LTN Discussion

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> Ha ha....that's the only piece of segregated cycle

> infrastructure they have put in across the whole

> area and it does impede the traffic

Anything that makes space for non cars will always have less space for cars.

It seems you have lots of high minded ideas but as soon as there's less space for massive SUVs to trundle aronud we'll hear about how whichever scheme can't possibly work (despite the numbers) or is wildly unpopular (again despite the numbers). And if they put segregated cycle lanes all along all the roads around that junction, I'm sure there's be gales of whinging about how there's EVEN LESS room for car.

Come to think of it, that's not far off what we have for Calton Ave and Court Lane. Was there whinging?

[checks thread]

hmmm...

;-)

[heartblock]

EDG was busy..but not stationary down the whole rd with cars spewing out pollutants. Traffic is down across London 10-15% but has increased in volume on average down EDG according to Southwark's figures and obviously has a peak time traffic issue.

It's probably better to go forward accepting that this is the downside of LTNs and start helping your neighbours to ask Southwark to help reduce this problem.

Or just carry on being very, very, very selfish.

[exdulwicher]

Ha ha....that's the only piece of segregated cycle infrastructure they have put in across the whole area and it does impede the traffic by narrowing the lanes to allow only one car to pass and causes a daily tailback in front of Dulwich Hamlets school - thus creating more pollution for the school children. I think you'll agree that's probably not a good thing.

Cos there was never, in all of history, ever a tailback in front of Hamlet before LTNs...?

You only need one lane there. Traffic coming into DV from Turney can only go left or right and it has it's own phase, it's effectively a T junction for cars now.

The advanced green phase for cyclists needs to be a bit longer to shift more riders before the traffic behind starts up and tries to turn left "across" the flow of riders who can go straight on and in fact it's not difficult to envisage a time where you'll need to give a full green phase to cyclists only at that junction. Same at Townley crossing over into Greendale.

[heartblock]

Please no more messing with junctions. Every time Southwark mess with a junction they **** it up. EDG actually was a lot calmer about 20 years ago, then they messed with the Townley/ Greendale junction and it got more congested at the Village end....add in the 5xLTNs and its been turned into a slow moving school car park Mon-Fri.

Incidentally traffic is busy during the day after the school madness - I watched the very young children at Charter EDG playing football only metres from belching, polluting cars, HGVs and vans - not a good look for a school road and I pity any parent who has kids there - ask the school to run a project like this excellent Brighton one - I'm sure Southwark Council will give a grant? I mean they pay for street parties, so why not a school project on air pollution on the sports ground and play areas? https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/106949/children-test-pollutants-brighton-science-project/

[Rockets]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> Ha ha....that's the only piece of segregated cycle

> infrastructure they have put in across the whole

> area and it does impede the traffic by narrowing

> the lanes to allow only one car to pass and causes

> a daily tailback in front of Dulwich Hamlets

> school - thus creating more pollution for the

> school children. I think you'll agree that's

> probably not a good thing.

>

> Cos there was never, in all of history, ever a

> tailback in front of Hamlet before LTNs...?

>

> You only need one lane there. Traffic coming into

> DV from Turney can only go left or right and it

> has it's own phase, it's effectively a T junction

> for cars now.

>

> The advanced green phase for cyclists needs to be

> a bit longer to shift more riders before the

> traffic behind starts up and tries to turn left

> "across" the flow of riders who can go straight on

> and in fact it's not difficult to envisage a time

> where you'll need to give a full green phase to

> cyclists only at that junction. Same at Townley

> crossing over into Greendale.

Ex- but the tailbacks are worse since the LTNs went in - every day (after the closure times) the traffic crawls to that junction.

Funny isn't it how they put that bike lane in and suddenly had to put a right-turn greenlight in because it became so snarled up because they had reduced what was effectively two lanes into one. Typical of so many planners - put something in that causes a problem and instead of fixing the problem try to move the problem on somewhere else.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

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

>

> Ex- but the tailbacks are worse since the LTNs

> went in - every day (after the closure times) the

> traffic crawls to that junction.

I remember taking 20 minutes to get through DV on the P4 before the LTNs. I do find the alt-history Southwark fanfic about free flowing traffic right up until the LTN (at which point demons flew out of the planters) to be entertaining for sure, but it's not actually especially useful when it comes to discussing the LTN and its effects.

