LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[Metallic]

tradingfiddle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are you for real? Plenty of parking in front of

> the shops in the designated bays. Not about being

> patient as I was in no rush and they were

> perfectly able to deliver before the closure

> without blocking the road.

>

> Indeed I am for real. Life isn't going to be perfect for anyone and as cyclists CONTINUE to use the Calton Avenue pavement further up the road, complaining about a van either doing mail or pharmacy deliveries is unreasonable.

>

> Metallic Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > tradingfiddle Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Just cycled through the planters on Calton

> > Avenue

> > > and there was a van parked across them. Also

> saw

> > a

> > > different van parked the same way yesterday,

> > maybe

> > > supplied for the shops? Tried to take a

> > photograph

> > > today but the driver clocked me turning

> around

> > and

> > > drove off.

> > >

> > > Can anything be done to stop this? It makes

> it

> > as

> > > dangerous as before as can't see the

> junction.

> >

> > Where do you expect deliveries to take place?

> I

> > imagine that a road wide closure means you

> could

> > have steered round the van without any trouble?

>

> > There are only bikes. A bit of patience to

> make

> > your world perfect?

[exdulwicher]

Indeed I am for real. Life isn't going to be perfect for anyone and as cyclists CONTINUE to use the Calton Avenue pavement further up the road, complaining about a van either doing mail or pharmacy deliveries is unreasonable.

A councillor stopped a cyclist there a couple of weeks ago and asked why he was on the pavement. He pointed at the signs saying ROAD CLOSED and said that as the road was closed he'd jumped the pavement to go round it.

This got mentioned previously by other posters commenting on the change from the red ROAD CLOSED to the green ROAD OPEN TO [symbols of pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchair etc]. That is why.

Ultimately it just shows that common sense isn't very common!

[tradingfiddle]

Well I am not sure how highlighting an issue with people beginning to park across blocking the junction is unreasonable? People were able to find adequate parking when the junction was open so no need to park across it, may end up needing to extend the double yellows?

Not sure why you are mentioning cycling on the pavement but I agree that it is bad and dangerous but if the junction starts to be blocked then unfortunately we are likely to see more cyclists mounting the pavements to get around parked vehicles.

Unfortunately the solutions seem to create more problems at this junction - Btw I drive regularly too and would not have the front to start parking across that junction in my vehicle!

Metallic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> tradingfiddle Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Are you for real? Plenty of parking in front of

> > the shops in the designated bays. Not about

> being

> > patient as I was in no rush and they were

> > perfectly able to deliver before the closure

> > without blocking the road.

> >

> > Indeed I am for real. Life isn't going to be

> perfect for anyone and as cyclists CONTINUE to use

> the Calton Avenue pavement further up the road,

> complaining about a van either doing mail or

> pharmacy deliveries is unreasonable.

> >

> > Metallic Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > tradingfiddle Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Just cycled through the planters on Calton

> > > Avenue

> > > > and there was a van parked across them.

> Also

> > saw

> > > a

> > > > different van parked the same way

> yesterday,

> > > maybe

> > > > supplied for the shops? Tried to take a

> > > photograph

> > > > today but the driver clocked me turning

> > around

> > > and

> > > > drove off.

> > > >

> > > > Can anything be done to stop this? It makes

> > it

> > > as

> > > > dangerous as before as can't see the

> > junction.

> > >

> > > Where do you expect deliveries to take place?

>

> > I

> > > imagine that a road wide closure means you

> > could

> > > have steered round the van without any

> trouble?

> >

> > > There are only bikes. A bit of patience to

> > make

> > > your world perfect?

[Abe_froeman]

"we are likely to see more cyclists mounting the pavements to get around parked vehicles."

Time for a permanent filter on the pavements then.

[Spartacus]

BBC News - London's pop-up cycle lanes 'stopping disabled travel'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53670087

An unexpected unplanned side effect 😱

[roywj]

Or stop vehicles blocking the junction, no need for bicycles to take pavement space especially if the road has been closed.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "we are likely to see more cyclists mounting the

> pavements to get around parked vehicles."

