Earl Aelfheah

Awful and cowardly attack. I really hope these people are caught. Glad you?re brother is OK.

If you prioritise people over cars, it massively improves quality of life, the environment, the economy - it's been shown time and time again to be a really positive thing to do in most city settings. But it takes bold action and leadership. Most people, if asked about changes which will make driving more difficult, will they support it in principle, but don't want to make changes themselves The reality is that we have to tackle the general carnage caused by turning over the public realm to motor cars at the expense of people, community and environment. The Council should be bold and if people don't like the result, they can vote them out. The phoney consultations help no one, increase frustration and in the end, just create more opposition.

If you make the area more welcoming for those who are on foot or bike, it is good for business. There is so much evidence to back this up. Very few people drive to Dulwich Village to shop.

James - will there be any temporary widening of pavements to make it possible to social distance? Walking in the road in order to pass someone, is becoming increasingly dangerous.

Don't get me wrong - I think the Council's approach is far from ideal. But the biggest problem is how little they are doing and how slowly they are moving to solve the problem of local pollution and dearth of decent alternatives to the car.

They appear to be a group looking to water down the already depressingly timid efforts of Southwark to improve the environment. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All, > If you actually want your voice heard look here > and sign-up - a fantastic, non-political, > pragmatic group taking a balanced approach to the > road challenges around Dulwich. It was set-up by > people who were fed-up with the council's > reluctance to engage in a balanced area-wide > debate on traffic issues. > > https://www.onedulwich.uk/ > > 156 people have registered thus far and hopefully > this will create the leverage needed to get our > councillors to finally start taking a more > democratic approach to these issues. > > And James, you were misled - the baseline > measurement was during the road works - perhaps > you would like to investigate further and let us > know what you find out?

... although, the CPZ has nothing to do with encouraging cycling (if anything, it makes it more attractive for households to keep a car).

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The extremely steep hills at either end of ED ( > Dog Kennel and Forest ) are quite likely a factor > as to why more people do not cycle to commute, > even Greendale involves a hill. Add in rain and > wind and it is a rare cyclist that?ll go those > routes day in day out, especially on a ?heavy? > hire bike. > > This is why it is irritating that cyclists who do > not live in the area have been able to access the > consultation process to push CPZ. > > Don?t know why Southwark has been unwilling to > invest in Santander bikes elsewhere in the borough > though. Hire bikes are intended for shop journeys (i.e. cycling to Brixton tube, Herne Hill or Peckham), or just the local ED shops and back). There are lot's of people who also make the longer journey into central London on their own bikes every day (myself included). You can easily avoid going over Denmark Hill.

We had 3 months for Southwark to prepare the streets for the easing of lockdown. During this time, it would have been easy to extend pavements (as simply as cones and some signs), introduce temporary, segregated cycle lanes and put in some temporary road closures. The window of opportunity has been thoroughly missed. Traffic on Lordship Lane is, this week, back to pre-COVID levels. It is impossible to visit the shops on Lordship Lane and comply with social distancing rules. As a result businesses will suffer and potentially, peoples health will suffer. The slow action by Southwark, when compared Lambeth just next door, is shameful.

Lot of good things happening in Lambeth and Hackney in terms of low traffic neighbourhoods

I don't like CPZs because they just entrench the idea that public space should primarily be used for the purposes of driving and long term car storage. I would prefer that we low traffic neighbourhoods, segregated cycle routes, and a much greater proportion of public space given over to people rather than cars. If we're going to create healthy, happy and sustainable communities at some point we have to stop giving up to 80% of the available public / communal space to motor vehicles.

As we don't have tube stations, cycle superhighways, any of the other London wide dockless bike hire schemes.... as there are no extensions to pavements, or temporary segregated bike lanes... Perhaps we could just get some Santander bikes? I'm not sure whether TFL and Southwark are aware, but we do also pay taxes in the south of the borough.

How about fixing this glaring hole in the provision of Santander bikes?

