Rockets

They are certainly persistent - they try to sell us it every time we walk up and down Lordship Lane - no matter if you told them no thank you three minutes earlier! Anyone else feel that sense of relief when you walk and see they have someone they are talking (invariably looking like they are trying to get away) allowing you to walk past without becoming their next sale target?

DulvilleRes - that's the best post...honestly - never have I seen more perfect example of the over-riding problem here...was it posted as a joke? The fact that some, who clearly come from the pro-LTN side of the argument, are so vexed by what One Dulwich puts out there shows what a great job One Dulwich are doing to ensure both sides of the argument are heard and that is the very essence of democracy at play - the fact some are trying to demonise them for doing so speaks volumes. Do elements of the Dulwich Society fear that One Dulwich are going to mount a coup and turn Dulwich Village into a multi-storey car park.....or maybe it's more a case that One Dulwich are, in fact (and this will probably vex a few people), a community action group run by local Dulwich residents who are interested in a range of wider issues covered by the Dulwich Society?

The whole defence of "this isn't an issue because drivers cause more harm" is just blinkered nonsense. There is clearly a problem which is why the police are doing what they are in the City and issuing PCNs for offenders - 1,000 is a hell of a number (and another 9,000 being spoken to) if these are being issued by officers standing at junctions - I would love to know how they are doing it do they watch them jump red lights and wave them down further down the road? I did see a cyclist once ride up from Monument onto the pavement and across the lights in front of a police motorcyclist who just shook his head as the bike rode in front of him with the pedestrians crossing and then, once the lights went green, zoomed off to pull the cyclist over. I mean that is just daft by the cyclist! Hopefully the message will start getting across that everyone is supposed to obey the rules of the road.

Cyclists certainly do have a bit of a perception problem at the moment and when I cycle I see a lot of examples of arrogance and ignorance that gives all cyclists a bad name - it does seem that many cyclists have caught the entitlement bug many drivers seem to have.

But Spartacus didn't mention the significant amounts of land being used for car storage - that was most definitely you. And I am afraid when you apply your same measure to other transport uses (like cycleways and cycle lanes - Malumbu is your stat on the 360 kms of cycle network cycleways or cycle lanes?) then it most definitely is relevant for the debate. Should we assume then that if all this ULEZ money and government bailout money is being poured into TFL then the system is, financially at least, broken or is it a case that the money is being mis-spent (like the DV junction project)?

Is Sadiq worried about voter apathy/protest votes? Just got another flyer through the door, it seems to be one every couple of weeks, suggesting the Tories are closer than any opinion poll suggests and that people should not vote for the Lib Dems or Greens.

If it was then that would have required me to have deviated the discussion onto that particular subject but I didn't did I - you did - you started the "land given over to cars" cost narrative within the discussion did you not? Clearly whomever dreamt up the "land given over cars" narrative (remember that wonderful graphic people were posting on the forum?!), was so blinkered that they didn't bother to think it through properly....but hey ho...not the first time we have seen this happen! Clearly ULEZ money is not going back into public transport or maintaining roads and I think that was the point that was being raised - so it does beg the question where the money is being spent. Perhaps it goes to fund projects like the Dulwich Village £1.5m re-design of the re-design of the re-design.....

In London huge swathes of public land have been dedicated to the sole use of cyclists (often to the detriment of other road and pavement users and at a massive cost to the tax payer - the overwhelming majority of whom won't ever use them).

But this is what you said...that has nothing to do with emission standards. You're clearly advocating land use be charged so therefore you must support the same for cycle lanes. That's not whataboutery...that's pointing out the clear flaw in a flawed argument.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/cyclists-fined-city-police-london-bank-junction-b1152140.html It looks like red-light jumping cyclists might become a nice revenue generation opportunity for councils...I wonder how long it is before Southwark catches-on to this missed opportunity!! 😉 I suspect being forced to sit in the cab of an HGV to see how little they can see is a humbling and sobering experience for red-light jumping cyclists and probably sends a very powerful message to them about the dangers of jumping lights.

So, by that measure, I presume you would be happy to charge for use of cycle lanes then?

We saw the flash and heard the bang from ours (never heard anything like it) and I said it sounded like it had landed nearby - glad no-one was hurt!

We have seen this narrative peddled as some sort of issue - can someone explain why some are so fixated on the amount of land for car storage - it seems to be the narrative of those (mainly the bike lobby) who want the space turned over to their chosen use? Surely the true value of car ownership is the flexibility of being able to jump into a car and perform a journey and not be beholden to the limitations of public transport? If it is (and I am not convinced it is) then is the transport system in London fundamentally broken? Given the repeated bail-outs TFL has had to fight central government for and given the increased revenues from ULEZ (and other revenue generation schemes targeting motorists) combined with the continued reduction in public transport is something foundationally broken with the whole system or is it now the mother of all political footballs with both sides happy to give it a good kick?

Bus services have been being cut in London since 2017....22 million miles in fact: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cpde37700jjo#:~:text=The data%2C from the DfT's,a reduction of almost 14%. It seems that TFL took Covid as a strategic opportunity to cut things further and they have not returned despite passenger numbers returning. Meanwhile motorists are seen as a revenue raising opportunity by TFL and local councils at a time when public transport is declining...drivers are caught between a rock and a hard place and seem to be the go-to solution if you have a funding gap! One has to wonder where all this revenue is actually going - when I look at the £1.5m Southwark are spending on further updates to the Dulwich Village junction (and I know this is not TFL) I do wonder whether a lot of money is being wasted on ludicrous and utterly unnecessary ideological vanity projects that are championed by a few who have the ear of their local decision-makers. Although I do often wonder whether London doesn't ban them because it would hit champagne-socialist voters the hardest and that may not be a vote winner!! 😉

One Dulwich Campaign Update | 13 Apr Southwark to close Calton Avenue to emergency vehicles…again Emergency vehicles arriving from all over London need access through the Dulwich Village junction, which is the quickest connecting route in the Dulwich area. This was recognised in 2022, when the junction was reopened to the emergency services. Indeed, the design that went out for public consultation in December last year showed Calton Avenue as a ‘cycles and emergency services route’. Now, however, Southwark Council has decided once again to block off this arm of the junction, leaving just Court Lane open to emergency vehicles. This is clearly unworkable. The LAS has previously highlighted the dangers of closing a road at this junction saying that “emergency vehicles will be forced to take long detours around congested and narrow side streets… that could further delay an emergency response” for a “critically ill or injured patient”. The Council says it wants to block off Calton Avenue because a small number of non-emergency vehicles drive through the junction. In our view, this is down to poor signage – a straightforward traffic management issue. The London Ambulance Service (LAS) was pressured into accepting the blockage at a meeting with the Council in February. However, according to a recent FOI, the London Fire Brigade confirmed “we have had no confirmation of this proposal or communications regarding this”. Why is the safety of local residents being put at risk in this way? Please email us at [email protected] if you experience delays from the emergency services, and please continue to send us photos of emergency vehicles doing three-point turns or reversing out of side streets because of 24/7 road closures anywhere in the Dulwich area.