>

> Time for a permanent filter on the pavements then.

[Earl Aelfheah]

I wonder whether ?One Dulwich? would have opposed the closure of Dulwich Park to through traffic at the time on similar grounds?

[Spartacus]

Isn't it a shame that the science fiction utopia of flying cars that was predicted in the 50s didn't come true.

Then again this thread would be "our healthy skies phase 3" and imagine the outcry over cars getting free parking on the roofs of houses.

George Jetson, where are you when we need you?

[exdulwicher]

Isn't it a shame that the science fiction utopia of flying cars that was predicted in the 50s didn't come true.

Tomorrow's World (and/or Back to the Future...) had definitely promised me a hoverboard by now.

[Spartacus]

Don't get me started on jet packs exdulwicher

[Earl Aelfheah]

We were promised hoverboards, we got electric scooters. Very disappointing.

[mr.chicken]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Mr Chicken, [...] what are you afraid of?

Getting run over on a bike, getting pollution related heart disease or a lung condition. There's plenty to choose from.

[Spartacus]

mr.chicken Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > Mr Chicken, [...] what are you afraid of?

>

> Getting run over on a bike, getting pollution

> related heart disease or a lung condition. There's

> plenty to choose from.

Guess the advice that has been dolled out to the car wed could be applied to you here, if the area doesn't suit then you could always move to the countryside.

Or is that too much of a price to pay, much like its too much of a price for car owners who it's been leveled at ?

[mr.chicken]

Spartacus Wrote:

> With this in mind, does it not imply that we are

> all (regardless of race) actually safer commuting

> in our cars than on public transport as there is a

If you're going to wish for the impossible why not just wish that we're all immune to all future pandemics.

The road capacity simply does not exist for Londoners to move wholesale from public transport to cars.

Take the Victoria line (our closest tube). It has a capacity of 40,000 people per hour per direction, and it runs at capacity in one direction at rush hour. The busiest section of the M25 manages 250,000 vehicles per day in both directions combined. If you're going to move everyone into nice, safe single occupancy cars, you're going to have to turn almost the whole of London into nothing but 8 lane motorways.

Then again, I think some "grassroots" groups might actually support that.

[Spartacus]

Mr chicken

Stop your silly clucking and twisting of my words as you are scratching uselessly in the ground.

The point I was making is not that we should all abandon public transport wholesale and move to cars, simply that as public transport presents a higher risk of germ and virus transmission then we should abandon the drive to push more people onto it as pre pandemic it was already at peak capacity.

There is an equal balance of the needs for cars, public transport and other methods of getting around and the push for cycling can't be touted as a one size fits all solution.

[Metallic]

"Posted by tradingfiddle Yesterday, 02:20PM

Well I am not sure how highlighting an issue with people beginning to park across blocking the junction is unreasonable? People were able to find adequate parking when the junction was open so no need to park across it, may end up needing to extend the double yellows?

Not sure why you are mentioning cycling on the pavement but I agree that it is bad and dangerous but if the junction starts to be blocked then unfortunately we are likely to see more cyclists mounting the pavements to get around parked vehicles."

Mentioning the pavement cyclists of Calton Ave because I see them as I walk down to the shops from Woodwarde Rd. I simply do not believe people who think this is ok, and I can't understand why Calton Ave is now safe for children to cycle safely - from Woodwarde down yes, but Woodwarde up Calton to Townley? The stupidity of not making this a closed both ends street at the time the bottom closure was implemented, is unbelievable.

As for vans parking, they are probably there for a few minutes going to the pharmacy and if their round USED to involve EDG you can hardly blame them for finding another route rather than sit it out in EDG for half an hour.

[exdulwicher]

There is an equal balance of the needs for cars, public transport and other methods of getting around and the push for cycling can't be touted as a one size fits all solution.

