Raeburn

The good news is that there's bigger plans to reduce car/vehicle dependancy - ULEZ extension later this year, TFL's Healthy Streets plans, Gvmt strategy for 'half of urban journeys walking or bike by 2030', tax initiatives to encourage cycling/active transport. All fantastic initiatives to get behind to improve air quality for all - and part of the government target to reduce carbon emissions by 68%(!) by 2030. Anyone really interested could help lobby for more traffic calming/LTN's in the streets that you're concerned about - Heartblock, I agree - Underhill Rd and Wood Vale would benefit massively from some of these measures.

Sure, not recommended, but would have been a suitable solution in the short-term, before the systems updated - right? It's very possible that emergency vehicles were doing this, and it was the additional barriers that then caused the delays to Court Lane in the article. And totally agree, I'd love a simple, cheap solution to keep roads clear for essential users - the problem is some motorists are spoiling it for everyone else. Looking into this, here's a more recent statement from Khadir Meer in September 2020; ?We are working incredibly collegiately with local government partners across London and with GLA partners. We are not aware of any LTNs that have led to any patient safety concerns or any significant delays. We are monitoring it closely but we are also keeping working very closely, collegiately and collaboratively with both our emergency services but also our health and care partners across London. [so as Heather said] we prioritise patient safety and we prioritise our response times above anything and everything else, we?re not aware of any significant issues at the moment and we are keen to continue to work collaboratively to work through any implications of any LTNs.? ------ If there's genuine concern on response times, I've tried to help with the explanation (in the article you originally posted, not me) for readers to know about. There's reassurance that the issue has been worked on, and has been resolved. Good news for everyone? ...but it seem this is about stoking opposition to Healthy Street initiatives.

Yes, thats right - the softwear sometimes takes months to get new road layouts, unlike a commercial satnav or phone. Upon reaching a change, the time it takes to recalculate a route can be many minutes, with crew even having to reboot the system for it to find a route (or use their phones). Rockets linked to this a while back, which has more details - and an unfortunate event in Feb 2020 due to this problem; https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/paramedics-say-low-traffic-roadblocks-delayed-response-to-at-least-two-life-threatening-emergencies-because-satnavs-didnt-recognise-them/ My estimation, but I presume this is the same FOI the Telegraph article is based on. I pointed out a few weeks back it was a shame those additional blocks had to go in at Dulwich Square to prevent motorists mounting the pavement. There was plenty of room for an emergency vehicle if it was a real emergency. Navigation systems are now updated, for everyone's peace of mind.

Exactly. The Telegraph article acknowledges the problems were immediately after the implementation - 'newly closed streets' - when the older ambulance navigation systems didn't have the amended road layout. The systems have been updated, and isn't an issue any more. Reassuring to know. I linked to another article which had a broad coverage of the topic, and associated considerations like health. I haven't mentioned cycle-lanes, and perhaps the journalist is confusing LTN's and bike lanes. However, if this discussion is around emergency access, bike (and bus) lanes are largely good for enabling this type of access in congested areas - another positive?

FairTgirl, this is the same stuff Rockets was linking to - ambulance navigation systems not updated to include adjusted road layouts. Good news is the nav systems have now been updated. A better reference might be here - highlights faster response times in some cases; https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/13/covid-bike-and-walking-schemes-do-not-delay-ambulances-trusts-say Hopefully puts your concerns at ease.

