Southwark Consultation on no entry - Denmark Hill/Champion Hill

[edanna]

50% increase in traffic sounds like rather a lot to me James - that?s half as much again.

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi bagpipes,

> If people currently driving across from Grove Hill

> Road to Champion Hill wont. So they wont queue

> beside Dog kennel hill waiting for the green

> light. So Dog Kennel hill school should see a

> reduction in traffic idling besides their school.

>

> Traffic displacement. If the traffic is coming

> along Avondale Rise it would need to turn left and

> join Dog kennel hill via Quorn or Pytchley. Both

> would be serious delays meaning much traffic will

> evaporate from the area. If they turn down

> Camberwell Grove they'll be delayed by the

> filtered traffic lights and then going through

> Camberwell Grove. Again much traffic will

> evaporate if they decide that is the next best

> alternative.

> Minimal queue on Champion Park joining Denmark

> Hill currently. The loss of the through route E to

> W if it all went via via Champion Grove, the

> parallel A road would see that A road have less

> than 50% increase in traffic.

> I do live on champion Hill - but I think such

> measures should be widespread. I'd personally

> prefer them to be cameras enforced and limited to

> non Southwark residents. No Southwark residents

> should be on our A & B roads not our unclassified

> residential streets. And vice cress when I'm in a

> car in other boroughs. It could also then be

> trisected to the most approripaite times of day,

> etc.

[sdrs]

Agree - this actually represents a significant increase. It will seriously affect northbound bus journey and emergency response times. Congestion in morning rush hour at the Champion Park junction with Denmark Hill has already worsened since the closure of Windsor Walk to through traffic. Throw the major roadworks now beginning on Denmark Hill/around Camberwell Green AND the Champion Hill closure into the mix? Doesn?t bear thinking about. Re traffic ?evaporating?, I doubt it. What will happen if this goes ahead is untold congestion and a massive rise in air pollution and highways safety issues, especially on the roads around and bisecting the East Dulwich Estate. One only has to look at the expensive Loughborough Junction fiasco to see how traffic fails to ?evaporate? in the real world. The localised congestion, attendant delays and pollution and impacts on Kings caused the no entry scheme to be abandoned (the whole thing costing Lambeth Council ?100,000).

[Passiflora]

Looks like this is going ahead. Seen the notices on the lamp posts leading from Wanley Road and the public notice in the Southwark News on Thursday. Champion Hill Junction 'no entry' Experimental Traffic Order.

[uncleglen]

I shall be traffic that 'evaporates' since i will be driving through dulwich village and up Sunray avenue- the only reasons I can think of that has warranted this move by southwark is 1) there is a Labour knob living on that route judging by the house that was festooned at the last elections, or 2) someone from Kings has complained because there is a hall of residence along there- BOTH reasons are a joke imvho

[rendelharris]

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I shall be traffic that 'evaporates' since i will

> be driving through dulwich village and up Sunray

> avenue- the only reasons I can think of that has

> warranted this move by southwark is 1) there is a

> Labour knob living on that route judging by the

> house that was festooned at the last elections, or

> 2) someone from Kings has complained because there

> is a hall of residence along there- BOTH reasons

> are a joke imvho

So you've completely made up reasons in your own head and then shout that they are a joke. Quality contribution to debate, as always.

[TheArtfulDogger]

It's worth reading the consultation results before you say that Southwark have taken it fully into consideration

https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/championhilltrial/supporting_documents/Consultation%20summary%20and%20next%20steps%20v1.0.pdf

Page 7 shows that based on 141 responses from residents in the consultation area 83 voted yes and 54 voted no

Page 8 shows that base on 364 overall responses, 216 voted against the proposal and 135 voted for it

Page 8 also states that motorists are much less in favour

Page 9 breaks this information out into a chart

Based on this the recommendation was to implement the trial

It does raise questions how Southwark interpret results, potentially in their favour, to support what they propose

[Sally Eva]

I'm sorry I can't find page numbers but

fig 5 (all those in the consultation zone) 83 yes, 54 no

fig 6 (champion hill and side roads) 80 yes, 32 no

Other results are based on total responses specifically including those who provide no postcode or post codes outside the consultation zone.

