heartblock

Well @CourtCampaign on Twitter is a good place to start. There has already been a very ancient tree felling ?by mistake? and they have campaign and protest days.... it seems that Mums for Lungs and Clean Air for Dulwich don?t seem bothered so much about this aspect of de-greening Southwark, so I urge others on roads effected by extra pollution due to LTNs to show support for our neighbours. It?s all about intersectionality of the impact of decisions that make life better for the privileged few to the detriment of the many.

Fabulous thread. Public transport. Stop building on green spaces and stop cutting down trees. Re-use before recycle. Grants for electric bikes. Force schools to have a no drive policy for parents...lots more.

I?m sure this will be lounged, but as we are discussing clean air etc. our neighbours in Peckham are having Green Spaces taken away from them while very privileged residents in the most expensive and greenest part of Southwark now have less tarffic and their new ?square? please whatever your thoughts on LTNs, support our neighbours and write to Southwark to stop them from building on green spaces and trees....which are the lungs for all of us. Trees remove pollutants and produce oxygen..we need them.

Bus journeys on the number 37 have increased transiting East Dulwich Grove during rush-school run hours. So, during the time in which the usage is the highest. With no traffic at all it would take a vechicle around 3 minutes to drive down the whole of ED Grove (1 mile at 20 miles an hour), obviously with lights, stops and ?normal? traffic it is longer than that. I was told that the number 37 bus now takes an extra 20 minutes to transit ED Grove, during the school run since the LTNs and that was from a Council official. That?s 20 minutes more idling pollution from one individual bus.

Because Rahrahrah Southwark has given a binary choice in the consultation. Southwark has all along never listened or considered any alternative voices, we all know the consultation is not an exercise in consulting, but to rubber stamp their own entrenched decision. I actually voted Green rather than Labour...in the hope that they would tackle illegal levels of pollution....something this council ignores and even worse, increases on already polluted roads.

I like that..my flat is right in a swirly bit..and I often feel swirly..

Honestly it is so frustrating to be constantly labelled by people like rahrahrah as wanting the status quo. Many of us follow Rosamund Kissi Debrah, Choked Up and Green accounts because we want...demand a reduction in pollutants, especially in areas that have illegal levels of pollution historically. This straw man argument that we want things to stay the same...no reduction in pollution or car use is flawed. Why do I oppose the current LTNs.. because I believe they increase pollution, increase idling and do not contribute to active travel in this area. If people like Mums for Lungs and other pressure groups really cared about pollution and green spaces, they would be down at Bells, Greendale etc, campaigning against building on open, green spaces. It is about privileged, gated communities.. we all know it..and nothing about pollution reduction. So take out the LTNs Monitor levels of traffic and pollution Cease building on green spaces Come up with a plan that is fully consulted and EqI assessed and number one priority - reduce pollution on rds with illegal levels of pollution

From Paul Wheeler an article on LTNs. Paul Wheeler is a very long standing member of the London Labour Party and a founder member of London Cyclists with a Conscience (#realLCC) ?Perhaps most significantly for long-standing Labour supporters, those councils ignored the reality that LTNs primarily displace traffic from the roads of the prosperous to the roads of the poor and disadvantaged, which already suffered from the highest levels of air pollution. The additional congestion and stalled traffic offered no alleviation. It was a policy that went against all the principles of social justice.? https://www.onlondon.co.uk/paul-wheeler-last-rites-for-the-covid-ltns/

The Labour Party in Southwark doesn?t represent me anymore, sadly. Building on poorer estates green space and children?s playgrounds while diverting traffic from a road such as Court Lane, with its enormous gardens that back onto a huge park to Croxted and ED Grove. I?m surprised that the idealistic values of fairness and equality have been lost in a haze of self-congratulation, entrenched views and arrogance. Followed up by approval of smear tactics towards residential anti-pollution campaigns.

Thanks legal, is it an open meeting. On another note ED Grove during this school holiday is literally ?a breath of fresh air? I hopped on a 37 bus yesterday as had hurt my knee gardening over the BH and it swept down East Dulwich Grove. The schools and Southwark really need to rethink how much school traffic has been concentrated on school roads like ED Grove and Croxted due to LTNs.

