heartblock

Oh Goldilocks - it is all there in the latest newsletter from Southwark Council - it actually says it is a 'new' count and from the point where I said it is, you can go look at it on ED Grove. As I tell my students - look at the raw data, and all confounding data, especially when a drug company, researcher, organisation is desperately trying to prove something they believe in is right and analyse it yourself. You know the true scientific method is always the best - why do we choose the null hypothesis?, because the purpose is to prove whether or not the test/treatment/intervention is supported, which is separated from the investigator's own values and decisions. It states the exact opposite of what an investigator or an experimenter predicts or expects - so they should have started with 'LTNs do not reduce traffic and pollution or increase active travel' then proved this wrong.

How do you know traffic has fallen outside my home..as I have said on countless times ED Grove Central is a point measurement - with one and only one count in 2021 as the counter was not placed before Autumn 2021. It is not a stretch of road, it is one counter located at Melbourne Grove Junction/Health Centre. So please stop reporting a false narrative about my location and the so called ED Grove 'section' of road. If LTNs are justified on these types of false and erroneous narratives, one can understand the high number of residents that replied to the consultation wanting LTNs removed. I think the main feeling in many ways is the distrust that has evolved due to at the best poor data and at the worse manipulated data to prove a policy has worked, when it is so obvious to anyone living on a so called boundary road, that it really has not.

I live on ED Grove in a flat I have voted Green or Labour in every election I walk and use PT for all short to medium journeys, and have used a car about 6 times in two years. I am a member of Medact that is pushing for many green related health issues and a reduction in inequalities in health So stop gaslighting us individuals as a 'hardcore' 'tantrum' 'them' 'lobby' with no interest in reducing car use and pollution. Why do I oppose these particular LTNs - because the evidence I have read does not prove to me that pollution and traffic has been reduced by LTNs and the evidence I see on my road also informs me that traffic and congestion is now worse on my road. Road pricing - yes, but remember this favours the wealthy, more local green public transport and in my book - close all private schools so all school journeys are short because all children go to their excellent state run school....see not very Tory at all!

I imagine that residents with a disability or are less mobile, will be told by certain lobby groups to 'try harder' when it comes to 'active travel' and by Southwark to use buses, when bus routes are being cut. Meanwhile those with private garages and drives for private parking, living in gated roads can continue to be rewarded for their good luck and wealth by this poorly planned policy based on erroneous information. I note that the Feb Dulwich Streetspace Review, admits two things 1. ED Grove Central has only been monitored since Sept 2021 2. They are going to "Explore measures to improve traffic conditions along ED Grove" What does that tell me? Firstly as I have been saying there is no pre-LTN data for so called ED Central, which seems to be a point on the road rather than a stretch of road, so therefore all this spin about a fall in traffic is an exercise in justifying keeping Melbourne Grove closed and I would think if after 2 years of the flawed LTN implementation there is still need to 'improve traffic conditions' then this tells me that at least for ED Grove the traffic and pollution is much worse that pre-LTNs - especially taking into account the drops in traffic across London (from the same TfL 2021 report) - "plateaued across all areas, at a lower level than before".

Thank you legalalien, yes that FOI was interesting and yes the benchmarking was an exercise by DfT, but this is from TfL, as the information is from TfL's 2021 report - Travel In London Report 14, which was a comprehensive report that included section 7.2 Overall Trends For All Traffic In London. It uses DfT figures and graphically shows the 'blip' in 2018/2019 benchmarking event. In the report - pages 143-145, commentary is made about how this statistical benchmarking event resulted in a false 60% rise in traffic on side-roads that was not "an actual observed trend". Traffic has not risen year by year on side roads and DfT after being alerted by TfL that their data which falsely indicated a rise, was being used to drive policy, are now reviewing their minor roads estimation methodology for future data.

When one looks at actual counts there are at least 2000+ extra vehicles travelling down ED Grove per day compared to pre-intervention - and this is in a background of decreasing rush hour traffic across London. I truly believe if there had been no LTNs x 5 pushing traffic onto ED Grove the vehicle count would be lower per day compared to 2018/19 figures. TFL have already admitted that a benchmarking exercise on 'side-roads' in 2018, made it appear as if traffic had increased on these roads and have written to FOI's that this data does not show any increase in 'side-road' traffic "No evidence of a year-on-year increase on minor roads from independent data over the preceding decade" from 2008-2018. Flawed data used to increase traffic on already polluted roads. Well done Southwark Council.

