first mate

So some of you now seem to be arguing that it is possible for police to pull over someone cycling at speed, if they can simultaneously note they are not pedalling at that moment and can see they are using a throttle, but if they are just exceeding a speed limit ( say 20mph) it would be difficult, if not impossible, for them to do the same?

Are you sure. I had thought 20mph zones can be placed and enforced using by-laws, which are effected locally by the LA and enforced by them? FYI 20mph is not a National speed limit, is is discretionary and set at local level, according to need see: 4. The overall speed limit framework, including the setting of national limits for different road types, and which exceptions to these general limits can be applied, is the responsibility of the government. The 3 national speed limits in England are: the 30mph speed limit on roads with street lighting (sometimes referred to as restricted roads) the national speed limit of 60mph on single carriageway roads the national speed limit of 70mph on dual carriageways and motorways These national limits are not, however, appropriate for all roads. The speed limit regime enables traffic authorities to set local speed limits in situations where local needs and conditions suggest a speed limit that is different from the respective national speed limit.

Think it is about clarity. I disagree it is really easy to distinguish between all the types of bike. The only way to do that would be to run stops on different e-bikes to check them out. Surely, if you are going to run stops it makes sense to do them for cycling behaviour that presents a risk, rather than checking technology? Moreover, if you are prepared to have cyclists pulled over for travelling in excess of 15.5mph, why not 20mph, surely all the same caveats apply?

Alice, you may have nailed one of the issues, which is presumably a key holder who needs to find time to change flyers and so on. I take on board the issue about free advertising for businesses, but would not put small, very local businesses into the same category as all other businesses. That said, I can see rationale for voluntary and NFP taking precedence, are these organisations actually making use of the boards?

Just to make the point that the water is very muddied read this review on the range of e-bikes on offer https://e-bikereview.uk/how-fast/ Seems even pedal assist can be tweaked up. Nowhere are any of these described as electric scooters or motorbikes. Perception is all.

Unfortunately, time is not on our side. The e-bike has landed and is creating all sorts of issues that might not have occurred if we only had push bikes heading the UK cycling revolution.

Love that you call them electric motorbikes. Come on Earl, some look like legal e-bikes, that is the point isn't it? It is a very slippery slope. A whole can of worms is being opened up by the advent of the e-bike and we need to wake up and address growing issues before it is too late. Legislating against mod kits is super tricky and it may be easier to adopt my route. I am open to persuasion though.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the push bike element, not least because as technology progresses it may become increasingly difficult to distinguish between some push bikes and some e-bikes and, I suspect, dual or hybrid use will become the majority choice, especially round here, where local geography is an obstacle to broader uptake of the push bike. Must admit, I see more school kids on scooters and Lime bikes, not that many on pushbikes. Not sure the health benefits that clear cut, but there we go.

I think we are discussing two different things; the first is enforcing legislation for dangerous/ careless cycling behaviour (already agreed and discussed); the second to apply 20mph locally (bye laws) to all bicycles whether e-bike or not, with much stiffer penalties for anything pulled over for exceeding 20mph in a spot check, and subsequently found to be an illegally souped up e-bike. You are also talking about halting sale of illegal e-bikes at source? I believe the issue is that when sold they come with limiters and are therefore legal, only afterwards are they altered/retro-fitted. I think this was all addressed in a Panorama on e-bikes.

Sorry Earl, if you live in ED or DV then I apologise, I thought you lived further afield. I had suggested spot checks ages ago, to much resistance by some, glad we can now agree this would be useful. Do you also agree to the local 20 mph as well? Of course, this would apply to all road users and I am more than happy for any cars breaking speed limits, running red lights, or god forbid, driving on the pavement, to be penalised.

The issue is already muddied because regulated e-bikes look like non-regulated e-bikes and may behave in the same way, by mounting pavements and running red lights. Because they look very similar legislation has to apply to all or none. I prefer the former and, obviously, this would include push cycles. Glad you agree there is a difference in cycling culture over here. I think we all know the reasons why that may be, but we are where we are and the more 'unhealthy' speed obsessed aspect needs to change.