Definitely need more bins in the parks. Dulwich and Peckham Rye are such lovely places, we are lucky to have them and I just can't understand why people cannot take rubbish home with them if bins are full, but it would help to have more and for them to be emptied a bit more regularly. I'm not sure if it just my perception, but when I walk through Brockwell, it does seem to have more park staff working there, always gardeners, people painting and cleaning going on.

The Consultation document is anything but, it reads as a piece of propaganda. The whole debacle is such a lost opportunity for a well supported, fully consulted plan to reduce car use and traffic across Southwark, with a subsequent increase in public transport and cycling routes. People who have supported greener travel are now split and people who needed convincing about car use reduction are now probably more entrenched in their views. Poor politics, bad planning and has caused such a division in this area. I'm not sure it is possible to bring in a change in a more incompetent way.

Bank Holiday Monday, how lovely to not have the school run traffic on ED Grove. Just had a lovely walk and the air smells so clean. The number 37 bus moving faster than me, which is not the case on a school day.

I know DullvilleRes, I didn?t actually say you, just pointing out the behaviour you so rightly condemned. Interesting that eastdulwichlocal99 says the house prices on ED Grove are reducing because of LTNs...and yet I?m told daily that LTNs are good for my road and that there is no increase in pollution or traffic, do you see....the argument changes every time, the gaslighting continues. It doesn?t matter how much people like me or Rosamund point out that our concern is the impact on health, we are told by others what we think. This is gaslighting.

And there you have it.... described as a ?gun nut?, so much for your very good idea of intelligent and non-personal, non-aggressive discussion DullvilleRes. The tatic of picking out one phrase and gaslighting someone concerned about an increase of pollution on ALL residential roads in Dulwich and the consequent health impacts on children and young adults, rather than discussing the pros and cons. I?m probably one of very few people on this forum who has witnessed the after effects of a gunshot wound on a young adult, so for many reasons a poor analogy to use on me.

Why is Southwark planning to cut down 4 trees on Peckham Green, next to one of the most polluted roads in Southwark.

I agree DulvilleRes, the people that have been going into private property on East Dulwich Grove destroying and defacing items is not progressing the issue in a civilised manner. The people posting pictures of individuals on Twitter accounts with no right of reply, who are legally using their rights to peacefully protest is individualising and personalising the issues. The individuals trolling Rosamund Kissi Debrah on Twitter, forcing her to protect her account is disgusting An account from an LCC member taking a screenshot of a Twitter account and posting it with an invitation to troll them and a supposedly clean air campaign account that blocks the right to reply, calling a resident living on a busy road out as a liar. I agree all of the above are very problematic. These LTNs cause division. Why? Because they were introduced with no consultation of the residents on roads adversely impacted. Who was consulted. Outside interest groups and local campaigners that wanted their roads to be gated communities. Unfortunately this was never about reducing car use, never about active travel and certainly was not about reducing pollution on roads with already legal levels of particulates and emissions. Southwark are completely to blame, if they did allow all voices and did allow proper and ordered argument and discussion, then these frustrations would not boil over to behaviour I am sure we all condemn. The trouble is they are hiding issues raised by the LAS, promoting their pro-LTN stance publicly, while privately panicking that they have made mistakes. So yes, let?s have an open and civilised discussion, let Southwark take a neutral stance. How about all LTNs are removed, the air quality and traffic, car ownership and inequality of communities be properly measured for a year, then a planned and fully consultative process occur, with the focus on overall drop in car use, pollution and an increase in public transport and active travel. I?m sure we can all get on board with that.

Don?t worry flippit, Southwark are going to ask class 2 at Little Village Primary to all draw a sad picture of an open square of shame and an open Derwent and Melbourne Grove, with slogans such as ?don?t take away our play area? and ?don?t take our clean air away? as part of their ?consultation? to prove we all think the current LTNs are great. Meanwhile real school roads like ED Grove will continue to have polluting idling traffic during the school run, and Southwark will carry on building on green spaces, children?s play areas and cutting down trees on estates such as Brenchley and Bells. It is either incompetence, stupidity or a fundamentalist belief that a decision they made and supported cannot be flawed. At this point their own propaganda of tweeting delightful pictures of parties and people enjoying sitting in gated roads, needs to be juxtaposed with them cutting down trees and concreting over green spaces on Southwark estates.

