LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[legalalien]

Council report on the Great Suffolk Street scheme. Yet again fairly flimsy analysis on climate change / socioeconomic duty and ?let?s do the EqIA a bit later in the process? approach.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103068/Report.pdf

Seems to be quite a bit of slightly strange spinning going on there with criticism of out of area taxi drivers but out of area cyclists being fine. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103071/Appendix%20C%20-%20Great%20Suffolk%20Street%20Streetspace%20Scheme%20Public%20Consultation%20Analysis%20and%20Monitoring%20Rep.pdf If you thought the Dulwich data was spun I suspect this is a whole new level?

We met the Southwark Cyclists and it was positive. We didn?t meet the taxi guys and their comments were negative.

Businesses didn?t support, we had a meeting with three businesses online through our subsidised BID and those three like it.

The list goes on.

Particularly like

?As there is not strong support for this scheme from residents, it is recommended that the Council should proceed with permanent traffic management order for the current scheme.?

To be fair it goes on to say ? However further changes are needed. Officers will produce an options report to improve the scheme to allow further access to residents, business and licensed taxis. These options will be consulted on to gauge public opinion before being installed.?

Meanwhile, in relation to the Bermondsey LTN, council is using data it knows to be unreliable

?Whilst August is within the school holidays and thus not reliable baseline data, undertaking further counts in August 2021 has allowed us to directly compare the traffic movements in school holidays one year apart.?

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s103062/Report.pdf

More flimsy ?we expect??type analysis based on nothing in particular?

ETA at least it?s not just Dulwich?

[Spartacus]

Champion park will be closed around the Denmark Hill station area over the weekend of the 27th and 28th for crane operations

That's going to add fun and games to the traffic

[hpsaucey]

Interesting initiative 'We transformed a London borough into a game to get fewer people travelling by car ? here?s what happened': https://theconversation.com/we-transformed-a-london-borough-into-a-game-to-get-fewer-people-travelling-by-car-heres-what-happened-171035?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20November%2016%202021%20-%202116520954&utm_content=Latest%20from%20The%20Conversation%20for%20November%2016%202021%20-%202116520954+CID_280f8c9b460b484a2b13b80b41ea0805&utm_source=campaign_monitor_uk&utm_term=We%20transformed%20a%20London%20borough%20into%20a%20game%20to%20get%20fewer%20people%20travelling%20by%20car%20%20heres%20what%20happened

[Rockets]

There are some tremendous examples of proper nudge initiatives at work (like the one HP linked to).....

I really like this one...so simple yet so clever.

[legalalien]

100%. How many miles did our kids walk when Pokemon Go was a thing!

[Rockets]

Imagine is you incentivised the school run for kids by encouraging them to walk or cycle - I reckon you would see a 75% decrease in car journeys to school. Probably really cheap to rollout and maintain and something everyone could get behind.

I just wish our council would show some lateral thinking about how to address the challenges Dulwich faces.

[malumbu]

In deed, but you are being a tad critical of Southwark, whose responsibility is this:

The parents for sending their kids to schools far away?

The parents who could get their kids to school in other ways, or where necessary even ride share?

The earlier government for introducing the policy of greater competition in the state sector

The earlier government who introduced the next stage of this, a sort of grammar school by stealth ie academies, outside of local authority control

Earlier governments who did not introduce measures that discouraged private education in particular maintaining the charity status of the fee paying schools

The schools themselves

National government for not pushing harder on this - both DfE and Defra, the latter oversee Local Air Quality Management Plans, and can compel local authorities to do more

The Mayor and GLA for not doing more pan-London

I've seen great examples of schools pursuing sustainable and active travel, particular mention for Bessemer Grange. And then those who seem to have zero interest, I cycled to a school in Shirley once to do some mock interviews and there was no cycle parking and a massive car park.

Back to society, when many of us were young, and parents were less risk adverse, we walked to school. Friends moved to Scotland, and local parents were surprised that they felt that they needed to take their kids into primary school, as certainly in that area there was a mass walk to school in the morning.

Gross generalisations of course.

[Rockets]

Malumbu - I am being critical of Southwark because they need to be called out for their inaction. Thus far, the council seems to think dealing with the climate emergency means listening to Southwark Cyclists and putting in a load of LTN roadblocks.

It has to do more and we should all be challenging them to do so.

Things like this would be easy to implemented and a good way to spend the public purse - why should the council not be leading the initiative on things like this? It seems to me that this would be a low cost initiative that has an immediate positive impact.

To me it seems like they loaded all of their eggs into the LTN basket and sat back doing nothing else for the last 18 months - a case of poor window-dressing in my eyes.

