Rockets

You're clearly abusing the forum and treating it, and the people who post here, with contempt.

Earl, thank you, thank you, thank you..... the funniest thing with that post is that it was actually a "campaign" post that Southwark Cyclists put out to try to encourage its members to respond to the Dulwich LTN consultation after Southwark extended the consultation response period (because they had way too many people saying no!!!). I mean the Southwark Cyclists post actually took people to a page to spoon feed them on how to respond... Of all your own goals this is by far the most impressive!!! The gift that just keeps on giving and a timely reminder of the lengths the cycle lobby went to manipulate the Dulwich consultation process.....DOH!!!! Where's that facepalm emoji.... https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/new-data-reveals-huge-success-of-dulwich-traffic-measures/ Respond to the consultation here! The deadline has been extended until Sunday 18, July. Uncategorized No Comments This month, three schemes in the Dulwich area are being consulted on as part of a big review. At Southwark Cyclists, we think there is a lot to love about the schemes, with some of the measures leading to amazing increases in walking and cycling. But for the schemes to be considered really successful in achieving the council’s worthy aims, certain tweaks are needed, and more measures need to be introduced. If you’d like to read more about our thoughts on the scheme, read our blog post here. Respond to the consultation and prioritise answering question 2 under each measure. Our responses are as follows: Traffic filter in Dulwich Village Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Timed closure at junction of Dulwich Village/Burbage Road with College Road/Gallery Road Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Make the camera on Dulwich Village operate 24/7 and in both directions, so it becomes what in other parts of London is called a “bus gate”. Replace the camera on Burbage Rd with a 24/7 modal filter so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Timed closure at junction of Turney Road and Burbage Road Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Replace the camera with a 24/7 modal filter so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Timed closure at junction of Townley Road with East Dulwich Grove Select “Option 😧 Retain the measure, but modify/ reduce the hours of restrictions” Add: Make the camera on Dulwich Village operate 24/7 and in both directions, so it becomes what in other parts of London is called a “bus gate” Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Traffic filter on Melbourne Grove (South) Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Traffic Filters on Melbourne Grove (North), Tintagel Crescent, Elsie Road and Derwent Grove Select “Option B: Retain it as it is” Northbound traffic filter on Champion Hill Select “Option D, Retain the measure, but modify/ enhance it with other features” Add: Make the filter operate in both directions so it becomes no through route for motor vehicles but full access for walking and cycling. Install additional planting and seating. Introduce additional modal filters in the area, in particular on Red Post Hill to create a longer, safer, north south cycle route Install cycle tracks on all main roads Respond to the consultation today!

And what happens if you have a scuffle outside a pub, someone falls awkwardly and they then die? The more you post the more blinkered it appears you are. Earl, I have completely lost track of the point you are trying to make and, I suspect, you have to now. You're tying yourself in knots in the vain hope of continuing an argument - it's all getting a little surreal now.

Clearly - time for an @administrator yellow card perhaps? Earl is clearly abusing the right to use the forum and is trying to ruin it for everyone else. All gone a bit too Mr Chicken for my liking.

Earl can't even get that fact right!!!!

But Malumbu - maybe you should open your mind a little. Consider this: do you need the mass or velocity of a car to knock someone over, or to make them stumble and fall? No. Of course not. With many of the deaths caused to pedestrians by cyclists it is not the collision but the fall that does the damage. You may have noticed that many of those who have been killed are elderly and as First Mate rightly points out you often don't know there is a bike approaching you at speed until it goes past you.

Did Calton finally go live today and has anyone seen any additional signage going up? Does anyone on the pro-side think that the signage on Calton is adequate and won't be entrapping unsuspecting motorists?

Ha ha...given you obsession with who is behind One Dulwich do you not think you should know who is on the transport sub-committee of an organisation you are a member of given they are setting transport policy for the Dulwich Society - something you clearly care a lot about....? BTW was it you who asked admin to redact <admin - removed> name from the thread when I told everyone about her active travel lobbying work for LCC etc? If not, any idea who it might have been and why they were so keen for it to be redacted......? On this were you aware of the presence of the local Village Labour councillors in the transport sub-committee meetings?

Well, given that is not an offence to cycle whilst using a phone it's probably a good idea....I see plenty, on Lime bikes in particular, doing so concentrating more on their phone than what is ahead of them.... On a serious note do you think that is something that doesn't need to be changed?

