heartblock

I think mixed housing, so social housing, maybe for some of our older generation and young families. A youth centre and a green space/playground. If this space was opened as a truly social space for those who really need help, rather than a playground for the richest, whitest most privileged population in Southwark... I think I would almost feel that I could deal with the extra traffic on my road.

Hi James, This is incorrect ?that roads are designed with specific functions in mind. Main roads are built to sustain higher volumes of traffic, higher speeds, and larger vehicles. This isn't my personal view, but the universally accepted one? East Dulwich Grove was specifically built as a residential area as was many of the older ?main? roads in London. In fact a new house in the 1880?S on EDG was won by a private in the army, in a Tib-bits competition as a dream family home. Was not ?designed? for higher speeds and larger vehicles?. Also ?universally accepted? by whom? Cycling campaigners? Southwark are making a choice to designate areas as gated communities and the rest of us. 10% of Londoners live on so called ?main roads? 4% in LTNs. Labour councils have really got this very wrong and have compromised the health of those least likely to be part of very white, very middle class and well organised pressure groups. Start listening to black and minority voices and those living on ?main? roads.

Dulwich Square, skate board park and youth centre, with social housing where the Audi garage used to be? The borough needs a good youth centre.

What a complete mess. I think my main concern is the amateurish way Southwark approached the whole scheme, without any high level thinking, consultation or planning it seems. No equality assessment, no consultation, no thought of residential main roads. Now I think they know that it is having very negative effects as the data emerges and complaints from residents pile up, but they don?t know how to undo the damage without having the wrath of the residents on gated roads. The gated communities are obviously enjoying a peaceful road and a rise in their house price. I?m sure if I lived in an LTN I wouldn?t want it removed. The whole episode has put neighbour against neighbour, haves and have-nots, clean air for some, more pollution for others. I can?t think of a more divisive act at a local level to make some feel ignored and second rate citizens and others feel rewarded due to their postcode. I still cannot believe a Labour Council I stupidly voted for had carried out such an unequal and negatively impactful act.

Short exposure to PM10 and PM2.5 can trigger a lethal asthma attack in a child. Croxted was definitely over the legal limit of both today for the school run. Did Southwark measure this today?

Schools back... EDG back to being a polluted nightmare.. m any cyclists using the pavement too...

Absolutely Penguin...local consultation. It would be lovely to have some of LL pedestrianised... not sure how it would work, but shutting off Calton and Court is ridiculous...they were made as wide carriage roads, not private roads for the wealthy. Need a nice double decker and a few bus stops. It is not the countryside people, the countryside is where all their second homes are :)

Court lane and Calton Ave are very wide roads, could easily take a local small bus route.

The bus stop was allowed near the park, but it had to be a special one so as not to offend the sensibilities of the wealthy. About time that we had proper local transport plan and consider routes and cycle lanes in Dulwich, North, West and East. Have a Southwark wide consultation to consider pedestrianisation taking into account equality measures. Just DO IT PROPERLY!

?While on the subject of public transport in Dulwich, you may be interested to know that until the 1960s there was no bus service running through the centre of the village. The P4 route did not start until 1972. It was considered by the Estates Governors that buses would only spoil the idyllic peace of the rural setting. Even then, the Estates Governors only permitted single-deckers to operate on the route which runs from Brixton, via Dulwich and Honor Oak to Lewisham. The first few years of the service used a ?Hoppa? bus. Although the vehicles are now larger ? to hold more people ? the rule about single-decker buses through the village is still enforced over 40 years later!? from know your London. And .. yes, drive less, especially now my road is a boundary road and has all that additional traffic.

I have lived here so long that I remember that the majority wanted more public transport in Dulwich Village, so people without cars could get around. There was a big push from Villagers that they didn?t want buses down Calton/ Court etc as they all had cars and big buses would bring the tone of the Village down, so it was only the little P4 allowed. They also campaigned against bus stops for the same reason. Now they have their lovely gated communities too. Divisive, clean air for the wealthy and pollution for the less well off. Southwark Labour deserves to lose the control of this borough for abandoning the poorest to make gestures towards reducing pollution that do not work and actually make the lives of the least well off, who live on roads such as Croxted, EDG and LL less healthy.

