Metallic

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Court lane to dulwich village takes around 6 mins > in the car (according to google), yet people > denying that the diversion only adds a few minutes > at most. How quick was the journey before? The > changes are not stopping anyone making essential > journeys. > > Previously it could take several minutes to > negotiate the junction as a pedestrian trying to > get across from calton avenue, especially if you > had mobility issues, or were with young children. > Why was no one worrying about the impact on > elderly people travelling on foot? > > The reality is that people don't like having a few > minutes added to local car journeys, to make it > easier for people to get about by foot or by bike, > whilst claiming that they're in favour of reducing > car usage. There has been plenty of complaints over the pedestrian crossing at the base of Calton Avenue and the danger to anyone using it, going back to the day it was unveiled. And it cost over half a million to make it so unusable we now have this version. people have been injured there in accidents, and who takes any notice? No one.

thebestnameshavegone Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Metallic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I know so many old people who are not > > going to be able to move out and about locally > > without their car and then having vast > > diversions. > > > As far as I can see every resident can still park > near their home, drive away from their home and > return to their home? There's such massive > entitlement at play here. This is nothing to do with entitlement.You buy or rent a house, get old and need to use your car for shopping or social/medical use. Do you honestly deny it doesn't add loads of time to a trip? Anyone want to go with an older person while they choose their fruit and veg, then carry it home for them? Thought not. Too busy. In the afternoons the tailbacks to Dulwich Village are long and slow, lovely for all those people who live and walk there.

rupert james Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How have the figures from 5 to 50 been obtained? Made up. Bet you.

Sally Eva Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I am benefiting from it far away in Eynella Road. > The reduction in Court Lane "short-cuts" by > through traffic has reduced the continuous stream > of cars and vans on that road to zero and > increased the cycling/pedestrian traffic to 50 > from 5 or less. Eynella traffic was negligible so > the junction with Lordship Lane was safe and > good-tempered. > > > > Metallic Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Apart from about twenty homes, no one at all is > > benefitting from the closure. The bottom of > Court > > Lane and the base of Calton Avenue after > Woodwarde > > Road are the only places to lose traffic. But > > instead everyone else is coping with rat > runners, > > cyclists going too fast because they think it > is > > their space now, displaced traffic and random > > out-of villagers who say how nice it is and who > > cares about well off people in SE21. I would > love > > it if all these fans of the new system would > say > > where they live when they are making all their > > anti-Dulwich, pro-cycling and closure comments. > > > All those people photographed saying how great > the > > new system is are those who can walk without a > > problem, but I know so many old people who are > not > > going to be able to move out and about locally > > without their car and then having vast > > diversions. > > Just wait until the next phase is introduced - > > see if it makes a POSITIVE difference to > > residents. I'm hoping it does, but fear it will > > not. That's because the cars are going further down Court Lane and cutting through. Try living further down Woodwarde Road and especially when all the Foundation schools come back.

Apart from about twenty homes, no one at all is benefitting from the closure. The bottom of Court Lane and the base of Calton Avenue after Woodwarde Road are the only places to lose traffic. But instead everyone else is coping with rat runners, cyclists going too fast because they think it is their space now, displaced traffic and random out-of villagers who say how nice it is and who cares about well off people in SE21. I would love it if all these fans of the new system would say where they live when they are making all their anti-Dulwich, pro-cycling and closure comments. All those people photographed saying how great the new system is are those who can walk without a problem, but I know so many old people who are not going to be able to move out and about locally without their car and then having vast diversions. Just wait until the next phase is introduced - see if it makes a POSITIVE difference to residents. I'm hoping it does, but fear it will not.

womanofdulwich Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I hear it might be made into a skateboard park, so > young people have a space of their own... It is already being populated by skateboarders, in the evening. Lovely sound. Grinding and slapping the boards.

James Barber Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I made a point of checking Effra's concerns about > East Dulwich Grove traffic backing up for myself. > > 7.50 Dulwich Village junction of EDG - virtually > no traffic or queueing on three arms. The arm > going north from the village had circa 15 cars > just before going green which all passed through > on green. I'm afraid mornings during school holidays do not give you a sense of what term time is like BUT!! If you go to EDG junction anytime from around 4pm and hand around, you will see what hell is like for residents. > 8.20 EDG/Townley Road. Just before the lights go > green 5 cars queuing going west and 4 cars + 1 bus > queuing going East. All passed through on green. > Private schools are on summer holidays which will > reduce traffic levels. But carmegeddon East > Dulwich Grove is not.