I hoped that the council might take the opportunity to widen pavements, slow traffic and make Lordship Lane cleaner, safer and more attractive. Certainly if there is any hope of the local shops recovering as the lockdown is eased, then there needs to be room made for social distancing along the Lane. So far though, Southwark seem happy with narrow pavements, multiple pinch-points and speeding cars.

That's a real shame about Next Door

I think most people are happy to have a conversation about race, as long as it's respectful, open and honest... Not on social media of course, that's just a shouting match, but in real life people are pretty reasonable. It's our duty to discuss it imo, to recognise the hurt that many are feeling right now and not to ignore it, or pretend that there isn't an issue.

I am genuinely worried about how quickly we now seem to be moving to 'unlock'. If we relax the 2 m rule (which is largely being ignored already), then social distancing will effectively be over. I was listening to the medical / scientific adviser to the NZ government on the radio and his advice was, strict lock down, coupled with effective track and trace and quarantine for those entering the country for 6-8 weeks (I think - might have the time frame slightly wrong) and we could in his opinion, eradicate the virus. The half measures, partial tracing, kinda lockdown etc. is all a recipe for a second wave. Of course, this is what we ought to have been doing from the beginning, but we are where we are now. I understand that we need to get things moving again, but the oft cited 'public health vs economic damage' narrative represents a totally false dichotomy imo. A second wave will cause a much deeper and longer recession.

Could be young kids. Mine have been known to suddenly decide that they need to go RIGHT NOW!

People who litter should be put in the bin

Or even bring some of the cycle hire schemes to the south of the borough

If the council want to make it easier for people to social distance and support local shops as things start opening up again, then the single most pressing local challenge is along Lordship Lane. Then there is the need to quickly create space outside of schools (which they are taking some action on, but not everywhere). Lastly, they should be looking to create segregated cycle lanes into central London to enable people to get to work, whilst avoiding public transport or having to resort to cars. This could most obviously be done along the 'Southwark Spine' route (so down Crystal palace and Bellenden Road an on northwards). They need to be radical. All they have done so far is to bring forward a few discrete projects they had planned already. Lambeth on the other hand are creating new 'low traffic' neighbourhoods, widening pavements and creating previously unplanned cycle routes. They are acting with urgency. We need much bolder and strategic action.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Everyone knows that these measures have nothing to > do with social distancing, it is wanton > opportunism by the council to circumvent their own > consultation and due-diligence processes (which, > it has to be said, are usually implemented with > the same attitude to democracy, fairness and > balance as a directive from the politburo). > > Take a look at their long list of fast-tracked > programmes throughout the borough, all but a > handful are those that they had in the > consultation system already and have nothing to do > with Covid. > > If these changes cause the problems many suspect > then will have to ensure those who supported them > are held accountable for their actions - but, as > we see so many times with this version of the > Labour party no-one is ever responsible and it is > always someone else's fault. I agree with this. They have accelerated schemes they were planning already, instead of responding to the current crisis. As it happens, I'm not opposed to the former, but I am very disappointed at their failure in respect to the latter.

Lambeth have acting incredibly quickly to bring in new emergency schemes, aimed at enabling social distancing and active travel, in response to COVID-19. They have created several 'low traffic neighbourhoods' in just weeks, extended pavements and put in temporary cycle lanes and road closures. Southwark on the other hand have just accelerated a few schemes which they were pursuing anyway. Nothing new and very little in East Dulwich. It is impossible to shop on Lordship Lane and to keep 2 metres distance from other people - yet they have not widened the pavements, even at the worst pinch points. I don't have a problem with the Melbourne Grove barrier per se, but I do wish that the council would follow Lambeth's lead and take a wider view.

The parties have started already. Blaring music and lots of people in a garden near us. No social distancing going on, but lots of weed smoking. This is going to be a tedious weekend.

Lockdown is done. The government has lost all moral authority. People will hopefully use good judgement but beyond that? I think people will do what they think reasonable (as instructed by the Cabinet) and some will get be sensible and others will get it horribly wrong. But that's what happens when you sweep the rules away to protect one person.