Bic Basher

Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Mr/Mrs Rockets, Wandsworth, low council tax AND no > LTNs. Oh and it's a sunnier borough too. Ant > plans to move there? 😊 It's a demographic change in Wandsworth. More Labour supporting voters have moved into Battersea/Nine Elms and they pledged to keep the council tax artificially low. Even if Labour put it up 5% per annum, they'd still have the second lowest council tax in England.

Jacqui5254 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Voted at the St Clements, Friern Road polling > station, 6pm-ish, and they said that turnout had > been low so far... Very quiet at the Bew Court TRA Hall during the day, but much busier this evening.

I don't need beergate or partygate to tell me which way I voted today. It came down to local issues, but I respect there will be protest votes from those not happy with Southwark Labour or with the Tories at a national level, even though they're voting for local Cllrs.

It looks like Southern will operate 5 car units on the West Croydon/Beckenham Junction services after the timetable change in mid-May.

DuncanW Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > A picture taken at 9:27 this morning on Lordship > Lane. > > I had to take a detour this morning on my way to > the polling station, so was surprised the roads > were so quiet after everything I have read on this > forum about traffic chaos and congestion caused by > the introduction new LTNs. Try again at 3.30. Labour are doing the rounds on my part of LL this afternoon.

Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who is this Boris, a mate of yours? You've just > encapsulated what a mess we are in when so many of > the electorate use the PM's first name and see him > as a lovable rogue irrespective of his lack of > integrity and moral compass. I saw through the act very quickly.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I?m hoping the Tories gets good kicking in local > elections personally. I know they?re meant to be > about local issues, but in practice they?re likely > to be seen as a verdict on Johnson and his cabinet > of dunces. That I agree with. They're expected to lose the most seats tomorrow and will hopefully be another foot closer out of the door for Boris.

I wouldn't be surprised if Labour didn't use recycled paper for their many leaflets...

Note the times the traffic levels have peaked up to January 2022 in Lordship Lane S. I suspect it's now regularly peaking since then as well. The school run is still bad along LL. There was traffic from past the Picturehouse to the roundabout at 3.45pm today, one day before the election and we're still being told it's working, but if it's not working at peak times when this scheme was designed to reduce car usage, it's not working.

Waseley Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > And remember folks, this is not a referendum on > LTNs. Which I very much doubt will be removed. > Time to move on. It may well change Labour's selfish policies if they see seats go across South and North Southwark while still holding onto their strongholds in Peckham and Camberwell. Increased opposition from the Lib Dems will give them more power to oppose Labour's waste which hasn't been possible under the current administration. I hope also in Lewisham that we finally see opposition as Labour have all of the council seats there and there the apathy to their LTN schemes have been as terse as here, but they don't even have a single councillor who can defend residents who don't like how it's been managed since 2018. This is why it's important to vote for whoever you feel is the right person/party for the job in your ward rather than the status quo.

-3.5% in my part of Lordship Lane is nothing to brag about. If the scheme was working properly, it'd be down across the board, but East Dulwich Grove is really feeling the pinch and I'd see how much it's working once Labour introduced their latest scheme in Herne Hill.

We call all agree that the Tories continual choking of TfL isn't helping anyone, including the delays to the remodelling of the Dulwich Common/LL junction which in part with the LTN is causing the additional traffic along the eastern end of LL.

hpsaucey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Bic Basher Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > hpsaucey Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > TWB Wrote: > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > ----- > > > > Supporting women's rights isn't > transphobic. > > > > > > 👍👍👍 > > > > > > But do these supposed 'women's rights' also > > include trans women? I doubt it. > > 'Supposed 'women's rights''! Wowser! lol. > > HP There hasn't been one mention from the transphobes who support your cause over the threat to abortions in the USA. Not one and yet your lot are supposedly supporting fellow cis women? Right...

kissthisguy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I thought Cllr Williams seemed quite nervous. TBF > it would've made more sense for local cllrs who > (whatever you think of the LTNs) did design them > and cheerlead for them all the way along, to front > the Labour interview. Agree on Tristan! Sincere > but could do with some savvy too. Ho hum. I'm surprised Dickie didn't come out and represent Labour.

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > When the trains do reappear, are they different > stock, and do they require SDO? Did the trains > that were running last week require SDO? Has the > 8 car stop board been moved.? After May 15th which is when the 455s are being replaced, they'll be using Class 377 trains which also have selective SDO. I think that line can only handle 8 coaches anyway, unlike the Forest Hill line which has had 10 coaches in the past on Southern trains.

The iPlayer copy of the LTN report will be deleted tomorrow, so have added a copy to YouTube for those who want to watch later.

hpsaucey Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > TWB Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Supporting women's rights isn't transphobic. > > 👍👍👍 But do these supposed 'women's rights' also include trans women? I doubt it.

