heartblock

Tilt 👍🏽 yes this is the point. Thank you.

How disappointing, I asked for some pay by phone parking spaces for plumbers, builders etc on EDG as no parking for anyone but residents and it seems to not have been taken up.

Good local transport, bike and bus lanes are the real solution....LTNs just shift a problem elsewhere, but not to areas where there is such excessive wealth, one can pay a private company to clean ones bins......

To be fair, there are households in Calton and Village who do not see current LTNs working in the way that Southwark claims. Do they really get their bins washed?

Also, Croydon's traffic survey found that car ownership inside the LTNs is 87% - with traffic increases on residential roads with 20% car ownership. It would be interesting to conduct the same survey for the Village and East Dulwich LTNs.

If you use the pile of rubbish analogy, then we started with illegal piles of rubbish on EDG, LL and Grove Vale, all of which have schools. Calton and Court had very little rubbish. Now the roads with previously illegal piles of rubbish have the extra burden of the small amount of rubbish from other roads. To me, this doesn?t seem a way of reducing pollution.

I think you are right exdulwicher, it can be used either way. I suppose when I think about ?success? from a purely reducing pollution point of view, which I think should be the goal, then I do wonder why the illegally polluted roads that also have schools on, such as Croxted, Grove Vale, East Dulwich Grove and Village are not LTNs but Derwent and Calton with very low levels of pollution are. Are the Dulwich LTNs about reducing pollution or creating quiet neighbourhoods for certain people?

Another section "Low traffic neighbourhoods work. Data collected from similar schemes elsewhere have shown that over time, LTNs do not move traffic from closed roads to other areas; they reduce overall car use both on residential roads and boundary roads. They do this by making journeys by car less convenient, and travel by foot and bike safer and more accessible for a wider range of people. On streets closed for school opening / closing times for instance, you can see children now walking and cycling to school because it's safe to do so - taking cars off the road, reducing congestion, and improving the air for all."

Hi Glemham, frequently seen on EDG - car stuck in traffic and school child jumps out with scooter, bike or walks, so arrive at school as an 'active travel' statistic, but have actually been driven down EDG school rd. If a busy parent has 3 children to drop off at various nurseries, primary and secondary schools, before trying to get to work, then maybe driving is for them is the most effective way. I feel sorry for all these busy parents being condemned by the 'lobby' as petrol heads and not caring about pollution, it must be very difficult naviagating road closures, idling traffic and different school opening times.

Hi Rockets, not sure I can share it all from source, as might indicate the person who sent it to me, but I think that they can influence consultations? Maybe councillors can't but a local political party can, so within their rights. Not sure. I think they do truly believe it is the right way to reduce pollution and traffic, despite the local problems for residents, businesses and school-children walking to school. It does include a 'fact check' that links to Sustrans and Peter Walker Guardian articles, but frames it all as; "It's an issue of equality. Less than half of Southwark residents own a car, with car ownership concentrated in the highest earning households. Yet all people pay the price for car use, disproportionately the most vulnerable. People living in deprived areas are more exposed to pollution, and suffer worse health outcomes. Disabled Londoners and those with health conditions make 32% fewer car trips each day than other Londoners, but as pedestrians are five times more likely to be injured by a motor vehicle than non-disabled people. We need to make our streets safe for all people, not only people with cars" So apparently the increased traffic and pollution on EDG, Croxted. LL and Grove Vale is making 'streets safe for all people'? It's like Orwellian Doublethink.

Interesting to see so many 'Clean air for all' posters in local independent shops on Melbourne, Grove Vale, LL and Village. As well as houses inside LTNs. Also two nurseries on EDG. Some interesting tweets from Rosamund Kissi Debra, on the inequalities of diverting traffic onto residential roads with high density housing - although she is constantly trolled sadly. I also have been sent a copy of the latest Labour Party meeting, encouraging members to fill in the consultation and tick 'strongly agree' for all LTNs. They also repeat the flawed research about disappearing traffic and reduced pollution/traffic in areas with higher poverty and high BAME residents and have produced a poster, that would seem strange in a window- with an SUV and a second car on the front drive - with the tagline. CARS ARE A LUXURY, CLEAN AIR IS A RIGHT. PUT PEOPLE BEFORE CARS When I see the removal of Green space in Brenchley and Bells, both high density housing by Southwark, it all seems a little hypocritical, increasing traffic on LL,EDG, Croxted and Grove Vale, while removing trees, green space and children's play areas from these estates. If you want to know more - do follow Infilling Harms Estates@CourtCampaign They are currently campaigning to save Peckham Green, 1.4 acres of nature from private development

I think legally they can push and then get back on the other side. Certainly worked for me when I had a motorbike.