Well May is easy for me now...I don't see a vote for Labour Central being on my cards after today. I'll either vote for a Tory/LibDem type who wants the LTNs to go or a Tory/Labour type who wants them to stay.

"I see a few mentions of the idling coaches from the independent schools - this is run by the Foundation Coach Service, maybe people should email their Transport Manager to complain?" Yep done that and e-mailed the schools and one of the village councillors (who told me that it wasn't in their remit to do anything about school coaches :( )

When counts have been 'invented' for a section of previously unmonitored road from a different month and a different location - surely one must question the validity. More important when this 'new' information is an outlier to the trend. I know this isn't a RCT but if data has an impact on policy, that may result in CYP having adverse health outcomes, then it is a case of Southwark undertaking due diligence and to investigate, audit and review 'facts' or details.

There is no data that shows traffic counts between Melbourne Grove and Townley Road has fallen from pre-LTN levels to the current date. I think you are confusing the so called "ED Central Northbound" 'data' that is from the Health centre to the Harris School Northbound a mere 40 metres - disputed figures at the best. ED Grove traffic along the whole road (which had no turn-offs) has risen by at least 25% - Southwark Council data.

Section? I live on a road not a section. Regular reminder that traffic has increased the length of EG Grove by at least 25% in the background of decreasing traffic during rush hour. Zero evidence - So Southwark failed to measure the increase in idling traffic, but we all see it. But of course - do go ahead and gaslight..

Thanks Metallic and kissthisguy - this is our (ED Grove residents group) point - our high density, residential school street as a stretch of road has seen an increase in traffic overall and idling traffic/congestion is more prevalent than before the ED and DV LTNs - in the context of a drop in traffic at rush hour across London. So in no way can this be a success - unless of course you live on a gated road.

Also parents dropping of and picking up kids at Alleyns, JAGs and Judith Kerr primary all the way down ED Grove, Village Way and Half-moon Lane - in residents parking spaces, no parking zones and even once on the pavement. Also coaches picking up JAGs and Alleyn's kids.

Everyday on EDG 8:15 -9:00 wish

1. LTNs are central conservative policy 2. Yes there are always people who want access to private cars at any cost, but the majority of individuals on ED Grove involved in the ED Grove Group campaigning for clean air and less traffic are completely focussed on the pollution/traffic aspect, schools and disability/elderly access - hence our letter to Southwark Council asking them to retain and extend traffic and pollution monitoring - pointing out that 4000 children travel to this road to be educated. These LTNs haven't delivered a less polluted environment for me and my neighbours and having campaigned for green new deal and policy within MEDACT and the Labour Party for many years up to the point I left the LP over this debacle, I don't see anything but negatives from LTN in terms of making East Dulwich a cleaner, greener area and making us a cohesive community. The local Labour Parties policy over green spaces, democracy, consultation and dubious contracts with property developers such as LandLease, do not encourage me to vote for them.

I listened to the person speaking on a recorded Southwark Council meeting, so all in the public domain. Not ?outing? anyone. They quoted the average car ownership in their area as 3-4 cars per household, they gave their road name. They said that they represented the ?Dulwich Residents Supporters of LTN? and that LTNs discouraged ownership of polluting cars. I was comparing Rahx3 commenting on private household drives that had a car and the green signs on their private property to LTN lobbyists on closed roads. I personally thought that there was some hypocrisy demonstrated if both were compared. Yes harassment, gaslighting and any form of targeting individuals is abhorrent. It would be nice if private gardens on Croxted Rd were not trespassed and signs vandalised, shopkeepers not victimised and for people to have a reasonable debate. One of the reasons I dislike LTNs is the way community?s in Dulwich, Enfield and Lambeth have become divided and accusatory. All very sad.

