LTN Discussion

[Earl Aelfheah]

Just your friendly reminder that there is a data dashboard for those interested in objectively assessing what's happened with traffic. Vehicle counts show a reduction in car journeys across the area since the LTNs came in. Walking and cycling is also up.

There isn't a great conspiracy. The motivation for LTNs was to make getting about the area on foot or by bike a little safer and easier, and to reduce the number of car journeys. This is exactly what it has achieved.

[heartblock]

Just a friendly reminder that TFL has said that LTNs in Dulwich have increased congestion and made bus journeys longer on residential boundary rds.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Southwark News has been campaigning against LTNs in Dulwich since the beginning. They've printed lot's of stuff that is demonstrably false, or misleading before. There is no link to this TFL report. can you provide one?

[Spartacus]

Southwark News has been campaigning against LTNs in Dulwich since the beginning. They've printed lot's of stuff that is demonstrably false, or misleading before. There is no link to this TFL report. can you provide one?

 

I belive this is the report you require https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhHc02WXeovZL02aXi0iLWssPdgcuSiy/view?s=09

[heartblock]

Here is Southwark, dismissing any causality that LTNs have increased congestion and journey times in their report in Sept 2021 ' in the absence of any other changes' - when bus journeys had been prolonged due to LTN implementation according to TFL and the Council themselves recorded increased times on Croxted, EDG, LL and Grove Vale.

'As can be seen, speeds significantly increased in the first lockdown, and less so in the second, before slowly returning towards, but remaining slightly above, pre-COVID levels. It could therefore be expected that in the absence of any other changes, bus speeds in Dulwich would have followed similar patterns.'

Quite clearly the comment 'it could therefore be expected'.. basically saying the journey times would have been longer even if LTNs were not implemented is spin... and TFL have exposed this with their report.

LTNs cause increased congestion on our roads. Fact!

[Rockets]

Rah x3 - what the, much manipulated and doctored council dashboard actually shows is that traffic has reduced on the roads benefitting most from the LTNs but has increased on the roads living with the displacement - the council and councillors promised us everyone would benefit and traffic would reduce on every road - this has clearly not happened. In fact what has happened is what many predicted would and that is that traffic is just routed in other directions and creates more congestion than before the measures.

The council and councillors denied repeatedly that this was not happening - see Cllrs Leeming and Newens in relation to Croxted Road.

Rachel Aldred et al told us this was not happening.

The Guardian told us this was not happening because Rachel Aldred et al told them it wasn't happening.

Meanwhile residents were telling us this was happening.

Then the emergency services told us this was happening

And now TFL is telling us it is happening.

I know who I believe.

So I think the only conspiracy is actually the one spun by the council, the pro-LTN lobbyists and the cycle lobby that LTNs don't impact traffic flows and lead to benefits for all. That is quite obviously utter bunkum and was from the outset.

[Rockets]

Southwark News has been campaigning against LTNs in Dulwich since the beginning. They've printed lot's of stuff that is demonstrably false, or misleading before. There is no link to this TFL report. can you provide one?

 

I belive this is the report you require https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhHc02WXeovZL02aXi0iLWssPdgcuSiy/view?s=09

 

And Rahx3 in case you can't/won't click through to it here is that it says on Page 6 of TFL's report:

Root Cause of Delays

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion.

Pretty compelling huh? I wonder how the councillors and pro-LTN lobby are going to try and spin their way out of that one.......

[Spartacus]

And no reply from rx3 after being presented with concrete evidence

Typical lack of response akin to an ostrich burying it's head in the sand

[ab29]

Bungled email shows Labour councillor tried to suppress damning LTN report, claim residents

Cllr Leeming said the report "MUST NOT" be sent to local residents

https://southwarknews.co.uk/featured/exclusive-bungled-email-shows-labour-councillor-tried-to-suppress-damning-ltn-report-claim-residents/?fbclid=IwAR2f_tmw5TxjOR_LxZASZJi-MpNe9VSdFU0-nWn9PSkkVQCgS5rMG5trJWw

[Bic Basher]

If this is proven that Cllr Leeming allegedly mislead constituents, he should stand down and a by-election held in Dulwich Village ward.

[Rockets]

Wow…..and so the house of cards begins to fall…talk about a smoking gun…what a buffoon…sending it to the very people he didn’t want to see it.

It makes you wonder how many other reports the council intercepted in an attempt to change the “current form” of information shared with the public. It might explain why so many reports were delayed during the whole process.

I suspect Cllr Leeming has just shone a spotlight on the manipulation the council has been engaging in to try and suppress the truth about LTNs.

