Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The point is that many of those spaces are not used by people visiting the shops as was claimed. They're used for long term storage (whether a rental car, a lease car, or one owned outright is entirely irrelevant). We have narrow pavements up that end of the lane, which are packed at weekends and difficult to navigate (especially if you use a wheel chair), so maybe half a dozen people can store a car there, often for days, weeks or even months on end, free of charge. It might be better to use that space to make it easier for the hundreds of pedestrians visiting the shops. 

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 2

What a funny little Alan Partridge like post. You're so far down your rabbit hole that to score internet points against a twitter account you don't like, you're now appearing to excuse an untaxed vanity hire car with illegal number plates taking up space on LL. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Agree 2
8 minutes ago, snowy said:

What a funny little Alan Partridge like post. You're so far down your rabbit hole that to score internet points against a twitter account you don't like, you're now appearing to excuse an untaxed vanity hire car with illegal number plates taking up space on LL. 

Exactly. At the point that people are arguing that this is the best use of space... 🤷‍♂️

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Agree 1

Snowy - I am point scoring about people using incorrect facts for point scoring.

Like you just did. 😉

The vehicle is both taxed and has a valid MOT which I believe makes your post far more Alan Partridge than mine...

Honestly a little bit of research goes a long way....

But thank you so much for validating my point.

 

 

  • Like 1

It's a choice. You can prioritise maybe half a dozen people being able to store their car on the high street long term and free of charge; Or you can prioritise the hundreds of people who regularly crowd the pavements some of who struggle to navigate their way to and from the shops along (in places) very narrow pavements.

The type of car being stored there is really not relevant to the above. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

Careful DKHB - you're the one who started the illegal plates discussion that then turned into (somehow only Snowy knows how) to the not taxed monster truck.

I found that report from Southwark on Lordship Lane shoppers. It's from 2015 and showed that 22% of those surveyed had driven to Lordship Lane (37% had walked and 31% got the bus and those were the two highest)

29% came from SE22

17% SE15

11% SE12

5% SE5

And then the rest from boroughs much further afield (that the report author commented on because it was surprising that it had such a pull)

 

47 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Or you can prioritise the hundreds of people who regularly crowd the pavements some of who struggle to navigate their way to and from the shops along (in places) very narrow pavements.

Not to mention the problems with flooding which clearly don't warrant any $ from Southwark because it's not Dulwich Village....

 

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The point is that many of those spaces are not used by people visiting the shops as was claimed. They're used for long term storage (whether a rental car, a lease car, or one owned outright is entirely irrelevant). We have narrow pavements up that end of the lane, which are packed at weekends and difficult to navigate (especially if you use a wheel chair), so maybe half a dozen people can store a car there, often for days, weeks or even months on end, free of charge. It might be better to use that space to make it easier for the hundreds of pedestrians visiting the shops. 

The greatest likely issue for wheelchair users and those with limited mobility is uneven surfaces and cycling on pavements. 

  • Agree 1

What do you mean by supervised?

Sounds a bit like creating chaos for one day a month. Those relying on buses may not thank you as presumably some may have to walk further? 
 

But shall we try to keep this thread on the subject of  the state of local pavements on a rainy day? Do you think more should be done to rectify poor paving on LL and roads like Northcross?

Edited by first mate
  • Agree 2
1 hour ago, Rockets said:

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! 

On 09/09/2024 at 18:51, teddyboy23 said:

95% of cars parked from boras down to farmers .are all commuter parking.they start from 5am till7am.park up then all use the busstop outside the gym.thats why the same cars are there every day.5 days a week.

And of course, all commuters should be shot as being the scum of the earth. Can I remind you that to get to ED (if you live on an East West axis), you are almost bound to use a private vehicle, as east west commuting using public transport, where most routes run north to West End or City is a huge chore and time-waster. 

These filthy commuters are the people who teach our children, nurse, doctor or dentist us, serve in our shops and restaurants - or, even worse, travel further into town to earn salaries and pay tax. We certainly don't want those sort dirtying our pristine roads.

Commuters are what keeps the local, and national economy afloat. Without people commuting in to serve us, and/ or to generate wealth, we would be in dire straights. 