Aaah how they love to bring up Dulwich Alliance and One Dulwich rather with questions about what we agree and don't agree with, as though everyone who is describing the increased traffic and pollution on their road - simply MUST be a member of one of these lobby groups. KidKruger is correct - the constant upbeat messages are gaslighting - when is proper pollution monitoring for NOx and particulates going to be measured and data released for ED Grove?

Yes WW2 stretchers, very simple design, always loved walking past these on my way to DH station or Sainbos.

"It?s interesting that many of the ?clean air for all? placards along Dulwich Village, East Dulwich Grove and Half Moon Lane, stand in driveways with several large vehicles. But I?m sure that outside their vocal support for more through traffic on side streets, they are committed environmentalists, as the signs suggest." Nope all the ones in Goose Green Ward (not talking about Village end) - all in a row near Harris School are all 2 and 3 flats in converted houses or at the LL end in flats and small terraces, with no garages and have to pay for street parking. The large houses near the crossing in Village Ward do get it much worse than us in our flats, because although we have more traffic idling outside our flats than before LTNs - it is very much during the private school terms - which is why pre-LTNS it wasn't this bad because parents driving miles into this area to drop of Fantasia and Pericles in their 4X4 also used other roads, not just ED Grove, it's never been about local's and short journeys- at the crossing, the traffic is much worse all day, so yes they are bigger houses, but people have lived there a long time, have children, or are elderly and have just as much right to less noise pollution and air pollution as anyone else. Not sure why it's ok for someone on Gilkes to have 3 cars, no street parking restrictions and has been a lead vocal campaigner on LTNs and active travel, with the presumption to tell us that we need to give up cars, yet someone in ED Grove who happens to have a nice house and one car on the drive cannot comment on LTNs or be upset their road is now dirtier, noisier and more polluted? Also - I'm getting really fed up with so called 'cycling campaigners' making ableist comments on twitter such as "it's amazing the disabilities/ physical limitations that 'disappear' whilst cycling. It's a matter of the right bike and then practice' - it has the same tone as Capita and Department for Work & Pensions' handling of disability benefits - inferring that some individuals wouldn't be disabled if they tried harder. I say 'cycling-campaigners' as a lot of this s**t comes from people living on closed roads, that have cars - who haven't seen the working end of a bicycle in years. It's just about having a closed road for their own personal car-park and a nice exclusive road, it really isn't anything to do with real change to increase public transport and make cycling and walking more desirable - we all know that really - don't we.

Massive 4x4's and at least one more car, multiple car ownership on closed roads - makes a mockery of the whole scheme. I look forward to see who is standing in my ward in the May elections.

There are a few left on one of the roads in the estate (Quorn Rd), but why they were removed from DKH the main road baffles me, but glad the Dulwich Society is doing this unveiling.

Firstly, cycling and walking should be encouraged. There is poor cycling and poor driving, a car is obviously more likely to cause someone damage. The problem is that as someone who walks almost all my journeys, with limited use of trains, buses and the tube, the main danger for me has been cyclists. I have been hit by a bike on the pavement and had a few near misses by cyclists running red-lights. I no longer ask people to cycle on the road if they are on the pavement as the abuse is not worth the effort - and scooter dad with child on his way to JAGs who I had to jump out of the way to avoid being hit is another issue. I also think the LCC's attitude treating any dissent to LTNs with disdain, gaslighting and abuse and the comments from some of their employees has tainted how many see cycling - which is a shame as most cyclists cycle on the road, do not run red lights and have chosen a healthy and non-polluting method of travel. I have to remind myself that the LCC and the shouty, sweary light runners and pavement invaders are not typical of the majority of people who choose cycling as one of their transport choices.

This would easily pay for a local green-bus.

25 million unspent https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/council-fails-to-spend-any-of-25m-climate-fund/#.YfvsNkYWmNl.twitter and you want me to vote them back in?

Maybe the Labour Party should have considered that before implementing a Conservative party policy. I am also outraged by the sleaze and repulsiveness of those on the front bench, I'm also repulsed by local Government policy causing pollution and idling traffic outside of my home and building on Green Spaces in the poorest and most deprived area of Southwark, with the highest level of pollution and the lowest number of private gardens. Sometimes one must choose which devil one lies with.