
Rockets
Member-
Posts
4,756 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Events
Blogs
FAQ
Tradespeople Directory
Jobs Board
Store
Everything posted by Rockets
-
And led Will Norman to have to intervene to get some control and calm things down a bit.
-
And, if I am not mistaken, the TFL report in question said that bus delays were being caused by congestion caused by the Dulwich LTNs....it was that that sent the councillors into a rage....
-
Ha ha Park your prejudices....boom boom...did you see what you did there? 😉 Westminster leads in terms of numbers in London (which came as some surprise) but it is interesting that those boroughs that have areas in the most central parts of London perform better than those that don't. Do you have any idea why that might be, given there is more reliance on cars the further you go out would expect the reverse to be in play? Or is there something else perhaps that we are missing in terms of the underlying data? There are 56,000+ registered cars in Southwark so some way to go don't you think? Where we live in Dulwich there are very few charging points and we have councillors who say, publicly, that EVs are not the answer and should be discouraged - which doesn't fill anyone with confidence that they are going to try and help accelerate EV rollout. Sorry if this has triggered you but I thought it was a sensible idea to encourage the council to use money from the fines and CPZ charges to reinvest it in encouraging people to take up EVs. And remember this was an idea that came to me after I saw how many more houses now have EV charging points along Friern Road and made me wonder why the council was not doing more to help facilitate the transition for on-street parking in the area.
-
So what are the council doing to help facilitate people moving to EVs...as that will clearly be the only option for a new car in 6.5 years? Not sure about anyone else but I am not seeing an increase in charging points across the area (I do on private driveways but nothing on the roads). Seems like a huge missed opportunity to me.
-
Mr Chicken - so glad it is entertaining you! I think it is often you that is trying to hound people off the thread with your aggressive, accusatory and angry contributions. As I was saying a pretty obvious solution - we hear time and time again from the council that LTNs, CPZs etc are all here to make air quality better but they do virtually nothing to help the transition to electric vehicles. They should be asked why not - it seems to me this is a massive missed opportunity for them. And Mr Chicken, roads are getting increasingly congested (and remember car ownership has been declining in London steadily for some time before any interventions) because councils are closing more and more roads to through traffic and forcing buses and other vehicles to share less and less road space as they build more and more and bigger and bigger cycle lanes, and despite claiming the opportunity for a 10 fold increase in cyclists post Covid cycling in London has increased by just 11%.
-
It's all about the revenue....
-
Surely encouraging, and helping facilitate, people to go electric should be a priority for the council if their goal really is to reduce emmissions? It's clear car ownership in Dulwich is high for a number of reasons (notably age of the population- at both ends - more families and low PTAL scores) and it will always be that way so rather than trying to convince people they don't need cars maybe embrace a form of car that reduces emissions. Seems pretty obvious.
-
Is there a diversion in place from the Goose Green end?
-
Barry road will be closed further UPDATE important
Rockets replied to tedfudge's topic in General ED Issues / Gossip
Going to be fun on Monday if Lordship Lane is still closed at Townley. I presume Thames Water must think they will have LL open again tomorrow - although there are a lot of big holes at Townley tonight and no-one working. -
I noticed there was a diversion in place at the Plough that sent traffic heading northbound down Barry Road but at the Townley Road junction no diversion is in place - is something in place at the Goose Green end?
-
Completely agree. They seem to have allowed themselves to be so blinkered by their own ideology that they have lost sight of the goal.
-
Relevant to your claim that lithium "very much is not a fire hazard". Here is a thought, if the council is so keen on putting in place a CPZ then why don't they reinvest some of the millions they get from that and the various LTN cameras in proper electric car charging infrastructure. That is far more likely to encourage more people to EVs. This evening I wandered down an East Dulwich street and what was striking was that a large percentage of houses with off street parking have electric charging points and clearly if more people have access they will make the transition and if the council is truly committed to cleaner air then surely this would be a way to it. Ensure charge points are situated outside every house and I bet EVs would quickly replace petrol and diesel.
-
BBC News - E-bike and e-scooter fires at record high in London https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66672360
-
Very interesting article about the politics behind the withdrawal of the service in Paris.
