Earl Aelfheah

Good to see Susan Crawford win the race for seat on Wisconsin supreme court, despite Musk's million dollar bribes. Why he is allowed to flout election laws in this way though I just do not understand.

I think it means it would be cheaper to replace it than repair it. Looks like it's the actual structure under the walkway that's rotten.

As I understand it, Dulwich Estate own the property, but it is leased to Stonegate. DE have tried to get Stonegate to return the lease so that they can do something with it, but they have not. As the lease expires this year, we'll probably see something happening to it. My money would be on flats as @fredricketts says. Whilst some might want a Wetherspoons (not me personally), that seem incredibly unlikely following the recent closure of the Capitol just up the road.

There has been some fair challenge about the different classifications and differences between US and UK. But to be fair, you have been adding just as much to muddy those waters by insisting on talking about ford Pumas etc. I thought we might simply agree that a growing trend for more, large off road vehicles in London (which there clearly is) is an undesirable one. But then you have Penguin apparently in favour of it on the grounds of 'personal choice', a very odd belief that anyone who disagrees is simply doing so out of 'envy', and because we're not 'Marxist'. Fundamentally, you do see large SUVs in Dulwich when you didn't 10 years ago. I don't want large off road vehicles in built up areas. I'm amazed there are those who do.

Henry Bessemer’s Observatory! https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/londons-alleys-green-dale-se5-74976/

Some info on it's history here https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/londons-alleys-green-dale-se5-74976/ "Later, in 1955, the alley was fully closed to road traffic"... Don't tell OneDulwich!

Walked past yesterday, it's not Thames Water, but Conway on behalf of Southwark Council. Don't know why they couldn't have done it alongside the night time resurfacing of that stretch a couple of weeks back.

As I said above, I think there have been some fair points made about some of the research and the different context between US and UK, but then also made the following point: When one in three new private cars bought in certain London boroughs (like Kensington and Chelsea, Hammersmith & Fulham, and Westminster) are large SUVs that seems like an issue. When one cannot even agree that large off road vehicles are not a sensible choice in built up areas, without talking about hate and Marxism, then I think there is some ideological dogma at play frankly.

And there it is

You may want to talk about small cars. I am not. I'm talking about the significant year on year growth in large SUVs, most of which are in driven in towns and cities. This is a fact and if you want to defend it, then do. Posting pictures of small cars is utter deflection. Again, if you think a trend for more large off road vehicles in London is a good one, then I would like to hear it explained.

Again, rather than saying "yes but there are small SUV style vehicles", or "some people may need a large off road vehicle outside London", or "but there are even bigger, more ridiculous vehicles in the US", how about acknowledging that there are more and more of these cars being driving in London. Again, if you think a trend for more large off road vehicles in London is a good one, then I would like to hear it explained.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-56647128#:~:text=Three quarters of all SUVs,areas is a large SUV. "The largest SUVs are most popular in three London boroughs - Kensington and Chelsea, Hammersmith & Fulham, and Westminster. One in three new private cars bought in these areas is a large SUV."

I don't get the insistence on talking about mini SUVs, whilst ignoring the conversation about Large SUVs (which are what most people mean when they talk about SUVs). It feels like deflection. You don't think an 4X4 Range Rover sport is an example of an SUV? Because they call it themselves "The original luxury SUV"

No, it very explicitly breaks down 'SUVs' into different categories from 'mini', to 'large'. It shows year on year growth trend in all categories, including 'SUV Large'.

https://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/suv-sales-up-by-more-than-a-fifth "...sales of SUVs, including large SUVs, Have been increasing significantly in the UK, with SUV registrations exceeding one million in 2023, and SUVs now accounting for a substantial portion of all new car registrations" And again, if you think a trend for more large off road vehicles in London is a good one, then I would like to hear it explained.

Middle class gang warfare.

Very, very few people need a large off road vehicle in London. Yet, their numbers are growing quickly. It is not unusual to see large SUVs in a number of inner London suburbs, Dulwich included. Something that was almost unheard of 10 years ago. If you think this trend is a good one, then I would like to hear it explained. Because I can't see how it is desirable in any way.

