Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Siduhe, yes it is bad and your/my observations backed up by Southwark?s own figures that show on one measure an increase in traffic if 25% and on another 36%.

The jams are awful and change daily in terms of time of day and length of time. Of course living for 30 years on this road and observing change or your observation compared to your previous experience will be dismissed by the more observant and far better abled to assess traffic movements.

Maybe living in an LTN improves cognitive function.

No I will not be posting proof of my observations on this forum, I send the proof to my local councillor in hope that they actually do something as per the Councils recorded increases in traffic.

Ok busy time at Uni from Monday... so goodbye forum for a bit...

It's no good arguing amongst ourselves over if traffic is higher or lower than what each other sees (I see no ships 😱)


What we need to see is the figures that Southwark publish and the results of the consultation.


Then we can debate what has happened, how accurate their interpretation is and what happens next


As I understand it a decision may be due soon but I could be wrong on that.

Calton Avenue Average daily cycle flow.


Sept 18 768

Sept 20 1039


35% increase.


Figures from One Dulwich report.



first mate Wrote:

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

> Northernmonkey said:

>

> "If the September figure was chosen as a baseline

> and compared with Sept post measures, from memory

> it would produce something in the region of a 35%

> increase in cycling".

>

> Weasel words NM. Phrases like "from memory" or

> "something in the region of" are not useful or

> convincing.

Just to say, that photo of the queue - that queue was there more days than not pre-ltn - I know as I have walked/cycled my kids to school down Ed Grove for 9 years. The stretch from Melbourne to Alleyns always the worst and we often dismounted from the bicycle and walked on the pavement for that bit and walked faster than the traffic.


On the upside, I now see many many more people walking and cycling and have spotted some great new bikes out there that carry children. A segregated cycle lane down Ed Grove would be very beneficial and no doubt reduce the number of drivers on the school run.

Otto2 Wrote:

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

> A > segregated cycle lane down Ed Grove would be very beneficial and no doubt reduce the number of

> drivers on the school run.


There may be some practical difficulties but if they could be overcome that sounds reasonable. And a segragated cycle lane down Calton Avenue could also benefit cycling without the Calton Avenue closure that is causing so much congestion and pollution on the boundary roads. That is the sort of reasonable conmpromise that the Council should be considering arther than trying to force though draconaian measure based on dodgy data.

There is space for potentially a bi directional cycle lane all along the section by the dutch estate - it would then need to turn off on thorncombe road, travel along glengarry as a quiet street and then would need some rearrangement of the pavement / parking by the shops to get to Melbourne Grove where it could link up north / south with the filtered streets.

northernmonkey Wrote:

> Calton Avenue Average daily cycle flow.

> > Sept 18 768 >Sept 20 1039 > 35% increase. Figures from One Dulwich report.


Isn't it good that One Dulwich are so open about their data, shame we can't say the same about Southwark council. And as I wrote previously, One Dulwich have actually chosen the lowest Sep 18 baseline in their report. They could instead have used the Dept for Transport's raw data for Sep 18 (901) or the estiamte for Sep 19both of which would have reduced that increase.


But, in comparison lets look at Southwark's report shall we?

Nov 18 ( or maybe Dec 18) 259

Sep 20 1,039


Increase of 301%!!!!!!


Of course that innacurate and fraudulent "301% increase" is the sort of figure that minorty activists like to tweet to claim LTN's are working.



But do you could consider that 301% figure in Soutwarks report reasonable? Or the previous 47% increase in traffic through the junction claim ? Or do you think that Southwark deceiving the public is just " a bit iffy" and fine if it supports your cause?


Open your eyes.

Isn't increased boundary road traffic One Dulwich's main concern?


If they care so much about this why aren't they looking more closely at the data on EDG and offering their

*expert evidence* to prove that EDG is indeed gridlocked for over four hours a day every day?

Sorry Alice - you are saying that the Dulwich LTN hasn't worked because cars are turning right out of Townley Road onto Lordship in the direction of Forest Hill is showing that the LTN's haven't worked?


I'm interested because there are no southbound restrictions on Dulwich Village or Burbage Road so its unlikely to be displaced traffic travelling from the west to go south east. Traffic coming from the East would always have gone down Lordship or somewhere east of that where there are no LTNs, so what is the effect you're commenting on here please?

