Earl Aelfheah

There is quite a lot of silliness on both 'sides' of this change.

Cyclemonkey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Chaos and havoc! Is this a Donald Trump tweet?

Hi James, Any update on this? Is it likely that plans might be progressed for a school street at Heber? rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I believe the school applied to be made a school > street some time ago. > > jamesmcash Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Hi all, > > > > Let me look into the zebra crossing issue - > agree > > that it's very odd. > > > > As for Heber School, I'd be happy to get school > > streets put in place on Heber Road if the > school > > wants this. I know there are currently plans to > > adjust the road layout on the street to make it > > safer, but school streets would be good too. > > > > Best wishes > > James

Surely it's just a marketing campaign no? Can't see how it's a scam exactly.

nxjen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > https://twitter.com/dulwichsquare/status/129223098 > 1877891074?s=21 > > Very contrived. Why would people want to hang out > there when the more attractive and larger Park is > just down the road? I cringed at this myself.

I noticed today that M&S appear to have taken action where the council has failed, by putting in a tape barrier and encouraging people to queue in the other direction. Good on them

We were promised hoverboards, we got electric scooters. Very disappointing.

I wonder whether ?One Dulwich? would have opposed the closure of Dulwich Park to through traffic at the time on similar grounds?

You OK hun?

If you have to push past the queue outside M&S, you're getting extremely close to others (have a look at the photo of Chesterfield). It only takes someone to cough or sneeze as you're squeezing past to risk infection. The council should be making sure that it's possible to walk down the street comfortably, whilst maintaining reasonable distance from others. We're not talking about normal walking at normal clearances, because there are queues on the street which didn't exist before. And to suggest that outside in good weather, you are almost entirely risk free is certainly not in line with current guidance.

People are getting unbelievably complacent.

Penguin68 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ... but you know, heaven forbid that people should > be able to pass one another safely in the street. > > In this weather, sunny and breezy, and if you are > talking about actually walking past people and not > stopping to chat, then a metre or less of > clearance will be quite safe. The 2 metre rule > (which anyway now has been reduced) reflected long > (10 minutes or more) contact in enclosed spaces > (so still relevant for e.g. shops and > supermarkets). Actually, normal walking at normal > clearances, even unmasked, is almost entirely risk > free in these weather conditions. Bumping into > people is different, of course, but I really > wouldn't be worried about passing people quite > close in the street. > > Of course, if you yourself are symptomatic, stay > at home and isolate. Good to hear that there is no risk of Transmission ?in this weather?. And asymptomatic transmission isn?t a thing after all. As long as you?re outside you can?t catch coronavirus! No need to keep your distance or wear a mask. Great

So we need not worry about social distancing. The council should not concern itself, we can all push past each other. Ok

'war on motorists'. Pull the other one.

A different perspective perhaps on Railton LTN (Imagine if we had this in ED)

Ah, yes, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying Alice.

Just wear a mask - It's not much to ask is it? If it helps protect other people?

... but you know, heaven forbid that people should be able to pass one another safely in the street.

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > An unfair and snide response Rahrahrah. If you > cannot block off even more of the high street to > accommodate social distancing then surely the only > other option is to start to ?reclaim? parking on > side streets? It isn?t ?all about me and my car? > it is about finding a reasonable balance. For some > the car is a necessary ?evil?; unfortunately I > fall into that category. I?d love to be in a > position where that was not the case and it must > be wonderful for those (like you?) that can choose > to be car-less. I think we have to prioritise social distancing and saving local businesses right now, even if it means some loss of parking. I don't think this is a thread to talk about the gripes of some drivers, but as you have raised it - I am very much in favour of a 'reasonable balance' in terms of how public space is allocated. The current domination of motor vehicles over almost every public space is not balanced. TFL estimate that around 40% of adults in the borough, have household access to car. There are 3 million licensed vehicles in London with the average car spending 95% of it's time parked (around half of these are 'stored' on the street). A third of journeys are less than 2km. The amount of public space allocated just to cars left parked in the street is equivalent to around 10 Hyde Parks. We allocate very, very little dedicated space to pedestrians, cyclists etc. in comparison.

JohnL Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oval have actually said who's allowed rather than > who's banned > > https://twitter.com/LambethCyclists/status/1288552 > 299908997123/photo/1 They've got these signs on the Dulwich planters now I believe.

I'm suggesting that the council should ensure that people can follow the social distancing rules when visiting businesses along Lordship Lane. But you know- it's probably all about you and your car.

The rules still state that you should only meet outdoors in a group of up to six people from different households (at least as I understand it).

TheArtfulDogger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mr.chicken Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Someone's cut the tubes on the pneumatic car > > counter on Calton avenue. It looks more like a > > deliberate disablement of it rather than kids > > vandalism. > > > > One dulwich supporter? > > Careful, this edges very close to slander Good luck whoever thinks they could bring that case exactly.

Also, this is quite interesting in terms of highlighting the general inefficiency of car use, and why we need to move away from 'hopping in the car' being the default for short journeys: [edited to correct link (although both are interesting imo): ]

Encouraging more people to cycle, walk, or use public transport by dedicating space to these alternative modes of transport should also make driving easier for those who need a car or van. Thought this graphic offers a good illustration of this point (the urban superposition):