Sorry what a load of utter claptrap....you seem to be suggesting the moment someone gets on a bike they suddenly becoming impervious to causing accidents....and if every car journey was replaced by a journey on a bike then there would be zero accidents or injuries.....goodness me... Here we have Cycle Brain of the Year!!!

Surely stricter regulation of bicycles leads to safer roads?

Maybe take this chat to the thread in relation to this but it looks like members of Dulwich Society tried exactly that...that's when it all went a bit pear-shaped...

I am not. I am just wondering why an "independent" local campaign group, which seems to get funding/support from Southwark Council, has decided that increases in traffic congestion and pollution on Croxted Road is down to private schools in Dulwich....when we know that TFL said the increases were down to the LTNs - myabe the two are interlinked but no mention of that from the campaign group.....

Ha ha, if you'd been in a car and threatened to run someone over you'd probably have left yourself open to a threatening behaviour charge or using a car as a weapon or maybe ended-up in a Jeremy Vine video. You really should not be threatening to run anyone over even when on a bike.....perhaps you were just doing your bit for cyclist/pedestrian relations....or maybe the red mist descended....

Thanks Earl, another great example of Cycle Brain..... The point remains - there are billions of pounds every year spent on making our roads safer in terms of vehicles, there are laws and monitoring in place to ensure compliance or catch those who break the laws and more clearly needs to be done. If I go out in a car, drive at 25 mph in a 20mph zone hit and kill someone I will face the full face of the law and regardless of whether the pedestrian stepped out in front of me or not I would expect to be charged with dangerous driving. If I go out on my bike, cycle at 25mph in a 20mph zone hit and kill someone in exactly the same circumstances I can claim the speed limit does not apply to me so speed cannot be used as a factor. That is wrong and surely even you can acknowledge that?

No-one is pitting pedestrians and cyclists against each other - don't be so daft. We are highlighting that pedestrians are at risk from cyclists. Let me introduce you to a new concept "Cycle Brain" - where cycle lobbyists refuse to acknowledge that there is an increasing risk to pedestrians from cyclists. Let's take a look at a classic example here from our dear friend at the Guardian Peter Walker: https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/bike-blog/article/2024/may/21/uk-dangerous-cycling-offence-achieve-nothing A piece purely designed to throw attention back onto cars - we see it every time anyone dares to suggest to the cycle lobby that can we please, as well as dealing with the issue of damage caused by cars, look at damage caused by cyclists. Immediately there is a pavlovian BUT WHAT ABOUT THE CARS!!! response - seemingly to deflect attention away from cars. Now, here's another piece featuring someone called Peter Walker (not the Guardian journalist) but someone whose wife was killed by a cyclist and how ludicrous it was that her death was not investigated by the police accident investigation team because..."it wasn't involving a motorised vehicle". The police concluded that no crime had been committed by the cyclist but the bar for cycling offences is very, very high - way too high if you look at the case of Hilda Griffiths. Given that you can ride at any speed on a bike and cite that as a defence it's clear the laws needed to be reviewed. Allied to that if anyone does get charged for injuring someone on a bike it is more often than not, under a law from 1861 entitled Wanton and Furious driving. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cjr7rkgrpldo So let's all agree that more needs to be done to reduce car accidents and death and injuries from that - and let me be clear for the 1,000th time - no-one is minimsing that or denying that. But can we also agree that the laws in relation to cycling need to be updated and that it is in all of our interests for people who kill or injure pedestrians whilst riding a bike face the full face of the law if they have been found to have cycled irresponsibly or that excessive speed was involved.

And the fact is that some on here come complaining about One Dulwich are actually part of an organisation which seems to have become increasingly politicised. You know what they say about "those who shout loudest have the most to hide....."

Is Solve The School Run being used as a political lobbying tool? Trying to pin the congestion on Croxted Road on private schools seems to be a stretch to say the least and we need to remember that the very same Croxted Road was the subject of a most unholy argument between TFL (who said that Croxted Road congestion was caused by the Dulwich LTNs) and Southwark Councillors (who angrily said it wasn’t - they made TFL staff cry and Will Norman had to jump in to keep the peace). Now Solve The School Run state, on their website, that they are supported by Southwark Council - coincidence or cosy?