At a guess some of it is traffic trying to get out of the LTN area and head west or north west? As they can?t exit via Court Lane into DV or Turney or via Townley onto edg during restrictions? I?m thinking the traffic turns right into the 205 from LL?



northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Sorry Alice - you are saying that the Dulwich LTN

> hasn't worked because cars are turning right out

> of Townley Road onto Lordship in the direction of

> Forest Hill is showing that the LTN's haven't

> worked?

>

> I'm interested because there are no southbound

> restrictions on Dulwich Village or Burbage Road so

> its unlikely to be displaced traffic travelling

> from the west to go south east. Traffic coming

> from the East would always have gone down Lordship

> or somewhere east of that where there are no LTNs,

> so what is the effect you're commenting on here

> please?

northernmonkey Wrote:

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

> Sorry Alice - you are saying that the Dulwich LTN

> hasn't worked because cars are turning right out

> of Townley Road onto Lordship in the direction of

> Forest Hill is showing that the LTN's haven't

> worked?

>

> I'm interested because there are no southbound

> restrictions on Dulwich Village or Burbage Road so

> its unlikely to be displaced traffic travelling

> from the west to go south east. Traffic coming

> from the East would always have gone down Lordship

> or somewhere east of that where there are no LTNs,

> so what is the effect you're commenting on here

> please?



You misread my post, which perhaps was unclear. I was referring to traffic on Lordship Lane from Townley Road to the A205 jam packed, idling and polluting. Previously they would?ve been able to go down Calton or court avoiding the much longer detoured journey.

No dulwich central that is not what happened.


You asked why One Dulwich were not out collecting evidence of gridlock on EDG (sealioning, by the way) and I replied it was unnecessary because Southwark council's own data showed that to be true already.


You then brought up some irrelevant nonsense about 24,000 fewer cars

@dulwichcentral

southarks report says traffic down 24k vehicles a day across the area (says 23k on page 2 - not sure whhich is right)

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review

but who knows?

no raw data even tho this was promised

no traffic data released in august, even though this was promised

one dulwcih looked at 1 statistc (cycles up 231% on calton ave) and it wasnt accurate.

so we dont have much hope do we?

do councillors expect campaign groups to do the traffic counting for the council?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • What was he doing on the stage at Glastonbury? Or on the stage at the other concert in Finsbury Park? Grinning like a Cheshire cat whilst pissed and stoned 20 somethings on the promise of free internet sung-- Oh Jeremy Corbyn---  What were his policies for Northern mining towns with no jobs or infrastructure? Free Internet and university places for youngsters. What were his other manifesto pledges? Why all the ambiguity over Brexit?  I didn't like Thatcher, Blair or May or Tony but I respected them as politicians because they stood by what they believed in. I respect all politicians across the board that stick to their principles. Corbyn didn't and its why he got  annihilated at the polls. A socialist, anti imperialist and anti capitalist that said he voted for an imperialist and pro capitalist cabal. He refused to say how he'd vote over and over again until the last knockings. He did so to appease the Islington elite and middle class students he was courting. The same people that were screaming that Brexit was racist. At the same time the EU were holding black and Asian immigrants in refugee camps overseas but not a word on that! Corbyn created and courted a student union protest movement that screamed at and shouted down anyone not on the left . They claimed Starmer and the centre right of labour were tories. He didn't get elected  because he, his movement and policies were unelectable, twice. He turned out not to have the convictions of his politics and died on his own sword.    Reform won't win an election. All the idiots that voted for them to keep out Labour actually enabled Labour. They'll be back voting tory next time.    Farage wouldn't be able to make his millions if he was in power. He's a very devious shyster but I very much doubt he'd actually want the responsibility that governance requires.
    • The purge of hard left members that were part of Corbyn's, Mcdonnel's and Lansmans momentum that purged the party of right wing and centrist members. That's politics. It's what Blair did to win, its what Starmer had to do to win. This country doesn't vote in extreme left or right governments. That's partly why Corbyn lost  We're pretty much a centrist bunch.  It doesn't make it false either. It's an opinion based on the voting patterns, demography and statistics. Can you explain then why former mining constituencies that despise the tories voted for them or abstained rather than vote for Corbyns Labour?  What is the truth then? But he never got elected!!! Why? He should have been binned off there and then. Why he was allowed to hang about is an outrage. I hold him party responsible for the shit show that we've had to endure since. 
    • Depends on what the Barista says doesnt it? There was no physical confrontation with the driver, OP thinks she is being targetted when she isnt. These guys work min wage under strict schedules so give them a break unless they damage your stuff
    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...