Last night the traffic was backed up from Forest Hill along South Circ/LL due to the gas main works at the main junction in Forest Hill.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > DulwichGirl82 - the experiment has failed. > Completely and utterly. The council knows it, the > pro-closure lobby knows it - we all know it. The > experiment has forced traffic from one set of > roads onto another set of roads, increasing > congestion and pollution as a result. For all the > harping on about modal shifts in Dulwich Village > and for all the pictures of people cycling and > walking the overall impact has been a negative one > on the broader Dulwich community. The council is > well aware of this and is trying to manipulate > everything in a desperate attempt to justify the > closures. They know that they have to try and hang > on for their own credibility. The whole idea was > flawed from the beginning, badly planned and > poorly executed and will have done untold harm to > the long-term goals of reducing pollution. > > It is a shame as it didn't take a rocket scientist > to work out what would happen when you closed > those roads (many on here predict exactly what was > going to happen). The reason many won't answer > your question is because they fail to acknowledge > there is a problem as it undermines their whole > position. Once you acknowledge that there has been > displacement the experiment will have failed. But it hasn't failed as you are saying? There's a brilliant post from @SE22_2020er on previous page explaining how they have decided to do what they can to reduce reliance on motor vehicles, but still uses them when necessary. It was refreshing to read an honest, considered and pragmatic view. More cycling and other active/wheeled transport has been enabled through these corridors, and it's made a big difference to school transport. It is possible to find the LTNs inconvenient and acknowledge negative aspects, but still support them and the objectives. Maybe, just maybe - stick with me for this - London has developed an over-dependance on vehicles, and that's whats causing the congestion and pollution? The statistics certainly present this, without increase in vehicle size even factored in. I'm amused that Dulwich Village has been shaped by an LTN before motor vehicles even existed; the toll booth on College Rd has been diverting traffic from (what was) the main road into London for 230 years.... The idea that this is a covert plan by the council is laughable; this is a cascade from the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) for 2030. Every UN member state signed up in 2015; whats happening currently is implementation on a national/industry/local level. This is why you see organisations declaring a climate emergency, this is why Johnson has bought forward the phasing out of petrol and diesel cars to 2030, its why theres a sugar tax, why there's a shift to reduce meat consumption. Every industry has goals to cut CO2 reliance, improve working conditions, balance equality, phase out harmful substances etc etc to connect with the 17 categories. It's everywhere if you look. Some countries/councils/towns/industries are way ahead of targets, and some ....aren't. Wether you like it or not, these changes are happening - some big, some small - because we can't keep on the same trajectory. To make changes sooner is going to be considerably more efficient in the long run. If you aren't willing to make changes, no problem, but it is possible to support/enable those who do want to. Every person choosing not to make a journey in a vehicle, makes it easier for those who do rely on them.

Precisely. Doesn?t say anything about a fight to get LTN?s removed.

? It says lots of things, disappointment with the Council, community consultation, ULEZ, issues with traffic moving, air quality and lower income housing. The topics are complex and some of the points very nuanced, which Rosamund Kissi-Debrah acknowledges and questions. But it doesn?t say anything about a fight to get LTNs removed.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Do the pro-closure lobby realise that Ella Kissi- > Debrah's mother is a key voice in the fight to get > the LTNs removed? > > https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/18616846.air-qu > ality-voice-rosamund-kissi-debrah-slams-lee-green- > ltn/ > Rockets, do you ever read the articles you link to? The piece covers many complex topics, but doesn?t mention anything about a ?fight for LTN removal? - ? It literally quotes Rosamund (Ellas mother) as saying; ?We?re not against low traffic neighbourhoods...? I?m only highlighting this quote to show how disingenuous you are being, not as a comment on the case/Lewisham/Hither Green. Please stop misrepresenting information, it?s not helping anyone.

Traffic was free-flowing through the LL/South Circular Grove junction at 18.00 today, both directions. V little backed up, certainly no problem with the xmas tree place. Issue with xmas place was at the weekend/first weekend after movement restrictions eased/retail re-opening. Stood and watched a few light cycles, no problems with traffic or xmas trees. ????? I noticed earlier (when Rockets posted the pic) that the traffic extended up Horniman Hill - I can see this from my window. Walked up to take a look about 18.15, and there?s temporary lights on Honor Oak Rd, 100m from junction. These are not synchronised with the junction and when ?out of sync? backed traffic up to the junction, impeding flow and jamming the junction both ways. No idea if this could have been the reason for impeded traffic at peak flow, but something to consider.

- traffic also extended up Horniman Hill > Forest Hill, big I didn?t go up there. The queue of cars for the xmas trees was clearly a major cause of LL gridlock, and was likely contributing yesterday afternoon/evening too. You?ve said today is the worst you?ve seen for 15 years, here?s the most probable cause, but you fixated on the LTN. My point is, you keep presenting evidence which when examined has little or no substance. You then change the subject, conflate topics, mis-direct, or ignore. It undermines any reasonable points that might be up for discussion.

No idea - I didn?t go there.

