LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[slarti b]

@ rahrahrah

Do you have the equivalent figures for Southwark, or London?

[Earl Aelfheah]

There is this: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/technical-note-12-how-many-cars-are-there-in-london.pdf

Suggests that car ownership has slightly dropped in London. Of course, much of the traffic doesn't necessarily originate in London (i.e. people driving in).

[Earl Aelfheah]

@slartiB - Probably some good data here:

https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/traffic-flows-borough

I haven't got time to look through it right now, so can't tell you whether or not it shows an increase.

[slarti b]

exdulwicher Wrote

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

>

> You wouldn't make a very good Daily Mail journalist or taxi driver would you?! ;-)

Nor a local councillor or traffic officer quoting a 47% increase in traffic as justification for closing DV junction without mentioning that the base figure was when the junction in the middle of rebuilding works!!

Interesting of course that Raharah has picked up on your irrelevant figure of a 36% increase which is the opposite of what is happening in London. ;-)

[slarti b]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> @slartiB - Probably some good data here:

>

> https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/traffic-flows-borough

>

I have the data at home. As I pointed out above my recollection is that, for London, the proportion of trips by car has decreased over teh last 20 years. If so, the 36% increase quoted by eXD is alarmist and irrelevant for this thread.

[Abe_froeman]

To Raharah, re "registered vehicles"

You've cherry picked one of the worst recessions ever as your starting point and compared it with four years where the economy is booming.

Is no wonder your campaign just doesn't wash with people outside your lobby when you use such one sided data

[Metallic]

Why oh why do cyclists go through the Calton Ave/Court Lane junction towards Turney Road on cycle red lights? Or cycle on to the pavement and nip along to the pedestrian lights to get back on to Turney Road? What a joke this expensive closure is.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> To Raharah, re "registered vehicles"

>

> You've cherry picked one of the worst recessions

> ever as your starting point and compared it with

> four years where the economy is booming.

>

> Is no wonder your campaign just doesn't wash with

> people outside your lobby when you use such one

> sided data

It was what a quick google turned up. I?m not actually part of any campaign or ?lobby?. Just a local resident who would prefer low traffic neighbourhoods.

[seenbeen]

This could be a start of something.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8719399/Is-Sadiq-Khans-council-U-turn-33m-green-scheme.html?ns_mchannel=rss&ico=taboola_feed_desktop_news

Lewisham is no better- side roads are closed off so that any traffic going from Blackheath Village to Ladywell then on to Dulwich is now forced onto the horrendous Lewisham one way system.

[Rockets]

It's starting....the pressure is mounting....TV news coverage tonight as well. Votes will be at stake now....

[James Barber]

Hi slarti b,

I think the key is the number not the proportion of car trips. Last 20 years no increase in London roads but significant increases in London's population and public transport. Not so much change in public transport locally but OVergorund, no.42 bus extension.

Last 25 years extra 2 million Londoners another 2m expected in the next 25 year. So anticipate lots more trips being made. So even if proportion of car trips has declined the total number may have risen.

So key is number not proportion - will be interested to see your stats.

Regards James.

slarti b Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > @slartiB - Probably some good data here:

> >

> >

> https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/traffic-flows-b

> orough

> >

> I have the data at home. As I pointed out above

> my recollection is that, for London, the

> proportion of trips by car has decreased over teh

> last 20 years. If so, the 36% increase quoted by

> eXD is alarmist and irrelevant for this thread.

[alex_b]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> FairTgirl Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Is there much in this data and discussion about

> > the role Google Maps and sat navs have to play

> in

> > actively sending traffic down residential roads

> as

> > well?

>

> It's not *really* DfT's remit to go down that

> route to be honest but there are countless studies

> and articles about the phenomenon, eg:

> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-12

> /navigation-apps-changed-the-politics-of-traffic

>

> In the US in particular (where Waze is bigger than

> in the UK), communities have been reporting closed

> streets to Waze / Google on a rotating basis to

> try and get rid of some of the issues that it

> creates. You can search for it online, there are

> community blogs that describe it. Basically, it's

> the community trying to create their own LTN to

> counteract the issues of travel apps directing

> drivers off down residential roads.

