first mate

It is interesting that it is the same tree Gala 'reduced' because I believe it interfered with their perimeter fencing. Gala are proposing an increased footprint and extended event, this year. Is this tree possibly in the way?

Yes, so long as pedestrians are mingling and mounted cyclists are, well, staying in their lane. Saw a female cyclist pelt across the pedstrianised area on her bike. I caught her eye and she looked sheepish, just for a moment.

Do One Dulwich provide guides on how members of its affiliated groups living in other boroughs can contribute to and affect consultation results on road design and traffic management at local level? Does it provide detailed guidelines on how to harness social media at local level to get the 'right' messaging out and quash dissenting voices. Does it advise how to lobby councillors and takeover/ 'invade' lical groups with political clout? Maybe it already does, if not, perhaps it should, just to balance things.

Including all the fair weather cyclists, so it will be interesting to see if careless cycling increases or people start to be more careful. There will also be more pedestrians as the weather improves, so let's hope cyclists stick to the cycling areas.

I cannot stand speeding drivers and I am pleased to say I have a clean record on that score. I am diligent about observing 20mph and not only in town. I would not dream of jumping a red light, whether in a car or on a bicycle. I don't know if I have just been unusually lucky or perhaps it is because I have never been a speed freak, but I have had near misses both with other motorists and with other cyclists, the latter outweighing the former by some margin- which is surprising I know, but that is my experience. I have had no issues with pedestrians and no near misses with pedestrians when cycling, but there again, I do not cycle fast.

Ah, not really, since Vanity Square has become something of a badly behaved cyclist hotspot, where jumping the red lights is de rigeur, even with your kids on a cargo bike and some cyclists zip through at quite a crack, whizzing across the pedestrian square as a shortcut. I was simply pointing out that getting 20mph set to include all road users does not seem to be the huge, complex and impossible task some of you have painted it. Enforcement, a bit trickier but not impossible either.

Okay, so speed, weight and size of cars is the main issue? I did not say it was unreasonable to want cars to adhere to 20mph at all; I would be very happy for that to happen, so that is a shared aim, only I want all road users included, not just some. As to weight and size, I also agree, I do not see the need for enormous vehicles in town, but if made to adhere to 20mph by speed limiters and seriously penalised for any breaches, I guess I could live with larger cars, given speed as a major driver re safety, has been addressed. Where we differ is the whole widening paths, greening streets approach, if 20 mph is adhered to, penalties are increased for breaches surely that is the main thing? I also think that if you are going to push for rafts of measures to make life as difficult for car drivers, should you be leading by example and sacrificing your own car use, however occasional?

Clearly you do not or choose not to read what others post, so you can deflect and perpetuate your accusation of manufactured culture wars. I said I would not have an issue with cars being fitted with speed limiters. I am sure you have done your homework, so please tell us how this would work in practice? What legislation, if any, would be required? Would cars have to be retrofitted with tech, how would this be done? What sort of timeframe and what costs? How might he geofencing aspect work? So, what else do you want? Come Malumbu, here is your chance to give us your vision. Of course, I assume you will no longer ever use a car? After all, from what some of you say we can and should all do without cars and simply rely on a combination of bicycle and public transport to get us anywhere, whether that be to see a relative, to visit a second home in France, or to go to hospital.

So really you want to squeeze and fine all but a few car owners and force them to use bicycles of some description. In terms of weight classes do all your preferred stipulations also apply to electric cars? I would not have an issue with speed limiters in town. On the basis that your main objection seems to be about car speed and potential for damage, given size/weight, if all/majority of cars could be speed limited in town to keep them within designated limits, is there a need for the other stipulations? Do you use cars...ever?

Okay, so what do you want to change? Do you want stiffer penalties for car drivers that break the law? Do you want more cameras installed to catch them? Do you want the whole of London to be 20mph, but only apply to car drivers? What else do you want to do?

What period does that data cover and who is monitoring/collecting? In regard to cyclists on pavements, there is the additional issue, that is hard if not impossible, to quantify, where vulnerable pedestrians just feel less comfortable and relaxed. This may impact their wellbeing. I am sure you will reply by citing data and saying the perception of risk does not tally with the reality. However, in other areas of the law, perception counts for a lot. i do seriously think this aspect must be considered, along with everything else. Unpredictable environments do not feel safe.

I think some peer pressure from other road users and pedestrians may be a starting point. I mean for not stopping at red lights, cycling on pavements, speed cycling in local parks. I am perturbed by how many parents with kids on a bike I have seen ride through red lights of late. What are they teaching their children? Before you say it, of course this is my experience and subjective. Just as you consistently not seeing this stuff is also subjective.

Earl, most of us have agreed dangerous drivers should be dealt with. This is obvious and I really do not believe anyone here supports cars driving dangerously, exceeding speed limits, jumping red light, driving through pedestrian crossings is a good thing. Laws are in place and should be used to apply penalties. But, surely it makes sense for speed limits to be adhered to by all vehicles, in parks or on the roads? Damage from a collision with a bike may not be as great as with a car but it will still hurt, may still maim or exceptionally, kill and surely we don't want any of that, do we? Speed limits are successfully applied to all other vehicles/road users in some other countries, so it can work. Perhaps organisations like LCC and Southwark's council funded cycling tutorials and rides are advising cyclists to stick to speed limits, to stop at red lights and not cycle on pavements, as to do otherwise is anti-social. I am not aware if this is happening, do you know?

