heartblock

EDG and Half Moon Road absolute nightmare at 7:30 -8:00 when I walked to Herne Hill station today. Lots of cars parked all over the show dropping kids off at schools. When is it evaporating again?

Mmmmh that's the point the nursery has a 'no drive policy' in the same way JAGs and Alleyn's has a 'no drive policy' - in that neither has - they can't stop parents from driving they can only encourage. You can interpret any way you want. They may promise staggered arrival and to minimise idling vehicles, but pretty soon the Council will lose interest and promises can be forgotten. I actually don't object to the building being a nursery, there is a need in ED - but I have no doubt it will lead to extra traffic on an already busy road.

I have no doubt it has a no drive policy, in the same way JAGS and Alleyns have and yet - they drive. They park in no parking zones, on the pavement and even let the kids out in the road - I'm constantly amazed. Meanwhile the pavement is a cycle lane - with parents and kids on cycles and scooters. Southwark Council really need to get a grip of the situation.

They will drive - they are driving even now in the chaos of ED Grove. Sitting in an air-conditioned car listening to your fav CD...dry if it is raining and cool in a heat wave. Only residents, pedestrians and cyclist suffer.

I think they are fighting each other in Southwark ... let alone between neighbouring Councils!

https://www.jacionline.org/article/S0091-6749(18)30029-0/fulltext Anyway for anyone interested - a 2017 article on the inflammatory aspects of PM. Please do not burn logs in your homes or rubbish in your garden - it creates harmful PM.

Indeed particulates are extremely dangerous - constant accelerating and braking in idling traffic causes much wear and tear - road humps also a problem on tyres. I would much rather see a full bus than one person in a car, which is why public transport that is based within the local needs of an area can help. Obviously cycling and walking for those than can and very importantly want to - making a road more pleasant to walk on is an advantage on closed roads (obviously isn't nice on ED Grove and Croxted at school rush - this morning it was so bad I was asthmatic for the first time in ages) Fossil fuels need to be left in the ground and we need far bigger changes to reverse climate change. A colleague of mine posted an excellent run down of how particulates interact with the body's cells - I was trying to find it for malumbu, I will post it if I find it again.

DC - what is this data you keep bringing up? The official Southwark data is 28% more traffic on EDG and 200% more at the LL junction. As I say - the not caring about 1000's of children isn't really the case and rather a bit of incorrect whataboutery that is also not helpful - but obviously a forum is a place to express one's thoughts, so all healthy expression I suppose. I do look forward to this drop in pollution and traffic on ED Grove that you seem very sure of - I await.

If they work and traffic and pollution are shown to decrease on all roads in the designated area, including boundary residential roads I will happily change my mind and support the policy.

By the way DC - continual posts about how I don't care about young children and their lungs isn't really adding to the thread. I spent a long time working in a paediatric cardiorespiratory unit and I'm content with my career dedicating myself to the health and wellbeing of others, including very difficult times with end of life care for some very young people. I suggest that this avenue isn't terribly helpful, as I am sure we all want the same thing in this area - cleaner, less polluted roads, fewer cars and cleaner air for residents. I do disagree with you about how the traffic on Calton and Court was, it is just that a disagreement and I do understand that once given a better environment for your road, it would be very difficult to not support keeping it - as I say, if I was in your position I might very well want to keep an LTN. The problem is it comes at a cost to others and this has been admitted by some LTN advocates - they have just said that more traffic should go onto roads like ED Grove and Croxted. I may disagree with this, but I do admire their honesty.

If ED Grove traffic and pollution just even goes back to pre-LTN levels, so not even any improvement at all from the traffic before LTNS -which wasn't great but at least it was not idling down the whole stretch - and if those inside LTNs still have a gain - I will be more than happy for all LTNs to stay and I will be happy that others have a better experience and will not mind in the least why certain roads were chosen. It's the increase of pollution and traffic and noise and the slowness of the 37 bus when I occasionally use rather than walk that has happened after the LTNs that makes me sad - but as I say even a return to pre-LTN traffic will do for me. This morning was a mare - with a lorry outside my house belching fumes while stuck in the queue that idled slowly from LL all the way down to Village. malumbu - interesting article - nobody really agreed, which is pretty typical when looking at multifactorial causation - it is always difficult in any pathology. I will try and dig out something interesting about how particulates and nitrogen dioxide are implicated - interesting physiology.