I was told by a council officer that a Traffic Management Order restricting a road to access only (or access only for certain heights/weights) would feed through into SatNavs and apps fairly quickly. He was looking into getting one put in for Adys/Nutbrook/Maxted but then left the council and no officer or councillor has been bothered to take it up since. It wouldn?t stop the determined rat runners, but would stop all the lorries/coaches getting stuck in residential roads blindly following their satnavs.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Road closures and changes in traffic patterns get fed back very quickly to Waze and Google Maps by their users - not least Uber drivers who have to use one of those two apps and people who leave those apps to work in the background by default.

[slarti b]

James Barber Wrote:

> So key is number not proportion - will be interested to see your stats.

James, they are TfL figures not mine :-)

Anyway the TfL figures cover the whole of London, are based on daily average number of trips and cover the period 2000-2018.

During that time the population of London increased by 25% and the number of trips by 18.5%.

In terms of absolute numbers, "Private transport" ie cars\taxis\motor bikes, reduced from 10.9m to 9.9m trips, a decrease of 9%.

In terms of mode share, Private transport reduced from 47.8% to 36.9% of trips.

To answer your question, the number of car trips in London has reduced on both an absolute and percentage share basis during the almost 20 year period, despite an 18.5% increase in trip numbers.

So, when exDulwicher and Rahrah quote figures relating to the whole of the UK they are not relevant to London and misrepresent what is happening here.

What is worrying is when our local councillors deliberately use highly misleading figures to claim a massive , but actually non-existent, increase in traffic flows. Even more worrying is that council officers collude in their deception.

[slarti b]

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> I haven't got time to look through it right now, so can't tell you whether or not it shows an increase.

Rahrah.. I was thinking of the TfL data for London which shows a reduction in "Private Transport" trips (Car\taxi\motor bike) between 2000 and 2018 of 9% in absolute terms and from 48% to 37% in mode share. So completely opposite to the 36% increase you mention for the whole of UK.

You link to the DoT data of traffic flow (ie vehicle Km's) by borough. For Southwark, this shows an even bigger reduction of 20% in traffic flow between 2000 and 2018.

So, both the TfL data for London and the DoT data for Southwark are showing absolute and relative decreases in car traffic.

Please stop scaremongering with irrelevant and misleading statistics.

[thebestnameshavegone]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> It's starting....the pressure is mounting....TV

> news coverage tonight as well. Votes will be at

> stake now....

Oh no, not the TV news! You already posted this in the other thread by the way.

[JohnL]

thebestnameshavegone Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's starting....the pressure is mounting....TV

> > news coverage tonight as well. Votes will be at

> > stake now....

>

>

> Oh no, not the TV news! You already posted this in

> the other thread by the way.

EU, Cladding, Climate etc. It's easy to get in the press and even arrange big marches. But all of them get nowhere - politics now is continue going as you are and b*gg*r the consequences. The pragmatic side to this country is gone (for the moment).

[seenbeen]

Politics has always been like that...politicians get elected then do what they have basically promised to get in e.g. leaving the EU. Other than that they are pandering to the voters with a view to getting elected next time. Anyone who is pragmatic would not touch politics. Politics is corrupt and self-serving- always has been- I don't know why we put up with ANY of them.

It is estimated that ?3.5 BILLION has been defrauded from the public purse in the furlough scheme....so when we get tax rises we know it is our own friends and neighbours who are responsible...

The cladding thing is a prime example of the shenanigans going on in construction especially when public money is available.

https://www.constructionmanagermagazine.com/grenfell-rydon-struggled-to-drum-up-interest-from-cladding-contractors/

JohnL Wrote

"EU, Cladding, Climate etc. It's easy to get in the press and even arrange big marches. But all of them get nowhere - politics now is continue going as you are and b*gg*r the consequences. The pragmatic side to this country is gone (for the moment)." .....

