first mate

If it's only a little get together then a back garden should be ample space. If larger then here's a novel idea, why not meet up with neighbours and chums in one of our local parks. If tarmac really is your preferred substrate for socialising, then there is always good ole Dulwich Square!

Having listened to some of the Southwark Council scrutiny session in July, I discovered that London Cycling Campaign (which includes Southwark Cycling) are working very closely with Lime and Lime are funding LCC initiative. Lime are also pushing to reduce car parking and fund Lime bays and shared use cycle racks on every street, if they can. Presume the idea is the bays are not just for e-bikes but also e-scooters. There was discussion - not that fruitful- on limiting irresponsible riding, including on pavements and discarding of Lime bikes. It may be possible using geofencing to put speed limiters on e-bikes and scooters. However, it was acknowledged in the meeting that there are problems but clearly an intention to massively expand Lime anyway. They are dangling large amounts of money to the Council to fund cycling infrastructure.

Should this be in the traffic section or even the lounge? It is not ED specific, people in ED are invited to do it but nothing happening as yet, and the aim is to proselytise about reducing cars?

I don't get it. Encouraging kids to play in the streets and at the same time shut off sections of the park through weeks of summer so kids cannot use it.

Traffic decreases in an LTN, no shit Sherlock!

Interesting. Lime did a presentation and Q&A at the July Environment Scrutiny session. Frustratingly no sound for first half but second half worth a listen. They would like a Lime bay on every street. Not sure how this works.

"And, as TFL has stated in relation to Croxted Road, conjestion and bus delays are being caused by displacement from the LTNs - I presume you aren't supportive of lobbying to have LTNs removed...of course not because in the blinkered world of pro-LTN lobbyists the prviate car is the sole reason for every problem there is......? This!

Perhaps my eyes are deceiving me, but it seems on that map that the majority of residential streets in Dulwich Village are light blue ( a 2 ) and the rest purple, yes? When Rockets referred to Dulwich I assumed they meant the Village. I always refer to East Dulwich as East Dulwich or ED. Again, if I have misinterpreted another post, I am sure they will correct. All said though, the scoring is pretty crude; I see that TJ Centre scores both a 3 and a 4:) 'Score well' is also a bit ho hum. The best overall score for ED is 4, so we are not in the realms of excellent services. The colour coded map is very clear as a comparison to those parts of London, all in shades of red, that have great public transport.

Are you saying PTAL scores in Dulwich Village are not what is on the map ie about as low as you can get?

I've just looked at the link provided by DKHB, and it has Dulwich Village marked up on the map in shades of purple and light blue, so scores of 1a, 1b and 2, at best? Lordship Lane in East Dulwich (towards Goose Green and Dog Kennel Hill, scores much higher). But seems Dulwich Village, home of Dulwich Square, has scores about as low as you can get? If I have misread or misunderstood, happy to be corrected.

Thank you for going. I could not attend. About the tree cutting: was there an explanation as to who had authorised it? I think a lot of people complained while the event was on. I wonder if those complaints were included? I know of someone who complained at the time and gave contact details. They were not invited to the feedback event at Peckham Levels.

You frame the discussions as tedious, yet keep participating? You cannot just make a problem disappear because people disagree and you'd prefer they did not. People will keep on questioning when what they see happening contradicts the preferred narrative. I'd prefer 'smarter' spending by our Labour council. I am sure we can all think of much better ways of spending the £5 million they are currently chucking at their vanity project, Dulwich Sq. No doubt the developers of the brand new private luxury housing, adjacent to the square, were over the moon to be gifted their very own special car free zone to complement their gated community. I bet that sent valuations soaring.

For those with care responsibilities it may well be a "tipping point" but not in the way you suggest. Where care responsibilities come into play I do think there can be other priorities. 'Smarter' choices does sound patronising and smug, given the context. In terms of other posts on CPZ etc..; it is really not for you to try to censor or shut down opinions. If you don't like it then desist and don't comment.

Oh my, an informal carer's permit is £155. Let's penalise family and friends visiting to care for their relatives and mates. Also unbelievable that Southwark Labour will penalise ordinary residents to have people care for them while they merrily shell out £5 million for a totally unnecessary created social space, in one of the wealthiest parts of the borough.

So Dulwich Park and its cafe, Belair Park and its restaurant, the large cafe and restaurant in the extensive Dulwich Picture Gallery grounds, plus the Greyhound pub and its very large gardens, the many cafes with extensive outdoor seating, are not enough for people to safely connect, socialise and play?

It occurs that the very large development on the old garage site will possibly have gained considerably by having a once busy junction transformed into a car free zone. There may be no connection at all, but...

Given the huge amounts of smoke these can give off (according to design) perhaps it is time for us all to consider giving up BBQs, just as many of us will have to reconsider the wisdom of running wood burners. On a very hot day, BBQ smoke is especially anti social and for anyone with breathing issues I'd imagine presents a serious risk.

But don't see how any of that justifies or explains spending £5million on the creation of Dulwich Sq? The council's justification for all this was to reclaim land and create a safe space for people to connect, socialise and play? Even you must admit given the site, local geography, wealth and resources available, plus the multiple destinations and opportunities to 'safely connect, socialise and play' that already exist in Dulwich, this looks an exercise in extreme profligacy by the council.

But the increased congestion at that junction (and associated increased pollution) occurred after the council made their alterations. The uptick was part of the council's report into the alterations - they basically admitted they had made the problem worse (at great expense to the tax payer).

As you know, they have already tried to get the event extended to 6 days and then backed off; my guess is they'll try again next year. Catherine Rose seems to have now been replaced as Cabinet Member for Parks, so I don't know if that will affect things. However, she was absolutely set on monetising park land. As a matter of interest, would you support extension of this event as well as opening up the park for other similar events? I do wonder what would happen if it was proposed to rotate the event, so one year it is held in Peckham, the next in Dulwich Park. That way the pain and the pleasure is shared around (transport a barrier to the latter, I guess).

It sounds like you think any objection is fruitless - is this because you think the event has full council backing, no matter what? Your reference to brownie points (at least I think that is what you meant) does make this feedback meeting sound like a tick box exercise, which is really disheartening. I don't think the three day event will be stopped. My greatest concern is that the event is extended and then a precedent set for yet other festival, large private events to be held.

In summary, £5million for an improved junction in one of the borough's most wealthy areas, by an allegedly cash-strapped council. Go figure.

Not only that, the location chosen for feedback means they may be more likely to draw in more of those in favour, but who don't necessarily live adjacent to the event. The event is in the park, not on the common. A feedback location should be much closer to the event site, as it has always been before.

Southwark Council has proposed paving over a swathe of the Dulwich Village junction to create a ‘public space’ with trees and outdoor seating. The council says the changes would mean “reclaiming space” so the community can “connect, socialise and play” in a “safe and pleasant environment”. It’s the latest proposed changes to the junction which has increasingly restricted motor traffic ever since the Dulwich Village Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) was installed in June 2020. So the above is the rationale for overhauling this space. A need to connect, play and socialise. In one of the wealthiest parts of the borough, in a locale brimming with restaurants and cafes, a Picture Gallery ( with plans for children's play areas), with no less than three massive areas of parkland in which to meet, socialise and play (Dulwich Park, land next to Picture Gallery, Belair Park)? What is the overall cost of the whole Dulwich Square deal? Cycling through there yesterday, could not believe extent to which everything dug up and ripped out. Really major work and disruption. I thought the council was struggling for cash?

"At least try to watch it with an open mind and give some credibility to the experts in academia". I must have misunderstood, I thought Rockets was commenting on it because they watched it? But because they do not agree this means they are not open-minded?