redpost

It's actually illegal and you can get an urgent injunction to stop works.

Read the report, it would be counted as 3 journeys because it is 3 journeys. Also note, the report is only about cycling and takes no account of people walking rather than driving. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Also, was there anything to prevent those 300 > counted cycle journeys from being outbound and > return journeys? So, if someone cycled down Calton > Avenue, dropped their child at the school and then > cycled back is that counted as 1, 2 or 3 journeys?

Actually, your neighbour should be the one pushing for a statement of condition, without a statement of condition there is no proof that a defect wasn't present before the works started and you can press for compensation or repairs. I know this because my neighbour tried to stiff me for replastering some rooms and redecorating her house because of so called small movement cracks caused by some minor party wall works. The statement of condition had detailed photos on a DVD which proved they were present well before any party wall works started and I told them where to go stick it. You also have a choice of party wall surveyor and do not have to accept the use of their party wall surveyor, you can have a chat to your neighbour and use this as leverage since some of them are quite expensive...

Rockets, but your pictures are inflammatory hogwash. There is no context or metrics presented with the photo, just an un-timestamped picture and an accompanying rant about people not being able to drive their brum brums quickly because everyone in tooley street is secretly wearing lycra under their business attire. How long did it take to clear? when did it start? any accidents reported? Did you check the tfl traffic cams? https://www.tfljamcams.net/index.php?v=openstreetmap Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Nigello Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Rockets, I see that and I also see empty > stretches > > of LL, so neither shows a typical situation. It > > shows a snapshot, that's all. Every day feels > like > > a Friday because you maybe want it to because > it > > reinforces your viewpoint? (You also have a > car, > > so are, ipso facto, part of the problem even > > though you may not want to believe that.) > > > Nigello - you only want to see what you want to > see (same applies for me). My pictures are based > on what is happening and the nonsense some people > are spouting about this being because of the > Christmas tree sellers on the A205 is utter > hogwash - anyone who bothers to look will have > seen those queues have been there since the LTNs > went in and well before any Christmas trees were > being sold. You revel in images of proof there > isn't a problem yet attack those posting images > showing there is - you don't work for the council > do you? ;-) > > I am not even going to grace your accusation of me > being part of the problem with a response - it is > a childish, and frankly, ill-conceived attempt to > bait which really goes to show the problem those > who dare voice an opinion other than total support > for the closures face. Any second now I am sure > you'll pull the Daily Mail/Nigel Farage/Jeremy > Clarkson* accusation.......it's frankly tiresome > and goes to show how fanatical some of the > pro-closure cultists have become - incapable of > having any reasoned debate or acknowledge that > there might be another side of the story without > defaulting to attacks. It's doing your cause no > favours. > > *delete as applicable

Reasons to reduce car usage: 1) health of driver, not walking/cycling 2) health of people breathing pollution 3) people killed on roads 4) Co2 emissions 5) particulate pollution (brake pad dust, tyre dust) of the land from runoff 6) land usage dedicated to roadspace

Yes, very much a 1st world problem. It's all very well complaining about building noise when you've bought or are renting a house that had noisy building work in the recent past, or you decide to extend in a few years time.

I agree rockets, because pre-LTN london roads had less congestion & delays to emergency services than a 12 lane boulevard in 1970s pyongyang. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > redpost Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > And yet again, no mention of excessive car > usage > > contributing to congestion and delays to > emergency > > services > > > No because it is a story about LTNs causing > disruption to response times - are you suggesting > there should be a follow-up article on the delays > being caused by the congestion caused by the LTNs > too!!! ;-) > > Clearly, despite what the pro-lobby would try to > have us all believe the planters are causing > issues for the emergency services - we have to all > hope that we aren't the ones needing the emergency > services. One wonders why the council is > steadfastly refusing to remove them and replace > them with something the emergency services agree > with and it begs the question how much > consultation was done with the emergency services > in the first place.