Me too. Intrigued I followed the gridlock eastbound along to junction with South circular ...the gridlock is caused by the xmas tree sales opposite the Grove. Vehicles on both sides (but largely from North) waiting to turn into the small, full, car-park. Staff are trying to manage the situation(?!) but it?s preventing traffic flow. Every cycle of the lights allows v few cars onto South Circular. As I left an articulated lorry was trying to navigate the column of 5(?) cars waiting to get into the xmas tree sales. That?s what?s causing the tailback today.

So applying your logic ...in your photo the opposite lane is clear = LTN has evaporated traffic? (it hasn?t). I?m simply pointing out that you can?t present a photo as evidence, without context or even an attempt to understand what?s going on. Your last two points were similarly hollow. The lack of critical thinking is either on purpose ...or not.

But Rockets photo is taken facing South West, away from Court Lane. The jam extended all the way to Forest Hill, 1km away from the LTN - ? It?s also the first Friday since restrictions have been eased. There?s been waterworks at the junction of South Circ and LL these last few weeks too. My point is that presenting this photo as evidence is just incorrect. Not sure if this is knowingly or naively, but it serves to undermine any reasonable discussion.

If the LTN was causing the congestion you have posted, surely the peak traffic heading away should be more free-flowing? The jam extended from your photo to Forest Hill, away from Court Lane. I said in my post, possibly the congestion was caused by something in/beyond Forest Hill - my speculation - and probably compounded by people leaving London on a Friday evening.

But that jam went all the way into Forest Hill? I walked from Overhill Rd bus stop (100m from Court Lane) to Forest Hill Sainsbury?s at 19.30, I kept same pace as vehicles in the jam the whole way. Perhaps there are works beyond? Not sure what your point is, but your evidence undermines any reasonable discussion. Stop wilfully misrepresenting what?s really going on.

Nice distraction from your misrepresentation of the article you linked to. So, moving on; these barriers could be easily movable (and relatively cheap) ...but they get vandalised and taken out. Camera enforced barriers (relatively expensive) have been seen to raise a lot of revenue from fines ....and there?s a lot of opposition to this too. Which is the best option?

Ambulances are allowed to drive on footways if they need to on a call. Feel free to look this up - ?

The issue is the Sat Navs not having up-to-date road layouts. Your faux-concern is undermined by the vid linked to somewhere up this thread. An Alpha Romeo fully mounting two pavements to drive around the Carlton Rd planters. If a low slung sportscar can drive over the kerbs, an ambulance would be absolutely fine to do the same if it needed to. More restrictive barriers had to be put in because people driving cars couldn?t be trusted. I don?t understand you wishing ill on LTN supporters who might need emergency services, when it is vehicle drivers who have restricted the potential for emergency access - ?

Yes, we are reading the same article that you linked to. Same as your comment about the link, you are choosing to edit and misrepresent, which totally undermines any respectable point you have. You missed this bit; ?Shockingly they also reveal in February one patient appears to have died of a heart attack after paramedics were sent to the wrong road because their sat-nav misdirected them. When they realised they were in the wrong place they called for back-up ? which was then delayed because they too were sent to the wrong location by sat-nav.? If you are so concerned about response times, you should be discussing irresponsible drivers being the reason an ambulance can?t navigate a planter when their old sat-navs take them there.

But the article you linked to is about Sat Navs not having current data? I understand the systems in these vehicles take minutes to recalculate a new route, sometimes needing to be completely reset, taking 5+ mins. That was the issue in Feb, nothing to do with LTN?s Problem is any reasonable debate is lost when things like this happen. Strange thing is an ambulance would have been able to drive around the initial planters ....but people driving cars also kept mounting the pavements to drive around them. Ergo, it?s these drivers who have Put lives at risk - ?

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ambulance teams complaining that Carlton Avenue > (amongst others) closure delayed 999 > response....https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/p > aramedics-say-low-traffic-roadblocks-delayed-respo > nse-to-at-least-two-life-threatening-emergencies-b > ecause-satnavs-didnt-recognise-them/?cmpredirect The article is about sat navs not recognising changes to road layouts and not having updates to their maps yet? This is a recognised problem with older equipment fitted to these vehicles, and has widely been reported. Describes an incident in Feb, before implementation of LTNs, so the LTN?s have only served to highlight the issue more clearly. Interesting read, lots of useful perspective.

- somehow posted a duplicate message -