Rockets

Ha ha, you'll be pleased to know that private schools are now off! 😉 BTW I presume Southwark Cyclists haven given their blessing to these new measures..;-)...I read the document form 2020 and laughed when I read the below as this was the infamous document where the council rolled over to accommodate the requests of Southwark Cyclists but ignored the input from the emergency services.....and was the first sign of who was pulling the council's strings.... Southwark Cyclists Southwark cyclists are in favour of the cycling improvementsin this area. They requested some added cycling road markings and a minimum width of 1.2m for the segregated lane. We have accommodated all the suggestions from Southwark cyclists.

Is there any LTN that has majority support in its local area (and i am not talking about a single street that has the closure)? It seems like they are installed on the whims of councillors and a few vocal activist groups who are in cahoots with the council and then residents have to live with the dire displacement consequences and are then ignored and belittled by councils and the pro-LTN lobby when they dare say they may not be working.

I found the aborted plan from 2020. APPENDIX 1 PECKHAM RYE.pdf

DulvilleRes - any concerns from your side about the stories of Labour councillors and award winning active travel lobbyists infiltrating the "properly constituted local organisation" Dulwich Society transport sub-committee to the point that Dulwich Society had to intervene and state that that committee did not speak on behalf of DS and that they were impartial to the DV closure...... It seems there is a hefty dose of double-standards at play here or is that fatuous?

Dog Kennel Hill is always good for some thigh burn!

Yeah Earl...take heed of Malumbu's words....;-)

I am sure this is part of the plan they had for this part of Peckham back when they were going LTN mad and where they prioritised the input from the cycle lobby over the input from the emergency services. Does anyone have the old pdf from then as that will probably show how far these plans will end-up extending? I reckon details will be somewhere on the old LTN thread from back in the day - was it what they referred to as Phase 3? They are clearly coming back to have a second go after they failed to get it in back in 2020/2021.

This modus operandi always happens when someone scrutinises what people post - some don't seem to like any sort of scrutiny or accountability - which is a trait that is depressingly familiar amongst many on the pro- lobby and actually one of the reasons this issue will never go away - because people are fed-up with the council propagandists who will do anything to try and prove that they are right - whether they are or not. They are tired of the cultish behaviour.

For pedestrians due to cyclists. I asked the question does the data exist and if so who collects it and where does it come from. Does, for example, a child being knocked over by a cyclist get recorded if no police or ambulance attended? Because it comes from "TFL" and you could provide no detail on how it was collected - is it based on police reports, ambulance attendance, insurance claims.... No I asked you the question whether you knew that the displacement routes were safer. A reduction in accidents on a closed road is one thing, whether the displaced traffic causes accidents and issues somewhere else has to be considered. It was misleading because you did not acknowledge that it included lockdown - it's the very definition of misleading information., Especially as you drew a conclusion from said misleading info. I posed the question whether you do this deliberately. Certainly if you post comparative data, draw conclusions from that to back up your argument and forget that a large part of that time was during lockdown then, unless you admit it was an "oversight" then it does lead one to believe it was misleading.

Yup, clutching at straws. Have you heard the saying: time does not heal all wounds.....? This narrative that somehow just because something happened years ago we should all just live with it is a narrative that people who know there is something to hide like to circulate.

Ahem, Southwark Cyclists were also whipping up support to respond to a consultation......you seem to have ignored that part....and still every consultation has gone against the council. Again, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.... You're clutching at straws a little bit now. Clearly the weight of evidence suggests there is significant resistance from local residents. The problem is the council just listens to the vocal minority and try to steamroll their ideological plans through...see the tactics employed in the Dulwich Society.

Didn't they try to do this when they were going LTN mad after lockdown? Is this the rehashed version of that (which Phase was it) which I think was dropped when someone worked out it was going to be a displacement disaster <removed>

Did you not say this in relation to your misleading stats.....?

March46 doesn't like the truth to get in the way of a good story!!!!

Malumbu...????