I saw a film on twitter which showed a child on Calton Avenue rushing past parked cars and I just thought 'watch out' as an accident would be dreadful.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Does anyone know if there are any plans to reduce > traffic / pollution in ED (other than Melbourne > Grove being closed to through traffic). Anything > to improve Lordship Lane? I saw a twitter photo of pavement widening up near the cinema.

100Dulwich Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I appear to keep getting anonymous glossy leaflets > through my letter box from One Dulwich. Does > anyone know who is funding this? It seems to be a > pro car lobby group trying to fight pro cycling > road calming. > > Is it masquerading as a community group but > actually funded by an individual or organisation? > It doesn?t say on their website. Having 800 > ?members? doesn?t mean it?s not privately funded. > The leaflets and website are quite slick. Is it > done by a professional social media company? That > would cost money. > > Does anyone know who is funding One Dulwich?? In balance of fairness, I had a pretty glossy one from Clean Air for Dulwich through the door, which pre-empted the OneDulwich one.

I support this charity, it is a wonderful service to our larger community, I am sure saves many lives, and is well worth you signing up for a direct debit, even if it isn't much a month you are giving.

It's CALTON Avenue, for heavens sake spell it properly everyone.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People should go and check out Northcote Road. > It?s been utterly transformed. That's too far for me to cycle I'm afraid.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > first mate Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If the main issue is local residents needlessly > > using cars then we should expect to see massive > > gains very soon. However, if the main issue is > > through traffic then things may get very much > > worse as traffic becomes concentrated along a > few > > routes and, yes, I do then wonder what happens > in > > emergency situations and to bus services? > > > > Through traffic suggests journeys that are not > > local and are to some degree necessary. > > > > > > rahrahrah Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > ... so there is no practical alternative to > the > > > car? What any of the time, in any situation? > > But > > > you are definitely supportive of healthy > > streets > > > 🤔 > > Fair enough. We will see pretty soon. I think > traffic through the Village will remain fairly > high, as it was before the changes. I expect there > will be a drop in some local journeys and a > significant reduction in traffic on some > residential streets, with a greater number of > people walking and cycling to Dulwich Hamlet > school in particular (you can already witness > this). > > But like you say, we will be able to see. That's > the point of this pilot as I understand it. School holidays now, please don't use the downturn in traffic numbers to say the closure was successful.

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 2km each way on foot is a long, time-consuming > journey for most people. > > Your only other answer to this is cycling which > isn't satisfactory. > > There has to be viable public transport > alternatives to get people out of cars but none of > the Close-The-Roads! zealots ever address this > > Public transport, at the moment, is running at way > below the capacity it had pre-Covid and certainly > suffering a major collapse in public confidence. > > From the centre of Dulwich Village, it's Herne Hill, West Dulwich and East Dulwich > stations, and to the South Circular / LL junction. > 15-20 min walk, maybe 8-10 min bike ride. The > reason that many people don't do it is not because > they can't (the vast majority of people CAN), it's > a mix of laziness, ignorance (of distance, of any > other means of transport) and ingrained habit of > just jumping in the car. > > Cycling from Sevenoaks or Chiswick. Fun. > > Chiswick is a lovely ride. 12 miles, about an hour > no matter what time of day or night. Either along > the river and back over Vauxhall Bridge all on the > CS or drop down to Richmond and back in that way > (avoid the S.Circ by going round the back of > Wandsworth, over Wandsworth and Clapham Commons, > then cross Brixton Hill and through Brockwell > Park). Actually a really "green" ride. > > Not practical for all journeys all the time, no. > But it's about finding the ones that can be done > another way and using that in the right way. > Unfortunately, people need to be directed towards > that because leaving people to "work it out for > themselves" or asking people to please not drive > as much simply doesn't work. rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Most people don't need to drive to schools. Unless > we want to see higher levels of breathing > problems, road deaths and escalating obesity > levels, we should be encouraging those who can, to > walk and cycle. Closing a few junctions does not > amount to banning cars. 80% or more of all public > space is still given over to motor vehicles. We're > just looking for a modest rebalancing in favour of > people. My comment was clearly linked to the post about children coming to school from outside Dulwich. But tell you what, it shows how pro-cycling lobbies can skew an argument when you post that.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... so there is a lot of opportunities to > encourage fewer car journeys locally. > Also, if you?re driving from Sevenoaks to > Chiswick, the changes at this junction are really > not going to make much difference to your journey I'm talking about Foundation coaches bringing pupils in to the area, don't be ridiculous.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Most people don't need to drive to schools. Unless > we want to see higher levels of breathing > problems, road deaths and escalating obesity > levels, we should be encouraging those who can, to > walk and cycle. Closing a few junctions does not > amount to banning cars. 80% or more of all public > space is still given over to motor vehicles. We're > just looking for a modest rebalancing in favour of > people. Cycling from Sevenoaks or Chiswick. Fun.

