Dogkennelhillbilly

Buses are quicker along the roads (like bits of Lordship Lane, Dog Kennel Hill, bits of the South Circular) where there are bus lanes, and slower along the bits where there are not bus lanes. In some places, the road is too narrow for a bus lane under any conditions - some of the roads in Dulwich were designed for Victorian carts. In other places, there has been a decision to allocate road space to car parking instead of a bus lane. The consequence of that decision is that buses are slower because they have to wait behind all the other traffic. This is undeniable. Whether the bus can "traverse" these roads at all is a red herring. The question is whether bus speed and reliability is adversely impacted. This made me lol! Does it go the other way too? If we pushed people off buses into low occupancy private cars, do you think that would improve bus speeds? 😀 😄

You certainly do! Some six year old document based on even older data seems very important to you. Meanwhile, for anyone else who has an interest, the up to date PTAL data is freely available on the TfL website (link below). People can come to their own conclusion about whether Mr OneDulwich's multiyear odyssey to abolish LTNs and increase private vehicle access will make public transport better or worse. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/planning-applications/planning-with-webcat

It depends if the drivers have time and can be bothered. I’ve seen them swap a couple of batteries and drive off, leaving loads of them all over the shop. It’s the companies’ fault, really…

Ehh - if you want to live in a red zone, then you're basically either living within about 300-400 metres of a train station or you're living along a major artery like Walworth Rd or Norwood Rd that has multiple 24 hour buses. That's not a realistic ambition for most of Dulwich... ...but we could realistically make the existing bus routes more reliable and efficient by getting some of the low occupancy private vehicles that are clogging up limited road space.

Yes, exactly - Dulwich Village (and the strip of low-density/expensive housing either side of it, and Dulwich Park, and the sports clubs, and Dulwich College) scores low on PTAL. Dulwich as a whole (and particularly the parts of Dulwich where most residences are packed into) scores well on PTAL. "Calculating PTAL scores is fairly straightforward and is based on the distance to the nearest public transport stop from a given point, as well as the frequency and reliability of the services using that stop. Each point is then awarded a score from 1 (extremely poor access) to 6 (excellent access), with subdivisions 1a, 1b and 6a, 6b." https://blog.podaris.com/ptal-accessibility-analysis/ So obviously that low housing density part of Dulwich is going to score worse on PTAL than the rest of Dulwich because for the most part: a) you're a few minutes' walk from a bus stop that only has a single route (the P4 along College Rd or P13 along A205 or 37 along HML) or West Dulwich/North Dulwich/Herne Hill BR as the nearest public transport stop (esp if you're standing in the middle of the playing fields or parks etc that constitute a lot of the blue blob). b) the P4's reliability is poor because its obstructed by the volume of traffic and/or parked cars along the South Circular, College Rd, Dulwich Village, Red Post Hill etc... Just about the only bus lane the P4 has between Brixton Police Station and Ladywell is the stretch between the tile shop and the Horniman on the A205. The rest of the time it's stuck behind low occupancy traffic. An exception to this is in the weekday mornings and afternoons when the Dulwich Village timed restriction is on: then it flies between the A205 and North Dulwich...and gets stuck behind private cars again. Mind you, to go back to an earlier point, 90% of this country would love to be a few minutes' walk from a bus that runs 20 hours a day, at least every 15 minutes, costs £1.75, and connects to a tube station, half a dozen rail stations on several lines and a DLR station. Sorry - edit to add that the PTAL-rated 1 areas (the purple bits) up to Sydenham Hill are pretty much all playing fields, parks, golf course etc. Obviously there isn't great public transport running through the centre of Dulwich Park!

...that relies on data that is (at least) six years old. The link to the up to date data on the TfL website is above.

I do keep digging because I'm so intrigued in your answer: yes or no? This is totally untrue, no matter how many times Mr OneDulwich says it. Most people in Dulwich live in places that are PTAL rated 3, 4 or 5, which is mid to high ratings. And the two chunks that are rated 2 are along East Dulwich Grove and the low density housing each side of College Rd/Dulwich Village...where the 37, 42 and P4 are disrupted and delayed by the volume of private cars driven and parked along those roads. https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/planning-with-webcat/webcat?Input=Lordship Lane%2C London SE22 8EW%2C UK&locationId=EiJMb3Jkc2hpcCBMYW5lLCBMb25kb24gU0UyMiA4RVcsIFVLIi4qLAoUChIJC-5HvOoDdkgRh6-WI-1PwbASFAoSCRFsZN-WA3ZIEXwoypxXGVcB&scenario=Base Year&type=Ptal

Do you think that parking fees reduce car journeys - yes or no?