[Rockets]

thebestnameshavegone Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > It's starting....the pressure is mounting....TV

> > news coverage tonight as well. Votes will be at

> > stake now....

>

>

> Oh no, not the TV news! You already posted this in

> the other thread by the way.

Sorry, I didn't realise I wasn't allowed to post on multiple threads. I consider myself suitably chastised.

The point I am making is that there is growing awareness of the problems these measures are creating. This, in turn, creates a narrative that all traffic congestion is being caused by it (whether it is or isn't). The news actually showed one of Lambeth's parking enforcement cars trying to drive down one of the closed roads so it all adds to the general perception that it's been rushed and is chaotically implemented and creating big issues. The fact that the mayor's office put up a spokesperson to defend the closures was interesting.

[Abe_froeman]

The Mayor is desperate for people to get back onto public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt on his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor also said that people will die if they travel on the tube).

[Ole]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> The Mayor is desperate for people to get back onto

> public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt on

> his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor

> also said that people will die if they travel on

> the tube

[Ole]

Ole Wrote:

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

> Abe_froeman Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > The Mayor is desperate for people to get back

> onto

> > public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt

> on

> > his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor

> > also said that people will die if they travel

> on

> > the tube

He (The Mayor) also forgot to factor in the Archimedes principle. Closing off roads without putting in measures for the displaced volume was always going to lead to traffic jams. Transport is particularly bad East-West; the gov seems to assume that people only want to travel North-South.

[Ole]

He (The Mayor) also forgot to factor in the Archimedes principle. Closing off roads without putting in measures for the displaced volume was always going to lead to traffic jams. Transport is particularly bad East-West; the gov seems to assume that people only want to travel North-South.

[exdulwicher]

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> The Mayor is desperate for people to get back onto

> public transport because TFL has gone bankrupt on

> his watch. (They won't though because the Mayor

> also said that people will die if they travel on

> the tube).

That's politics in play right there.

TfL would have gone bankrupt anyway no matter who was Mayor given the Covid crisis. Half their funding comes from fares and that's collapsed.

So the Government bailed out TfL (quite rightly). They then put a host of conditions onto that bailout such as the increased congestion charge (both pricing and hours of operation). That wasn't SK running that through, it was central Government but it suits them very well to have everyone blaming the Labour Mayor.

There's similar political posturing going on now over Hammersmith Bridge - Grant Shapps said it's been in a terrible state for decades which presumably also means the point when Boris was Mayor of London... However it's being blamed on SK. But the infrastructure money comes from central Government so it's more or less been in the hands of the Conservatives for the last decade!

It's all just political point scoring. Sod the constituents, politics is now just arguments on Twitter as one Minister or councillor seeks to belittle another.

[Earl Aelfheah]

slarti b Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I haven't got time to look through it right now,

> so can't tell you whether or not it shows an

> increase.

>

> Rahrah.. I was thinking of the TfL data for

> London which shows a reduction in "Private

> Transport" trips (Car\taxi\motor bike) between

> 2000 and 2018 of 9% in absolute terms and from 48%

> to 37% in mode share. So completely opposite to

> the 36% increase you mention for the whole of UK.

>

>

> You link to the DoT data of traffic flow (ie

> vehicle Km's) by borough. For Southwark, this

> shows an even bigger reduction of 20% in traffic

> flow between 2000 and 2018.

>

> So, both the TfL data for London and the DoT data

> for Southwark are showing absolute and relative

> decreases in car traffic.

> Please stop scaremongering with irrelevant and

> misleading statistics.

Not meaning to scaremonger. I linked to the details you shared above. It?s good that traffic flows are improving. Could be linked to significant increase in cycling, congestion charge etc. Will be interesting g to see what difference these latest changes make if given enough time to bed in.

It is also true that car ownership in the UK is increasing btw. Not a sustainable trend. Hopefully London can continue to lead the way.