Earl, please cut it out. I am not lying or making things up, as you keep inferring. You keep saying you want a 'good faith' discussion, so try to practise what you preach. I very much doubt you know what 'everyone in Dulwich Village' experiences or thinks, not least because you do not even live in the area. Does it occur to you that I see stuff you don't because I am a local? What are the dates for the data you are looking at and what is the data you are comparing it to? Do we need really need to wait for a couple of accidents to happen before we address this? If as many cars were daily running red light, I am sure you would want it addressed. Doing some spot checks would be a great idea and once word gets around it might act as some sort of deterrent. of course, if we can do spot checks for running red lights, without the need for licensing, we could probably do the same for exceeding 20mph (using bye laws). Despite your statements that changes to the junction are five years old, I must remind you that there have been major changes in only the last 6 months. Visually the area looks very different and I think that may be contributing to some of the behaviour.

Given your recent behaviour, Earl, I think it is a bit rich for you to be calling out others. Leaving that aside, I think if we were talking only about push cycles, you would probably have a point but the issue is muddied by e-bikes, some of which do not go faster than 15.5 mph and others which do. You and others slide around that point by saying that the souped up variety are legally not bicycles but scooters. The problem is they behave exactly like cyclists, driving on pavements, running red lights and so on. Do we really have enough data about the behaviour of the whole range of e-bike riders, to support your assertion, given how new the e-bike phenomenon is over here? I also read research somewhere, cannot remember exactly, that cyclist behaviour in the UK was very different from that in say The Netherlands, where cycling behaviour tends to be more sedate and more respect given to pedestrians, with many more sit up and beg type bikes. The assertion was that over here speed and getting around as fast as possible dominates. It was felt that a 'lycra lad' culture contributed to this.

The notice boards are a reasonable size, surely there should be room for both types of leaflets, after all we are meant to be a community? Unless space is extremely limited, it feels a little divisive for a councillor to say private businesses cannot post. All businesses are important for the lifeblood of a community too, aren't they?

Thank you for finally acknowledging these events are happening. I am asking what should be done to address these issues? This is a genuine question? I honestly believe it an example of an accident waiting to happen.

Whatever you are then Earl, cycling activist, born again cyclist, I find it odd you have zero response to the behaviour I witnessed yesterday and that I am seeing with increasing frequency. As someone that wants to massively increase the volume of cyclists on our streets, how do you think we should address the issue of cyclists running red lights and cycling on pavements?

I am surprised that our cycling activists, Earl and Malumbu, have absolutely no comment about me being chastised by an e-bike rider for being in his way as he ran a red light, followed by 5 other cyclists, two carrying children. Don't you think this is careless/dangerous or is it just another 'shoulder shrugging' moment, as far as you are concerned?

This evening, as I was crossing Dulwich Square at the red lights on foot I was warned by a cyclist on an e-bike, "to be careful" as circumvented me and went sailing through the lights. He was followed by a group of cyclists, around 5, two carrying children, who also all went through the red lights.

I think Earl you miss the point, your constant deflection, obfuscation, nitpicking, messing with forum etiquette, are ways to detract and sabotage, we all know that but repeatedly trying to rubbish points made by others, by almost any means you can dream up, in the hope they will eventually give up, is akin to censorship. Admit it Earl, you want to close down all objection to LTNs, CPZs, Dulwich Square and anything that threatens your views on those subjects. You seem absolutely desperate in your attempts to do this, even going so low as to accuse me of lying and making stuff up. It all began to make sense when Rockets revealed your shirty post to James Barber about how local speed humps were spoiling your driving experience, many years ago. I guess you must have experienced something akin to a religious conversion around cycling and like many converts you now feel it necessary to cajole others to join up.

My guess is posters might think you have set up an online clothing emporium of some sort. I do like your new portrait by the way, it is alarmingly similar to how I have pictured you, in the past.

Earl you are hilarious, your sheer wit and invention are wrong-footing us all.

Perhaps it's one of those alternative 'facts'.

I guess for the conspiracy theorists on here at least if the One Dulwich updates appear largely on a thread called One Dulwich updates, it means you can hold your noses and ensure you don't click. For others, it means they know where they can read the updates. Some forumites may not be aware of One Dulwich, it might be a welcome surprise.

Hang on, given current trends in cycling behaviour locally the risk to pedestrians might increase if more people cycle as they are doing. For the most part, cars do not routinely drive on local pavements, nor have I seen a cars running red lights with the same frequency, locally; granted that is just what I have seen.

As I said, LTNs, CPZ, Dulwich Square, One Dulwich, all interlinked, so any could pop up on many of the threads really.