After months of trying, West Dulwich Action Group finally got a meeting with the council on June 3rd to “express and substantiate” their concerns about the ‘Street Improvement’ (aka latest Low Traffic Neighbourhood) plans The group requested a two hour, face to face meeting. Instead they were granted a one hour, online meeting with West Dulwich ward Cllr Fred Cowell and Rezina Chowdhury, one of Lambeth council’s two deputy leaders. The other ward Cllr Judith Cavanagh we due to attend but pulled out on the day. The presentation West Dulwich Action Group gave can be found on their public Facebook page.
~~~
The group have now put TWENTY THREE questions to Lambeth council:
~
1) Unnecessary re-routing of resident traffic forced North (including confrontation with school traffic entering South) – will the council look into the clash between resident traffic and school run traffic, and better integrate individual street CPZ timings with LTN consequences, considering an earlier CPZ time on Tulsemere Rd?
~
2) Increased traffic and pollution will be pushed onto already highly polluted boundary roads – will the council analyse in advance the negative impacts of +100-200 extra boundary road vehicles per hour on safety and air pollution around the LTN zone? Will the council say whether it thinks it fair to further punish residents and schoolchildren – and cyclists – on boundary roads?
~
3) And increase the likelihood of residents being in a collision by over +1000% – will the council look at collision consequences for resident safety and give a view on whether this is acceptable for a plan that is meant to improve safety?
~
4) While there have been no reported collisions with cyclists or pedestrians within the zone for the last measurable 5 years – will the council confirm what problem(s) within the zone the LTN is solving?
~
5) A mere 72 second extended journey time on re-routed journeys will create more pollution than the LTN saves – will the council formally respond to this, and quantify how they expect the West Dulwich LTN to reduce pollution (without resorting to generic research from other areas)?
~
6) Crucial local businesses will suffer decreased customer access and hence sales – will the council undertake a true consultation with all relevant local businesses around the zone and address all their concerns?
~
7) Likely delays to public transport and emergency services on boundary roads – will the council share a detailed record of their exact consultation with local transport and emergency services and reassure residents about the LTN consequences for both?
~
Please provide answers to these questions before any further decisions are made:
~
8) Current traffic counts exclude all traffic travelling or stationary under 10kph / 6 mph, therefore the current evaluation is biased in favour of demonstrating an overall reduction in net traffic – will the council produce a clear formal statement about whether its traffic counts do or don’t include traffic under 6mph, and if the latter give a view on how much traffic is missed?
~
9) The same under-representative traffic counts are used to model air quality, with similarly misleading results – will the council guarantee that air quality modelling will use 100% accurate traffic data, account for journey time, and be cross-referenced with actual data to assess model accuracy?
~
10) Accurate baseline measurements are not in place, those that are being proposed are from out of date, unrepresentative time periods – will the council commit to using up to date, representative baseline data?
~
11) How will the council’s evaluation account for the multiple independent variables of the LTN, CPZ and HR launching in the same time period – how will the council’s evaluation methodology be able to tease out the independent contribution (positive or negative) of the LTN within the three Street Improvement components?
~
12) Any evaluation must treat all residents equally and fairly cover within the LTN, the boundary roads, and relevant surrounding roads – will the council commit to fair and equal audience representation and measurement in and around the zone?
~
13) The majority of residents and businesses do not feel that ”Resident Feedback” is fairly assessed, responded to, and acted upon – will the council respond to all resident feedback, and re-evaluate the plans in full if the majority of residents continue to oppose the LTN?
~
CPZ concerns in summary
~
14) The majority of residents and businesses do not support a CPZ – in any form – at all. – Will the council explain the rationale for the CPZ when there is only highly road-specific localized demand?
~
15) Why was a no CPZ nor a 2 hour restriction offered to residents when it is prevalent elsewhere in the borough? – what is the justification and legal basis for this when it is prevalent in the borough?
~
16) Why have local business needs not been taken into account – will the council confirm how many businesses were directly consulted with rather than spoken to assess their needs regarding parking for their business?
~
17) Kerbside strategy unsuited to West Dulwich – will the council explain why this is deemed necessary in the greenest part of the borough?
~
Healthy Route concerns in summary
~
18) Detailed design concerns, e.g. removal of roundabout – will the council share planning rationale and impact?
~
19) Use of traffic wands, which will not preserve or enhance the Conservation Area, rather than kerbstones – will the council confirm if wands fulfil this criteria?
~
20) Safety and increased risk: driveways, pavement, cycle lane and parked cars – will the council respond to resident concerns and confirm or deny increased risk?
~
21) Consultation to date has been flawed and poor in the view of over 85 per cent of residents and businesses – will the council confirm or deny this figure is representative, and if not provide an alternative research methodology and figure?
~
22) Will the need for and details of the LTN be reviewed in accordance with the DfT’s draft statutory guidance?
~
23) Will the CPZ and HR statutory consultations include clear information on impact assessment, including impacts on local businesses?
Further reading: From Lambeth council’s official website
NEWS FROM CRYSTAL PALACE 