first mate

I disagree. There are clear speed limits in place and therefore absolutely no reason for speeding ( people speed in Devon too and country roads are notoriously dangerous). Why the Council won't put a camera in on such a well used road, when they can do it elsewhere, is not clear. Perhaps someone has the answer?

Hoping to get an answer to this. I should also add that for me at least, this is not a debate about LTNs in general. I appreciate that general data will be used to support the idea that they work locally. However, my interest is in being persuaded that local LTNs are beneficial to all ED residents equally.

With a view to avoiding another lounging and to get the thread back on track, is there any sort of update on the above?

As a cyclist I simply say what I see and experience. Most of the so-called anti-cyclists on here also cycle. I think trying to frame the experiences of others as "spewing anti-cyclist hate" is OTT. You cannot make genuine issues just disappear by telling others to shut up and put up or, as others have done, advise those who disagree with you to seek intervention for mental health problems.

I've seen them ridden on the pavement and I am pretty certain I am not alone in that so I think the title is fair.

In terms of music Gala definitely better, it is a music festival and PITP is not. If it were literally only a matter of three days that Gala caused upheaval and sectioning off of the park, I doubt there would be the objections there have been. It is the matter of huge fences, lack of access, a change to the feel of the park for a month in the best weeks of summer that is the problem. As Fishboy also mentioned, weeks of generator noise and floodlights is just not acceptable or ecologically friendly.

https://check-long-term-flood-risk.service.gov.uk/map?easting=534795&northing=175338&map=SurfaceWater This is from Environment Agency. I think the flood element is genuine but the sudden need to fell mature, healthy trees is very iffy. Friends of Peckham Rye are furious and have published a notice to say they were not consulted about the tree felling aspect despite being a stakeholder. They say the works are being arranged to best suit the contractor. Another view might be, as Penguin suggested earlier, removing trees creates more event space for the future. Is this another Cllr Rose 'special'?!

I wonder what the motivation is for all this? Southwark is fiercely protective of trees, including street trees, it makes no sense. I'm not sure I buy the access point. If you read through plans for this work there is a huge amount about protecting trees and tree roots. This 'access' issue seems to have snuck in last minute.

Yep, a new low, using the serious issue of mental health to try to score points in some way. Pretty revealing really.

https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/C956F09DB0E8BEB9518C7093109A814E/19_AP_5692-SOUTH_BUND_PROPOSED-843280.jpg This is all I can find, which dates back to 2020. Much is made of tree protection. Are the new plans a change to this https://planning.southwark.gov.uk/online-applications/files/59EAB2329129709EABAAD4A0EF4335BF/pdf/19_AP_5692-COMMITTEE_REPORT-3651037.pdf

Tried to get through on the link and got a server error message. Anyone else having same issue? There may be very compelling reasons for doing this work now but what are they exactly? That area has always been a bit marshy but it has never been a problem that I am aware of. Won't felling trees increase the drainage issue in that roots suck up water? Very happy to learn more from those in the know.

I am hoping someone is able to let us know about the revenue benefits of Gala specific to Peckham Rye ( and not, I hasten to add, to cut down healthy trees). Also what free events will be funded?

Abe that has also been my experience and I agree with you. Typical born-again cyclist response above. The worst offenders are those former car drivers who enjoyed speed and 'handling' the car. I think certain risk taking behaviours and the desire to go as fast as possible transfers to their new vehicle of choice, when they adopt cycling.

@cohen22 Never had a problem with the small scale events on the Common. They have never involved sectioning of some choice areas of park with ugly, high metal fencing for months, no security guards, little if any damage to the park. My concern is I can see an agenda for PR to go the way of Brockwell Park, that is extremely large scale events all summer. Those events are not free. It is using the park as a private events space.

JohnL possibly crossed wires? I was referring to why the need for an events space on the so-called Dulwich Square/ public highway. I imagine you thought I was referring to Peckham Rye as an events space? Or maybe, quite correctly, you were bringing the subject of the thread back to Gala? Anyhow, I guess the issue of whether Dulwich Square should "host" some 15 events per year probably deserves its own thread. I still hope someone can say how much revenue Southwark gets from Gala and how much of that is used to 'improve' Peckham Rye and specifically in what ways and also which free events will be funded from that revenue over the coming months?

Can anyone explain why an events space is needed here at all, when Dulwich Park is literally on the doorstep?

Malumbu said: "think it is also great that Horniman museum and Gardens is also doing ticketed events, closing the park, and generating new revenue, We all welcome this and nobody in the vicinity complains. https://www.horniman.ac.uk/event/horniman-family-rave-with-big-fish-little-fish/" I see this is a four hour event, so no comparison with Gala at all. Anyway, back on thread; I am very interested to know what proportion of revenue earned by Gala goes back to Southwark and out of that what is used for Peckham Rye and also what free events will be supported by that revenue. Does anyone know how to get hold of these figures?

Out on streets adjacent to Northcross yesterday. Loads of Lime bikes scattered around. There really is a trend to leave them right in the middle of the pavement. This is surely completely at odds with the council's push to push active travel and micromobility. I think it is also only a matter of time before bikes parked badly on the road topple over and damage parked cars. Thus far, the dedicated cycle bays are not being used as they should.

Walking through the Rye yesterday it was lovely to see the green metal fencing down and have that wide open space again, post Gala. A lot of the grass scorched to nothing and areas ridged by tractor tyres. Saw the team of litter pickers out. It is hoped everything cleared. My sense is Gala and Council will have tried extra hard this year because they want to extend the event in 2024. Please everyone remember, if they extend it won't mean just three more days, it will be many more weeks with activity, noise and fences up throughout that time. The dismantling of the Gala site and rebuilding of whatever else they have in mind, will massively extend the time this large area of park is sectioned off and inaccessible to locals. Next year, I for one would like to see the whole park open for the best weeks of summer for all to enjoy and that includes no ugly, vandal proofing fences scattered all round the park and no security guards. PS @Malambu. Do you put notches on your belt for every thread you get lounged. Said it before...stop it!

Those small - scale, free music events at the Horniman are great. No huge metal barriers or security guards with walkie talkies, no damage to the environment, no sectioning of part of the gardens for weeks... totally different.

I think DKHB has a valid point, that in comparison to Dulwich Park's Pub in the Park, Gala in PR is not as well run. I took that to mean that the level of disruption to residents and the park environs is not as great.

Interesting so at least two in favour are not local. I wonder how many more are from further afield? I am sure that for some of those next to the park those three days are near torture, others won't be so affected. But it is not just noise for three days but for the duration of the build and dismantle, which is weeks. My plea is to leave it at that and resist the council's move to extend the event, doubling however many weeks that part of the park is non accessible to park users and the noise impacts for locals.

The thing is it is not clear what their mandate is to do this. Before the last election Cllr McAsh gave his word that no street in ED that did not want CPZ would be forced to have it. Where in the last Southwark Labour manifesto was the intention to make the whole of Southwark, and specifically ED and Nunhead, made clear?

Just keep it to the three days.

I believe the aim is to put at least one bay and some hangars on every road.