Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This doesn't seem to have had a mention before, but Southwark has opened its thrilling Draft Kerbside Strategy for consultation by the huddled masses. It seems depressingly focussed on parking, but I'm sure someone must have something to say about that. For those that don't, there are plenty of free-form boxes for comments about dog mess or pheasants.

For a summary of the motivating factors, see also the short accompanying report submitted to the Cabinet member, downloadable from the Decision Details page http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=6056, or get it directly: http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s66569/Report.pdf.


The downloadable copies of the Strategy document at Burbage's link look to me identical in content. The smaller one has perhaps generally better colour contrast. Both versions have some examples of scrappy importation of graphics files. Some of the sources weren't at high enough resolution and contain compression artifacts, and there's occasional truncation (as in eg Appendix G).

Oh lummy they are at it again.

I feel that narrow roads and slightly obscured junctions make people slow down? By opening everything up - it encourages speed and recklessness.


The wide opened space and clear vista around dog kennel hill school is a case in point.

Hi Abe_froeman,

The consultation report will be made public and it will be listened to. But rahrahrah perspective can mean a lack of responses and things do then much more easily go through despite many peoples misgivings.


Hi fiddles,

That is my understanding. Wide open roads encourage speeding.

As a cyclist and a pedestrian, I only struggle for visibility when tall sided vehicles are parked close to junctions.


Therefore a good compromise would be to only restrict tall vehicles (vans/lorries for example) from parking in the 7.5m zone, but allow cars to park there. This would resolve the "wide-open road causes speeding" theory (of which I agree) and also make junctions safer as pedestrians and cyclists will have more visibility.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Girls In Your City - No Selfie - Anonymous Casual Dating https://SecreLocal.com [url=https://SecreLocal.com] Girls In Your City [/url] - Anonymous Casual Dating - No Selfie New Girls [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/vanessa-100.html]Vanessa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/molly-15.html]Molly[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/cheryl-blossom-48.html]Cheryl Blossom[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/carola-conymegan-116.html]Carola Conymegan[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/pupa-41.html]Pupa[/url] [url=https://secrelocal.com/girl/mia-candy-43.html]Mia Candy[/url]
    • This is a remarkable interpretation of history. Wikipedia (with more footnotes and citations than you could shake a shitty stick at sez: The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the structural current budget deficit would be eliminated to "achieve [a] cyclically-adjusted current balance by the end of the rolling, five-year forecast period". The second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall. The government intended to achieve both of its goals through substantial reductions in public expenditure.[21] This was to be achieved by a combination of public spending cuts and tax increases amounting to £110 billion.[26] Between 2010 and 2013, the Coalition government said that it had reduced public spending by £14.3 billion compared with 2009–10.[27] Growth remained low, while unemployment rose. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_government_austerity_programme From memory, last time around they were against the LTNs and competing with the Tories to pick up backlash votes - both failed. They had no counterproposals or ideas about how to manage congestion or pollution. This time around they're simply silent on the matter: https://www.southwark-libdems.org.uk/your-local-lib-dem-team/goosegreen Also, as we have seen from Mr Barber's comments on the new development on the old Jewsons yard, "leading campaigns to protect the character of East Dulwich and Goose Green" is code for "blocking new housing".
    • @Insuflo NO, please no, please don't encourage him to post more often! 😒
    • Revealing of what, exactly? I resurrected this thread, after a year, to highlight the foolishness of the OP’s op. And how posturing would be sagacity is quickly undermined by events, dear boy, events. The thread is about Mandelson. I knew he was a wrong ‘un all along, we all did; the Epstein shit just proves it. In reality, Kinnock, Blair, Brown, Starmer et all knew as well but accepted it, because they found him useful. As did a large proportion of the 2024 intake of Labour MPs who were personally vetted and approved by Mandelson.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...