Rockets

If that was the case then the Highway Code would not make the stipulation they do? As I said before that rule seems to be taken by some cyclists to justify inconsiderate and selfish cycling I think you hit the nail on the head when you say "entitled to do" with entitlement being the key. The road is not narrow, it was broad daylight so no-one would have a problem seeing them yet they did it and created challenges for other road users by doing so. If they had been thoughtful to other road users then they would not have done it but they seemed only to care about themselves and actually seemed to be revelling in it. Why? Again why the use of should adopt....you can cycle perfectly safely and also be considerate to other road users - I could adopt that position I don't have to. It's your use of should rather then could that probably flags the issue here. I could adopt that position should the situation dictate it - it's a subtle, but important, nuance of language and probably mindset.

@malumbu I think your addition speaks volumes and highlights the issue. Most urban roads are not narrow and are not the type of roads to which the Highway Code refers. It is very interesting that cycling in the centre of the lane does come with those caveats as many cyclists seem to interpret it as applying to all roads but it clearly doesnt. And therein lies the issue and takes us back to the original post and the ludicrousness of some of the things said about wearing dark clothes whilst cycling at night. Why wouldn't you try to make yourself more seen or why would you cycle down the centre of a road or two abreast on the A205 holding up lines of traffic?

Is that stipulation on the circumstances where is it ok to ride in the centre of the road removed anywhere else? It's interesting that many cyclists interpret that as it is ok to cycle in the middle of the lane in any circumstance. I didn't realise it came with some caveats. The not using the cycle lane and riding two abreast (along the A205) has come up on these threads before and as a cyclist I always take the approach that I am always considerate to other road users. I do remember two gents cycling really slowly along the A205 two abreast along the section between the Grove Tavern and Dulwich College and folks coming on here saying - well they can so they should. They had created a long line of traffic behind them as they had a good old natter and were, quite rightly, getting volleys of harsh words from drivers - the lack of consideration for other road users was quite something.

I am really laughing so loudly at the ludicrousness of this discussion. It just shows how hilariously blinkered some people are.

You see. Another pragmatist....!

Street lighting, paving slabs, better bike parking....anyone? Or is it all about the parking.....it's always about the parking...all the world's ills can be brought back to parking...

Because I am not sharing the pavement with faster moving vehicles that can do me real harm if they didn't see me and hit me. I am taking a commonsense and pragmatic approach to joining the carriageway with bigger vehicles. Your argument seems to be based on...there are no rules to say I should so I won't...unless you're applying for a Darwen Award I doubt it is a smart approach to cycling.

I don’t why some on here take every conversation as a means to try and attack car use. Funny how no-one has anything to say about the variety of sensible improvement suggestions for Lordship Lane yet are fixating on widening the pavement by removing car parking spaces. I mean, has anyone got stuck outside Odonno’s for more than a few seconds….or has anyone been stranded there for days…….;-)

Did you read it, what do you think? You may have to pause occasionally but it's hardly the end of the world and no different to most other high streets at a weekend.

This thread is hilarious. Just because it doesn't say you must wear bright clothing why wouldn't you? When I cycle I have a day glo, reflective builders bib that I bought from a builder's supply store for a few quid. It's no fashion statement but it fits in my pocket and over anything I am wearing and I wear it because it increases the chance of other road users seeing me, especially at night. That seems entirely sensible and pragmatic. I also marvel at some cyclists seemingly going out of their way to decrease the chance of other roads users seeing them. Not sensible and pragmatic.

Errr...because the last time the council surveyed Lordship Lane shops 22% said they had driven....that is all...goodness me P.S. that was the last time the council ran such a survey.....and it is here (I am out and about so cannot attach): Source: Southwark Council https://share.google/5ZZZbi6iG3BDEAx5j

Here we go again…..goodness me…relentless. Zero point trying to have a conversation when it gets skewed like this. So, maybe let’s just encourage the council to run another survey as I do not think they have done one for 10 years so we can get an accurate picture. When I get a chance I will also post the survey the council did 10 years ago so you can all see for yourselves what was said.

But where did it say they are driving to work there and then shopping? 22% of the respondents said they had driven. Look, we know some are trying to use this to lobby for the removal of parking spaces but those spaces (which are growing more limited each time the CPZ creep takes place) are vital to the thriving Lane as we know it now. Please, drop the parking bone and go pick up another - there are far more pressing needs for Goose Green end of Lordship Lane if the council were to spend any more on it....move it to Dulwich Village and millions would have been spent by now! 😉

Yes I am not sure there are many Southwark traffic management experts suggesting the closure of Lordship Lane - the chaos that would create with buses alone would be awful! It appears an utterly farcical idea born out of ideology rather than pragmatism and, of course, begs the really basic question of how do bus users then get to Lordship Lane - get off at Dulwich library and walk or wait for the bus to divert all the way round to Goose Green, get off there and walk?

What in the report (that was based on a survey done on a Tuesday and a Saturday - that concluded footfall is far busier on a Saturday) suggests that conclusion? It states it draws people from a wider than average area and it does also say, doesn't it, that....."The fact that the variety of stores is rated more positively (and by quite a margin) than the convenience indicates that this is drawing shoppers strongly, which is a phenomenon not noted in many other Southwark high streets which seem to be visited "because it is there". Also worth noting that a far higher % of respondents noted ease of parking as one of the draws of Lordships Lane and this was noted in the report that it was more than twice the average of elsewhere. Which area of transport are you an expert in again @malumbu? I am no expert but that doesn't seem like an idea that is entirely credible. Unless, as @CPR Dave suggests you divert everything around to and along Barry Road. Which route do you think would work for buses and essential vehicles if the shopping part of LL was shut?