-
ULEZ expansion ruled lawful by High Court
Rockets replied to megalaki84's topic in Roads & Transport
No Malumbu - if you read the article you would realise it is saying heating is the largest source of NO2 in London air - it doesn't mention anything about roadside pollution - you've added that, not the journalist. Anyway, before you take this thread off on a tangent I only posted it to show that some are lobbying for other polluting sources to be charged in the same way as the ULEZ operates. Maybe restart the thread on ideas to combat pollution that got deleted following posts by your esteemed fellow poster as that thread was going in the right direction before it got removed as this would be a good discussion point for that. -
ULEZ expansion ruled lawful by High Court
Rockets replied to megalaki84's topic in Roads & Transport
Errrm, thanks Malumbu...did you actually read the article....? I was only posting it as I thought it was interesting that some now feel domestic and commercial heating will need some form of ULEZ not as an excuse for a snarky school lesson from you i had one of those from Mr Chicken on engineering....;-) Research suggests most of the nitrogen dioxide pollution in the London air comes from burning fuels for heating, with action demanded from the government to tackle the problem. -
Mayor scraps plans for central London zero-emission zone from 2025
Rockets replied to Rockets's topic in Roads & Transport
Malumbu - doing my best not to feed the trolls! 😉 But yes, I have been very supportive of electrification of any road vehicle as it seems to me to be the quickest fix to a problem - but I was shocked to hear how few miles the "electric" black cabs do as pure electric they are hybrid rather than full electric but any reduction has to be considered a step in the right direction. I just wish others felt the same way about helping encourage the transition to electric cars as that does seem like the most sensible near-term solution to transition away from combustion engines. -
Did anyone know this was even on the table? Now the Mayor has passed the baton to councils over this it will be interesting to hear what Southwark says - they did not respond to the BBC when approached but other councils have said they have no plans to implement it - I suspect the Mayor's office is doing a cleanse of anything buried in their plans they think might become a political hot potato ahead of the mayoral election and ahead of the general election. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-66647266
-
Interesting - the purple ones are where there are existing CPZs in play I think? They ran a consultation in 2019 for the Rotherhithe and Surrey Quays one and omitted a "yes/no" response mechanism but in 2021 ran a consultation for the Trafalgar Extension zone where they did offer a "yes/no" response. Links both below https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/trafalgarcpz/results/zonetconsultationreport2021.pdf https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s102320/Appendix 3.pdf In the Trafalgar one of all the roads consulted 19 were in support and 27 were against but they seem to have made the decision on the basis that the overall number of individual responses (120 yes/113 no) were slightly higher - which if they had applied that model in reverse to East Dulwich would have meant no CPZ anywhere. Is it just me or are they seemingly making the rules up on a ward by ward basis?
-
And the above always feels like the Achilles Heal for the council as it always seems the consultation process (for many things) is just a way for them to tick the boxes and "validate" the procedural requirement to roll them out after they have taken their decision. They got away with it during Covid but now, with the increased attention on such schemes, they may not have such an easy ride of it moving forward. I do ponder why they are not doing this in East Dulwich but the surrounding areas and I wonder if the 68% against in the previous consultation could become a thorn in their side.
-
I second that - Legal that is really interesting. I do feel the council are running down a dead-end of CPZs and they may be running out of a goodwill runway from a legal perspective. It seems to me (and before Mr Chicken jumps in - I have no legal background whatsoever) but it appears they have been able to bend the rules with the LTNs and have used that momentum on CPZs but they might come a cropper - the "second" consultation promise looks like a U-turn because they know what they are doing now is risky. I do also think the judge in the ULEZ case might have put the cat amongst the pigeons within the council/s and I bet they are determining whether the bar for the consultations needs to be raised as he was critical of the robustness of the ULEZ consultation and that asked a simple yes or no question (but they ignored the majority response against). The last thing Labour HQ will want is a load of Labour councils getting a legal pummelling on these interventions especially as the Tories are clearly making it their No.1 (and seemingly only) election focus.
-
ULEZ expansion ruled lawful by High Court
Rockets replied to megalaki84's topic in Roads & Transport
And seemingly some think domestic heating as well needs to have some sort of ULEZ as it is the largest NO2 source in London......(apologies in advance to Mr Chicken if he thinks the publication I link to has some right-wing/Tory agenda but the Mr Chicken approved media outlet The Guardian hasn't written about this subject....;-)) https://www.homebuilding.co.uk/news/ULEZ-charge-on-homes -
Of course you don't because the fact the council has stated that Dulwich PTAL scores are low doesn't suit your narrative. Maybe the part of London that you live in has good PTAL scores but Dulwich certainly does not.
-
Another batch.....Dulwich Library does seem to have something of a problem at that junction
East Dulwich Forum
Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.