Any of the pro-LTN lobby have anything to offer in Cllr Leeming’s defence or are you wondering whether you have been used as part of the council’s propaganda machine to manipulate reality?

[Spartacus]

Maybe, like the traffic, he hoped the report would evaporate away.

Oh hang on, the traffic didn't either...

It does raise the question of what a Freedom of Infornatiom request on the LTN schemes would reveal ?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Southwark News has been campaigning against LTNs in Dulwich since the beginning. They've printed lot's of stuff that is demonstrably false, or misleading before. There is no link to this TFL report. can you provide one?

 

I belive this is the report you require https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhHc02WXeovZL02aXi0iLWssPdgcuSiy/view?s=09

 

And Rahx3 in case you can't/won't click through to it here is that it says on Page 6 of TFL's report:

Root Cause of Delays

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion.

Pretty compelling huh? I wonder how the councillors and pro-LTN lobby are going to try and spin their way out of that one.......

 

Thanks Rockets, that's helpful. I'm pretty dubious of Southwark News reports on LTNs, as they've run a campaign against them that's included very misleading, sometimes false reporting. It's a shame that they quote the report out of context, and don't link to it, but not that surprising perhaps.

Reading the report, it sounds as though the issues with increased bus times referred to in the Southwark News headline were prior to the changes Southwark put in place in March. Although it does sound that Croxted road Northbound (whilst improving), may still be experiencing increased traffic.

So perhaps the headline ought to be - a very successful traffic reduction scheme isn't 100% perfect and there continues to be monitoring and some adjustments being made. That is pretty shocking.

[Earl Aelfheah]

And no reply from rx3 after being presented with concrete evidence

Typical lack of response akin to an ostrich burying it's head in the sand

 

I don't live on this forum.

[Metallic]

I belive this is the report you require https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhHc02WXeovZL02aXi0iLWssPdgcuSiy/view?s=09

 

And Rahx3 in case you can't/won't click through to it here is that it says on Page 6 of TFL's report:

Root Cause of Delays

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion.

Pretty compelling huh? I wonder how the councillors and pro-LTN lobby are going to try and spin their way out of that one.......

 

Thanks Rockets, that's helpful. I'm pretty dubious of Southwark News reports on LTNs, as they've run a campaign against them that's included very misleading, sometimes false reporting. It's a shame that they quote the report out of context, and don't link to it, but not that surprising perhaps.

Reading the report, it sounds as though the issues with increased bus times referred to in the Southwark News headline were prior to the changes Southwark put in place in March. Although it does sound that Croxted road Northbound (whilst improving), may still be experiencing increased traffic.

So perhaps the headline ought to be - a very successful traffic reduction scheme isn't 100% perfect and there continues to be monitoring and some adjustments being made. That is pretty shocking.

 

My friend who lives on Croxted Road is pretty adamant that your explanation is wrong. The traffic is as bad as it has been since the LTN system was put in, and she should know I think. The decreased timings have made it worse. Clearly no problems during the school holidays, however.

[Rockets]

I belive this is the report you require https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VhHc02WXeovZL02aXi0iLWssPdgcuSiy/view?s=09

 

And Rahx3 in case you can't/won't click through to it here is that it says on Page 6 of TFL's report:

Root Cause of Delays

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion.

Pretty compelling huh? I wonder how the councillors and pro-LTN lobby are going to try and spin their way out of that one.......

 

Thanks Rockets, that's helpful. I'm pretty dubious of Southwark News reports on LTNs, as they've run a campaign against them that's included very misleading, sometimes false reporting. It's a shame that they quote the report out of context, and don't link to it, but not that surprising perhaps.

Reading the report, it sounds as though the issues with increased bus times referred to in the Southwark News headline were prior to the changes Southwark put in place in March. Although it does sound that Croxted road Northbound (whilst improving), may still be experiencing increased traffic.

So perhaps the headline ought to be - a very successful traffic reduction scheme isn't 100% perfect and there continues to be monitoring and some adjustments being made. That is pretty shocking.

 

But Rahx3 - even if you think Southwark News are running a campaign against LTNs it's pretty compelling what the TFL report says isn't it?

Again this is from the TFL report that Cllr Leeming wanted to not be sent to residents before he redacted it....

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion

That's not spin or part of a misleading campaign - that statement comes from TFL about the cause of the Croxted Road problems - laying the blame clearly at the Dulwich Village LTN and it is categoric proof that the LTNs in Dulwich are causing the issues, which is the polar opposite of what your fellow LTN supporter Cllr Richard Leeming has been telling/misleading people about the traffic on Croxted Road. This is why Leeming was so desperate to redact the TFL report and said "this must not be sent to the residents". Why? Because it exposes the lies the council and councillors have been telling people about the impact of LTNs and shows that LTNs do cause displacement, do delay buses and do increase pollution in other areas.

