Spartacus

Sooooo, if I live in a CPZ, own a car that has a permit then providing the bay isn't suspended (much like Parking in a non CPZ street can be now) then I can leave my car there as long as I like because I have a permit... it is just that I've paid to park there rather then it being free parking. 😉 Interesting so that kind of sinks your storage concept like the titanic meeting an iceberg.

Loving your narrative using Storage in place of Parking to try and justify a point. Even introducing a CPZ is a charge for Parking (hence the name Controlled PARKING Zone) Parking has been allowed since the invention of the motorised vehicle, and the alternative is people pave over their gardens to park there.

And when the electric cars are taxed, will you also advocate that a form of road tax be levied on e- xxs and cycles too or as a cyclist are road taxes not on the agenda. Saying everyone pays currently is not quite the whole story as motorised vehicles are expected to pay ved (with the exception of electric currently as a drive to boost numbers) so why shouldn't e bikes and scooters also pay when the time is right and all motorised vehicles pay?

Free car parking in streets (sorry earl NOT storage) has been around since the invention of motorised transport. If everyone nationally paid to park in the street from day 1 then it wouldn't be an issue but councils are selectively using it as a revenue generator which is where the issue lies. Personally I think all road users, including e-xxxs , cars and bikes should pay towards maintaining the roads as we all use them.

Ahhh ExDulwicher has put us all right using his mastery of spin from the council book of doubletalk. Baseline data that isn't the same as counted result data is like comparing swedes with apples, both are round but different contents and one will leave a bitter taste in your mouth. The TFL report caused quirte a stir internally at the council if I remember so not quite as low key as you try and suggest.

Let's not forget that there was little or no baseline survey data taken before implementation so the council can't prove that it has or hasn't worked compared to pre implementation. There's also that TfL report that the councillors tried so hard to bury, that proves it has slowed bus times down. @march46 you are using the "I'm alright jack so everyone else should be" argument, but others aren't as lucky as you to live in an LTN.

If only trying was good enough, what they have implemented has caused more congestion thus increasing emissions, not reduced them. Square that circle off if you will, but by introducing something badly they've made the situation worse. The heralded traffic evaporation just hasn't happened so more buses, lorries and cars are getting delayed pumping out more of the toxins you so badly want to reduce.

So are we, when LTNs are recognised as a general failure and removed. Nearly 2 years on and well past bedding in time yet our local one is still having massive negative impacts on surrounding streets local buses and the south circular despite the council tinkering and adjusting it. Face it Mal, the Dulwich Village LTN is badly designed, a general failure and needs a radical rethink otherwise this type of discussion will roll on and on. The council needs to engage properly with residents to design schemes that actually work and don't alienate large swathes of voters.

Ah I see, and you also cited the Loughborough Junction attempt, maybe that wasn't designed by your expert too. What about the Wandsworth ones, again not designed by an expert? I'm smelling a pattern. Maybe, gulp, none of them have been designed by an expert because they were implemented in a hurry by council officers who hadn't implemented one before.

Don't worry Ex, keep swallowing the councils shilling whilst the rest of us suffer with the LTN failures Rewinding your conversation a bit, I thought that you had been banging the drum over the past 18 months about LTNs being designed by experts and people who knew better than the ordinary person in the Street. But now you appear to be saying they aren't. Interesting.

Blimey ex It's not working so let's expand it. Fantastic logic, if we can't mitigate the pain, we will share it. Take your blinkers of and smell the failure

Ex, isn't that the problem with most LTNs Badly designed ?

Sorry chicken, I forgot you need an unbiased report to believe anything Try BBC News - Newcastle city council to axe low traffic neighbourhood https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tyne-66694402 Funny how so many worldly people who just claim to care so much just dis certain media outlets without bothering to read the story. To misquote the Bible, before the rooster crows today, you will deny three times that you know the truth about LTNs

Has LL been reopened or are buses still on diversion?

Here you go mal Not the daily mail https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/09/04/low-traffic-neighbourhood-newcastle-council-ltn-scheme-axe/ Basic story, it didn't work

Thanks Ted Hopefully they give enough notice to move cars and reroute buses

I'm sure it is, otherwise they wouldn't have been allowed to put the path up to the cafe in, build a car park and associated road in the park. Therefore logic dictates that widening an existing path and making it better for cycling is within their powers

Ted, as eyes on the ground, any update ?

Would it not also be a better financial use of funds as it is cheaper to widen and tarmac the cycle path rather than redesign a whole road.

I think the problem is that if they had gone ahead, whilst LL is closed, the chaos and disruption to buses would have been massive. Sounds like what Conway failed to do was to amend or remove the no parking signs.

The truth hurts 💔

That url sent me to a spam site I searched on them and this came up https://brawcollective.com/

Yesterday, at the Peckham Rye Fete, the highways department had a stall discussing a new consultation on cycle inferstructure through Nunhead. https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/c35-phase1/ Excellent that they are consulting on it. Around the park they had put up flyers (? Illegal fly posting?) Advertising their presence which started off with the words "You said..." Who is this "you" they are referring to ? ( it wasn't I, was it thee?) When did the mysterious "You" say this ? And why was it not an open conversation where more people knew about it? Personal thought is that a small minority of people were asked if they wanted more cycle inferstructire and the council are using "weasel wording" to make it sound more popular than it is. God loves a trier 🤣

Try going to the Ilford website as they have a search engine on their for courses and darkrooms https://www.ilfordphoto.com/ Or alternatively see if you can get a copy of the old book "The Darkroom Handbook" by Micheal Langford. Its an excellent guide to most techniques your friend will need to learn.

I wonder if the council have asked the residents or done studies to show thete is an increased demand for eBikes or if they are just driving their own personal agenda through at the cost of their voters ?