LTns have not reduced pollution, so still unsure how more LTNs will make anything any better. Indeed removing them in Ealing appears to have made idling traffic jams evaporate, so yes remove and introduce some of those excellent ideas, such as more public transport, safer cycling and encouraging the private schools to be more imaginative about how children travel long distances to those private schools. Knowing some of the vocal residents that have been asking for gated roads pre-LTN and then those same residents roads being chosen for those LTNs rather than school roads seems to me not fictitious or baloney, but that's just my opinion and others may of course disagree.

What does 'more' mean? LTNs? Move the pollution onto another road. It's kicking a can down the road rather than tackling the actual problems. LTNs do not solve anything, they just move the problem onto someone else.

Just to remind people - NOx is toxic, measured on Croxted Rd on Friday at 5pm - 66.49ppm. The increase in traffic on Croxted is a direct result of LTNs in the Village - as Margy has indicated. Why is NOx at this level a problem? NOx has direct effects on human health. It can cause breathing problems, headaches, chronically reduced lung function, eye irritation, loss of appetite and corroded teeth. In Britain alone, known NO2 emissions have been estimated to kill 23,500 people every year, according to aerosol science professor Ian Colbeck and have been officially implicated and recorded as an official cause of death due to a peak in pollution for one child in South London. So, although I am sure many people are very happy about their gated, quiet roads, maybe, just maybe they should spare a little thought for the corresponding implications for their neighbours.

There is no data showing any fall in traffic on EDG. I go back to - deny the actuality because accepting that ED Grove, LL and Croxted are significantly worse means that a quiet road is at the cost to other families. Faith not required, the facts published by Southwark giving an overall rise on top of an already busy road of 28% more traffic daily on ED Grove is neither a view or perception.

A road was busy at times - it is now not busy at any time because that roads traffic is now added to another roads traffic which was busy at times - and people on the closed road are very happy with that situation and will keep saying that traffic will evaporate and the other road is fine, it isn't more polluted and hasn't got more idling traffic for a longer time each day because they don't want their road to be busy at times ever again and they don't want the LTN removed. I do understand - if I lived on Calton I might feel the same, unfortunately I can't afford a 2 million pound house on Calton and could only afford a flat on ED Grove at the time. Many flats on ED Grove and schools and nurseries and health centres. Margy and lovers of the LTNs can say what they want - traffic is worse on ED Grove and everyone knows this - but to admit this will admit that LTNs have failed the test that Councillor McAsh said was important - that other residents should not be subjected to more pollution as a result of LTNs and they are.

Calton Avenue and Court Lane gridlocked - no I don't think so. Yes the traffic on a road was made slightly worse after the badly planned changes on the Court/Calton/Village lights years ago, so that junction did get a bit busy at rush-hour - but gridlocked.. I have been walking around this area for 35 years and I am very aware of the traffic on roads. It is all about having quiet roads for some very wealthy people - I see that there is no commentary about how bad it is that children with developing lungs are playing sports 3 metres away from pollution and traffic or about the lack of pollution monitoring. Plenty about those poor people on Calton and Court and the awfulness of it all, thankfully they can escape in the Range Rover to the second home in the Lake District at the weekend.

Ohh I want that book, thank you.

Maybe Southwark Council should publish all the raw data and methodology? Then One Dulwich can analyse the data. Why was there crowdfunding for pollution monitors - because Southwark were not monitoring pollution. It's was nice to see children using the new sports facility 3 metres from East Dulwich Grove road - I wonder what the NOx and particulates are just at that point? It's not monitored by Southwark. Of course, all those blah..blah..blahing on about Greenwashing HTNs don't actually care about pollution levels on school roads. We all know it's about nice quiet, leafy roads for the most wealthy in this area. It was always about house prices and keeping traffic off posh roads and never about pollution.