We should have more parking to support commuters (or a great deal more public transport linking communities other than those directly north and south of us).

6 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

Without people commuting in to serve us, and/ or to generate wealth, we would be in dire straights…We should have more parking to support commuters

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. 🫡

As I have off street parking for 3 cars, bring it on! 

And please realise that commuters are the people who bring services to our own streets, or would you prefer we had no schools, no surgeries, no shops, no restaurants locally? 

Maybe close all these down so you can keep commuters away from you. (We are poorly served by anything other than North South public transport. And not well served by that.) 

  • Agree 1
On 11/09/2024 at 22:16, Dogkennelhillbilly said:

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. 🫡

oh yes the hordes of cycling commuters we see daily. In fact, if there were much greater numbers of cyclists I'd probably stop cycling. On the few occasions I have been out cycling and there have been lots of other cyclists on the same route it has felt quite dangerous and unpleasant at times, with the speed freak element whether on e-bike or unpowered, seemingly oblivious to anyone else.Of course, these types of cyclists will keep cycling on all and any pavements for as long as they can get away with it.

Back to pavements. If the council can throw the sort of money they have to turn Dulwich Junction into a 'Square' how and why have they turned a blind eye to the state of ED paving?

Edited by first mate

And all I'm saying is that commuters aren't evil, and if they are parking, so what? Many will be doing so in order to undertake employment in ED. The ones that aren't will be gainfully employed, and paying taxes, elsewhere. 

Apologies - in the past Southwark Council has used the excuse of 'commuters' to try to impose CPZs on people, implicitly suggesting that we would agree that those sort of people aren't wanted here. So when I see parkers described as 'commuters' I read this  as part-and-parcel of the 'keep nasty 'foreigners' out of our streets' rhetoric. The 'ED streets for ED people' mindset. Apologies again if you weren't thinking that.

  • 4 weeks later...

The beautiful new natural stone pavement in the Dulwich village square, with a lovely flat, but gently sloping, surface to allow the rain to run off and the absence of potentially massive new trees that would, inevitably, distort the pavements and cause subsidence, is something those of us using the pavements of Lordship Lane can only dream of.......😢

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • DD, "Rejoice rejoice. It's a pity he and his fellow clowns were completely annihilated at the ballot box. I mean they were doing so well after all 🙃🙃" At least the economy and unemployment weren't in the mess they are now. What is it, give the public sector a whopping pay increase with no strings attached, double the black hole and then blame it on the last Govt. Give me strength. Rachel from accounts shouldn't be anywhere near the economy. The final straw was increasing employer NI contributions and look how that's worked out. Month on month both inflation and unemployment have risen. Won't be long before inflation and u/e are exceeding 5%, but guess what, They'll blame Sunak and go.  Lets have a snap election right NOW, then see how poorly Starmer, Reeves and Rainer do. They're already plotting to get rid of Starmer, and if you think its bad now, you ain't seen nothing yet. Oh and did I mention Starmer wanting to stop Freedom of Speech............................................Normal people can see right through what him and co are doing, great at spending other peoples money, him and co don't have = bankruptcy. We'll just repeat the economic collapse that happened in Greece and wasn't it in Italy as well?
    • One of the best of Shakespeare 's plays.  I did Othello for A level. Also seen a number of stage and film versions. Is there any specific aspects of the play that is difficult for your daughter to understand?  
    • @Sue think this is your quote.  It wasn't binary, good Vs bad, and Corbyn had a lot of popular support, as evidenced by the previous election. He had aot of good policies, some picked up by others since. He was defeated by a mixture of a right wing press,good targeting the Johnson 'Get Brexit Done" and for some that Johnson was a funny loveable rogue/fool/liar/philander/opportunist.  I wouldn't see choosing the perceived least worst candidate out of the two major parties as being "good sense'.  We imagine that Corbyn would have been terrible, but we don't know.  He would have taken a stronger line against Israel in Gaza, not sucked up to Trump nut on Russia?  Would the UK be better for that?
    • We have had 4 greyhounds - the last one, a bitch, was not speyed so we  had to pay for that at our local vet.  Only one dog was nervous around children and only one was cat friendly.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...