Ryedale SE22 - Proposal to block end of Ryedale at junction of Underhill Road - January 2026

[Angelina]

😶

Edited 2 hours ago by Angelina

[Insuflo]

6 hours ago, Tori Griffiths said:

I am standing for Labour in Dulwich Hill in the local elections. I will be pushing for a wider consultation as soon as is reasonably possible, which I would imagine starts at the 6-month mark. If, following a fully accessible and robust consultation, this change isn’t landing well for the majority of residents, then I will push for it not to be permanent. 

Good luck with your campaign, Tori. I am a Dulwich Hill voter and a Labour voter for decades.

However, for the first time my vote may go to the Greens. I will be looking for a clear commitment to action to reduce car use and prioritise pedestrians, from whichever candidate I support. Southwark Labour’s laudable efforts in this regard have been the main reason for Labour keeping my vote in the recent past.

I support the trial closure of Ryedale, which I use frequently as a pedestrian. There are no cogent arguments against the trial save for the usual yap from a martyrdom seeking motoring minority.

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, alice said:

another amazing post. almost unbelievable.

Amazing isnt it...someone who earlier purported to not even know what LTN stood for suddenly appears to be an expert on peer-reviewed documents from cycle lobbyists! 😉

P.S. has anyone seen anything of @Moondoox recently? There do seem to be a few first time posters trying to throw their weight behind the council's plans....hmmmm

1 hour ago, first mate said:

Once experimental traffic orders are imposed they tend not to be reversed. The council take little if any notice of local consultation results and tend to push ahead with their agenda. 

Absolutely spot on and whilst @Tori Griffiths may be throwing a vote for me and we will do a consultation line there is very little evidence that Southwark Labour will ever listen to the view of residents. Their motto is something along the lines of "never let the views of local residents get in the way of an active travel intervention that the lobbyists asked us to do".

1 hour ago, East Dulwich Friend said:

Does research show that traffic on neighbouring roads is improved, not worsened, by these measures? Yes.

Seemingly only data analysed by activist researchers (one of who was an LCC employee, the other who is an LTN poster vandal and an active and leading member of the West Dulwich LTN campaign group - her husband runs it apparently) makes these claims...I mean the council's own limited data showed a 6% increase in traffic on Underhill after the Dulwich LTNs went in....but hey ho...

1 hour ago, East Dulwich Friend said:

If someone can find a credible, peer reviewed study that says something different then please share it.

Unfortunately TFL and the Mayor's office don't tend to fund research that shows its interventions are not working.

[Lebanums]

What was interesting from the data count from the FOI is, those streets that had speed cushions instead of full length speed bumps had both more traffic and a higher % of cars speeding. Also when speaking with people whilst gaining signatures for the petition, we agree that some measures need to be in place to stoo speeding but the current solution which is also the cheapest is not it. 

On 14/01/2026 at 12:44, Rockets said:

Which is all a bit bizarre as they seemingly made the decision based on a non-council approved "petition". They're a bit contradictory aren't they?

Is this on the Southwark petition website?

It was a door to door signature. There was another petition online that took it to 339 signatures.