Bic Basher

Nextdoor is even worse than this place, I left when I explained clearly why a bus stop on the very narrow pavement at the LL end of Dulwich Common couldn't have a bus shelter by the row of houses and was told off for being "rude" for explaining in a clear and concise manner to the poster why it couldn't happen.

It doesn't though. The Congestion Charge has been factored into budgets for self-employed drivers and businesses and while it initially reduced traffic, go down The Strand between Aldwych and Trafalgar Square and it still resembles a car park on the westbound side. Did raising duty cut smoking? Nope. The council know well that affulent Dulwich residents will pay the LTN fines regardless of the supposed benefits to everyone. Sure you can ride down Court Lane or Melbourne Grove with a reduced risk of a pesky car trying to get from A to B, but yet again it's those of us outside the LTN zone who pay the price to allow a minority of cyclists and middle class people to have relative peace from vehicles while the rest of us choke.

The two Heber Road bus stops are currently closed as I saw yesterday, which makes me think the Thames Water works are about to be extended to LL.

This idea that Southwark News is somehow on a par with the Daily Mail is utter nonsense. LTNs and CPZs are local news stories which a proper local newspaper should be reporting on regardless if one section doesn't like what they read. They've also given a platform to local politicians of all colours to voice their opinion.

Yeah right, Clean Air Dulwich is undertaking another tactic to ensure they maintain their infulence over Labour run Southwark Council in the same way the think tanks maintain infulence with the Conservative Party. It's how you stay relevant by being on the side of the governing organisation.

I cycle and still use public transport and my perception hasn't changed. My interest in public transport and mobilty go back decades and have built up an understanding of how transport patterns are. This area has more in common with outer London suburbia than Brixton which has a much better transport service than we do. If you really want to reduce car use, stop being ideological and think of practical solutions that actually benefit everyone instead of punitive punishments which divide the community. A community that works together for the benefit of all works better than one who puts one side against the other which is what we have currently. It means the Council working with One Dulwich as well as Clean Air Dulwich.

Increase the bus service frequency so that more parents can use buses instead of cars parking on the residential streets. Anyone who rides the buses closest to Goodrich School know how overcrowded they get, so a car is going to be a viable alternative.

So Clean Air Dulwich wan't to resolve an non-existent problem? The reason there's parking spaces is because drivers don't want to park there or use the streets, so lets make a few quid for Southwark Council by imposing charges on those minority who park in Dulwich Wood Ward. If Clean Air Dulwich was a right-wing think tank, they'd be rightly criticised for the riduculous ideas they've come up with.

I don't know where you live exactly, but you're going to have a different perception of the bus system if you live in Peckham or Camberwell which have many more bus routes than here. Dulwich is still a car area despite the LTN, because we still don't have the level of public transport that the rest of the borough has.

Not all of us in the SE22 postcode use the Zone 2 stations. I live closer to Forest Hill and West Dulwich stations than ED/North Dulwich/Peckham Rye/Denmark Hill. Forest Hill fortuntely has a decent rail service with 8tph on the Overground and 2tph to London Bridge and Victoria from Southern, yet West Dulwich as I mentioned earlier has trains every 30 minutes, so hardly turn up and go. The bus connections and frequencies aren't great either. We've seen dramatic cuts to the 12, with reductions also on the 40 and 176. Connections between parts of Dulwich and other parts of Southwark aren't great either. We lost our bus route to London Bridge and the City, rerouting the 40 to Clerkenwell Green, to get from ED to West Dulwich by bus involves plodding about the back streets of ED and then getting stuck on the LTN boundary road at Dulwich Common and that's before if you want to get to Nunhead, you have to get a bus to Peckham Rye. then another into Nunhead instead of a direct bus from ED. If I want to get from where I live to the Kingswood Estate of which both are in Dulwich Wood Ward, it involves two buses and changing in Sydenham for the 450. That estate has no direct bus service to anywhere in Southwark, including East Dulwich. The centre and north of the borough still have either decent bus frequencies despite TfL cuts, while Rotherhithe and Bermondsey also have the Jubilee Line. Dulwich is still in comparison poorly served by public transport despite how close we are to central London.

