LTN: Our Healthy Streets - Dulwich: Phase 3

[ab29]

Anything but arrogance and patronising tone of rahrahrah, dulwich central and northern monkey. Thanks but no.

[Rockets]

northernmonkey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ah Rockets - how we've missed you replying to

> messages with your opinions presented as facts.

> Welcome back -was a bit worried about you as at

> least 2 people had expressed an opinion and you

> hadn't been on to own the narrative!

>

>

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > DulwichCentral Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Chris_1 Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > Plenty of space for everyone,

> > > > despite it being the biggest gathering at

> > that

> > > > junction to date I think!

> > >

> > > Did you not see this event based from the

> > square

> > > and passing through it several times? It was

> > > bigger

> > >

> > >

> >

> https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/dulwich-families-ge

>

> >

> > >

> >

> t-on-their-bikes-to-show-support-for-safe-cycling-

>

> >

> > > routes/

> >

> >

> > I love the fact that one of the pictures you

> > shared is of the flotilla of (LCC/Southwark)

> > cyclists who cycled down Woodwarde Road from

> > outside of Dulwich and had to be directed to

> the

> > "square" for the photo opp! ;-)

Northern - I am afraid those are facts because if the picture had been taken as they came down Woodwarde Road I would have probably been in it as I was walking the other way up Woodwarde when I saw the cycle flotilla and heard the ringleader calling out to people which way they needed to turn at the bottom of Woodwarde.

So putting two and two together would suggest, would it not, that many of the cyclists were not familiar with the area and had been (I won't say bussed in) cycled in especially for the event that got sold as Dulwich residents showing their support?

Anyway, glad you've missed me ;-) BTW did the tide turn and our dear friend Manatee floated off out to sea?

[heartblock]

Good grief.. back to face-to-face teaching all day and I come back to this! Really..

Some old and disabled people protest for an hour on a closed junction..they might have brought along some bags.

A cyclist might have had to slow down, or get off their bike.

The old and disabled people were called idiots, which is unkind.

If you have never walked down ED Grove during the school-run horror of jammed traffic and had to dodge adults and children cycling and scootering on the pavement, or cycled and nearly been hit by U-turning cars, then maybe a person in a wheelchair with their tote-bag by their side must feel like a MAJOR CATASTROPHE!

Lordy!

And...it is not a ******* square!

[legalalien]

Yep.

[Rockets]

This thread over the last few days reminded me of this.....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBFFrsvgu1Y

[northernmonkey]

People being told what the route is on an organised bike ride is not the coup you think it is Rockets!

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> northernmonkey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Ah Rockets - how we've missed you replying to

> > messages with your opinions presented as facts.

> > Welcome back -was a bit worried about you as at

> > least 2 people had expressed an opinion and you

> > hadn't been on to own the narrative!

> >

> >

> > Rockets Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > DulwichCentral Wrote:

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > > -----

> > > > Chris_1 Wrote:

> > > >

> > >

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> >

> > >

> > > > -----

> > > > Plenty of space for everyone,

> > > > > despite it being the biggest gathering at

> > > that

> > > > > junction to date I think!

> > > >

> > > > Did you not see this event based from the

> > > square

> > > > and passing through it several times? It

> was

> > > > bigger

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> https://londonnewsonline.co.uk/dulwich-families-ge

>

> >

> > >

> > > >

> > >

> >

> t-on-their-bikes-to-show-support-for-safe-cycling-

>

> >

> > >

> > > > routes/

> > >

> > >

> > > I love the fact that one of the pictures you

> > > shared is of the flotilla of (LCC/Southwark)

> > > cyclists who cycled down Woodwarde Road from

> > > outside of Dulwich and had to be directed to

> > the

> > > "square" for the photo opp! ;-)

>

>

> Northern - I am afraid those are facts because if

> the picture had been taken as they came down

> Woodwarde Road I would have probably been in it as

> I was walking the other way up Woodwarde when I

> saw the cycle flotilla and heard the ringleader

> calling out to people which way they needed to

> turn at the bottom of Woodwarde.

>

> So putting two and two together would suggest,

> would it not, that many of the cyclists were not

> familiar with the area and had been (I won't say

> bussed in) cycled in especially for the event that

> got sold as Dulwich residents showing their

> support?

>

> Anyway, glad you've missed me ;-) BTW did the tide

> turn and our dear friend Manatee floated off out

> to sea?