LTNs..

Book with NHS website. Both appts will be given to you ... pharmacists and some hospitals.

Maybe Southwark could remove the current LTNs and make sections of the boundary roads LTNs and then see how attitudes change. Calton and Court are nice and wide and could easily take a bus, especially if not used as an overflow car park for the 2nd or 3rd household vehicle. Don?t worry the traffic will apparently disappear.......

Aaaaah but Malumbu I am an expert in cardio respiratory disease.... and I know about particulates too. Sadly Particulate Matter (PM) exposure has been linked to adverse health effects by numerous studies. Non-exhaust emissions already account for over 90% of PM10 and 85% of PM2.5 emissions from traffic and are related to vehicle weight and braking. Less cars, vans etc of all types are the answer, rather than heavier electric cars (battery makes them heavier). Also better public transport and protected bike lanes. Pollution and health should be monitored for any route changes that increase traffic on residential roads. LTNs in ED and Dulwich... don?t seem to address car use and ownership or increase of bike lanes. In fact LTNs are in areas of multiple vehicle owning households, with free on street parking...

If Southwark had monitored particulates and NO2 and had undertaken an equality impact assessment then it is highly unlikely that the current LTNs would have been put in the roads that are currently gated. I?m not arguing against any LTNs but Southwark?s are misplaced and probably cause more pollution across the borough than less. Of course nothing can be proven as nothing has been measured. In science this type of bias is why studies are blinded in order to be measured to reduce unintended bias. So... if you live in an LTN, of course you can?t help being biased ....which is why councillors should say if they live in an LTN.

Is there an FOI about which councillors live in an LTN as there are financial implications of increased house prices? Also is a reduced house price on a boundary road due to LTNs without any consultation a case for suing the Council?

Cycle lane.. not along all of it, but probably from the bend up to the crossing, so from where the Dutch estate starts up to the Half Moon crossing, take off street parking away from the left hand side as not used so much after the parking zone, there is unused parking on the rail track side of the Dutch estate that could be opened up to local residents- but yes EDG is very busy with traffic due to the 4 LTNs so opening those roads would be better for cyclists generally. Unfortunately the LCC will not agree......

Cycle lane EDG .... yes please. So many cyclists on this road, please make it safer for them. The crossing will be great, that junction is so dangerous for us pedestrians.

Living ?near? an LTN.....an exercise in how to skew data. So if on a boundary road, with high inequality then classed as ?benefiting? from an LTN despite an increase in traffic and pollution. The LCC up to it's truth-twisting yet again.

Exactly devs... I?m a pedestrian living on EDG, I hardly ever drive ( a couple of times a year) and cycle on occasion, but I walk everywhere. LTNs have made pollution much, much worse for me. I dread the schools opening in March as EDG will again be awful for 3 hrs in the morning and 3 in the afternoon.... school run is horrific!

Maybe if you prove you have two cars and a child at a private school you can get a passport?

I think on Calton Ave in an LTN car ownership is about 2 cars per household... a town run-around and a family car to take them to their 2nd home. I have one home on EDG and have driven twice in 2020 and not at all on 2021. I don?t want to breath the extra pollution due to 5 LTNs around EDG. Yet............... of course I?m the gas guzzling UKIP loving anti-green liar according to LCC campaigners on Twitter.Such is life for us older invisible residents that Southwark don?t give two ****s about.

I?m glad the poor, deprived, ethnically diverse population are having this money spent on them...meanwhile Southwark Council trying to remove the small amount of green space for these very rich, mainly white, executives and highly paid professionals in Priory Court with Infill" ... a euphemism for the taking of estate play areas, gardens, tenants halls and other estate property. These places are intrinsic parts of estates. They were never meant to be built on. Petition change.org/priorycourt