Come on, be serious, who will stop the cyclists? Not once, have I seen any cyclists stopped by any SNT or other for cycling on the pavement, for jumping red lights, for cycling recklessly and certainly not for exceeding 5mph in the park. But, do you agree cyclists should adhere to 5mph in our local parks and 20mph in 20 mph zones? Are cycling lobby groups like LCC sending out advisories to its membership. If nothing else peer pressure may have some effect and is better than nothing. .

Snowy, so you don't think cyclists should stick to 5mph in Dulwich Park? Why not? Isn't it anti social to exceed it, given other park users? Please explain?

But it is clearly the case that the perpetrator was caught and presumably a penalty applied for a serious breach. On the other hand we regularly have cyclists going like the clappers in Dulwich Park, some I have seen timing themselves, treating the perimeter track like a race track. So speeds well over 5mph and well over 20mph, if you ask me. The park is often full of pedestrians, children and animals. Are you in favour of cyclists adhering to 5mph in the park, is there any good reason they should not?

@DulvilleRes Deflection and culture war, right there.

Yup, if exceeding 20mph they should be done, whatever 'vehicle' they are driving. I am all in favour. The much larger parks are arguably a slightly different case but in our smaller local parks, I would like to see 5mph for all vehicles adhered to.

I have said this before, but when I am out cycling I find the behaviour of some other cyclists just as, if not more, worrying than car drivers, in terms of predictability. I am looking at suitable mirrors for my bike as I have been silently overtaken at speed by another cyclist, too many times of late. It felt like were I to shift over to avoid a pothole or similar, I would have taken a knock/ come off. It feels similar to the type of reckless car driver that likes to 'go for the gap'.

I do hope this driver is identified and dealt with. It is dangerous and unforgivable not to stop at a pedestrian crossing, when people are waiting to cross.

You can't have it both ways. If cycling is not going up why are we spending so much on cycling infrastructure? If, as is hoped, it does increase, then I think my points apply. Parks are not now including cyclists in 20mph as part of a 'culture war'- what nonsense. It is because some cyclists like to go to parks and cycle as fast as they can- time trials. Numbers of cyclists doing this at 20mph and over poses a risk to pedestrians. If cycling increases on our local roads then I think there is a reasonable case for applying that 20mph as well.

I think you may be wrong about alleged technical blocks to getting 20mph for bicycles, see my post on another thread, the mechanisms are probably already there. Plus, 20mph zones are meant to be largely self-enforcing. Plus, if as some of you envisage, the populace migrates to cycling en masse, then 20mph would have to apply for reasons of safety, rather like it is being mooted for cycling time trials, where it is considered unsafe for numbers of cyclists to exceed 20mph in a 20mph zone, and that is a stipulation that has come from within the cycling community!

What could be more inappropriate than exceeding 20mph in a 20mph zone? Speedometers very simple to crack with modern, mobile phone technology and audio beeps. Not convinced a licence plate necessary, it is the rider not the bike that would be at fault. Realistically, enforcement would be very intermittent and random and would have to involve spot checks and fines, as City of London police carried out. Better than nothing. There is something almost distasteful in having a cycle lobby loudly insisting that for reasons of safety swathes of the country should have a 20mph speed limit imposed, except it won't apply to them. Reading cycling forums it seems a large part of this is to do with a number of highly active cyclists wanting the option to cycle as fast as they possibly can, besting personal times on Strava etc..

Some time back, it seems Southwark seriously considered applying 20mph to cyclists and the mechanism to do this was simply to remove the word 'motor' in the proposed traffic management order (based on the Road Traffic Act) leaving only the word 'vehicles', which would by definition have to include bicycles. I think the obstacle was the Met saying they would not enforce 20mph for anything, including cars. It was not the impossibility of actually installing a limit for all road users at local level. I also believe that, technically, the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2022, allows for speed limits to be imposed by local acts. Apparently, the idea that 'vehicles' includes bicycles of any description is the rationale use by the Met to prosecute cyclists for exceeding the speed limit in Richmond Park.

Richmond Park byelaws are made by the Royal Parks, Hampstead Heath byelaws are made by the City of London. The relevant police forces are tasked with enforcement but do not make the byelaws. I believe the latter case may point to precedent. Within London, speed limits in some larger parks are not dissimilar to those on surrounding streets, hence 20 MPH in Richmond Park, both for cars and bicycles; Regent's Park is asking the same of cyclists. Hyde Park has reduced 30 mph to 20mph. As we know, there was serious intent to have cyclists adhere to 20mph in the commons, but that folded with the election. My guess is it will get resurrected. Just as a little aside, I do wonder if this is the real reason so many cycling activists are averse to adherence to 20mph? https://road.cc/content/news/time-trial-riders-adhere-20mph-limits-guidance-says-306625 Note outraged comments at the end by time trial riders complaining that 20mph is sickeningly slow.