[northernmonkey]

And ab26, you're being rude AGAIN! I would ask if you would be so rude if you had to use real names and speak to people rather than type here, but perhaps you would. Anyway, as your mum would / should have said, its not big or clever!

ab29 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Anything but arrogance and patronising tone of

> rahrahrah, dulwich central and northern monkey.

> Thanks but no.

[Bicknell]

a long thread

but great taht the protest by older people about the LTN got such a lot of attention

[AlexandHelenC]

There is hope!

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ltns-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-london-review-protests-b953938.html

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/ealing-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-remove-resident-referendum-b951179.html

[legalalien]

checks Southwark website for the two thousandth time to see whether a decision might have been posted. Not yet, for the record...

ETA my first posting had the text in triangular brackets, which rendered it invisible...

[march46]

Interesting piece in the Times on Lambeth?s low traffic neighbourhoods today https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/results-of-low-traffic-neighbourhoods-speak-for-themselves-pjdtnkvtd

[slarti b2]

march46 Wrote:

> Interesting piece in the Times on Lambeth?s low traffic neighbourhoods today

That is an opinion piece by Lambeth Council's equivalent of Councillor Rose.

I wonder whether those cycling increase figures he quotes are as fraudulent as the ones published by Southwark?

[heartblock]

Strange that Danny forgot to mention Ferndale in Lambeth, where roads have had increases of 67% car traffic and 141% HGV traffic since the LTNs went in.

Also - where is the raw data that Southwark promised us?

[Chris_1]

Totally agree, and should not be controversial. Publish the raw data.

[malumbu]

northernmonkey Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And ab26, you're being rude AGAIN! I would ask if

> you would be so rude if you had to use real names

> and speak to people rather than type here, but

> perhaps you would. Anyway, as your mum would /

> should have said, its not big or clever!

>

>

> ab29 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Anything but arrogance and patronising tone of

> > rahrahrah, dulwich central and northern monkey.

> > Thanks but no.

You appear to have forgotten me in your list of arrogance and patronising posters. Although I thought some sort of truce had been called on personal remarks.

[Dogkennelhillbilly]

Rockets Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I

> saw the cycle flotilla and heard the ringleader

> calling out to people which way they needed to

> turn at the bottom of Woodwarde.

>

> So putting two and two together would suggest,

> would it not, that many of the cyclists were not

> familiar with the area and had been (I won't say

> bussed in) cycled in especially for the event that

> got sold as Dulwich residents showing their

> support?

Absolute tin foil hat material. Can't wait to hear how it links to COVID, the TV licence and (((Soros))).

[dougiefreeman]

I personally don?t care whether a hundred thousand cyclists turned up all living in SE22 (or all living in Kent) for the flotilla, it?s quite frankly irrelevant as it is not in any way representative of the real world day to day normality of road use in the area.

The fact is most active travel is made on foot. And in my view any measures that are put in that cause greater levels of pollution and/or congestion jeopardise the health and safety of all those making those active journeys.

I don?t believe there is any validity in the notion that removing LTNs is wrong because it would be putting more cars on side streets and so anyone pushing for that must ultimately have the goal of more cars on side streets.

UNLESS you also accept that the very implementation of the LTNs in the first place put more cars on side streets (LL, EDG etc are hardly bigger than the ?side streets? that have been filtered - they?re still residential roads after all).

The scheme is a failure, completely unfair and should be replaced with something else entirely (with proper consultation with all residents). Cue the ?ah so you just want to go back to loads more cars on the road - you?d rather just do nothing..? brigade. No, of course not. But I don?t believe that the ideology of cyclists and the environmentally conscious should somehow trump the rights to clean air of a selection of unfortunate residents. If you cannot give clean air and quiet streets to everyone, then your scheme needs work. If you are giving wealthy residents clean air and quiet streets at the expense of a selection of (arguably less wealthy) residents then your scheme is not fit for purpose. There is simply no acceptable excuse for forcing these measures on people.

Until a fair solution can be found, air pollution (as horrific as it may be) should be shared equally by all residents as it is all of our burden to bear (not just an unfortunate selection).

[hpsaucey]

first mate Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well I have only said it once and not aware of

> anyone other than you repeating it so doubt it is

> a catch phrase...yet. You have used the 't' word

> not me.

>

> Again, posters that are so outraged at alleged

> 'danger' to a cyclist and their children seem to

> have zero empathy with the many elderly and

> disabled protestors. Why is that?

