Abe_froeman

The whole hangar has now disappeared.

The cycle storage that has actually been provided is poor too. The state of the cycle hangar on NXR today is shocking.

It's one city though, it's more than half of a whole continent: "Rail transport has always been particularly well developed in Central and Eastern Europe. where cities usually have expanded tramway networks. Their residents are accustomed to this type of connectivity." It's interesting that in Warsaw they used EU funding to finance tramways and in East Dulwich we used EU funding to finance that pathetic plastic barrier outside some of the shops on Lordship Lane.

The bike hangar on North Cross Rd is completely empty today and all bent out of shape with the door wide open. Looks like another break in.

Lebanums putting on lots more buses would also make it less convenient to drive and courage modal shift from cars to public transport. But for some reason the council only seem to care about implementing the Tory' s plans to force everyone to cycle.

DulwichCentral Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- >"... So to even dare to suggest that some > people could use a mobility scooter is met with > insults and and abuse. > > ... " It is an appallingly offensive suggestion tbf. I would have hoped local councils' disability training was better than that.

It's a travesty that it is still closed.

ULEZ is a great idea for reducing pollution but it doesn't go far enough as far as certain commercial vehicles and buses etc are concerned. It does nothing to reduce traffic though, in the same way "LTN"s do nothing to reduce traffic.

It's true. That's why they call them Chelsea tractors.

Redpost that range rover sport actually has the shorter stopping distance. Its brake disc diameter is 320mm v only 260mm for the Nissan. But still this all irrelevant to LTNs and is simply about petty jealousy. The original complaint here about car sizes is that between 1968 and today they have got wider by the same width as a man's hand on each side of the car. It's a pathetic whinge.

It's just more bluster. None of this has anything to do with LTNs.

Nonsense and hyperbole again from rahrah. For a long time now as a matter of law cars have had to accommodate collisions with pedestrians/cyclists. Most fatalities and serious injuries were caused by the pedestrian's head impacting a hard solid part of the car. More often than not this was the engine block where the head would bend the thin sheet of metal that was the bonnet and then hit the immovable top of the engine. Sometimes it was other parts under the bonnet such as the tops of the suspension. To minimise the number of serious injuries caused to people outside the car it is obligatory to build in crumple zones that protect people from the hard parts. The only other option employed is to fit an airbag under the bonnet that is triggered in a crash and pushes up the bonnet to protect the pedestrian. All of this adds bulk to the engine compartment. None of this is employed on military vehicles. It's Also worth bearing in mind that the chances of being killed in a traffic accident in the boundary roads of our LTNs are practically zero because the traffic barely moves.

Those extra 28cm comprise crumple zones to protect pedestrians/cyclists in the event of a collision. You can't really be advocating for cars to go back to 1960s safety measures (and thus dimensions)?

There's more on mine too, east of Lordship Lane, but the cuncil didn't bother, or didn't think to bother measuring the obvious impact on roads like mine that these closures would have.

It's hilarious that someone defending a council consultation accuses anyone else of putting leading questions into a survey. Take the beam out of your eye before commenting on the mote in others'

Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The "Do Nothing" narrative seems to be doing the > rounds at the moment. > > It follows fast on the heals of the "Small vocal > minority", "Petrol head climate change deniers" > and "A roads are where all traffic should be sent" > nonsense we hear time and time again. > > Bottom line is the LTNs in Dulwich deliver cleaner > air for some and dirtier air for others - I just > can't get my head around why normally rational > people think this is acceptable. It's shameful really when all their paid professionals have come up with something objectively worse for some residents that they then put the onus on those victims to find the solution to the mess and pollution they created for us.

Can hear this now from Lordship Lane. Must be loud nearer to the action.

As a couple of 70+ year olds, people should be standing up and offering you their seats, not getting huffy about you sitting next to them. People have no manners at all these days.

There's no way that those injuries aren't still all caused by the 2 tonne metal box chelsea tractors parked up on the kerbside everywhere.

Hope they can pull through, very brave to even start any business and to keep going through times like these, never seen before, must take huge strength. best wishes to Gather.

Yes that was so disappointing because Kieron Williams came in promising a new approach and a change from the past and yet it seems he has delivered nothing at all in that regard

Pedestrianising North Cross road is a daft idea

95% of my local journeys are by foot or bicycle. I still recognise that the local LTNs are a failure and they have made our area worse and shown up the residents of Dulwich Village and Melbourne Grove asa bad neighbours.

This is boneheaded. "I have no idea either but you don't need to know the start point, end point, purpose and journey distance of every single car on the road.... there are too many cars doing too many short journeys "

Maybe it is time for independence from Southwark for East Dulwich. They do nothing to look after us.