first mate

That is a swerve,Earl. City Police have managed to fine cyclists for breaking the law, without licensing, so it is certainly possible.

It is such a simple question, all the cycle lobbyists on here are swerving around like crazy. I still don't understand why 20mph for all road users is not acceptable and such a problem?

A number of us feel the council has been less than transparent in the way it has handled street changes etc and they have the power to impose an agenda, not just criticise someone elses. Nonetheless, One Dulwich voices views that many recognise and agree with. I know this seems to drive you and other cycle lobbyists crazy, because it means you cannot control the messaging as you would wish, but that is democracy.

According to the govt 20 mph zones are meant to be self-enforcing. The above described by you is appalling behaviour, but it sounds as though this guy has issues with women aside from anything else, probably a menace even if not in a car. Hope he is charged. Good they got the reg. I witnessed really bad behaviour towards a cyclist on Lordship Lane the other day. The rider stopped in front of a huge amount of water (another Thames Water issue) and the driver was honking away and being aggressive. No excuse. I was totally on the cyclists side and ready to support him if it escalated. The issue is angry humans and bad behaviour, but this is not limited only to car drivers. Cyclists can also cycle carelessly and take risks that might cause harm; I saw yet another run a pedestrian green light at Dulwich Square this evening, just as someone was crossing - a couple of other cyclists waited at the lights. But why avoid answering my very straightforward question. We don't need to licence cyclists, we just need to have 20mph speed limit that applies to them, as well as other road users. Not everyone will adhere, but some will, it is better than nothing and it just makes it clearer. We can also include random checks, so maybe the odd person gets a fine. Easier if this can be done by wardens.

Well it is interesting isn't it, that they will go to such lengths to try to sabotage the message of anyone that disagrees with them. Perhaps we should all start pretending to be other organisations. One of us could be Dulwich Roads!!

From gov.uk 17 Mar 2024Successful 20mph zones and 20mph speed limits are generally self-enforcing Again, why is it such a huge problem to have a 20mph speed limit for ALL road users? Licensing not necessary.

RPZ has not been mentioned as an option, especially in this area. And yes, it is definitely Leemings' and Newens' turf. Doesn't one of them live in DV?

Admin are you saying ab29 is too much or that the person ( possibly Earl) now pretending to be One Dulwich is the culprit. I think the fake press release was a bit much and hope it will be removed, as these tactics feel very Trump-worthy.

But that is not a sound rationale to therefore having no universal speed limit. Again, 20mph is meant to be largely self enforcing. I also believe that in the City they were looking to get wardens involved in ticketing for various traffic offences, including bicycles running red lights. I would have to check this to be sure, but if it is the case, then we already know the council has invested in wardens to 'police' CPZs. So we could add another string to that role.

Dulville, I take it, that you see no contradiction between this council pushing LTNs on the basis that they improve the environment and their agenda to monetise swathes of prime, green parkland by putting parks up for hire for use by events organisers, through many weeks in summer? How can an environmentally conscious council possibly greenlight weeks of noise, light and diesel generator pollution, not to mention year on year damage and detritus after each event? Please explain?

I have a very straightforward question. 20 mph zones are meant to be self enforcing. This means there is intermittent or random enforcement, possibly once in a blue moon. On that basis, why can't we have 20mph for all road users. As with City Police, we might have a rare blitz to catch speeders and issue penalties. It won't work for all but it may get others to check their behaviour. What could be the harm?

No, you want to try and catch out as many unwitting drivers as possible before word gets round and signage is improved. It is a must to monetise confusion and ambiguity, while the option is there.

A bit random but I also strongly object to the council playing its 'environment, green and anti pollution' card to justify continued expansion of CPZ and LTN, but continues to press for more and more local parkland to be turned over for environmentally unfriendly events, run by private companies, through some of the best weeks of summer.

Just curious, how do you know that? Are the bays being monitored for driver activity after parking?

We still don't know much about where much of this surplus revenue is going? Have not been able to get a breakdown yet.

I accept that licensing may not be possible, but since City Police are already enforcing certain aspects of law breaking by cyclists and issuing penalties without any licensing, why can we not have random enforcement elsewhere? If enforcement is possible for some aspects of the law, why not for breaking a speed limit? It is also the case that most 20mph zones are meant to be self-enforcing, so why not just apply to all road users, with intermittent monitoring and the possibility of a fine? Not perfect but not impossible.

Does anyone know where the consultation will be held? Last year they decided to have it at Peckham Levels. The year before they did it at the Clockhouse pub, next to Peckham Rye, a much more sensible location and easier for local residents to attend.

You do see dedicated parent and children parking bays in various contexts as well as short term unloading. I must admit though, I have never seen one for "grabbing milk". It reminds me of that infamous urban myth put about by early pro CPZ/LTN folk, where loads of ED residents were allegedly jumping into their cars to drive a few yards to 'grab a latte'.

Agree with this. If not licensing then how do we enforce? if we can enforce then why can't we have speed limits that apply to all? Is it the view that it is simply impossible to enforce any kind of legislation around push and e-bikes?

Prior to the significant influx of e-bikes you may have had a point. E-bikes muddy the waters and it is not always clear when an e-bike is souped up or not. Having the same speed limit for all road users would make things clearer, simpler and in the long term probably safer too. See no reason why e-bikes cannot be licensed.

But, on that very specific point, why would you object to it? What exactly is the issue with limiting cyclists (including e-bikes and scooters) to the same speed limit as cars. Or, to put it another way, why not have the same speed limit for all road users?

Thanks for posting this. It looks as though the proposed footprint of the event is larger than ever before, with fenced off trackway stretching down the Colyton road side, well beyond the metal fence perimeter. The schedule is now set to take up most of May and the first week of June, again one of the most beautiful times of year in the park. They are wanting to add another day, which this year will be a supported 'community' festival. But surely this is to set precedent for adding many more days in future? Be careful what you wish for; the park is up for hire by this council. Do we want it to go the same way as Brockwell, where local residents are in despair at the slow erosion of their park and the annual noise and disruption? Protecting our green, tranquil natural spaces is vital for the lungs of the city, for wildlife and the mental health of our local population.

I cannot see that this includes what parking surplus and within that, Environment Reserve, is spent on?

As well as the above, has anyone else noticed the massive amounts of gum being spat out all over as well as marking pavements? This is not only disgusting as gum will be laced with human germs and saliva but also places a large cleaning cost on already stretched services. Why do humans insist on spitting out gum onto the pavements? Why can't they dispose of it in a bin or take it home?

I was under the impression that a local councillor lives in that street. Presumably then, the council are already aware.