I?m a little ole? lady, hopefully more Peggy Seeger than Peggy! Down the pub, but anyways...little ole? ladies are not fragile creatures that need protecting. Some of the anti-Southwark LTNers are not anti LTNs as a concept, but are anti the badly planned LTNs in Southwark that benefit little ?ole ladies living in LTNs but are bad news for residents on roads with illegal levels of pollution. Sooooooo maybe the little ?ole lady who has been seen going on private property to remove posters campaigning for less traffic and clean air for residents that do not own a 2 million plus house on a certain road should cease and desist....

The road isn?t just busy during school run, it is full of idling traffic, while children walk to school and adults walk, cycle or sit on the 37 bus trying to get to work. I?m not sure everyone understands the impact of spikes in pollution on the health of children and vulnerable adults. These pollution spikes can trigger a lethal asthma attack and can also cause cardiovascular and respiratory damage over the long term. The exposure is every school day for two hours in the morning and two in the evening. One cannot have it both ways, if Mums for Lungs and other low traffic and low pollution campaigniners believe as I do that car pollution needs to be reduced, I cannot understand their support for LTNs when as eastdulwiclocal99 admits there is an increase in both on these, on residential school roads outside of the LTNs. As residents we are gaslighted by being told ?the traffic hasn?t increased, you don?t know what you are talking about? to ?all you care about is that you have to drive a longer way? and ?the traffic has increased, but as it is only 4 hours a day, it doesn?t matter? also...on Twitter, ?just move house? ?don?t walk on your road? ?you are too stupid to understand how LTNs work? and best of all ?the traffic will disappear?

Really. ED Grove traffic is much worse during the school run..and always parking at that time as parents drive up and park to let kids out, but what would I know, have only lived here for 30 years.

As the schools, health centre and nurseries are on EDGrove it?s a bit difficult to avoid the road if cycling to these as a parent, worker or child. That is the issue on ED Grove, it is a road that has a lot of residents, pedestrians, children, parents who are actively travelling to this destination rd. The new ?playing fields? and entrance for Charter School are right next to the road.

When I walk to Herne Hill during the school run, many cyclists on EDG either use the pavement or cycle down the centre of the road past the idling, near-standstill traffic. Parents and school children on bikes use the pavement almost exclusively. I do worry about a pedestrian being hit, although I can't blame parents using the pavement to cycle as a family as the idling traffic produces lots of horrible fumes and it is difficult to cycle past on the left had side. The middle road cycling also worries me, I have seen a couple of U turns that could so easily hurt a cyclist and the buses stuck in a row, crawling down the grove are very difficult to see around. I have walked this route for 5 years, with an occasional hop onto the 37 bus if running late or to get to Clapham and catch the tube. Now, the 37 bus takes around 30 minutes to transit ED Grove. If LTNs are to remain, it might be a good idea to divert buses through LTNs so that they are a faster alternative to sitting in a car in standstill traffic. I haven't driven for 11 years, but if I did I would rather sit in an air-conditioned car with the radio on, than a full bus for 30 minutes (which is why LTNs don't always encourage people to use public transport).

Yes Snowy, you can buy them, but most people without a car will have not set up an account, so will have to set up an account in order to purchase visitors permits. The point I was trying to make, obviously not as well as I hoped, is that setting up is not so straightforward on the site, for instance it took over a month to set up mine as the site had issues recognising my address and it also required extra identifying documentation, in the end Councillor McAsh very kindly intervened. Some people who do not have a car may have accessibility issues when it comes to navigating a 'clunky' site, therefore it might be a nice idea for a few pay-phone visitor parking sites on EDG. I'm not sure this is an unreasonable request.

If you are a resident without a car, you will not have a parking permit, so will not have an account to buy visitor parking. Also it is not the easiest site to navigate and may present an accessibility challenge to some. Some pay by phone on EDG would be useful.