heartblock

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.

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.