It was a characterisation of Village Ward, but it did have a certain rhythm to it, so I?ll take that as a compliment:)

I believe a lot of multiple car owning, 3 million pound house owning, second home owning, kids at private school, wealthy residents, possibly with a lovely wood-burner or two... voted it down to protect the planet from climate change...As I say a very bad joke.

It's not really about clean air, or school children or people with reduced mobility is it? It's about wealthy people wanting quiet roads and piling traffic onto other roads despite those roads having schools, higher footfall and higher residency. It is a Labour Council causing health inequality and some very wealthy car owning residents wanting to keep LTNs for completely selfish reasons - why else would one of the most voracious supporters have 3 cars at the Dulwich residence and one more car at the weekend residence - yet throw out accusations about how horrid and selfish those people living in flats on ED Grove, who depend on the 37 bus are. It's a very bad joke!

Is there place for a couple of bike parks - I used to park a motorbike in these more organised areas, I felt it was more secure in an allocated area with other bikes - maybe they look after each other :) - I'm just wondering if there is a way of securing temporarily. I like the idea of planters - the issues are maintaining as cidolphus raised with some energy, but also LL is becoming a little tricky for less able visitors, wheelchair access is already a 'mare and difficult for those with visual impairment. Bike and motorbike thiefs are organised groups and can be very dangerous if you bump into them - usually a van with a driver and 2-3 guys with all the equipment to break most locks - hopefully the local police are aware of these gangs and will catch them soon.

Anti - low traffic measures group - you must mean Southwark Council who have made interventions that have caused more traffic congestion, more pollution, slower bus journeys and idling traffic on our roads. You must be embarrassed that disgraced Simon Still and people who have trolled parents of children with asthma - clean-air campaigners Rosamund Kissi-Debrah/ David (little ninja) are associated with the pro-LTN lobby (or HTN as I like to call them). See we call all pile out this stuff - you are bad, no you are bad, no you are bad..but it isn't helpful DC. (cue another 'wot about those posters' post) Much more helpful to stick to the discussion about do these measures work. So yet again, I am ready and willing to be convinced that the road closures introduced by Southwark will within a year reduce traffic, pollution and noise on my road compared to pre-LTN levels. I await.....

I have also heard this tiddles. It's a ploy so we do not blame 'labour' in May elections - basically it is all central government's fault. But. 1. Grant Schapps - Councils that fail to consult local residents and businesses over plans for Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) could see their funding reclaimed by the Government. The Department for Transport (DfT) said that Grant Shapps has been clear that ?future funding allocations will be reduced, and clawbacks could also be imposed? where local authorities do not consider affected communities. LTNs often close roads to motor traffic and reallocate road space to walkers and cyclists with segregated cycle lanes and wider pavements to encourage ?active travel?. The schemes have already faced critics, with some suggesting the planters, bollards and barricades have made congestion worse. The controversial measures have even faced backlash from a minority and some have even vandalised roadblocks and poured oil on spaces left for cyclists. Mr Shapps voiced his objections in a letter sent to council leaders in July, where he highlighted problems with using barriers to widen town centre pavements. He explained that the fixtures could ?prevent pedestrians from crossing the road, cause congestion for buses and motor traffic, and impede access for kerbside businesses?. Heaton-Harris Heaton-Harris?s letter, being sent on Friday, warns councils that if schemes installed using central government money, such as funds provided to boost walking and cycling during Covid, are then hastily abandoned, this could affect future grants. ?Premature removal of schemes carries implications for the management of the public money used in these schemes and for the government?s future funding relationship with the authorities responsible,? wrote Heaton-Harris. Southwark has evidence that closing roads is not a 'success' but have chosen to ignore much of their own consultation, so even though there is evidence that closing roads causes more pollution, traffic and slower bus journey times -they have chosen to present a rosy picture - therefore if any funding is removed it is due to their imagining of the facts and not for any other reason. it was central government money anyway - hence Ealing Council removing their road closures after their public consultation - it appears Ealing doesn't treat their residents as fools. Meanwhile green-washing Southwark is planning to cut down mature trees on a council estate to make a car park..