And yet again, no mention of excessive car usage contributing to congestion and delays to emergency services

Well, the mast has to go somewhere and the options are limited by: * height - may need to be on high point to get good coverage, or may need to be on a fairly low point to counter a not spot (dip in topography) * adjacent buildings that block signal * space for ancilliary building(s) at bottom to house network equipment, aircon, uniterruptable power supply etc * availability/cost of land * availability of fibre backhaul or microwave line of sight to another base station with backhaul so, you can see there aren't many candidate sites with all the constraints above

Yes, we can all see how K&C always have the best interests of their poorer and more vulnerable residents at heart. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Redpost - hardly a nebulous answer - well no more > nebulous than your retort that school streets > don't work - and your response amplifies my point > that many of the pro-closure lobby do not want to > entertain any of the middle-ground alternatives > ;-) > > What the pro-lobby don't realise is that their > entrenchment actually creates more problems and it > creates resentment and people move from a > pragmatic "let's try and work on finding a middle > ground" to a "rip them all out" stance and that > does nobody any good. This is being demonstrated > very aptly by what is going on in west London > right now in Kensington and Chelsea. A perfectly > sensible, and much needed, protected cycle lane > had been put in running from Kensington out to > Chiswick - it's now being pulled out such is the > local acrimony towards them. A pragmatic approach > from both sides will result in positive outcomes > for everyone, otherwise we run the risk of going > back to how things were and that benefits no-one.

Noise is permitted between 0800-1800 weekdays and 0900-1300 saturdays. If they make noise outside of these hours then get onto the council sharpish, it's illegal.

Again rockets, a nebulous answer. School streets don't work anyway, witness bessemer grange, loads of parents in cars waiting in side streets.

you may have kicked something off, just got a text from three saying there will be work over the weekend and may get no signal (SE24) being on three, i'm pretty used to having no signal

just get quotes for how much to finish and make good, these will be free and builders will be round like a shot deduct from dodgy builders money or sue for difference try and keep under 10K, then you can go through small claims court most builders will just ignore it, in which case you'll win by default if builder is trading through limited company, then may go bust ... nothing to do in this case

rockets - no, it's not obvious which streets to close, we're firmly in the realms of rocket science here east dulwich grove has 4 schools and a health centre - close that? dulwich village/gallery road have 3 schools - close that? then you immediately turn it around in the thread on asking someone else what they would do: "Out of interest, what do you think should be done to resolve the issues these closures have created?" I applaud you for engaging unlike many here, but as I said, you offer no viable alternative to reduce traffic apart from general hand waving Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Redpost - pretty obvious where school streets > could be implemented quickly and efficiently and > would be a lot less disruptive than closing 2 of 4 > East/West routes across Dulwich as we have now. > > My posts are laced with council criticism because > I feel the council are laying themselves open to > criticism with the way they have been handling the > LTNs. I am not alone in that and the council need > to be criticised by their constituents if the > constituents don't like what they are doing. I > know that doesn't make life easy for the council > or the pro-closure lobbyists but in a democracy > that's what constituents are supposed to, and > entitled to, do. I am not critical of Southwark > Cyclists per se, I am sure they are a lovely bunch > of people, remember I am a cyclist myself, but the > relationship between the council and Soutwark > Cyclists clearly steps over a line in terms of > balance and impartiality. There is no way > Southwark Cyclists should be given more weighting > and priority in consultations than those people > who live in the area affected by the measures > (which has happened repeatedly). > > JohnL - more than happy to have a consultation on > any ideas - that's all many of us want - dialogue > with the broader community not just a small > minority. If there had been a proper consultation > over the LTN closures I can guarantee we would not > be in the mess we are now and the council would > not be under so much scrutiny from many in the > community. > > More generally, what is the leaflet from the > Coalition4Dulwich? I have the FOMO too!!!! ;-) Are > they for or against the closures?

