FOI responses or research on braking and turning around LTNs and School Streets

[Rockets]

@DulvilleRes oh deary me....I have not ducked any question and I have told you one million times before...I have nothing to do with One Dulwich nor have any affiliation to any lobby group or political party. I do not think they are funded by some shadowy cabal - but you, clearly do, yet other than making mealy-mouthed accusations against others you have presented zero evidence to back this up. Zero.

So maybe it is time that you go and do some "citizen journalism" yourself and come to everyone with something substantive to backup your claims. Because at the moment it looks like nothing more than a poorly thought out, poorly executed desperate distraction technique which you whole-heartedly wish to be true. I remind you that it was you who seemed to take great offence that someone made public (using publically available information and information publicised by the person concerned themselves on their own social channels) that an award winning active travel lobbyist had been appointed to an influential position within the Dulwich Society on transport issues - why was that exactly? 

My personal view is that you just don't like what I post as it doesn't align with your own ideological, political and active travel views so you try to attack me in the vain hope of trying to silence me. Fair enough - that's you're prerogative (and this seems to be the go-to position in the active travel lobby playbook on how to try to deal with dissenting voices) but that probably says far more about you than it does me and, as I have said a million times before I have nothing to hide.

As I have said before you seem to be a Dulwich Village resident so perhaps you can try to contribute to the debate positively by telling us if you believe congestion is better or worse since the LTNs went in on Dulwich Village?

A yes/no answer will suffice,.

 

14 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

There is still heavy congestion on some of those roads at certain times of day of course, as there always has been. 

Yey...it took a while but almost there.....do you think the heavy congestion is better or worse then pre-LTNs?

15 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Are you ever going to produce any evidence at all to back up you claim that the LTN increased traffic, congestion and pollution? I doubt it, because we all no there isn't any.

Only, I suspect, when the council does research that it didn't commission an active travel activist researcher to produce! 😉

The growing issue for councils is that if, in time, people discover they did have information that these interventions were not working and they were selective in the information they decided to share in infographics etc then they could be in big, big trouble both politically and legally.

[Earl Aelfheah]

You have someone insisting that a six-year-old traffic filter is the cause of rush-hour congestion, claiming it has increased traffic, pollution, crime, and road danger. When asked for evidence, they provide none and simply double down.

You present data showing that traffic, crime, pollution, and collisions have not risen and have, in fact, generally decreased. They dismiss it as untrue. You ask again for the evidence behind their claims, and they deflect.

You share peer-reviewed research, and they respond by attacking the academics involved. You ask them to produce research supporting their own position. They offer nothing and change the subject.

In the end, you’re left with someone repeating unevidenced claims and insisting something must be true simply because they believe it is. What’s the point?

Edited 9 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

2 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

You share peer-reviewed research, and they respond by attacking the academics involved. You ask them to produce research supporting their own position. They offer nothing and change the subject.

@Earl Aelfheah can you show us any research where said activist researchers were not involved......? If one of the famed authors is passionate enough to tear down anti-LTN posters in their local newsagents I think everyone is well within their rights to question the impartiality of their output as an "impartial" author on (vested-interest) funded research into the effectiveness of LTNs....if the boot was on the other foot I very much suspect you would have an issue with it.

3 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

In the end, you’re left with someone repeating unevidenced claims and insisting something must be true simply because they believe it is.

That's a bit rich coming from you don't you think...you are more than happy to insist something must be true because the council tells you it is so.....I mean they got you hook, link and sinker with the "majority support" for the Dulwich Village LTNs in their consultation summary documents didn't they....#justsayin 😉

[Penguin68]

18 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

You have someone insisting that a six-year-old traffic filter is the cause of rush-hour congestion, claiming it has increased traffic

It hardly matters that it's six years old. If I'd built a wall across a road 20 or a 200 years ago, the road would still be blocked. It only unblocks if the wall or the traffic restriction, is taken away. 

[Rockets]

And the longer this goes on, the more the council's underhand tactics come to light and sheds new light on what was happening when they started these programmes - validating what many of us were saying at the time and one intervention at a time engages more people across the area in the debate - look at the number of people from the Ryedale area posting on here and now from Peckham Rye. This is the beauty of local discussion forums like this - they allow people to communicate who would probably never do so without it!

This is why so many who support the council are so desperate to try and make people move on - they probably realise there are skeletons buried under every LTN in the area (figuratively of course) and are trying to protect their beloved council - as we have been saying for years councillors, councils and politicians of all political persuasion absolutely hate accountability.

Edited 9 hours ago by Rockets

[malumbu]

7 hours ago, Rockets said:

No, usual gusto and blusto to avoid answering a very simple question - we all know why it is such a difficult question for folks on the active travel lobby side of things to answer.

Congestion is worse post LTNs on Lordship Lane, Croxted and Dulwich Village to name but a few (even TFL and Southwark council engaged in a very ugly public spat on the cause of the Croxted congestion as TFL said it was being caused by the Dulwich LTNs). Everyone knows this - this is why it is so hard for some to admit.

 

 

 

I answered your questions honestly.  No need for all the above.