first mate

Well, no but it is or was a major access route into DV, hence the negative impact on those with mobility issues.

This is really seen as adequate justification for spending millions on the space? As for people across the borough visiting. Really? I just cannot see people making Dulwich Square a must see destination. They will pass through to go and visit the shops, the pub and restaurants, the parks, and the famous Picture Gallery. They will pass through because many will have to, it is one of the routes into DV. DKH, it is the council and Cabinet member in charge wot make the policy therefore they are accountable, you cannot really get away from that, no matter how many "lols" you post 🙂 You still have not revealed the identity of your "Mr One Dulwich"? I have asked quite a few times now?

But with so many local venues, not to mention the large parks replete with free seating, just a few minutes down the road, you can't seriously mean there was a pressing need for this space?

Apparently the PO on LL is closed? There is a handwritten sign in the window saying closed owing to technical issues. There is no phone number or way to check when or if it will open again? If anyone from the branch reads this perhaps they could post and update us? It might save people time and effort. It might also be useful to update the website, which says the branch is open. If this is only very temporary and already open again then I apologise.

Hmm, I think it they are referencing that great Wings hit "Let em in" (Someone's knocking at the door, somebody's ringing the bell"etc..). They may not have considered the suitability of the title for your particular thread 🤣 I think and hope it was little kids playing knock down ginger. Teenagers booting people's doors for a dare not so excusable.

Surely you are not suggesting I have the same power, reach and influence as Cllr McAsh? Cllr McAsh is, for now, the Cabinet Member in charge of the Streets for People policy, so it is legitimate to comment on how he handles the decision making process and optics around that. I think a number of us wondered why he had changed from describing himself as Marxist to socialist? It is relevant to know what ideology may be driving his political decisions. Anyway, you still haven't revealed who"Mr One Dulwich" is? You and others have referred to this mystery individual a number of times. I am surprised you are keeping his identity under wraps.

I think this is known as "playing the man and not the ball". Plus, the implication that if you so much as dare to question or criticise the council, this is proof you are a gas guzzling, Tory. Come on DKH. I do find it odd in a cost of living crisis that our Labour Council can find millions to spend on the creation of Dulwich Square in one of the wealthiest parts of the borough. I would be less surprised but equally questioning if this had been the decision of a Tory council. It is the council that decides and who are accountable for those decisions.

But surely the time to say 'no' to a specific issue is when that something goes out to consultation? In general, people do not vote at elections on single issues, although, as we have said before, quite incredibly some local Dulwich residents did just that. I think those in favour of LTNs, CPZ etc, have to stop framing it as a left/right thing. I think for those of us against, it is about the validity and situation of certain traffic schemes and transparency and honesty of process. As has also been said before, Southwark Labour were quiet in their campaigning on LTNs etc.., so the idea that they have a mandate to go ahead with their various plans is not the case. Not sure I would refer to residents with mobility problems as vested interests?

Well you seem to know who this 'Mr One Dulwich' is, so tell us. I genuinely don't. The fact that you do, or say you do is interesting. As for your sensitivity about criticism of the council- who else are we to hold accountable for management of LTNs, CPZ etc?

I don't think I have forced anything, just expressed an opinion and, also relayed what Southwark Council have said. As for whether the Council spin their call for world car free day/ street closures for fun and play, let's wait and see. We've closed the street for a party for a number of years, just not before as a call to action by the Council.

You could also consider a dry shampoo, like they use for car upholstery, or if the material is colour fast borrow a steam cleaner? Most have an upholstery attachment.

Okay, let's just say we'd like some street parties and to do that we need to close the street- to all traffic. A nice side benefit is kids can play in the space while the adults socialise and have fun. I can see that residents think, yes, a party would be nice and they organise it. Supposing there is a good turnout, you just know this will be spun as overwhelming support for Southwark's car/street plans. Are you denying Southwark have said this- about the cars, of course.

We need a biologist or even a paper to explain.

I am interested to know how many posters here support Southwark's stated intention to remove all private cars from the streets. For those that need to use a car how do you see this working? If a major intention of getting rid of cars is to free up streets for children to play, for socialising etc., how does e-bike and scooter use fit into this idea? Given other cities have now banned these because they are so dangerous I am interested to understand the thinking. Southwark is looking at removing car parking spaces on every street and installing e-bikes and e-scooters in the space instead.

What is road tax? Road taxation has existed since the 17th century to pay for building and maintenance of Britain's highways, and in 1909 the Road Fund was established to collect road tax for the financing and administration of road building and maintenance. A tax specifically for motor vehicles was first introduced in 1920, but after 1937 the Road Fund and any ring-fencing of the vehicle excise duty for the specific financing of roads was ended. Since then all UK road tax is paid into the government's Consolidated Fund and road maintenance is financed out of general taxation.

Is there any update on this?

I do not use slug pellets either and, like you, keep forgetting beer traps. I had hoped that foxes etc would have a feast, especially on a rainy night when the lawn is literally carpeted with slugs. Suspect these city foxes prefer stuff in the bins etc...

How have people dealt, or not, with the huge amount of slugs this year. Has anyone else noticed plants being eaten that would normally be untouched? Is this down to a new type of slug or just competition for food as so many more of them?

Don't know much about this but will say that I have noticed more aeroplane noise recently, it seems to have got worse but no idea if that is about my perception or a reality.

Nope, listen to the latest Southwark Council scrutiny session.

Yes, so it is about balance. Quite how we decide who deserves to use a car remains to be seen but Cllr McAsh did say that; perhaps it was a moment of levity, playing to the 'stakeholder' gallery, who knows.

The opinions expressed are partly mine but much more me just passing on what the council has said it wants to do to increase park hire for private events and ridding the streets of all cars. I will add to that a possibility that councillors may be seduced by the Lime dollar and remove parking space on every street to make way for Lime e-bike and scooter storage and use. I don't quite know how a proliferation of e-bikes and scooters sits with the aim of getting children to play in the street, not at the speeds I have seen some of them go...

I don't know who 'Mr One Dulwich is.' If you know for sure, can you tell us? I thought this was about locals with mobility issues and those who have a greater need to use a car (in a low PTALS area) and have found the LTN and Dulwich Sq have made life a whole lot more difficult for them. A whole load of them objected, did they not and were pretty much ignored. But I think this reflects the council party line that the end justifies the means and there will be collateral damage along the way.

Gala doing their thing for three days, what about when it becomes 6 and then yet more events are added to that? In earlier posts you said you were not aware about Gala extending as something that nearly happened and was withdrawn at a late stage. James McCash has also stated in meetings that he would like to see all cars taken off the streets of Southwark and streets open for children to play in- presumably all the time. So you see, the Council suggestion to have a 'lil partee' to celebrate no cars is underpinned by an intention that extends well beyond just one day.

In regard to Gala, no implication, Cllr rose has stated she wants to increase events in our parks, so probably not just Gala if she has her way, more the Brockwell Park model and you probably know what many local residents feel about that. If you don't believe me then go back and listen to the Council scrutiny sessions. As for the unnecessary tone on your part (mush); the forum supports difference of opinion and I will continue to state my views, including on this.