From day 1 the council have been manipulating everything to do with LTNs to paint them in a positive light and confirms what many of us have feared - that the council and pro-LTN supporters have been lying to people to defend the LTNs that create quiet roads for them and increase congestion for everyone else and that is a disgrace and the council and the pro-LTN supporters should be ashamed of themselves.

[Bic Basher]

Considering Cllr Leeming has already featured in Private Eye's Rotten Boroughs for his treatment of a constituent, it shouldn't come as a surprise that his behaviour comes into question again.

[ab29]

LTN is a con perpetrated by people like leemings & co (= southwark lab concillors) - the sooner all are removed the better

[Earl Aelfheah]

And Rahx3 in case you can't/won't click through to it here is that it says on Page 6 of TFL's report:

Root Cause of Delays

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion.

Pretty compelling huh? I wonder how the councillors and pro-LTN lobby are going to try and spin their way out of that one.......

 

Thanks Rockets, that's helpful. I'm pretty dubious of Southwark News reports on LTNs, as they've run a campaign against them that's included very misleading, sometimes false reporting. It's a shame that they quote the report out of context, and don't link to it, but not that surprising perhaps.

Reading the report, it sounds as though the issues with increased bus times referred to in the Southwark News headline were prior to the changes Southwark put in place in March. Although it does sound that Croxted road Northbound (whilst improving), may still be experiencing increased traffic.

So perhaps the headline ought to be - a very successful traffic reduction scheme isn't 100% perfect and there continues to be monitoring and some adjustments being made. That is pretty shocking.

 

But Rahx3 - even if you think Southwark News are running a campaign against LTNs it's pretty compelling what the TFL report says isn't it?

Again this is from the TFL report that Cllr Leeming wanted to not be sent to residents before he redacted it....

Herne Hill is the best logical alternate route for northbound drivers who are otherwise unable to travel through Dulwich Village

This has caused increased flows through this section of network resulting in increased congestion

That's not spin or part of a misleading campaign - that statement comes from TFL about the cause of the Croxted Road problems - laying the blame clearly at the Dulwich Village LTN and it is categoric proof that the LTNs in Dulwich are causing the issues, which is the polar opposite of what your fellow LTN supporter Cllr Richard Leeming has been telling/misleading people about the traffic on Croxted Road. This is why Leeming was so desperate to redact the TFL report and said "this must not be sent to the residents". Why? Because it exposes the lies the council and councillors have been telling people about the impact of LTNs and shows that LTNs do cause displacement, do delay buses and do increase pollution in other areas.

From day 1 the council have been manipulating everything to do with LTNs to paint them in a positive light and confirms what many of us have feared - that the council and pro-LTN supporters have been lying to people to defend the LTNs that create quiet roads for them and increase congestion for everyone else and that is a disgrace and the council and the pro-LTN supporters should be ashamed of themselves.

 

I don't know how Cllr Leeming has the power to redact a tfl report. The fact that we can read it online suggests that hasn't happened.

The point I was making is that Southwark have responded to the issues raised by tfl and made changes accordingly. The tfl report suggests that the tweaks made in March have been broadly successful and that they continue to work with Lambeth and Southwark. The fact is that data show a broadly positive impact on traffic reduction across the area and an increase in walking and cycling. The 'shocking' news is that they have continued to monitor and adjust the scheme, in order to improve it over time.

[Bicknell]

so people living east of DV junction now officially live "nowhere"...

https://southwarknews.co.uk/featured/exclusive-what-the-fork-is-the-difference-drivers-left-confused-by-signs/

[alice]

That's a Stealth LTN for Lordship/ Eynella. Who authorizes these false signs?

[Metallic]

That's a Stealth LTN for Lordship/ Eynella. Who authorizes these false signs?

 

Catherine Rose of course. And don't forget in the early Our Healthy Streets plan for Eynella, they wanted to close the junction and make it people friendly.

[first mate]

Having looked the signs are identical.

Southwark has placed a no entry sign at the start of a road on the basis that it leads to other roads which do have restrictions. Dodgy or what. By that logic you could place no entry signs all over the shop.

[Nigello]

Bring these misleading signs to the attention of the MP.

[Penguin68]

Having looked the signs are identical.

A cynic might suggest that someone with influence (but not enough to get their 'own' LTN) has managed to convince someone with authority over signage to get a sign which almost achieves the 'LTN effect' of a private road without actually being an LTN. Only those really in the know will be trespassing past their house.