Residents Melbourne Grove, Adys Road, Bromar Road - Traffic increases due to Champion Hill

[talfourdite]

I do believe Champion Hill to be a much wider street (road to house frontage)than most other streets now bearing the brunt of the re-routed traffic. It was always free flowing and did shorten our journey by around 50%, I can still use it coming home, but outbound it is shut to us. It does feel like people are reporting a growing number of traffic problems - to some degree this is the inevitable consequence of the additional volumes of traffic re-routed via these streets either exacerbating or causing some of these issues. After all, it's clear that the impact of this change will be exactly the sum of those journeys, less the people shifted to walking / cycling / foregoing their journey. In my case, we still drive and and have to drive twice as far, at two thirds of the speed to get to the same end goal.

As an observation, reading this thread, this does feel like CH versus the rest of the world. That I suppose is inevitable if public roads are allowed to be treated as private roads - with locally advertised consultations with wide-reaching consequences. If I were in Lordship Lane, Melbourne Grove or Adys Road, I would feel a strong motivation to have my street closed to traffic too. I wonder where that would leave us.

[PeterW]

"this does feel like CH versus the rest of the world"

Certainly not from my point of view, as someone who lives on CH. As I've said before, I'd support such schemes just as vigorously if they were directed at other roads, eg Melbourne Grove. And the *only* way you'll get more such schemes is to not try and kill them off in the first place. Also, if you did have more and more residential streets shut to motor traffic, you'd gradually start to see the modal shift to other forms of transport (assuming other measures are taken to, for example, make walking and cycling more pleasant).

Out of interest, Talfourdite, what is the journey you make by car, and would there be a way to make it by other measns? Don't tell me if you don't want to, and it's not so I can judge - some trips are tricky by other methods. But the evidence is that a fairly decent percentage of London car trips could be made in other ways. For example, when I was walking down Champion Grove at 7.40ish on Friday, about 90% of the traffic queuing for the lights was single people in cars. I'm guessing at least some could use other methods but prefer not to. Sure, that's their choice, but it will cause congestion, and there's no reason why the majority of locals who don't own cars should have to indulge their choice at the penalty of more smog, danger, noise etc etc. Ultimately, the cause of the gridlock isn't one, minor traffic scheme ? it's too many cars.

[sdrs]

Th? problem is that the roads such schemes displace traffic onto, such as Dog Kennel Hill and Grove Lane, are also residential. Furthermore, these roads, together with Champion Park, take significantly more pedestrians than Champion Hill does. Far from being made more pleasant for walking, the trial closure of Champion Hill has made them unpleasant, unhealthy and unsafe. We are talking about a major pedestrian route to three local primary schools (Lyndhurst, Dog Kennel Hill and Goose Green). Closing single streets to make the roads we all use to get to school and work dangerously congested and polluted is neither equitable nor rational.

[rendelharris]

talfourdite Wrote:

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

In my case, we

> still drive and and have to drive twice as far, at

> two thirds of the speed to get to the same end

> goal.

OK, you may find this question offensive, and I sincerely apologise if you have issues which make any other form of transport unviable, but is it strictly necessary to use your car to go two miles from Talfourd Road to Dulwich Village? That's a distance that can be cycled in ten minutes by the most unfit of riders. If you have a disability that mandates your using a car, then fair enough, I would never want to have that proscribed. If you're just using a car for the school run or because you find it a convenient option, I can't offer you too much sympathy about congestion, because you're part of it.

[talfourdite]

I don?t really want to get into the specifics of my own life, I don?t think that?s what this is here for. I can tell you that I cycle, own an electric hybrid, have a pollution monitor at home, assess every journey I make and consider the pollution levels to be the single biggest issue facing Londoners today. However, despite all of this, I think this scheme is regressive and poorly thought out for the reasons I have raised. I totally get schemes to up car clubs, electric car ownership and cycle lanes. They are a good use of my tax payers money, shutting one street at a timers just idiotic. We need to encourage better transport choices and drive off highly polluting vehicles, this just isn?t the right solution to ny mind.

[Sally Eva]

If your reason for opposing this scheme is that it is too small perhaps you would like to propose a larger scale scheme which you would support.

[talfourdite]

my reason for objection has been laid out quite a few times. it certainly isn't that it's too small, it's that it's too stupid.

[rendelharris]

talfourdite Wrote:

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

We need to encourage better

> transport choices

But not discourage school-running two miles every single day?

[talfourdite]

Is that a question to someone?

[rendelharris]

talfourdite Wrote:

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

> Is that a question to someone?

Well yes - to you I think...

[talfourdite]

I don?t really think I understand. But if you?re asking me should people be able to drive their kids to school, then I would say of course I do. Do you not?

[rendelharris]

It doesn't come under my understanding of "better transport choices", no.

[James Barber]

Hi talfourdite,

I get the feeling we should all be able to driving our children to school if we so wish.

On a practical note...

Local primary schools maximum admissions distance home to school typically 300-1100m.

Secondary schools typically circa 1,250m.

These distance are easily walkable for 99% of children.

