snowy

I believe rch said ?difficult issue? not difficult time. The rest of your post equally applies to the speeding car drivers ?disrespecting the law? and being stopped by the police on Barry Road this week.

Swytch can convert your existing bike into an ebike easily. Balfes will probably do it for you. The battery is physically small but has a range of 50km. They don?t look like expensive items (in fact it?s hard to tell it?s an ebike) and you can manage any hill ED has to offer. Panniers and racks have been around for a while I believe, and locks mounted in the frame are negligible. As a ?normal? bike it?s fine to get on trains etc. You?re probably covered for theft and public liability through your household contents insurance but it?s always worth checking. There?s a try before you buy scheme through Peddlemywheels.com for new bikes of all types. Slightly limited in ebikes- presently as they focus more on domestic cargo cycles and trikes.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Snowy - they also publish the Cyclist magazine - > you forgot that one!!! ;-) > > And Viz and a load of PC mags - so they aren't > just a petrolhead publishing house!!!! Straight in with a classic bit of whatabouttery!

Slarti - that will be Dennis publishing group who are responsible for the following publications or websites autotrader Buyacar Car throttle Carbuyer Driver power Driving electric Enzo Evo Octane magazine and Aston Martin vantage magazine Where he worked for over 7 years. If we are scrutinising the (publicly declared) conflicts of interest of Woodcock, Goodman, Aldred etc, I think it?s a reasonable to do the same for others, don?t you agree? Will answer your question about peer review later if that?s ok - currently assessing research applications (not related to this topic) and am on a deadline.

Who does Paul Lomax work for?

Heartblock - could you share the qualifications, experience, publications & citations and funders of those other authors please? Their employers should host their work, but if not even a jstor weblink or equivalent would be a good starting point.

Ffs. It says it on the web page of the report.

Unless suggesting voting for Bailey is an April Fool?

Bailey wouldn?t have the authority as Mayor to remove LTNs. They?re a Local Authority scheme which the mayor has no control over. He also has very little chance of being elected.

ab29 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This forum is for residents of Dulwich and this > specific thread for people from Goose Green area - > you live in neither. It?s not though. Read the first post in the About this Forum subsection.

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It also seems to suggest that the council > forecasted 100 hangars for the 20/21 financial > year and only managed to install 55. > > As I have been saying for some time the council > seems unable to put the most basic infrastructure > in place to support its strategic objectives - it > has put the cart before the horse with the LTNs > and should have been spending more time, money and > effort installing bike hangars to satiate the > demand for the ability for residents to store > bikes than cameras to close off Dulwich Village. > > It's really quite damning. You remember there was a little pandemic going on, so staff were probably furloughed? That seems to be reflected in the delivery timeline graphic Glad to see you support the multi million investment (?8m if I?ve got my maths right).

Does that suggest that 2000 people in the Goose Green ward alone have requested a cycle hangar place? And that there?s a waiting list of over 8000 people across the borough for existing hangars, with just under half of that in wards around east Dulwich? There?s a comment to the diagrams that seems to say that they?re looking at new ways of tracking requests for cycle hangars as the demand is so high.

Concerned2021 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I found the minutes for the Lewisham Healthy > Streets schemes. Unbelievable that a scheme that > has such a massive impact on our lives and > infrastructure was decided by a few cyclists and > council officials. The Feb minutes indicate that > the consultation in Lewisham will only include > those inside the LTN. Basically it?s a stitch up. > > > https://lewishamcyclists.org.uk/wp-content/uploads > /2021/02/Meeting-Record-20210217.pdf Unless I?m reading them incorrectly, those are the minutes of Lewisham Cycling which mentions he Healthy Streets scheme

Choked Up is calling on the mayoral candidates to dramatically improve air quality along the capital?s major roads, the so-called ?red routes?, which make up 5% of London?s roads but carry a third of its traffic. Choked Up co-founders, from left, Nyeleti Brauer-Maxaeia, Anjali Raman-Middleton, Destiny Boka Batesa. Photograph: Martin Godwin/The Guardian They are calling for a reduction in goods vehicle and private car use, and a renewed focus on ?a world-class walking and cycling network, as well as affordable and accessible zero-emission public transport?.

For the policy geeks amongst us, the Parliament Transport committee is on today as part of their Reforming Public Transport inquiry: https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/f4a70a38-f9ff-4284-b1ff-b710bcc256a8 Including the Federation of Small Businesses advocating road pricing.

Thanks for pointing out you don?t really understand peer review!

Hmm, who to believe more - Professor Aldred, publisher of 25 peer reviewed papers at the university of Westminster and winner of the European Social Research Council award for ?outstanding impact in public policy? or Rockets off the internet?

But one that?s not often recommended by traffic planners eg https://www.bathnes.gov.uk/services/streets-and-highway-maintenance/road-safety/traffic-schemes/one-way-streets ?Many streets suffer from rat-running or high traffic volumes and may benefit from the introduction of this type of control, but it is likely that: Some traffic will simply be diverted onto other less suitable streets The new one-way street may attract more traffic albeit in the remaining direction Residents may have to access their street by an alternative and less convenient route which may involve the use of other neighbouring streets Traffic speeds may increase due to drivers' perception that there is no opposing traffic Without physical traffic calming there may be an increase in accidents and their severity Some, particularly short sections of one-way street are likely to be contravened by drivers thereby requiring police enforcement.?

Tell me who just said this Keane: "There's no question - none - that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day."

Given that Jay Rayner also used to post on Urban 75, I?m not sure trolley would be welcomed there either.

And this doesn?t bode well: https://www.rha.uk.net/getmedia/a17d600a-13f1-4034-b15e-ba021df01bd0/The-Rt-Hon-Michael-Gove-MP-1st-February-2021.pdf.aspx

That sounds a little bit Aled?s iPad

That comment reads like the pavements are ok for you and therefore fine for everyone else. Disabled People?s organisations and charities like Age Concern have long complained about the poor state of pavements, tripping hazards, cars illegally parked on them etc. Pavements can also be mixed use eg pedestrians, cyclists in more mixed use streets.

Textbook cakeism

You do realise they?re tested before and with more rapid tests on the day?