Even cycling up to Dulwich Park or Peckham Rye, I have a problem finding a safe place to park the bike (flat types and I don?t like this rain at the moment). I think Southwark needs to think ?carrot? rather than ?stick? if it wants to encourage cycling. Also losing places like the practice football area in Greendale is a shame, so many families take their kids there to practice cycling.

I think Southwark doesn't know what to do next.

Well done Droid!

just to reiterate the consultation on the Dulwich road measures is open until 11 July.

FOI ab29. If you are interested a simple google will be able to produce all the requests. I also have contacts in LAS through my profession, but not able to post anything which is not in the public domain. But this is, as an FOI for the scrutiny committee Emergency Services ? Southwark Experimental Transport Measures 16/07/2020 London Ambulance Service ? London-wide these measures are happening and they are not joined up. Our fleet is very fluid and not from a fixed location. The nearest ambulance to the emergency wil be called up to attend. Planters are not showing up on Satnavs. The measures are creating delays responding to calls. Not against principles of scheme just conscious of how it may cause slower response times. ANPR cameras are the best measures and these work for us. Width restrictions are also a problem. Ambulances are more likely to use neighbouring roads. Metropolitan Police ? Pan-London units wil have similar issues with SatNavs. London Fire Brigade (Old Kent Road) ? We have a 6-8 minute attendance time. Must be mindful of width restrictions. Fire brigade can also come from further afield and these measures can have a big impact. We are heavily under the microscope due to previous issues. Metropolitan Police ? We have had to add these measures in to our risk register. If you read through all the DATIX then there are delays due to physical barriers, one being a paediatric cardiac arrest. I suppose it is upsetting for me, as someone who used to be part of the on call primary PCI team to imagine the frustration paramedics and first responders feel when delayed. Very much in favour of reducing car use and encouraging active travel, but doubt LTNs achieve either. Seems to causing chaos for many and increased house prices for the few.

Good grief... the local business and independents make East Dulwich and Lordship Lane a thriving place to live, you don't have to shop in these places. Personally I'm sad to see it go, I was sad to see the indy veg shop on Northcross go as well.

Yep FirstMate - the report to Southwark includes an ambulance delayed by the Calton Ave hard closure adding time to a Cat 2 call on Desenfans Rd and an inability to use Derwent Road because of a hard closure to avoid heavy traffic on Grove Vale responding to a Cat 1. The report ends with a request to make changes due to 'previous feedback' and wonders about an 'update' as 'we still seem be experiencing delays, that are very concerning and leading to patient safety concerns' I know that my paramedic students dislike the hard closures, they consider them to contribute to a higher risk to life.

So, is it true as reported, that in Sept 2020 the London Ambulance Service reported delays to life threatening emergencies and asked for Southwark Council to remove the hard closures in Calton, Derwent and Melbourne? Citing traffic jams on Grove, EDG and Croxted and no alternative routes.

The infamous square will... if it stays, make it a no through for cyclists in case little Chlamydia or Epididymis is knocked over by a Lycra clad king of the road.

It was a lovely shop, had lots of interesting foodie things, I also miss the veg shop on North Cross rd, but Franklins was not just for veg.. it was great to look around and find unusual chocolate or little jars of this or that. It is interesting shops like Franklins that make LL such a great road to visit.

I?ve registered. So far nothing through my door or e-mailed to me...still I live on East Dulwich Grove, so probably won?t get one. As long as Henrietta 5, Tamsin 3 and Creola 7 in Court get them though...that should be fine. I do expect we will be seeing many hand drawn pictures from inside the LTNs with sad faces and phrases such as ?please don?t take my play square away? etc. Ooooooh it tugs at one?s heart strings, even for an evil, petrol headed, boundary roader like me......I should just breath in the fumes every morning and think myself lucky to be allowed to live near 5 LTNs.

Dulwich has always had a high percentage of local active travel, so people walking and cycling, but it was never about that. Certain residents running certain campaigns were desperate to copy Gilkes Crescent and have a gated enclave, it was never about pollution, increasing active travel or reducing traffic, it was always about being jealous of the nice quiet street with the posh houses. Of course the gate at Gilkes is only there because Southwark messed up the installation of speed humps...Gilkes was supposed to be temporary, maybe time to take the gates off......

On street parking and bike hangers. I walk and use public transport in the main, probably 4-8 car journeys a year visiting people out of London. I bought a lovely bike 11 years ago but when I cycled anywhere locally could not find anywhere safe to park. A friend of mine was so used to his bike being stolen he had two padlocks and used to lock his bike on the railings of private dwellings and institutions to my embarrassment. I have nervously continued cycling but don?t use to commute, firstly because ED Grove is a mare during school drop off and secondly I don?t trust any of the current bike parks. Leyton has an enclosed bike park near the tube station, one of those near each train station (and Herne Hill) would be great.