Do you think that the volume of other vehicles parked or being driven on roads in Dulwich affects the speed or reliability of buses - yes or no?

You don't think that allocating street space to car parking instead of bus lanes slows buses, but you do think that allocating street space to cycle lanes instead of bus lanes slows buses. Got it. To bring it back to Dulwich: if the stretches of bus lane on Lordship Lane/A205 up to Forest Hill were removed and replaced with car parking spaces, it wouldn't slow buses down. But if those stretches of bus lane on Lordship Lane were removed and replaced with a cycle lane, it would slow buses down. Absolutely clear. 👍

Ahh, okay. So you don't think parking fees reduce car journeys?

Just trying to work out whether you do or don't think that parking fees reduce car journeys. Your post seems to suggest that parking fees at workplaces do but parking fees at residences don't.

So when road space is taken up by cycle lanes that preclude bus lanes, it does slow buses down -- but when road space is taken up by parked cars that preclude bus lanes it doesn't slow buses down? 🤔

So you don't think that the volume of other vehicles parked or being driven on the roads affects the speed or reliability of buses? 🤔

So you don't think the cost of parking at a person's workplace influences whether they drive there or not?

You don't know you're born if you think public transport in Dulwich is poor. Dulwich has three train stations (East, North, West) that run first thing in the morning to last thing at night. It also has a zillion bus routes running through it, some of which run 24 hours a day. They're all integrated into a single ticketing system and each bus and train is live trackable and accessible for people with disabilities. Speak to anyone outside London or in zone 4-6 and they'd be stunned anyone is moaning about this stuff. It's true that the buses would be faster and more reliable if there were fewer private vehicles logging up the roads. We can either demolish thousands of houses along bus routes to build new bus lanes or we can reduce the number of private vehicles being used and parked in London. But there's no magical way to speed up buses and let every Tom, Dick and Harry drive and park freely at the same time.

So you're saying if that person had to pay for parking at work they might not drive...? 🤔

Another way of looking at it is that the Chartwell Cancer Trust (on whose building the sculpture was fixed - it wasn't a picture) won't benefit from it now it's been stolen. Not from attention, footfall or flogging it.

I don't think any of that tat is licensed.

It didn't go so well for the last bunch that tried that: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/24/man-arrested-suspicion-theft-banksy-artwork-peckham-london

Have you been to Ayres Bakery in Nunhead? It does the kind of thing you're talking about, but also other stuff very well. It's always busy. Yes - it was called "Truly Scrumptious".

That's a bit harsh on the OP. But it is the middle of summer and schools are on holiday, so it's a busy time. If the OP is worried that it's dangerously overcrowded, then it's fair enough to ask the staff about it. Otherwise - schools are back at the beginning of September and it'll be much quieter then.

It's common practice for clients (like JAGS) procuring services in sectors where there's a high risk of worker exploitation (like cleaning services) to require vendors to pay their workers the (real) living wage. This has been around for years in the private and public sectors. The Living Wage Foundation and Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority websites have plenty of information about this subject for people that would like to become better informed...including JAGS? https://www.theconstructionindex.co.uk/news/view/battersea-workers-to-get-london-living-wage https://www.constructionenquirer.com/2014/09/22/canary-wharf-contractors-sign-london-living-wage-deal/ https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/tfl-and-living-wage-0 https://livingwage.org.uk/news/real-living-wage-increases-£12-uk-and-£1315-london

...and yet in addition to employing teachers, it also employs accountants, marketing people, maintenance people, security people, operations and contracts managers and a bunch of other people outside its "core competence" of education. 🤔 If JAGS were (as it claims) legitimately committed to championing social awareness and sustainability inside and outside the classroom, then it would be simple to insist its outsourcers paid their labourers the London Living Wage, for example. This is a common provision in contracts where supply chain workers are at a high risk of exploitation.

That's a weird comment. Presumably the Head, the Director of Finance and the Director of Operations are all directly employed by JAGS instead of being outsourced. Do they only do it for the money and as such do the bare minimum? As JAGS outsourced their cleaners far in advance of the election (let alone the introduction of VAT, which still doesn't even have a firm date set) and JAGS has explicitly said it's nothing to do with VAT, I think we can safely conclude that VAT on private schools is totally irrelevant to the subject.