melbourne Grove South closure back in 2016 (which I have a copy of the Feasibility Study which advised against it). It?s been fascinating to watch how both of the schemes have evolved as I actually live on Melbourne Grove South and haven?t owned a car since the late 1990s... But, more importantly, in all cases the engineers suggested positive alternative schemes, which I personally think would be extremely useful to discuss on the forum in an attempt to identify a useful way forward.

Just to let everyone know that the Goose Green Safer Neighbourhood Team are doing another free bicycle registration marking event tomorrow (Halloween!) from 10am-1pm outside Franklin?s on Lordship Lane. The first session earlier in October was extremely successful, registering 50 bikes within three hours. We were able to use the CGS grant that I had been awarded to buy the kits, which are intended to encourage local police community engagement in order to address the high stolen bicycle statistics that have emerged on Lordship Lane since the beginning of Covid. This concept seems to be working so well that I submitted another CGS bid for more kits next year, to get us through the summer. Please drop by to say hi to the team if you?re out shopping tomorrow! We?ve also used CGS funds to buy a Speed Gun to monitor speeding traffic within the ward as well as some experimental PlantLock cycle racks that can be used outside of shops on Lordship Lane:- https://www.frontyardcompany.co.uk/products/plantlock-at-work

I'm still here, Penguin. I do a huge amount of community work, people always stop me in the street, message me, or even knock on my door for advice... but I find it very difficult to log into the forum on my ancient computer so I tend to communicate via Twitter. There are several threads that I keep intending to comment on so, now that I know that you're missing me, I'll try to update more regularly when I can log in. BTW, ironically, the councillor who has helped me to progress several huge issues is James McAsh... he tends to respond to emails rather than publicly.

I live nearby and have heard complaints about this address from other neighbours, but fortunately I can't hear it where I am. I would suggest that you definitely call Southwark's 020 7525 5777 number and log it with the Noise Team. If you can call from a location in your house where the team can hear the noise over the phone, that would be even better. In the meantime, also keep a diary as suggested above, but it might also be useful to speak to some of the other neighbours to see if you can make complaints in tandem.