You certainly are aren’t you, almost obsessional. I don’t know how many times I have to tell you I am not One Dulwich, I have never spoken to anyone from One Dulwich, I do not know, nor care, who is behind One Dulwich. I am sorry, what? Clearly the pro-LTN branch of The Dulwich Society. Are you a member of the Travel and Evironment sub-committee per chance? Are you a member of the Labour Party as well? This is fascinating and the plot thickens….read on…. Now remember back in June there was a thread on the shenanigans taking place at the Dulwich Society which you started Dulville Res? Well there were suggestions from others during the discussion on that thread that the Travel and Environment sub-committee gained a new chair some time ago and the DV councillors started attending the sub-committee but not any others. That sub-committee also gained a lot of new members and some suggested the sub-committee had been hijacked for political purposes and to push the DS to support the DV LTN. In June I did some research from publically available and posted documents and found that the sub-committee chair was Laurie Johnston and I posted details of her roles as an active travel lobbyist. Someone appears to have then contacted admin of this forum to have her name removed as you can see below. You bleat on about transparency in One Dulwich but someone clearly doesn’t want any transparency within the Dulwich Society or at least details of the lobbying that has been done by said person. I would love to know who requested to have the name removed…..and why…..@dulvilleres do you know? Now why on earth would someone not want Laurie’s name mentioned in relation to her active travel lobbying efforts or her award from the LCC as Active Travel Campaigner….? I wonder….. Maybe One Dulwich isn’t the only organisation you should be obsessing about the political influence within…. Post from June 7th 2024 Wow...just read the SGM of 2021 and it is very interesting particularly where it says in bold: The Travel & Environment Sub-Committee does not make decisions on behalf of the Dulwich Society. Was there some sort of takeover of the sub-committee by active travel lobbyists? Very interesting to see that new chair was <name removed> who is: Volunteer Chair of Southwark Living Streets A member of Dulwich and Herne Hill Safer Routes to School which cites partners as: Dulwich Society Living Streets A seemingly now defunct group called Clean Air Parents Network - I wonder if this is any relation to Clean Air Dulwich? who won London Cycling Campaign Campaigner Active Travel Campaigner Award: LCC said: "<name removed> from Dulwich and Herne Hill Safe Routes to School was awarded active travel campaigner of the year for all the work she’s done, particularly around Our Healthy Streets Dulwich and the Streetspace measures that brought us Dulwich Square." on accepting the award she said the below (I did read it and thought is Clean Air Dulwich a group - it seems to be more an anonymous online lobby group but very interested that she called them out specifically amongst actual groups.......: She said: "I've learned at the feet of greats like Alastair Hanton and Jeremy Leach. We are proud to work collaboratively with amazing groups such as Mums for Lungs, Clean Air Dulwich, Southwark Cyclists, Lambeth Cyclists, London Living Streets, Better Streets groups, the new love my LTN groups that we're getting to know, and more." who made deputations to Southwark Council on behalf of Dulwich and Herne Hill Safe Routes in support of changes to Townley Road in 2015 Edited June 13, 2024 by Administrator Name removed under request.

Calton is clearly (or not due to it being so poorly signposted) a revenue generating trap laid by the council.

??? What? Edited to add: Ah I have just worked it out. Because I added more detail to make my point in response to Malumbu you think I did that to make you look like a cold-hearteded person to make it look like you were saying "so sad" to the number of serious injuries caused by cycliats..ha ha, don't flatter yourself and I am not that scheming...my update was to make my point to Malumbu with actual data on injuries after his incorrect claims. Thanks for reminding me though because Snowy promised us an expose of how they thought I had manipulated the findings from the Hilda Griffiths enquiry...Snowy? So what do you think of those stats...two serious injuries a week is a lot and something we need to deal with or perfectly acceptable when comparing with injuries from cars?

As I was saying....

Ha ha...spoken like someone who knows there is a problem....

Clearly One Dulwich are doing a great job as it is making some people so irate for exposing the lies and manipulation that have been part of this process from the council and their supporters. When people start saying things like "it's been 5 years let's move on" you know some are afraid of scrutiny and accountability. They sound like a politician trying to bury a scandal.

Earl, Two things. No it does not apply to TFL if you challenge the PCN - TFL will give you 20 metres grace. Secondly, answer me this. Southwark say you must not touch the line at the junction of Overhill and we know that 100 metres down the road TFL allows you to at Underhill and stops their bus lane far enough ahead to allow for 20 metres grace. But just 50 metres down the road from Overhill, still in Southwark, to park in front of the shops or go to the builders merchant everyone has to break the bus lane - is this then a revenue opportunity in waiting for the council? The bus lane is not broken there at all. So are all these vehicles liable for a fine too?