[TheArtfulDogger]

Figure 8 (page 8) shows total respondents, including those in the consultation area (364 in total) and I'm just pointing out that they were allowed to respond but their views were ignored as Southwark didn't set a criteria for the survey and could use what ever elements or interpretation they wanted

[richard tudor]

From: richard tudor

Sent: 09 November 2018 16:58

To: Livingstone, Richard; Ali, Jasmine

Subject: Re: Champion Hill Closure

Thank your for your prompt reply.

I have now found the 2015 scheme on the Southwark web site that prompted this scheme and have already replied to the current scheme from the website.

What I found interesting on the 2015 questionaire response is only 30 people from Champion Hill voted. The response from all the surrounding streets balloted just about got on the the reply side which shows peoples concern is not as urgent as is being made out but allowed the instigators to use these figures to push ahead.

Ruskin Park House produced 99 responses.

However there is no breakdown on how Champion Hill, on the actual road voted or how the flats of Ruskin Park House, with most way off the actual road, voted.

It would be interesting to know how many actual local residents have asked Southwark to reduce the impact of cars along Champion Hill over the last few years as you stated below.

I hope you/Southwark Council are going to produce the full results of the current survey.

"We wouldn?t ask if we didn?t intend to listen." if people voted no from the current survey would you shut the scheme down?

Again I appreciate your prompt response.

Regards

True to say I have never received and reply or response to thee above email of 8th November 2018.

Like all of Southwark's Consultations they only take the figures they need to get what they want through.

There is no need for this trial closure to happen.

[rendelharris]

richard tudor Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What I found interesting on the 2015 questionaire

> response is only 30 people from Champion Hill

> voted. The response from all the surrounding

> streets balloted just about got on the the reply

> side which shows peoples concern is not as urgent

> as is being made out but allowed the instigators

> to use these figures to push ahead.

>

> Ruskin Park House produced 99 responses.

Ruskin Park House is on Champion Hill, that's its address, I know as I used to live there. The only exits from the estate are onto Champion Hill, and thus the residents are affected just as much as any other residents of the street by noise, speeding and pollution. The idea that their votes somehow shouldn't have as much weight as others on the road is risible.

[richard tudor]

The question asked was how did Ruskin Park House vote?

[rendelharris]

Come off it, with your statement "how the flats of Ruskin Park House, with most way off the actual road, voted" you are clearly implying that their votes should carry less weight than those who live right on the street.

[richard tudor]

Only in your mind. All I wanted to know was how many voted yes and how many voted no.

[rendelharris]

Then why mention their distance from the road at all?

[richard tudor]

Almost 10 years ago you mentioned you lived on the front of the estate facing the road beyond the grass and pavement where you found it was not to your liking so you left. Would those living in front and behind now in 2019 have the same views as 2015. Champion Hill is now very much quieter for cycles, pedestrians and for cars.

A new consultation should have been made before closing this road off, since 2015 when this was conducted things have greatly changed. It is a very pleasant street and safe street for all to use, not that it was not before.

So how many votes were cast yes/No is important to know.

Distance from the front of a property to a road could be important as it might effect how to vote. To some not all.

[rendelharris]

We moved there in 2006 and left in 2016 (when all the traffic measures currently in place were already established) - in 2016 the road was neither pleasant nor safe, particularly at rush hour. As someone who worked from home with my desk at a window overlooking the junction, I feel I might have a better overall view of how the street worked than someone only using it once or twice a day.

[Charles Notice]

I think that this closure is not needed at all.

Have Southwark conducted any recent studies as to the current traffic conditions and all round environmental aspects before closing this road junction. It appears that they are doing it without any up to date information.