I’m just focussed on them, because it’s what most people mean when they talk of SUVs. You seem to want to talk about smaller vehicles. That feels like deflection (although some of your other points are fair). No one has said large SUVs are a majority of vehicles (in fact I explicitly said they’re a minority), but their numbers are growing quickly, particularly in inner London (bizarrely). Large off road vehicles are not a sensible choice in built up areas. Perhaps we can agree on that?

Don't think I said they're everywhere, I said there are more and more of those types of car (Volvo XC90s, BMW X7, Range Rovers etc). There are. They're still a minority of all vehicles as I said already, but there is no doubt their numbers are on the rise. The growth in medium and large SUVs is accelerating year on year. It's not uncommon to see 4X4's in Dulwich. And the rise in car size is not an inevitable consequence of electrification as Rockets suggests. There are plenty of small electric cars. The trend for car bloat precedes the move to electric, its the result of marketing. Again, I would like to hear someone explain why ever bigger, heavier, higher fronted, off road vehicles should be welcomed in a built up areas like London? And not with 'a ford Puma isn't that bad'. That's deflection.

I'm not sure, but think it might be. Looked like there were pipes going in.

I don't think this is correct. NCAP just ensures that they're not more dangerous than the maximum that standards allows. It doesn't mean that all compliant vehicles are as safe as each other. If both a mini and a SUV meet the NCAP standard it does not mean that being hit by them will result in broadly the same outcome. Again, I have never heard anyone explain why a general trend towards bigger, heavier, higher fronted vehicles in London is desirable.

The issue is primarily bonnet height. I agree that there are a lot of smaller SUV style vehicles, which definitely aren't as dangerous as the big SUVs, but they're also more dangerous than a standard saloon. There are also more and more, properly big SUVs - the ironically named 'Defenders' and the like, especially round Dulwich. US studies have looked in detail at the different bonnet heights (and shape) make to the severity of injury (below graphic is taken from one of these; They didn't just look at the super massive SUVs, but a range of vehicles and what is clear is the higher the bonnet, generally the higher the risk of serious injury). Similar EU studies have also found hood height to be predictive of greater harm. There will be exceptions, but this move toward higher vehicles, both SUV and SUV 'style' vehicles is not one that is making streets safer. The average width of a new car in the EU and UK passed 180cm in the first half of 2023, having grown an average of 0.5cm each year since 2001. New cars have become so bloated that half of them are too wide to fit in parking spaces designed to the minimum on-street standards. Again, I have never heard anyone explain why a general trend towards bigger, heavier, higher fronted vehicles in London is desirable.

It's very annoying as they actually did a good job of working on resurfacing the road there over a series of nights to minimise disruption, only to finish and then start digging up another bit during the day.

Not just about weight (although that is a big factor), but also the high bonnet. An SUV / suv cross with a high bonnet is about twice as likely to kill a pedestrian in a collision as a similar sized saloon car. 8 times more likely to kill a child. They're designed in a way that causes significantly more upper body and head injuries, which is typically what leads to serious injury and death. It's equivalent to being shot in the leg, or shot in the heart / head. Neither is good, but your more likely to survive one over the other. There is no good reason for it, except marketing / fashion and there are some very negative impacts. This is a complete misunderstanding of the statistics. That isn't because they are more dangerous cars, but because there are more of them / they are more popular (for now). The growth in SUVs / SUV cross vehicles however has been exponential, and they are considerably more dangerous. So it is a legitimate concern. Also, the growth in the number of 4X4 off road vehicles in London is unbelievable. I don't want cars which have been designed to easily leave the road and career through any obstacle in a built up area. Look at what happened in Wimbledon. I have never heard anyone explain why it's desirable in any way to have bigger, heavier, higher fronted vehicles in London.

Fundamentally, ever bigger, heavier, higher fronted, off road vehicles should not be welcomed in a built up area. We should insist on stricter safety standards / regulation. It isn't that long ago that we laughed at US drivers for taking these ridiculous vehicles everywhere, inevitably, car companies have managed to sell the same damaging illusion of SUVs as offering 'freedom' to many in the UK.