>

> hpsaucey Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > first mate Wrote:

> > -------------------------------

> >

> > Calling this a 'tactical confection' - is this

> the

> > new catchphrase to replace alleged 'trolling'?

> > HP

Re: 'Again, posters that are so outraged at alleged 'danger' to a cyclist and their children seem to have zero empathy with the many elderly and disabled protestors. Why is that?

Prime 'tactical confection'.

HP

[first mate]

dougiefreeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I personally don?t care whether a hundred thousand

> cyclists turned up all living in SE22 (or all

> living in Kent) for the flotilla, it?s quite

> frankly irrelevant as it is not in any way

> representative of the real world day to day

> normality of road use in the area.

>

> The fact is most active travel is made on foot.

> And in my view any measures that are put in that

> cause greater levels of pollution and/or

> congestion jeopardise the health and safety of all

> those making those active journeys.

>

> I don?t believe there is any validity in the

> notion that removing LTNs is wrong because it

> would be putting more cars on side streets and so

> anyone pushing for that must ultimately have the

> goal of more cars on side streets.

> UNLESS you also accept that the very

> implementation of the LTNs in the first place put

> more cars on side streets (LL, EDG etc are hardly

> bigger than the ?side streets? that have been

> filtered - they?re still residential roads after

> all).

>

> The scheme is a failure, completely unfair and

> should be replaced with something else entirely

> (with proper consultation with all residents). Cue

> the ?ah so you just want to go back to loads more

> cars on the road - you?d rather just do nothing..?

> brigade. No, of course not. But I don?t believe

> that the ideology of cyclists and the

> environmentally conscious should somehow trump the

> rights to clean air of a selection of unfortunate

> residents. If you cannot give clean air and quiet

> streets to everyone, then your scheme needs work.

> If you are giving wealthy residents clean air and

> quiet streets at the expense of a selection of

> (arguably less wealthy) residents then your scheme

> is not fit for purpose. There is simply no

> acceptable excuse for forcing these measures on

> people.

>

> Until a fair solution can be found, air pollution

> (as horrific as it may be) should be shared

> equally by all residents as it is all of our

> burden to bear (not just an unfortunate

> selection).

Well said.

[Metallic]

Seems hpsaucy and northernmonkey, plus their mate 3xrah are all getting hot under the collar. They are probably on their whatsapp group every night, along with other mates from MG, DG and maybe the councillors, plotting the next response.

"Your turn."

"No your turn."

"No it is your turn."

Grow up for goodness sake and see the problems people are having in East Dulwich Grove, Croxted Rd and Lordship Lane are all to do with a policy which actually began a while ago when you got your streets closed off to through traffic. My street is very much quieter because of the Calton Ave/Court Lane system and I do not like the fact that it comes at the expense of children's lungs.

[Metallic]

Forgot to say I totally agree with Heartblock and DougieFreeman.

[northernmonkey]

You're being rude again! Do you have zero manners?

Metallic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Seems hpsaucy and northernmonkey, plus their mate

> 3xrah are all getting hot under the collar. They

> are probably on their whatsapp group every night,

> along with other mates from MG, DG and maybe the

> councillors, plotting the next response.

>

> "Your turn."

> "No your turn."

> "No it is your turn."

>

> Grow up for goodness sake and see the problems

> people are having in East Dulwich Grove, Croxted

> Rd and Lordship Lane are all to do with a policy

> which actually began a while ago when you got your

> streets closed off to through traffic. My street

> is very much quieter because of the Calton

> Ave/Court Lane system and I do not like the fact

> that it comes at the expense of children's lungs.

[Metallic]

Apparently I don't have any manners.

[Spartacus]

Metallic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Apparently I don't have any manners.

I've got an album from Bad Manners, will that satisfy NorthernMonkeys comment that you have zero manners ?

It's amazing how quickly people on here tackle the person (poster) and not ball (argument) when they are called out.

Wait for DC to chime in that you've insulted them (I've had it a few times)

Is this the rear guard action of a failing group of activists?

Can we just have a sensible debate over an issue that has such wide effects on so many and not resort to name calling like 5 year olds in the playground ?

[legalalien]

This book review by Prof Alfred back in 2008 is an interesting read and perhaps gives some insight into the Marxist perspective on car dominance (a partial driver of some current policy?) I?ll leave people to form their own views.