more details rockets, not just hand waving about school streets and better public transport which streets? times? where will the money come from for transport? Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Malumbu - many, myself included, have detailed > many alternative ideas throughout the months on > these forums so it's a bit unfair to suggest that > there are no alternatives being put forward. At > the macro level One Dulwich has been very clear > what they would like to see and they have a lot of > support for their suggestions. > > Out of interest, what do you think should be done > to resolve the issues these closures have > created? > > I personally think a programme of school streets > across the area would have had a much more > balanced area-wide positive impact on encouraging > modal change. The council also has to do a lot > more to support the infrastructure required to > ensure modal shift is something everyone can > engage with not just the most wealthy and those > who can store bikes. The council also has to do a > lot more to improve public transportation in the > area - it is woefully lacking and it is no > surprise so many have to rely on cars. The council > also has to take a joined-up area wide approach to > this and not just engage in local councillor > vanity projects that negatively impact many more > people than it benefits.

When we did our victorian house up the longer joists had bowed in the middle over time... a good 20-40mm dip in the middle, quite natural and we had to use special self levelling compound before putting down solid flooring. If someone has divided the room up, then voila 2 sloping floors

They get sent to the kings lab. I would imagine the lab may have been very busy, but it could be that the GP didn't get around to notifying you straight away. My GP only contacts me if there is something out of the norm on tests.

I know that home delivery services act as aggregators of goods and reduce traffic to varying degrees depending upon the deliverees propensity to use a car for shopping. The milkman of old days served the same purpose - customers don't need to go down the shops for milk The postman today serves the same purpose - no one needs to go down the delivery office for post It can be proved formally with probability and graph theory.

There's a big difference between outright falsification of results and not publishing a paper because it doesn't support the sponsorers agenda.

So, by the same logic rockets, you would categorise a paper demonstrating the efficacy of a proprietary drug or vaccine as a similar shill piece paid for by the drugs company holding the patent? This logistics paper was published by a chartered institute and is peer reviewed. It has exactly the same status as the scenario above.

The lower the frquency, the further it will travel through a solid medium (ie. the ground). It's surprising how far the noise from a generator/substation will travel, especially if it's bolted to a concrete slab on the ground. You could get an old/cheapo stethoscope and listen to the ground at regular intervals to track down the source. Best to do it at night and have a good response prepared for the police unless you want to end up in the maudsley.

I defer to your superior knowledge gleaned from anecdotes, twitter and the daily mail. After all, what the heck do a Doctor of logistics and a Professor of logistics, with dozens of peer reviewed papers on logistics, know about logistics? Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > redpost Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > http://www.greenlogistics.org/SiteResources/343c53 > > > > 12-af8f-4cc0-a271-4191cb2ccdff_Edwards-McKinnon-Sh > > > > oppingTripOrHomeDelivery-FocusLogisticsJuly2009.pd > > > f > > > > 1) avg home delivery = 181 g of co2 > > 2) dedicated bus trip to shop = 1265 g of co2 > > 3) dedicated car trip = 4274 g of co2 > > Redpost - really......you are quoting stats from a > report commissioned by the Chartered Institute of > Logistics and Transport....that is about as > balanced and believable as an article in the > Guardian on LTNs penned by Peter Walker.....;-)

http://www.greenlogistics.org/SiteResources/343c5312-af8f-4cc0-a271-4191cb2ccdff_Edwards-McKinnon-ShoppingTripOrHomeDelivery-FocusLogisticsJuly2009.pdf 1) avg home delivery = 181 g of co2 2) dedicated bus trip to shop = 1265 g of co2 3) dedicated car trip = 4274 g of co2