[goldilocks]

Sigh - this isn't what happened. We've been through this before, but you're not interested in facts - just owning the thread or proving that your alternate reality is correct.

The lane has always been there -its a feeder into the bike box but cars used to cut across it and now can't - the right filter was nothing to do with the cycle 'lane' appearance.

As for Heartblocks - the traffic was fine 20 years ago and then Southwark started messing around with the junction - there really are no words!

Rockets Wrote:

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

> exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Ha ha....that's the only piece of segregated

> cycle

> > infrastructure they have put in across the

> whole

> > area and it does impede the traffic by

> narrowing

> > the lanes to allow only one car to pass and

> causes

> > a daily tailback in front of Dulwich Hamlets

> > school - thus creating more pollution for the

> > school children. I think you'll agree that's

> > probably not a good thing.

> >

> > Cos there was never, in all of history, ever a

> > tailback in front of Hamlet before LTNs...?

> >

> > You only need one lane there. Traffic coming

> into

> > DV from Turney can only go left or right and it

> > has it's own phase, it's effectively a T

> junction

> > for cars now.

> >

> > The advanced green phase for cyclists needs to

> be

> > a bit longer to shift more riders before the

> > traffic behind starts up and tries to turn left

> > "across" the flow of riders who can go straight

> on

> > and in fact it's not difficult to envisage a

> time

> > where you'll need to give a full green phase to

> > cyclists only at that junction. Same at Townley

> > crossing over into Greendale.

>

>

> Ex- but the tailbacks are worse since the LTNs

> went in - every day (after the closure times) the

> traffic crawls to that junction.

>

> Funny isn't it how they put that bike lane in and

> suddenly had to put a right-turn greenlight in

> because it became so snarled up because they had

> reduced what was effectively two lanes into one.

> Typical of so many planners - put something in

> that causes a problem and instead of fixing the

> problem try to move the problem on somewhere else.

[hpsaucey]

This thread is a bit like a Dystopian 'Groundhog Day'.

Here's to positive community-minded future discussions on LTNs and greening Southwark's travel and transport.

HP

[Rockets]

It is isn't it - we will all argue to death over it! ;-)

But so nice to see the tide has changed and Manatee has floated back again - we missed them so much. Anyone taking bets on how long they last this time before they get banned again! ;-)

In all seriousness I do really hope the councillors make real efforts to re-unite the community - LTNs drove a wedge between people and the council has to make it a priority to help mend the damage they did with the way they handled the whole process.

[DuncanW]

Or we could just leave it there...?

[hpsaucey]

DuncanW Wrote:

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

> Or we could just leave it there...?

Lol. Good idea.

[hpsaucey]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> .... But so nice to see the tide has changed and

> Manatee has floated back again - we missed them so

> much.''''

Agree.

HP

[diable rouge]

Rockets Wrote:

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

...LTNs drove a wedge between people and the council has to make it a priority to help mend the damage they did with the way they handled the whole process.

As someone who hasn't got a dog in this particular fight, this all comes across as a bit like Brexit in that people are either in favour of LTNs or against them, there's no middle ground to be had. How do you think a compromise can be found?...

[heartblock]

I think there is middle ground, in an area with high PTAL and no private schools with wide catchment area (which seems to encourage parents to drive to JAGs/Alleyns to drop off one child and use EDG as a car-park in the evening), LTNs in consultation with the affected roads may offer solutions that do make roads safer and areas that have benefit created, without detriment to others. There also needs to be a wider scheme so one borough doesn't push traffic into another (Croxted Rd).

This just isn't the case in Dulwich ED - poorly planned, implemented and roads chosen due to individual street pressure groups and this has caused upset, mistrust and rather ruined a once very cohesive community on all 'sides'... in that way maybe a bit like Brexit?

[Rockets]

Community-wide communication, engagement and dialogue - all of which have been sorely lacking during this whole process. Maybe a community meeting, not on the for or against, but on the how we move forward in a constructive manner to address the concerns on both sides of the argument. Too much of the discussion has been had behind closed doors with vested-interest groups and not enough with the wider community.