Yes and no. The problem with the transport system at the moment is that for years (decades) it has not been "equal" at all, it's been very skewed towards private motor vehicles. (This is not unique to Dulwich or Southwark or London or the UK, this happened worldwide from about the 70's onwards).

To address decades of inequality skewed to car use, there's a need to "over-promote" other options (active travel basically). It's not equality, it's equity. If you treat driving = cycling = walking, everyone goes for driving which then means that cycling and walking get marginalised and people are scared to walk / cycle along the now dangerously busy and congested roads.

To get back to the equity status, you need to be dis-incentivising car use.

There's a posh term for it, Nudge Theory: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nudge_theory

Got quite a following at first (like Chaos Theory) but it's really just a description of behavioural influence.

[mr.chicken]

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mr chicken

> Stop your silly clucking and twisting of my words

> as you are scratching uselessly in the ground.

Huh, well Today I Learned that reading someone's words and thinking through what the consequences of them actually are is "twisting them". I will endeavor not to engage my brain in future and consider such things. Boo buses bad! Cars good!

> The point I was making is not that we should all

> abandon public transport wholesale and move to

> cars, simply that as public transport presents a

> higher risk of germ and virus transmission then we

> should abandon the drive to push more people onto

> it as pre pandemic it was already at peak

> capacity.

But you're ignoring that the roads were also at peak capacity, so we can't push more people into cars either. Imagine we scrapped all cars and tripled the number of buses. People on buses would be spread further apart, lowering the risk of transmission.

> There is an equal balance of the needs for cars,

There's also a need for more land to build roads on to take the cars. Somehow the car lobby never has an answer to cars. It's only MOAR CARS!!11one!1!one. Of course when everything gets completely snarled up they whine too about how someone should really do something about the traffic...

> public transport and other methods of getting

> around and the push for cycling can't be touted as

> a one size fits all solution.

I like how cars count as one. But buses and trains and tubes and walking and bicycles and e scooters also count as one.

[not sure what happned to my post]

Spartacus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Guess the advice that has been dolled out to the

> car wed could be applied to you here, if the area

> doesn't suit then you could always move to the

> countryside.

It suits me much better now the roads are quieter.

>

> Or is that too much of a price to pay, much like

> its too much of a price for car owners who it's

> been leveled at ?

Ah yes the price. We have 4000 per yer dying in London alone due to pollution, and many more with long term health problems. I think drivers ought to pay a pollution levy to offset the costs on the NHS and social care, so that the price of the cars reflects the true cost. Otherwise it's just a way of getting everyone else to subsidies them.

But that aside, what's the prince you're talking about? It sounds like you make have to make some journeys on foot or by bicycle. Sounds like a negative cost to me!

[Metallic]

Anyone catch the risible goings on at "Dulwich Square" on Saturday?

[Abe_froeman]

What happened metallic?

[nxjen]

Very contrived. Why would people want to hang out there when the more attractive and larger Park is just down the road?

[macutd]

i can't believe that some selfish people say the roads are quieter now. Well theirs might be if they are sealed off.

But the rest of us that have to live, go to school and drive down the now over congested whats left have to suffer. Thanks

[seenbeen]

The streets will NEVER be healthy around here...people do not think beyond their own little world- and they will carry on polluting

[Earl Aelfheah]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> https://twitter.com/dulwichsquare/status/129223098

> 1877891074?s=21

>

> Very contrived. Why would people want to hang out

> there when the more attractive and larger Park is

> just down the road?

I cringed at this myself.

[Spartacus]

nxjen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> https://twitter.com/dulwichsquare/status/129223098

> 1877891074?s=21

>

> Very contrived. Why would people want to hang out

> there when the more attractive and larger Park is

> just down the road?

A very good example of the failure of the crowds to safely social distance ..

Agree that the park would be a much more conducive environment for events and surprised that the patisserie hasn't set up tables and chairs to take advantage of the space.. oh hang on people are blocking the cycle lanes so not such a good example of using a shared space after all..