eh? "Home deliveries are not efficient, especially when they a delivering goods sourced in Asia and sent on incredibly polluting cargo ships" so everything bought online is made in asia? as opposed to everything bought in the shops is not made in asia? "Online shopping invariably means people buy more which results in more deliveries being made" Overconsumption and buying too much chinese cr@p is entirely another issue, and irrelevant to this debate. And lets take an extreme example, which illustrates the point: ... one DPD van doing 200 drops on 100 roads = 100 road trips ... 200 people driving to the shops, driving on average 10 roads = 2000 road trips it's very basic math As I recall Rockets, you drove to the tulse hill to get a tin of paint and then moaned on here about how long it took you. This is the exact case where ordering it online will cause less congestion. Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > redpost Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > i think you've got this very wrong pinning it > on > > delivery companies. > > > > Take DPD for example, they visit our street once > a > > day. The driver makes around 200 drops in the > > area, driving short distances between stops. > Often > > dropping multiple parcels on one stop. Likewise > > parcelforce & hermes. > > > > Occasional visit from the smaller couriers: > DHL, > > Fedex, UPS, city sprint etc > > > > And then white amazon vans (contractors), one > drop > > in the morning. A more dispersed drop in the > > evening for same day delivery. > > > > Compare with everyone driving to the shops to > make > > a purchase, and you'll see that deliveries act > as > > aggregators and are very efficient. Software > > calculates the optimum sequence of drops to > > minimise distance even taking hills into > account > > (don't go up and down the same hill) > > > > Supermarket deliveries aren't so good, they > can't > > carry as many deliveries, are time limited > (cold > > ness) and don't have the density of drops. But > > again, certainly a lot more efficient than > > everyone driving to the supermarket. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rockets Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > alex_b Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > redpost Wrote: > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > ----- > > > > > it's not the 1960's any more, car > > owenership > > > > and > > > > > usage are at all time highs > > > > > > > > I can?t find any data to support that. What > I > > > can > > > > find (e.g. > > > > > > > > > > https://www.centreforlondon.org/reader/parking-ker > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > bside-mangement/chapter-1/#travel-habits-are-chang > > > > > > > > > > ing-but-modal-shift-is-slow) suggests flat > or > > > > slightly declining car ownership and usage > in > > > > London over the last 15 years. As someone > > else > > > > posted up thread there has been a dramatic > > rise > > > in > > > > the use of residential roads in London > > > coinciding > > > > with the rise of navigation apps but these > > seem > > > to > > > > be journeys displaced from major roads. > > > > > > > > Do you have anything to suggest that car > > > ownership > > > > or usage are at an all time high? > > > > > > > > > Private car ownership in London has been > > > decreasing for some time now (although the > > further > > > out of London you get where transport links > are > > > not as good and so the decline is slower). If > > > anyone bothers to do any proper analysis I > > think > > > we will find that delivery companies are > > > responsible for a lot of the "increase" in > > > residential road use. A couple of > > > Ocado/Tesco/Sainsburys vans and a couple of > > Amazon > > > deliveries on a quiet residential road can > > > massively "increase" the % of daily usage for > > that > > > street. > > > > > > As shopping habits move online so the > negative > > > cost has been an increase in cars on side > roads > > - > > > it gives the pro-closure lobby some nice > > headline > > > stats but scratch beneath the surface and you > > can > > > start to piece parts of the jigsaw together. > > > > > > I re-post the Guardian article I found over > the > > > weekend which digs deeper into London's > > challenges > > > with "cars" and the fact London's private car > > > ownership is falling. > > > > > > > > > > > > https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/feb/11/h > > > > > > > > > ow-london-got-rid-of-private-cars-and-grew-more-co > > > > > > ngested-than-ever > > > Home deliveries are not efficient, especially when > they a delivering goods sourced in Asia and sent > on incredibly polluting cargo ships. Online > shopping invariably means people buy more which > results in more deliveries being made - more often > than not in high polluting diesel vehicles that > are doing very short stop start journeys. Amazon > is under huge amounts of pressure to stop same day > deliveries due to the negative environmental > impacts of the "I need it now" culture. Often they > don't need it now they just want it now. Amazon, > and other online retailers do little to stop > multiple deliveries to the same address on any > day. > > Your DPD example just illustrates the point. If > that driver makes 200 drops in a given area I > guarantee that most of that delivery driver's time > is spent on side roads - that driver is > contributing massively to the number of "journeys" > made on sideroads - if they have 2 drops per road > they will hit 100 different roads. > > I am convinced that private car journeys are > decreasing but it is the shift to the home > delivery culture that is creating the increase in > vehicle journeys and I am not convinced that goes > away if you close roads in the area.