march46

Looks like pedal-me are looking at doing cargo bike school runs with DBS checked riders. This could be a better option for getting children to school instead of an SUV.

Disagree with suddenly removing filters from streets which have been made safer - to suddenly have through traffic rushing down say Melbourne Grove, where the school kids are, would be dangerous.

Came across these videos which clearly explain the forthcoming changes (from 29th Jan) to The Highway Code, giving priority to the most vulnerable road users.

Extending the CPZ hours to include school drop off times would help stop parents parking on Village Way, or better still - install a cycle path!

It?s great that cargo bikes deliveries are taking off in the area, I see a wide variety of companies using them to get about. Better cycling infrastructure gives them a competitive edge. https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jan/20/cargo-without-carbon-the-rise-and-rise-of-e-bike-deliveries This website is great if you?d like to support businesses choosing to deliver their services / goods by bike - lots of options for SE22 postcode http://broughtbybike.com/findacompany/

The 'polluter pays principle' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polluter_pays_principle#:~:text=Some%20eco-taxes%20underpinned%20by%20the%20polluter%20pays%20principle,waste%20sites%2C%20when%20the%20polluters%20can%20be%20identified.

This flyer is good from Mums for Lungs. I've just seen that you can order them for free from their website if you want to share with neighbours (under 'Resources').

There is plenty of car storage on East Dulwich Grove, unless you ignore the mansions with huge driveways and multiple cars. This constant ?them? v ?us? narrative is unhelpful @heartblock heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think you would find many > residents on boundary roads would not have such an > issue with that 'policy' as they do not possess > car storage - but do take a walk down Calton Ave > and Gilkes Crescent - car storage private roads > for the ultra-wealthy and I think you might see > who would object.

Thanks for raising awareness on this. So few people are aware just how dangerous their wood burners are (both to themselves and their neighbours). Today would be a really good day to avoid driving too, if you want to avoid adding to the dangerous levels of pollution.

I wonder how they know which party the people on their mailing list belong to?

?Congestion created? - odd comment given data shows Grove Vale traffic volumes are significantly down, 14% from memory. kissthisguy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Northern monkey is right about pollution not being > static of course. There's evidence to show that > pollution's effect on London's TFL red routes > extend to 150m each side of the road. If you live > at either end of Melbourne Grove / Derwent you > probably have worse pollution owing to the > congestion created on Grove Vale / EDG.

I notice that as well as the Dulwich schemes being made permanent, there are several other London boroughs announcing similar this week. A positive start to 2022. Lambeth - Railton and Oval Lewisham - Lewisham and Lee Green Enfield - Bowes

Pretty sure I read they have mobile ones too so best just sign up to auto-pay and try to avoid using the car as much as possible.

In case anyone didn?t receive the newsletter (mine was delayed in the post til recently) I see it?s available online now https://www.southwark.gov.uk/assets/attach/77726/Dulwich-Newsletter-6-PRINT.pdf

?We need data? ?No?not that data (it doesn?t suit my agenda)?

Replacing garages with homes is a good thing and to be applauded given the housing crisis.

Will be interesting to see the council?s latest data (when they finally publish it).

Whilst the offensive posters are still up I remain disappointed. heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How many posts do you wait for before expressing > your disappointment again about what was I think - > we can all agree in light of BLMs brilliant > campaign and the awful slogans from the racist > backlash - DA's unfortunate, misguided and a very, > very poorly worded poster. Is there an algorithm? > Is it a bit of whataboutery to try and paint > people like me, Rockets, Kid, Metalic, Legal who > object to diverted traffic, more pollution and an > increase in idling traffic as a 'certain sort'? > What is your motive M46?

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > but you know, those > Range Rover owners of 5 bedroom 3 million pound > houses deserve a quiet road - it helps then put up > with the working week before dashing off to the > second home in Suffolk darling.. Sounds as though you're describing the people behind One Dulwich/Dulwich Alliance who desperately want their roads opened so they can 'drive freely'. Who's been conned??

Disappointing to see Dulwich Alliance posters with their awful, inappropriate ?All Streets Matter? slogan are still up in a few places. You?d think they?d have a quiet word with the shopkeeper / household to ask them to remove it or at the very least replace with another poster if their apology was genuine.

@heartblock have you seen posts on twitter about East Dulwich Grove traffic? Looks as though traffic volumes could have reduced significantly in the middle section between Townley and Melbourne Grove, rather than increased - good news if so with the Charter school / health centre etc

@heartblock have you seen posts on twitter about East Dulwich Grove traffic? Looks as though traffic volumes could have reduced significantly in the middle section between Townley and Melbourne Grove, rather than increased - good news if so with the Charter school / health centre etc

It's hardly shocking news that One Dulwich grossly overestimate figures. More like 250-300 people from what I saw. Will they be cleaning the graffiti off the signs or is the council going to have to do that?

See the offensive 'All Streets Matter' posters by Dulwich Alliance are still being used. Graffiti on the road signs too, classy.

Not sure where you are getting your facts from Metallic. If you look at the council?s consultation report it shows 67% of Calton Ave respondents and 53% of Court Lane respondents wish to RETAIN it as it is / RETAIN the measure but modify/enhance with other features. Metallic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Except it seems very few people in Calton Ave and > Court Lane, in the bigger number of them, wanted > this closed off area. I know I didn't, and people > in Woodwarde, Court Lane, the Village certainly > didn't. Your comment fans the division. You > don't know who and how many you are actually > slagging off.