[malumbu]

So what legal measures to Southwark have to compel parents not to drive their kids to school? May work in North Korea but not North Dulwich!

[heartblock]

'It's so funny - every time someone brings up a solution that would cut traffic - people shout 'dictatorship' yet closing roads to car drivers on some roads but allowing people from closed roads to drive one of their many cars on a school road without consultation of any of the roads impacted with extra diverted traffic is not a 'dictatorship'. It seems that if one agrees with a policy then that policy is 'democratic' and if one disagrees with a policy it is a 'dictatorship'.

For example, some anti HTNs like me (I am going to call closed road policy 'LTN's they are HTNs from now on as they create High Traffic Neighbourhoods)and pro HTNs do not agree with my solution which is to take Charitable Status away from private schools with a view to changing them all to state run schools, increase taxes to the top 10% of earners to fund state schools and have children go to schools that are a 30 minute maximum walk from home.

I would also ban all non-electric cars from cities and vastly increase public transport.

Changing how education and transport works is just good policy - banning free speech in a one party state, with no political opposition is a dictatorship.

[Spartacus]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> So what legal measures to Southwark have to compel

> parents not to drive their kids to school? May

> work in North Korea but not North Dulwich!

This implies that the whole issue is around the school run. Possibly supported by the fact that traffic is a lot lighter during school holidays (although this should be adjusted as families go away thus reducing general car use at the same time)

If this is the case the punishing other drivers who need to get around (be it for work, long distance commuting , heavy Shopping or mobility reasons) is not in the interest of the local economy

Therefore the sensible solution is working with schools , reducing catchment areas, and the use of limited timed closures of school streets all of which will discourage parents driving to school.

The problem however is more complex

"I would let Winston cycle / walk to school but there are too many cars on the road so for his safety I drive him" thus creating a self fulfilling spiral.

LTNs are the wrong solution as they punish and restrict those that have a genuine need to drive thus causing additional idling traffic on other streets.

What's the solution that allows proper shared use of the roads and reduces the school run drivers at the same time ?

I guess that is something that could be solved with a proper consultation where the council listen and utilise local ideas to crack the nut rather then their 50 ton steam hammer approach where they can't hear local concerns over the noise of the machinery 🤔

[heartblock]

Yes Spart this is the problem - closing roads just doesn't work - I know some researchers and some organisations have tied themselves to this failed experiment and are now desperately trying to prove this is THE solution. The present government is quite happy with this - why?

Because so called 'LTNs' (HTNs remember) are something that Boris can point at as a 'solution' - he likes it as the people who live on main roads with extra traffic tend to have a higher percentage of BAME, elderly and poorer residents - so unlikely to impact the Tory vote, he can carry on building roads and digging fossil fuels out of the ground - also take money off Tory party donors from companies who are the world's biggest polluters.

Meanwhile nice families in nice roads can have a quiet road and see their property value go up, while telling everyone how 'green' they are, that they only drive the car for 'necessary' journeys, how they have Waitrose deliver so they don't have to drive, how their flowers and bread are delivered by bike ..don't you know..and yes - they do have to drive Jonny and Felicia to the private school, but it is a 30 minute drive, so it really is very necessary.

Boris supports 'LTNs'(HTNs)...I wonder why?

[DuncanW]

Here we go again - Southwark is not, by any definition, either a one-party state or a dictatorship. It's a Labour stronghold because people keep voting for them. That hasn't always been the case - not that long ago it was a Lib Dem/Tory coalition for a short while. And with local elections just around the corner, if the electorate of Southwark arent happy with them, they will vote them out. Let's see what happens in May.

heartblock Wrote:

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

> 'It's so funny - every time someone brings up a

> solution that would cut traffic - people shout

> 'dictatorship' yet closing roads to car drivers on

> some roads but allowing people from closed roads

> to drive one of their many cars on a school road

> without consultation of any of the roads impacted

> with extra diverted traffic is not a

> 'dictatorship'. It seems that if one agrees with a

> policy then that policy is 'democratic' and if one

> disagrees with a policy it is a 'dictatorship'.

>

> For example, some anti HTNs like me (I am going

> to call closed road policy 'LTN's they are HTNs

> from now on as they create High Traffic

> Neighbourhoods)and pro HTNs do not agree with my

> solution which is to take Charitable Status away

> from private schools with a view to changing them

> all to state run schools, increase taxes to the

> top 10% of earners to fund state schools and have

> children go to schools that are a 30 minute

> maximum walk from home.

> I would also ban all non-electric cars from cities

> and vastly increase public transport.

> Changing how education and transport works is just

> good policy - banning free speech in a one party

> state, with no political opposition is a

> dictatorship.