Thankfully the majority do not drive their children to school else we'd have even higher traffic and pollution levels.

Given the choice most children prefer walking, cycling, scootering to school. And in Southwark we have a child obesity epidemic.

Unless parents are ensuring lots of exercise, outside of driving their kids to school, they may well be doing their children physical harm by restricting their activity levels. And also harming other peoples children from increased air pollution.

[first mate]

Do we actually know what proportion of parents within the ED area that drive their kids to school on a regular basis, or is the evidence largely anecdotal?

[nxjen]

?Given the choice most children prefer walking, cycling, scootering to school.?

This is really interesting and I?m not doubting you James but is this based on research or is it anecdotal?

[Penguin68]

Given the choice most children prefer walking, cycling, scootering to school.

In my experience, rather depends on the weather.

Also - the assumption is being made that parents face the task of getting a child to school. But many face getting two or more children to different schools, often in different directions (from their house), one child at least probably needing to be accompanied, however travelling, and then, very possibly, additionally getting to work themselves (getting to a station etc.). Once those logistics are in place, the simplicity of 'walking your child to school' somewhat evaporates. For many children 'getting to school' if on their own (secondary school) can mean running the gauntlet of other children on foot or on buses - many years ago teachers (in a school my children went to) used to travel on some buses to try to protect their pupils from those of a rival school. As gangs and mugging proliferate, travel by car seems a safer option to some. And I can't blame them. My cosy 1950s schooldays of cycling, walking or busing to school in relative safety are long gone.

[bels123]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> And also harming other peoples children from increased air

> pollution.

As well as your own children - if you're sat in traffic you're breathing in the exhaust fumes of the car infront. Air pollution is 9-12 times higher in a car, a fact many people still aren't aware of, or choose to ignore.

[Sally Eva]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health

public health england "PHE medical director Paul Cosford told the BBC: "We should stop idling outside schools and we should make sure that children can walk or cycle to school."

PHE said 28,000 to 36,000 deaths a year in the UK could be attributed to long-term exposure to air pollution."

[talfourdite]

Every trip and situation has its own context and demands, from the age and number of of the kids and schools in question, the amount of things they are taking to school, family support network, distance, public transport options, weather to name a few. Every parent has to struggle with their own schedule and resources. All parents i am sure try to do their best, it?s often hard and sub-ideal, but that?s life. We do have a pollution problem and talking about that is to help build that into transport choices is vital, but assuming many of the trips in question aren?t done out of laziness and will carry on, via slower elongated routes, leads me to the conclusion this scheme is nett worse and makes the situational generally worse in every way for the entirety of local residents. I find the idea that parents shouldn?t be able to exercise their judgement on their children?s lives pretty bizarre. Rendel, I definitely don?t want to make this personal (as you seem to keep doing with your little barbed comments) but you seem very judgemental on every one else?s life and what they should/shouldn?t be able to do with no real knowledge about their circumstances. I personally find it quite rude, ill informed and offensive.

[rendelharris]

talfourdite Wrote:

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

Rendel, I

> definitely don?t want to make this personal (as

> you seem to keep doing with your little barbed

> comments) but you seem very judgemental on every

> one else?s life and what they should/shouldn?t be

> able to do with no real knowledge about their

> circumstances. I personally find it quite rude,

> ill informed and offensive.

AKA I don't like anyone disagreeing with me and so will make unfounded accusations against them. Kindly point out a single instance in this thread in which I have been rude to you - not just disagreed with you but been "rude and offensive". Just one.

I personally find it rude and offensive that some people believe their "right" to drive when and where they please trumps other people's children's rights to live in clean and safe environments.

[talfourdite]

everything in life is a trade off. I?m not sure where you passing absolute judgments from afar on other people?s lives without understanding their circumstances seems ok. I presume you have been in a car, used a bus, have central heating? All the choices we make have environmental consequences.

[rendelharris]

Indeed, life is all about choices. And when people make choices about their lifestyles - where they want to live, work, send their kids to school etc - that necessitate polluting and congesting other people's neighbourhoods, they shouldn't be surprised if other people exercise their right to make choices in terms of asking them not to and asking for environmental protections.

Still waiting for you to justify calling me rude - again, one single instance from this thread where I've been rude to (rather than disagreed with) you please.

[talfourdite]

No, I take it back. You?re right. Let?s all stop driving through your road and all the others and it?ll all be wonderful. Have a nice life.

[rendelharris]

That would be smashing if you could, thanks (Champion Hill is not my road, by the way). Yes it would be wonderful if all traffic bar access was kept to A roads, good idea, well done. Can I just ask you to think about this: Champion Hill was, before this closure, experiencing rush hour traffic levels equal to those on the adjoining A roads of Grove Lane and Champion Park. Living on Taulford Road, you're adjoining an A road too, (A202 Peckham Road). If 50% of the Peckham Road traffic suddenly started ratrunning up Taulford, I presume you'd just accept that without demur?

[talfourdite]

I think you?re such a genius you should probably advertise this great idea all the time.