Indeed. Why should someone in a leafy street have the right to reduce the amount of cars going through their road, while those on the South Circular have to tolerate increased traffic when the arteries which help to keep traffic flowing are being clogged?

Say that to those who live in parts of Outer London where they're only served by National Rail services by the likes of Southeastern and South West Trains. Southeastern in particular has a dreadful metro service. For most of the day, 2 trains per hour only operate on some sections, even West Dulwich has had only 2 trains per hour (4 in the peaks) since the DfT took over the rail franchise. If you live in a part of London with a TfL operated rail service, then fair enough, but that's not the reality for those in Outer London boroughs where buses don't reach central London or have a poor rail service, so you're going to end up using a car. Extending the Bakerloo Line to Hayes would help for starters.

Looks like a balanced piece from Southwark News for once.

This is what happens when Dulwich residents continually vote Labour back in. Despite not mentioning LTNs or CPZs in their manifesto at the last election, they'll continually milk residents for extra revenue using greenwashing tactics.

Are Mal and Chicken the same person with multiple accounts? The same old rhetoric from both of them.

20 Gibbon Road, at the top end of Nunhead Lane just before the roundabout.

Even more offensive is Leeming's comment about the extra traffic on the South Circular. Some of us live here and have as much right to feel that the LTNs aren't working, especially when I'm a carer for my elderly mother who has breathing difficulties since it was implemented. (And no, she doesn't smoke!)

LTNs, approved by the Conservative Party, implemented by cash strapped Labour councils as a way of increasing revenue, then the Tories come back with Sunak's comments on Sunday with the bait in an attempt to regain disenfranchised voters from Labour. While I'm pleased Sunak is finally saying something about them, it's nothing more than an election tactic and while we still have the mix of councils having to find alternative revenue streams (see TfL with the ULEZ expansion and axing the One Day Travelcard) and ideological Cllrs in the Labour Party, I can't see them going away just yet. Ironically Tower Hamlets voted for a bunch of socialists on the Corbyn side of the bench who completely scrapped LTNs!

No chance of that happening as Brighton is now a Labour council since the last local election. When it came down to it, the Green administration managed to make a pigs ear of refuse collections being one of the issues that led to them being voted out. When it comes down to it, if there's a strong local issue such as the bins or ULEZ in Uxbridge, voters will vote for whether will make their lives easier, not if they want to reduce pollution, regardless of the good intentions.

I went past earlier and there's a note on the door saying staff are working out of the Nunhead launderette from 1-6pm.

The Launderette was closed on Wednesday when I went past, so unless you've been past today, I suspect it's closed. Personally I hope it reopens ASAP.

The Southwark Labour guide to greenwashing while making money out of more affulent Dulwich residents which then benefit the north of the borough. Ticks all their ideological boxes. Until Dulwich is on a par with the north of the borough with excellent bus and tube links, we're always going to be penalised because while bikes are useful and can be the quickest way to get around, there will always be residents who have no choice but to use a car, regardless if it's petrol, diesel or electric, along with those who rely on buses and rail. At least we don't live in Croydon where the council tax was hiked up as well to pay for Labour's massive financial mistakes.

The summer months have seen an increase in people using bikes (or hired e-bikes) on the LTN roads, but in the autumn/winter when it gets dark earlier and is colder, sometimes I feel like I'm the only person bar professional riders and commuters who use the streets on LTNs who then revert to public transport or the car as it's warmer. I was still using rental bikes in December/January especially in the early evening when it's dark which takes a different skill to those who do it for leisure in the summer because I still find the bike easier to travel across ED than waiting for a bus which can still take forever to get from DKH to the end of LL.

For me, the Dulwich LTNs are about moving traffic from middle class streets onto already capacity full main roads of which are more likely to have residents who are likely to be poorer, so they get the brunt of the pollution from motor vehicles. East Dulwich Grove, Lordship Lane/Dulwich Common triangle and Croxted Road all have social housing on those boundary roads which have residents who are likely to be in low paid jobs or Universal Credit over the roads which are inside the LTN.

I saw a modded e-bike going up Eynella Road on Friday evening. The 'cyclist' made no effort to even use the peddles.