Siduhe Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > One question - have people had their polling cards > through yet? Mine hasn't arrived (Dulwich Hill), > which isn't an issue as I know where to vote, but > wondered if it's just me? I received mine in February. If you haven't got it, just go to your nearest polling station and give them your details and you'll be able to vote on Thursday. Southwark on 020 7525 7373 will be able to advise.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think CPR Dave is somewhat correct in this - > people have enjoyed their own private 'carriage', > that used to be only accessible to the very > wealthy when it was under real 'horse-power', > there is no going back from the freedom of > movement given by a private car as a choice. I do > choose PT over car travel in London, but I also > have enjoyed the freedom to travel by car across > the UK. Making PT cheap, comfortable, accessible > and efficient is needed, but people will not give > up the private car and this freedom to travel. > While train travel remains exorbitant and in many > cases awful, people will choose the car every > time. Rail is the real scandal here. Neither the old New Labour government or the Tories have resolved the issues around pricing, which is so complex for long distance journeys. They're bringing back a national brand for the railways called Great British Railways from next year, but are keeping private companies running the services on behalf of the DfT for the foreseeable future. It's similar to TfL's model for London Overground, DLR and the Elizabeth line where fares and services are planned by TfL, but a private company pays the staff and maintains the trains etc.

goldilocks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The other thing that struck me (apart from how > many people were using the space in the background > when Tristan was speaking for the Tories) was how > measured his comments were for this medium, > whereas locally he's been using much more > polarising language to stoke division. He has now > deleted it from YouTube but for a long while had a > clip of him referring to Dulwich Square as 'Ground > Zero'. I guess he thinks it speaks to his core > support base but its beyond offensive and shows > incredibly poor judgement for someone seeking > public office. A lot of the division has come from your side by sneering at people who have seen the damage with their own eyes and have been told otherwise by activists and Labour Cllrs who show very little empathy with those on boundary roads. The other political parties have seen that and of course they'll use it as an attempt to gain those two seats in Dulwich Village from what is a divided electorate. It wouldn't have been the case if the previous measures to control traffic on Court Lane were kept for which nobody argued about. As for the amount of people on what the pro-LTN supporters call Dulwich Square, but otherwise known as the Court Lane/Calton Avenue/Dulwich Village junction, it appeared to be filmed one day last week when the weather was milder, but there have been days when it's been empty and traders have reported lower footfall.

It may well be the case until they come up with something long-term, Southern may send a dispatcher to send the trains off on Platform 1. There was a similar issue with New Cross Gate platform 5 with Southern services which are made up of 8 or 10 coaches where Southern had dispatchers sent up for their trains. London Overground weren't affected.

kerry2015 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Slight off-topic, I haven't been a regular user > recently but the service to/from London Bridge > seems like it's been reduced . Is this temporary? > Noticed that the last train from London Bridge to > ED is 10.30. Recall it being a lot later > previously. There's a 90 minute gap between services after 2230. The final train to East Dulwich is the 0001 to Crystal Palace. From May 15th, the 2231 to Beckenham Junction will be the final train which continues to be an appalling state of affairs, although the Overground will still run after this time where you can change at Denmark Hill or Peckham Rye for local buses.

I remember the Congestion Charge being set-up with the genuine intention of reducing traffic and for a while it worked, but it's nothing more than a revenue earning cash cow for TfL as drivers would rather pay the ?15 per day charge than lose out on work. It's something companies and the self-employed now have to budget for. The real solutions have to come from the motor industry by reducing emissions from petrol/diesel vehicles and speeding up the process of EV becoming the norm. Shell have converted some former petrol stations into EV charging stops. Where local authorities can help is increasing EV charging points and reducing costs for those who go EV as a real. Every council estate should also have EV points so it's not just for people who can afford to put one in their driveway.

heartblock Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the stationary traffic every morning is > the 'conflict' for the 37 bus...I liked the days > it went down Melbourne Grove - a perfect transport > link. Maybe Melbourne should be a bus route again > - take out all street parking and divert the bus > down there to avoid the congested traffic on ED > Grove. School route served also. It was a controversial issue back then and Melbourne Grove traders were losing revenue from the lack of passing bus passengers on the 37. I doubt they'd re-route it back again as the 42 connects East and North Dulwich stations.

rahrahrah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > We need to stop providing huge amounts of free > (publicly subsidised) space for car storage. I > know any attempts to tackle the problem of car > dominance meets with stiff opposition, but we are > in a climate emergency and it requires leadership. Getting rid of the EV charging spaces on East Dulwich Grove for example is such a great idea in a climate emergency.