Bic Basher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > The screens that call the ticket numbers don't > work, so you have to listen carefully for your > ticket to be called. That was a quick breakdown of equipment!

eastdulwichlocal99 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I?m also not surprised the majority of Dulwich > Village residents would be in favour of the One > Dulwich proposal - it effectively creates a > private gated community. When will those residents > realise that they do not own the roads they live > on - they are PUBLIC and for use by ALL. If you > want privacy and no congestion move to the > countryside, not the capital city! They have no > more right to use ?their? roads than anyone else > in the country. Living on a new rat. run instead of traffic being spread everywhere and keeping on the move. I was under the impression many were in favour of traffic islands to keep the traffic moving, and it would have been better than displaced traffic on Woodwarde Road, College Road, Lordship Lane, and Dulwich Village itself.

worldwiser Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > At a time when we're being discouraged from using > public transport, it's stupifyingly moronic to > bring these measures in now. > > Seems to me the only beneficiaries are the already > wealthy property owners of Melbourne Gv and Calton > Ave. And while we're on the subject, how is it > that the wealthiest streets in the area always > have perfect, freshly laid pavements and road > surfaces? Just asking. Walk down Calton Avenue. Needs a lot of work.

singalto Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The foundation schools have not been operation > normally this term so I can?t see how their > ?closing? can have any impact on the current > traffic. Once the schools reopen and the coaches > are back, life on the local roads is going to be > hell. I?m not quite sure why reducing the traffic > in DV where there are few but huge houses should > impact so much on the rest of us. I'm afraid that is inaccurate. The reduction of private and commercial traffic is the goal but the amount of through traffic from Forest Hill, Crystal Palace, Bromley and points south, make an impact on air pollution which unfortunately is breathed in by the children of the four schools based on Dulwich Village. And I don't think that is fair to the very children we are all worried about. Or do you want it to all go down Lordship Lane or Croxted Road, because those are the two displacement points we should be worried about.

gkb Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Please be aware that the "One Dulwich" group > should be re-named as "one bit of Dulwich" they > are not representative and appear to be a select > group who are against change. Changes can never > appease everyone, but the road closures (temp) in > the village are a great step towards cutting down > pollution and making the roads safer for cyclists > and pedestrians. These changes have been requested > for years and it is at long last they have been > implemented. Do you think they are making up their membership? I'm not sure I do.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But they do have money to install new pavement > paving slabs in parts of the area - the latest > being Overhill Road....makes you wonder if there > is a Trojan horse at play here.... Allocated funds.

Plough Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > My understanding is that the underlying > justification is it reduce vehicular pollution. > > Without doubt, the vehicles causing most pollution > are those on short journeys where the engine and > catalyser have not reached optimum temperature. > This means local traffic - in particular the > school run, with yummy mummies taking their kids > to and from school, are the biggest polluters. > > In this technological age it is extremely easy to > set up an ANPR monitored system in the area > concerned. One could make it entirely free for > 100% electric vehicles and a progressive charge > thereafter depending on pollution rating. > > It could even be fine tuned to vary the charge > depending on the time of day. In fact it could be > fine tuned in a whole number of ways - e.g. by > local residents postcode to give exemption. TfL and Southwark have no money for tech solutions.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do we think children will also start arriving in > coaches to Charter? No, just Alleyn's, the College and Jags use coaches in to the Village area.