Dogkennelhillbilly

I'm old enough and grumpy enough to remember when Dogstar were the outsider-gentrifiers riding roughshod over the locals, not the salt-of-the-earth insiders driven out by unscrupulous newbies.

This comment didn't age well.

Possibly quite a revealing insight into your psychology there! But all the same, you should probably avoid Megan's...both branches...

Incidentally, inspired by the OP to go and actually read the Dulwich Roads account, I actually found the Tweet that @Rockets seems to be talking about. If I can get the formatting right, it is here: The tweet contains a letter from Dulwich Prep School to parents describing a recent incident in which a parent parked their car across an entrance, moved a school sign, argued with a neighbour and staff, threw a sign into a hedge, and generally acted like an aggro tit. DPS goes on to describe other "unacceptable behaviour" that goes against the school's values ethos like swearing and arguing in front of kids. People can decide for themselves whether that is "call[ing] for pupils to be expelled from schools if their parents park badly"... It is absolutely revolting that highly trained teaching staff are wasting time addressing the shitty behaviour of a few parents. Not the kids - the bloody parents!

If you want to argue with someone on Twitter, sign up for an account and argue with them on there. Bad tempered personalised arguments seem to cover 90% of Twitter. (The other 10% is fascist memes).

🙃 #southwarkderangementsyndrome hits its peak: ranting about Southwark not mentioning CPZs in its election materials (clue: Southwark is a council, not a political party) on a thread about an LTN in Lambeth.

"Roads are dangerous, which is why breaking a traffic law is serious business. At least, that is the case when you’re in a car." I mean, no, it's not. The most basic traffic law is the speed limit, and we know from real life that huge numbers of road users speed and practically no-one gets done for it. In observed 30mph locations, 8% of all traffic was speeding by more than 10%. The way that we detect, investigate and prosecute traffic crime shows that it is not a serious business in this country. Scooters are dangerous to the riders - that's separate and I agree. https://communityspeedwatch.org/downloads/CSW_FP_0_9~Stats_and_trends_-_a_CSW_Online_efficacy_document.pdf

⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️

QED.

I think it clearly shows your confusion about the fundamental difference between opinion polls and consultations.

I think that's entirely reasonable. West Dulwich Action Group's claim (mentioned/cited above) is materially different from that. Meanwhile - has anyone been able to identify what actions West Dulwich Action Group wants to take? Do any of them relate to reducing pollution/ congestion/ injuries/ accessibility/ whatever, or is all the action just to oppose an LTN? I could only see a Twitter account and a Facebook page which didnt tell me much. To be fair, I had trouble accessing due to my own ineptitude on Facebook and the lack of a Twitter login - others might find it easier to access info there.

I think this is a reasonable question and suggestion, but would point out: 1) the optimal level of charging for parking is where there is 90% occupancy. That's the level at which drivers can find a spot (maximising convenience) but also not overpricing (maximising revenue). Unfortunately people don't like dynamic pricing or overly complicated tariff structures. https://vexpan.nl/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/SFpark-pricing-parking-by-demand-Gregory-Pierce-en-Donald-Shoup-access43.pdf 2) it's only the parking immediately by the shops and restaurants that is being charged for. Rightly or wrongly, Turney Rd, Dulwich Village, Court Lane, Dekker Rd etc are all free still. 3) RBKC charges £1.60-£7.40 per hour for parking. Westminster charges £3.19-£9.24 per hour. https://www.rbkc.gov.uk/parking-permissions/visitor-parking-and-pay-phone/paybyphone https://www.westminster.gov.uk/parking/parking-prices

No, exactly. For all this stuff about being so concerned about accuracy, you're complaining about a hypothetical scenario that you yourself invented. There is nil data or sourced facts in your posts.

The second "result" you're referring to is a hypothetical one invented by you for the sake of argument.

🤣

Pepipoo (?) or Petrolheads forums would probably be better places to look than here tbh.

Gore blimey, you’ve made me tear right up, you have. I’ll petition the council immediately to get the unrestricted parking off Lordship Lane (where it obstructs the far larger numbers of bus + bike commuters, and even car-borne shoppers) and onto your street. No residents allowed. It’s the sacrifice you’ll be proud to make for those plucky (car) commuters. 🫡

It’s hard to be sure - you don’t cite any sources whatsoever for any of your data… West Dulwich Action Group says “67.5% of residents object to the plans”. Source of the claim is here: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GWpc2bQWQAAQzwf?format=jpg&name=large Source of the data is unclear to me.

Yes, there should have been e-bike rental legislation at national level. The last government didn’t grasp the nettle when it arose and this government doesn’t seem inclined to unify 100 councils’ responses either.

1) e-scooter trial is cascaded from central government ie DfT. It required Westminster legislation because e-scooters are prima facie illegal on public roads. It’s not a London trial - it’s a national trial. 2) no 3) yes

Yes. E-bikes and scooters are regulated entirely differently.

Hello neighbours as you may know, PECAN operates Southwark Foodbank, a food bank that serves and relies upon all of Southwark, including East Dulwich. They help hundreds of vulnerable people a month with fresh and stable food, basic hygiene necessities and other support. The level of need that exists in our community is unbelievable and PECAN’s work is literally a lifeline for some people. unfortunately they need our help now more than ever. As they explained last night: This Monday wasn’t a great start for us, as we had a break in at our Southwark Foodbank warehouse over the weekend. Unfortunately, large quantities of food, hygiene products, and a laptop were stolen. Sadly, the door and shutter were also damaged, leaving us with costly repairs. Now, our food stock is running low, and we are also faced with unexpected repair expenses. This situation tells us it is a challenging time for many. Therefore, we need your help and any support you can offer, whether through donations or other means, as it will make a difference to those who rely on us. ⚠ Here's how you can support us: > Our Tesco Food Collection is on 12 –13 September, at the Old Kent Road branch, so if you are shopping on one of those days, please take a shopping list and donate if possible. > Or you can donate via Bankuet https://lnkd.in/eGjE7V6x Thank you - Southwark Foodbank and Pecan Article from Southwark News here: https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/peckham/peckham-food-bank-ransacked-overnight-leaving-struggling-families-in-crisis/

Thank you! In some ways, quite straightforward: it’s a local shopping street for locals, and not much else to say. but interesting that almost a decade ago punters said they came to Lordship Lane because it had a wide variety of shops…but the thing that it was missing was a wider variety of shops!

No.

Can you please upload it or link to the data? Thank you kindly in advance.