mako

Have tried researching but anyone know how old the number 14 Dulwich sub/scorer was today. think he is josh fernandes?

the 'incident' happened in Bromley but ambulance had to stop on lordship lane to perform surgery.

Dulwich park and bel air park courts are all free on first come first served basis. he could join the park local tennis league in dulwich too. just google search local tennis leagues. is ?15 to join the league then free to play

There is a new league started up in Dulwich park. varied abilities and ?15 to join (free to play in the park).if search for local tennis leagues it will come up.

Not sure you can say decades and decades of nothing happening mr barber, when there is clearly a long term trend showing a decline in crashes.

Sorry someone answered on the other post. Thursday night at Margate.

great. thanks

Can soneone tell me when the play offs are. cant find it anywhere. thanks

Please can somone tell me when the play offs are? thanks

surely someone could breed pet dogs with smaller teeth? they dont need those massive teeth when given dog food and not allowed to hunt?

Bradley had to cycle 1000's of kilometers UP mountains! 24 mph is easily obtainable down sydenham hill without even pedalling so not really 'going some'.

If stopping 10m down the road they wont have reached 30 so this group is unaffected, so why spend all that money changing the limit?

James Barber why do you think 7 of 9 groups consulted on this, including the police, voted against it? Presumably not all boy racers desperate to drive a bit faster?

Wulfhound. you must surely be a Wum and you have pulled me in with your ridiculous posts over the last couple of weeks on this matter. well done I applaud your efforts. Of course a political party can do what it likes if voted in. Although perhaps may i suggest that as the people of East Dulwich didn't vote them in, (I believe they were at best 3rd in both Village and East Dulwich ward) perhaps the people of this forum do afterall have some right to complain if the policies are misguided and financially based, even if they told us of this plan in advance. Perhaps the bright people of East Dulwich had all read the manifesto and explicitly voted against them for this very reason, so to say they have no right now to complain is simply moronic. but I guess you know that Wulf

In rush hour it will be fairly irrelevant as you say-so doesnt justify the large costs involved. But at the other extreme it can have a big impact on journey time through the night. a big point though is that 'safer streets' is very debatable-especially if you have the limits ignored by many and people overtaking when previously they wouldnt have done. My experience is very much the roads have been less safe so far since the changes and that has been repeated by many on this forum.

I hate speed bumps but at least they do have an effect if you are serious about it being a safety issue. I imagine safe drivers who already are low on the causes of accidents will drive slower and it will have little impact on the dangerous drivers. And lowlander you either dont drive much or dont value your time. if you live a lifetime of driving at 20 instead of thirty it will be over a year extra of your life not spent with friends family etc (more for high mileage drivers). this is relevant, especially to those of us who dont believe these changes will, or even have the main objective of, improving safety.

lowlander, why do you presume that kford drives at 35-37 in a 30 just because his car isnt suited to driving at 20mph?

david_carnell. you cannot say what fox is saying is utter nonsense as he is stating factually what his own experience is. (unless you are accusing fox of blatantly lying). he is not saying its impossible but that after 40 years of driving and probably greater experience of driving at 30 he finds that easier, something which i agree from my experience and kford has also agreed with. these are genuine experiences and so cannot be utter nonsense. Loz also says he thinks driving at a constant speed of 20 is difficult and i think many cars are not suited to drive at that speed for long distances as it is between gears. if lots of people find it difficult and years of experience go to waste there can be an increase in incidents.

the key conclusion being that 'The results suggest that implementing 20 mph zones in high casualty areas is a cost effective way to reduce road injury, however, costs of implementation outweigh benefits in low casualty areas.' this makes total sense. many of the worst areas have already been done and there is not justiofcation for a borough wide limit.

How can anyone who has more than the average ten year olds maths or logic skills accept the councils calculation that is based on the savings on the new 20 zones being the same as on the previously installed 20 zones. they quote that the 20mph zones being used as evidence had crash figures double that of all other 30mph roads before being made 20. Of course there were improvments to be made-these were the worst roads in london. You just cant apply that to sydenham hill for example and say that the same improvements will happen.

It also says that changing the limit on its own has had an irrelevant 1mph chamge on average speed and only speed humps and raised junctions actually made any difference to new 20mph zones. If this was a safety issue fom the council then we would be getting humps which work rather than cameras which dont but do raise cash.

Peckhamside. My cars manual says optimum speed for fuel consumption is 52mph. Slower speed certainly does not usually mean less fuel in fact the reverse is generally true until you reach this point when it declines. Useful links bawdy but it ignores the fact that there has been a long term decline in all reported raod casulaties in the uk, the most recent full year data (2013) was the lowest ever number of deaths on record, close to 50% down in ten years. The 20mph limits were applied to the most dangerous roads where they were probably necessary (near schools etc) so to use this as a basis for expected improvements elsewhere is ridiculous, but that doesnt stop this council using it as if a fact that there will be a similar percentage improvments. Certainly its hard to reduce 57% of fatalities on roads where there are currently none.

welcome to the forum keekybreeks.