heartblock

Oooh that must have been cool. Ian Dury and the Blockheads at Brunel Uni Student bar circa 1980's was pretty good too!

It's depressing actually. Swimming is great. Life saving skills, good for young, old, less mobile and those with asthma and yet only one of the local pools is open to the public. About time those private schools with charitable status gave back to local residents, who have to put up with a lot of disruption to enable their existence.

The only culture allowed in ED is culture that fits in with a certain view these days in less edgy ED. The thought of Warmduscher performing at a live venue in that unit in a late opening bar and music venue sounds amazing to me...but I'm not sure jenjenjen and goldilocks would like it...:) aaah revealing my old punk roots...

Yes CPR Dave - do you know why you can't see PT Tube counters at ED Central point on Google Street View, because one cannot see what was never there. I imagine we will be told that's our 'perception' very soon......

https://geo.southwark.gov.uk/connect/analyst/mobile/#/main?mapcfg=Southwark%20Highways

The exact date and number of the ED Grove Central counter counts are 4 counts - 06/09/2021 13/09/2021 20/09/2021 27/09/2021. There is no other counter in this section. There is one near Oxonian Street with 69 counts and another old one near Dutch estate with two counts from 2018 and it hasn't been used since - all From Spectrum Spatial Analyst for Southwark Highway - you can search for yourselves. A very worrying thing when looking at the site that Southwark directs one to when looking for raw data - the NO2 measurement stops after 2018 with no monitors on ED Grove..I can only hope that this is not the case. The nearest monitor is on Grove Lane at Goose Green school and records an astounding and toxic average of 47.9 but as it is only one measure in that year I'm not sure how it can be an average. Is this really the data collection currently being measured by the Council

The Medact briefing is excellent if anyone really interested in green and health issues...rather than tinkering around diverting traffic from one road to another. https://www.medact.org/2020/resources/briefings/health-climate-justice-at-cop-26/ We need fossil-fuel free solutions if we want to combat climate change and that means stepping away from and stop funding these huge conglomerates that fund the Tory party and sadly the Labour Party too. Right I think that is me done :)

No not a conspiracy, it is well known if you have taken note of the revolving doors of ex-Southwark Cllr and employees and then Southwark giving work to those ex's - I think Private Eye and the 35% campaign are both quite illuminating - but that's another thread really. I would by the way - support the complete ban of all petrol cars in inner and outer London, with emergency vehicles being the only exceptions.

Because I live on ED Grove and it wasn't there. I travel pass that point almost ever day. That's why. It also states that in Southwark's own report if you look at the data detail. It documents this point as a new measurement point from 2021. Page 42 of the publised Appendix B: Traffic Flow Results ODF on this Southwark site https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review?chapter=4 "The charts below and on the following pages show the average daily flows on East Dulwich Grove Central, showing the difference between pre-implementation flows and data collected in January 2019 / September 2019 and September 2021. The choice of pre-implementation month January or September 2019 makes a significant difference to the baseline volume of cars/LGVs. Both are shown for comparison. January 2019 has been used in the main report to provide the more conservative estimate. ? This is a new site for data collection, having started in September 2021."

Thanks bud, so Uber has dramatically caused an increase on EDG at school run hours. Ah ok, that explains it. 2019 wasn't an actual count using the pneumatic tubing counter that appeared at this point in 2021 but was not there before. As I say the the Parliament research paper expresses the granularity of economic impact on traffic/private car use in London and is worth a read by those who can be bothered to understand the complexity. Traffic starting at LL travels down a road and cannot 'escape' until it gets to Townley (if open' or DV end). How do the closed roads of Elsie, Melbourne and Derwent make this traffic disappear. Do explain, because that is beyond my brain.

Bar please, I can go eat Sardinian pizza and then get a Negroni!

Metallic - this is the EDG Bermuda Triangle where cars travelling from LL to DV disappear and then re-appear. It's the magic unicorn of evaporating traffic we were all told about.

And why do I mention benchmarking, because this exercise in 2019 changed the figures in London by 31.6%, so added this to "These data have been used to recalibrate minor road traffic estimates since 2010 and to produce new benchmark estimates for 2019" - so up to 2010 in previous data the amount of traffic was measured as declining in London, until benchmarking added 31.6% to this data from 2010. So this data is skewed. Valid, but needs to read with this additional re-applying onto data only from 2010.

Yes it's interesting isn't it - I found another study (which is why various studies should be critically analysed) that gives granularity to the data. It seems private car use goes up during the so called good times of low petrol costs and low inflation and drops during high petrol cost and inflation. So the linear measurement in both studies is a little simplistic. Also benchmarking messes it up and traffic growth is measured on a few chosen roads and as an estimate, so as with all research one must understand how data is collected and manipulated. This is interesting though, it is from 2013, but I wonder what the increase in petrol prices and inflation will do to private car ownership and miles travelled? https://www.parliament.uk/globalassets/documents/commons-committees/transport/POST-briefing-on-peak-car.pdf

It hasn't which is the point Cllr Burgess was making - congestion is dangerous in terms of pollution - but of course it might only register as less cars passing a point. This is also why we need NOx and PM peak measures too. We need to know what these CYP are breathing in at these times. We need to study changes in health. I would love GSTT to monitor CYP at Charter, Alleyn's and JAGs with spirometry and other indexes of health - and compare to pollutant levels and modes of transport/journey routes to school, it would be an interesting longitudinal study. I might speak to my NHS/Uni colleagues.