[JohnL]

diable rouge Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> ...LTNs drove a wedge between people and the

> council has to make it a priority to help mend the

> damage they did with the way they handled the

> whole process.

>

>

> As someone who hasn't got a dog in this particular

> fight, this all comes across as a bit like Brexit

> in that people are either in favour of LTNs or

> against them, there's no middle ground to be had.

> How do you think a compromise can be found?...

Don't say that - 6 years on and the divisions aren't healing.

[Waseley]

The Brexit analogy is interesting. Like Brexit LTNs have happened so it is a case of making them work well. Like Brexit, the local elections have mirrored the last general election, in that there was no massive backlash against LTNs

I also suspect that those most against LTNs, and certainly the concept, are very much in the minority

So LTNs stop drivers using side roads as cut-throughs. This should dissaude some from driving as they may consider that their journey is unnecessary, or the big nudge to use other modes.

If this has yet to deliver, and this will take some time, what additional measures are required?

It may be as simple as better communication, or the bells and whistles that some want in supercharging public transport.

[heartblock]

Not sure 'communication' is an issue, I think enough has been said about theories and modelling.

I think what I would like is very clear pollution monitoring on roads that have high use in terms of people living/working/ and travelling actively and school rds - that are 'problem' rds, so we can measure peak levels daily and the long-term levels over a period of time.

Also noise pollution and congestion/idling traffic should be monitored and collected.

Then some actions - the money made by Southwark to be invested in ways to encourage less car use by parents taking children to school, pressure on the private schools to make it an admission rule, more EV charging points and a local network of green buses.

[ohthehugemanateeLTN3]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> But so nice to see the tide has changed and

> Manatee has floated back again - we missed them so

> much.

:waves: @ Rockets

> In all seriousness I do really hope the

> councillors make real efforts to re-unite the

> community - LTNs drove a wedge between people and

> the council has to make it a priority to help mend

> the damage they did with the way they handled the

> whole process.

Well I think the best way is to push it ever further with CPZs, more restrictions etc. They've already done a pretty excellent job listening to feedback (and not just EDF noise): they decided to keep the LTNs.

[Waseley]

Communication along the lines: Human activities result in emissions that can be damaging to health and the environment. It's important that we all take action. We have introduced these restrictions to help to reduce traffic. You can play your part by walking instead of driving. Using the bus. Sharing rides.

This is not well crafted and purely there as an example. It seems to me that many use air quality as a weapon to justify their beliefs rather than do something about it by taking some share of the responsibility and taking action themselves

[heartblock]

So people living on Croxted and EDG - they shouldn't complain about pollution levels and they are using air quality as a weapon to justify their beliefs.

Well - the art of any sensible discussion on this subject is now truly over.

[Nigello]

Back to the physical reality of the Village LTN - it?s ugly and looks extemporised with the random planters, useless traffic lights and trip-friendly kerbs.

[legalalien]

I think we?re supposed to have some community co design process. In the interests of bringing the community together, I really hope the council lets us all start with a blank piece of paper and not something they?ve already decided on. I?d also suggest NOT calling it Dulwich Square, it?s a name with too much ill- feeling attached to it.

As a temporary measure I think staining the planters black would be a good start.

[73jem]

What would help is to remove/replace those red and white bollards on the pavements, I think that they were put in because drivers got round the planters by driving on the pavements, something a little less ugly would be welcome

[Spartacus]

ohthehugemanateeLTN3 Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

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

> -----

> > But so nice to see the tide has changed and

> > Manatee has floated back again - we missed them

> so

> > much.

>

> :waves: @ Rockets

>

> > In all seriousness I do really hope the

> > councillors make real efforts to re-unite the

> > community - LTNs drove a wedge between people

> and

> > the council has to make it a priority to help

> mend

> > the damage they did with the way they handled

> the

> > whole process.

>

> Well I think the best way is to push it ever

> further with CPZs, more restrictions etc. They've

> already done a pretty excellent job listening to

> feedback (and not just EDF noise): they decided to

> keep the LTNs.

Interesting, so when the consultation occurred last year and the overwhelming view was removed the LTN from those that responded, you still want to claim that the council did a pretty excellent job listening to feedback ?

Didn't feel like it at the time 😕