first mate

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.

Some are resistant to reality when it contradicts what they want to believe. Over the last few months I have been really surprised by how often I have had to step out of the way of a cyclist or been startled by one whizzing by, too close for comfort, every time on a non cycling pavement. I know that I am not alone in experiencing this. I think it is worth posting as it is a new thing and, without some kind of intervention (I am not quite sure what) I suspect it will happen with greater frequency. As I said, an accident waiting to happen. This does not detract from valid issues with dangerous driving in cars, but at least there are penalties for that, even if inadequate at times. As I also said, it is not because I think cyclists are 'bad' but I suspect many are newish to cycling and as someone else commented, view themselves as pedestrians on wheels and entitled to ride on a footpath as they choose. I also suspect many are not aware it is illegal or do not care, as there are currently few risks of a penalty.

It is a pain, I agree. Worrying times. The idea that these 'gentlemen' have the wellbeing of abuse victims at heart is nauseating.

Sorry Earl, but having cyclists ride on the pavement, too close for comfort at high speed, on regular basis, is uncomfortable and worrying. I am surprised you feel it is all okay and dismiss it so readily while also, more or less, accusing me of lying. I am posting it because the frequency of this behaviour is very new. I think that is worth noting. My view is that we need to find a way to educate and or penalise cyclists doing this. It is an accident waiting to happen. Your approach seems to favour waiting. I do not share it.

Boring comment Earl and I would ask admin to take a look. Are you saying I am lying Earl and making these events up?

Over the last two days I have experienced more cyclists on non shared pavements. In both cases not food deliveries. Quite surprisingly one was a very large cargo bike with a totally empty bay. Both cyclists cut across the pavement at speed, presumably to shave a few seconds of their journey. Both were way too close for comfort and seemed to judge they could make the manoeuvre without hitting me.

Cllr McAsh is the Cabinet Member in charge of this stuff. One email to him with the response shared on here, job done. I get that some would prefer responses are kept private and one on one.

If you get an answer from Cllr McAsh, post it, so we can see.

It would be interesting to learn more about this.

I noticed that. I hoped it was to indicate where to put paving, or similar. We can only hope.

Like the idea of a dance fight. What would be the names of the respective dance off teams, what attire and what music? This should be good!

It may need some sort of redesign, low fencing, to stop the pebbles getting scattered everywhere. Seems it was not thought through very well, which is surprising, given how much it has cost.

Time to get your blinkers off.

On what grounds is this a 'professional' opinion? Are you a mind reader by trade? Please tell us what it is about your professional training that equips and entitles you to make high-handed accusations like the above? You cycling activists allow yourselves great latitude to accuse and judge everyone else. I think of the times you have also stated that those that disagree with you have mental health problems or anger issues. It is really distasteful and disturbing that you are prepared to sink so low to try to stand-up the points you make.

Oh, so now you are saying that CPZ only cost drivers money when they do something wrong? Are you being serious? CPZ are meant to relieve parking pressure; there has never been great parking pressure on the streets of Dulwich Village. May I remind you, only part of one street wanted it- that is out of the whole area. So what is the true reason for forcing an unwanted and unnecessary CPZ onto the area? £££££.

Thought I put a very fair point that you as a travel activist deciding to report back on your 'special' visit to the site to prove to us that this left turn across a bus lane is not a problem, is hardly the best debating point.

Isn't the title of this thread Dulwich Village Square?

First para, largely irrelevent to this specific and unusual junction. Second part, well you knew exactly what to look for didn't you? Forewarned and all that. A travel activist visiting a site to prove a point is not really saying anything persuasive. Many will be caught out, because the bus lane demarcation lines run on for longer than is usual. In heavy traffic or low light I can easily see how visibility and judgement might be affected.

What about community and housing?

That all sounds incredibly noble, but sadly just not convincing. Your own extensive track record of twisting and misrepresentation of what others have said, even suggesting other posters are making things up (lying) does you no favours. Plus, in the list of points above you are again making multiple misrepresentations about what others have said. These are not the actions of someone interested only in 'good faith debate'.

Ah, I think Malumbu is also trying this line out. So desperate to close it all down Earl. As I have said before, if it is such a non issue, why are you still here?

Let's see. Once that DV CPZ gets underway and the knock-on effects of multiple unwanted and unnecessary road tinkering starts to truly bed in.