Summary ? Motorised traffic volumes in London peaked in 1999, and have been falling steadily ever since. ? Annual motorised vehicle kilometres in London in 2011 were 11 per cent below the 1999 peak, despite a 15 per cent increase in London?s population and a 14 per cent increase in total travel (trips) over this period. ? Motorised traffic declined at a faster rate in central London, down by 21 per cent since 2000. The equivalent falls in inner and outer London (where about 97 per cent of London?s motorised traffic occurs) were 13 per cent and 8 per cent respectively. ? In contrast, motorised traffic in Great Britain continued to grow until 2007. Following three years of small declines to motorised traffic levels, GB traffic started to grow again in 2011. ? Since 2000, cars (including minicabs) have decreased ? down by 37 per cent at the Central traffic counting cordon. 13 per cent at the Inner cordon and 2 per cent at the Outer cordon. ? Van flows have increased, up by 20 per cent at the outer cordon, 10 per cent at the inner cordon, and falling by just 3 per cent at the central cordon, as the proportion of other goods vehicles in traffic has declined. ? Cycling has grown dramatically, with an increase of 156 per cent in cyclists entering central London between 2000 and 2010. The overall share of traffic accounted for by cycling rose from 1 per cent in 2000 to just 2 per cent in 2010. ? There is evidence of ?peak spreading? for motorised traffic in London. As demand approaches capacity in the peaks, drivers increasingly elect to travel at off-peak times, although lifestyle factors such as increasing leisure trips and more flexible working will also be a factor. Motorised traffic volumes in the peaks therefore remain stable or fall, and the proportion of daily traffic during off-peak hours increases. From ROADS TASK FORCE Thematic Analysis TFL https://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-02-what-are-the-main-trends-and-patterns-for-road-traffic-in-london.pdf

I think inspecting and critically analysing data is very different from rejecting. So if someone tells me 6789 counts of traffic at a point when a counter was at that point - I'm happy to accept. If someone tells me 9876 in 2019 - at a point where no traffic counter existed and then tells me that this number is taken from another counter, at another point in a different month and the count was 7342, but they have changed that number, but I should accept this as an accurate count despite it being. From another point, from a different month and then the number changed. Then yes I do not accept that as an accurate count. If you wish to accept that then great. Also longitudinal observation is a very valid measure of change. 'The benefit of a longitudinal study is that researchers are able to detect developments or changes in the characteristics of the target population at both the group and the individual level. The key here is that longitudinal studies extend beyond a single moment in time. As a result, they can establish sequences of events'

The junction at Townley was changed years ago, before then even at school rush it wasn't quite so bad coming up to Townley, after it was not great, then after LTNs terrible. Basically EDG traffic has been made worse by successive fiddling around with Townley junction and then LTNs. I'm sure they meant well, I just think the road planners they employed did not have enough expertise in traffic flow dynamics. I suppose if you know who and why these particular planners were employed, it might be a clue to why such a terrible plan went ahead.

Yes you are correct - the queuing traffic idles at those times, sometimes a little longer and doesn't idle after those times. It directly relates to schools opening. Before LTNs the traffic was busier, but moved at pace and I have never seen idling traffic outside of my house from LL to Townley until the LTNs went in. Saying it is the same is incorrect. I have lived on this road for 35 years and I have no reason to lie and I haven't lost my ability to see, hear and smell. Just for fun, lets say this very long queue of idling traffic has always existed, then why funnel extra traffic onto an already polluted road? The problem with this timing, is that this is the time that there is many, many young children walking down EDG and breathing in this pollution. If you remember the Ella case, it was one day of high idling road traffic pollution that exacerbated her condition and was judged to be the trigger of her severe asthma attack. My concern is that Southwark has not tackled the serious pollution and traffic problems in Dulwich with these LTNs they have just made them worse.

I'm not sure of your point DKHB. I look out my window and wave to my neighbour across the road in her flat with her two young children, we see a line of idling traffic outside our flats. When we both go out to chat, the air smells of pollution and the traffic idles as far as we can see both ways, from LL to the crossing at Townley. Of course I should take the 5 minute walk up to the point count just outside the health centre - where miraculously traffic disappears before returning the other side. But thank you for the emoji which indicates 'hmmmm I think you are lying' it's not a very subtle way of calling someone a liar. Again, being personal and gaslighting - rather than considering policy and road conditions. I asked for a solution for EDG - maybe thinking about that and giving constructive suggestions would be far more helpful than emojis indicating that your neighbours suffering from pollution are lying about their daily situation.

I think many non-oligarch Russians that live in London do not agree with Putin, I'm not sure deporting them helps? Why would that stop Putin?

Idiotic policy...idiotic policy. So not even a group of individuals or an individual, but a policy. This is the difference. Stop making it personal and stop attacking individuals, it ain't classy it's not clever and it's really unpleasant. Meanwhile my road is very unpleasant every school morning. Any suggestions to stop this idling and polluting traffic?

I dislike any fundamentalist attitude and personal attacks are unpleasant wherever they come from. All I know is my road I live on and have lived on for 35 years has been ruined by these LTNs. Southwark Council a a whole has not consulted or acted in a way that gives me any faith in the Council. As for my local Cllrs they have always been polite, helpful and ready to discuss local matters. It's about a flawed and idiotic policy, with questionable data and obvious impacts on already polluted roads. It isn't about being rather unpleasantly personal about individual Cllrs - I would urge everyone to stop that sort of language and vitriol - please. I have already asked someone on another thread to remove a cultural slur, so lets try to keep to the subject.

One can only hope that the people of Russia and the actual Russian army turns against this dictator. Who knows what his end-game is?

Ha ha no I enjoyed it...reminds as all that diverted traffic is an issue!