[heartblock]

Aah but I haven?t called anyone or anything a dictatorship or one party state..I think you might find that expression was used by someone else.

I wouldn?t use that term, just saying what a silly expression it is, I completely agree with you DuncanW, so either I made a poor job of making my point or you didn?t understand my response to a previous post, criticising malumbu?s use of that term. Either way, yes I agree with you.

[oimissus]

malumbu - I've seen you frequently ask people for solutions, and yet every time they do just that, you criticize them.

You actually seem to want everyone to stop criticizing the council and then just shut up. Which sounds pretty much like what the council want residents to do as well.

[DuncanW]

Heartblock - fair enough.

The phrase did appear in your post but I must have misunderstood what you meant by it.

[legalalien]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Does anyone have more info on tbe council

> admitting to residents on Turney Road that the

> monitoring data in the LTN review was wrong and

> instead of that road having a 61% decline it

> actually saw an 18% increase?

Info on this on the Dulwich Alliance website:

https://dulwichalliance.org/2021/11/15/serious-data-errors-confirmed/ Seems they mixed up the data from the two ends of Turney Road.

[goldilocks]

Thats just the same data - and same claims though. Would be good to see something not from the Dulwich Alliance on it.

[legalalien]

I agree, I'd like to see the actual data from the Council rather than anyone's edited summary, and then we could all have a look and test claims being made by either side.

It does sound as though the Council have acknowledged this particular data mix up though, and from the sound of it corrected it, I'm not sure whether in all the reported stats though.

[heartblock]

The Labour Party do seem reluctant to release data and full reports (Forde inquiry...) well - that's data that they intentionally withhold - personal private data..well that is a whole other story. The Council is just following Labour HQ - only release data that fit's in with the current Party line.

[goldilocks]

I agree. I don't know whether the data on the website is the original data or updated, and would also like to see clearer underlying data too.

I can't trust anything the Dulwich Alliance say unfortunately. Too many instances of them stating things that actually turn out to be untrue.

[Rockets]

If that Turney Road error is as bad as it looks then does anyone have any faith in the council's claim that there has been an area-wide reduction in traffic? When those corrected figures are added into the report it must now be getting close to no reduction in area-wide traffic.

On the basis of the multitude of oversights, errors, the lack of raw data being shared by the council then this must be called-in for further scrutiny - it's an utter shambles and it appears they are just trying to bury the actual facts to save face and avoid having to admit the LTN policy has been a disaster.

[heartblock]

No worries DuncanW, this is what saddens me more than anything else, people living on impacted streets and people who support HTNs (LTNs) all want less traffic, less pollution and are very concerned about children lungs, illness caused by pollutants and our climate..but what are we doing?

Calling each other names...saying that pensioners are thugs..calling cyclists lycra clad misogynists ... it reminds me of the Boris way of using his policy - create division and confusion, create a sideshow and don't tackle the real reason for climate change - profit.

This is why Southwark Council annoys me, they just cannot see where they have been led, it just seems very poor thinking to me.

[malumbu]

oimissus Wrote:

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

malumbu - I've seen you frequently ask people for solutions, and yet every time they do just that,

you criticize them.

You actually seem to want everyone to stop criticizing the council and then just shut up. Which sounds pretty much like what the council want residents to do as well.

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

You've missed my points. Firstly that the default position of many is to blame everything on Southwark.

Secondly that even with the best will in the world they do not have the powers to compel either the schools or parents to reduce the school run.

If anything you should be feeling sorry for local authorities who have been given the job by central government to sort out air quality without the funding or powers. A cop out, the point I have made during various central government consultations. Most of government effors is going on big ticket interventions - Clean Air Zones and the like working with the big metropolitan areas where, for example, you have greater control over public transport, such as Manchester, Birmingham, and to a lesser extent GLA/TfL (they don't like Mayor Khan). But little at the borough level.

I was always disappointed in the lack of publicity at borough level. But even where this was good, such as Croydon, still had little impact. https://lovecleanair.org/what-can-i-do/projects/clean-air-4-croydon-schools/#.YZVJth3Leos

I've also raised a couple of times where Southwark's interventions a few years ago led to more traffic passing a Lewisham primary. But not one of you, not one of you, showed any empathy. Which suggests a narrow perspective.

I could go on about what I have done personally and collectively to support sustainable travel to school, but this is not my moral high ground thread. And I reached out in the past as in the late noughties I got very obsessed over a planning matter and a local authority, which took over my life, so have been in a similar space.

[heartblock]

As Greta said..Blah..Blah ...Blah.. HTNs do nothing to tackle climate change, I have far more respect for Insulate Britain.