I have just looked at my journey from passing though Camberwell Green, which is always bad, to Champion Hill/Arnold Avenue which is just past the closure and to get there is ill thought out and not a lot of thought has gone into it. I am being pushed through residential roads which are off the most environmental direct route to get why I need to

be. Increasing my time on the road in a major way.

Have people looked at a map to see how residents need to get to their homes and how others will be effected.

Rendel Harris wrote.

"in 2016 the road was neither pleasant nor safe, particularly at rush hour. As someone who worked from home with my desk at a window overlooking the junction, I feel I might have a better overall view of how the street worked than someone only using it once or twice a day."

You moved sometime ago, how do you know what the conditions are now 24/7? No doubt your views have not changed.

I would like to see an up to date recent report why this has to go ahead. Other posters have asked but have received zero response.

I do not subscribe to Southwark's "we have figures"(old) this is what we are going to do, old figures dont worry"

Like the Government slip in bad news or unsupportable news whilst a major event is taking place people will miss it. i.e the current CPZ.

If it was needed I would support it 100%, it is not speaking to residents they do not want it or see why it is needed.

[rendelharris]

Charles Notice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You moved sometime ago, how do you know what the

> conditions are now 24/7? No doubt your views have

> not changed.

I walk and cycle up and down the road several times a week, and I have friends in RPH whom I regularly visit and who talk about the situation. You don't live there but it doesn't seem to stop you giving us your tuppence worth, but apparently I shouldn't because...oh, because I don't agree with you.

[Charles Notice]

You do not live there any more.

No first hand experience only second hand opinions.

No need to reply unless you have up to date personnel information.

Just noticed the errors.

[rendelharris]

Charles Notice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You do live there any more.

Do I?

> No first hand experience only second hand

> opinions.

So using the road three or four times a week gives me no experience? Do you live on Champion Hill? No you don't, but you feel entitled to give your opinion.

> No need to reply

Yes you've tried this before, you'd like to remain in your pro-car echo chamber and avoid all opposing opinions. Tough.

[rendelharris]

Charles Notice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If it was needed I would support it 100%, it is

> not speaking to residents they do not want it or

> see why it is needed.

Southwark consultation:

The majority of people (57%) within the consultation area were in support of the trial with 71% of residents in Champion Hill in support.

Facts, jolly inconvenient, aren't they?

[Charles Notice]

The majority of people (57%) within the consultation area were in support of the trial with 71% of residents in Champion Hill in support.

Facts, jolly inconvenient, aren't they?

How many people does 71% represent? Like RPH how many said yes and how many said no.

Please supply.

[rendelharris]

Charles Notice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> How many people does 71% represent? Like RPH how

> many said yes and how many said no.

>

> Please supply.

The funny thing is, it's not noted on the report how people from RPH voted, nor is it noted how many people from numbers 17-35 voted, or any other daft arbitrary measure - perhaps the survey took the controversial view that everyone living on the street who has to live next to it and get their cars out onto it and walk along it with their children, whether they live in one of the lovely big houses or in a block of flats, has a right to have a say? Perhaps they even thought that residents' views matter more than people who want it preserved as a rat run so they can shave 100 seconds off their journey from one area to another? Controversial but I think I can almost see their reasoning.

[Charles Notice]

"Perhaps they even thought that residents' views matter more than people who want it preserved as a rat run so they can shave 100 seconds off their journey from one area to another? Controversial but I think I can almost see their reasoning."

As it is most residents that use this road to leave and reach there homes I find that hard to believe they want it closed.

Please supply the figures that confirm this.

[rendelharris]

Charles Notice Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As it is most residents that use this road to

> leave and reach there homes I find that hard to

> believe they want it closed.

>

> Please supply the figures that confirm this.

What is it about "71% of residents in Champion Hill were in support of the trial" that you find difficult to understand?