Traffic Lights @ Forest Hill Road

[kford]

That would be far too pro-active and co-ordinated for TfL/Streets and Southwark.

[SimonM]

>>What all the postings seem to have forgotten so far is just how blooming dangerous Forest Hill Road is.<<

So how just dangerous is it/was it? How many people had actually been knocked down on that pedestrian crossing? I'd never felt at risk on it as I sometimes have done trying to cross the one at Goose Green roundabout from the Green side to the EDT, or the one by the Harvester on Lordship Lane. to quote just a couple of local examples.

And as for the cars having to wait a couple of minutes for the lights to change, I believe the traffic was backed up along Forest Hill Road all the way to the Wood Vale lights this morning...

[Frisco]

_LuvPeckham is right. And everyman, call me a cynic, but that speed camera is placed where it will trap the most motorists, rather than curtail the speed of vehicles approaching the shops and junction at Colyton Rd._

The speed camera is a hangover from when the school was open, and will probably be useful if when the new academy opens, especially if they use Peckham Rye Park as their sports ground.

If you object to the new traffic lights, and the apparent lack of consultation, I suggest you contact your councillor rather than just the Environment Department of Southwark Council. I hope the Environment Department deals with correspondence more efficiently than it does telephone contact, which all seems to get stuck in call centre hell.

[Marmora Man]

Frisco Wrote:

> If you object to the new traffic lights, and the

> apparent lack of consultation, I suggest you

> contact your councillor rather than just the

> Environment Department of Southwark Council. I

> hope the Environment Department deals with

> correspondence more efficiently than it does

> telephone contact, which all seems to get stuck in

> call centre hell.

LOcal councillors are (all Lib DEms who are usually very hot on local government issues such as this - I copied my e-mail to them as well as sending it to Southwark Council:

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[Chase Dulwit]

I completely agree. I was in a queue there on Sat afternoon and someone further back started honking, which led to four men getting out of the car in front of him, then generally intimidating him, tapping on windows etc. Remember, this is a main route out of Peckham, god knows what could happen given the right (or wrong) mixture of people and circumstances.

[PeckhamRose]

Hello

A relative newcomer here (tho I have just celebrated 24 years of living in my flat on Peckham Rye SE15!).

I thought you may like some information and my experience. When new traffic lights were put at the north east corner of Peckham Rye a few years ago, turning right from East Dulwich Road to get to my home on peckham Rye the SE15 side, proved very dangerous indeed. I am a motorcyclist. We wrote to our councillor who was very sympathetic and made statements to the Community COuncil about it, and nobody cared. Previous to this - on invitation to all residents from Southwark Council about some long term scheme or plan for the borough where they were asking for our input - I went along to the council offices and made a detailed presentation as to how I think that replacing all traffic lights at small junctions with roundabouts and zebra crossings would make life better for us all. I believe this because if dangerous car drivers know that they will get from A-B without having to wait unnecessarily at a red light, they will get used to the idea of giving way when there is traffic. I know it's a long shot, but I believe the traffic problem is designed against users' natural instincts and forces us on fewer and fewer roads making them angrier and angrier. Anyway, the Council ignored me. Like the COmmunity Councils, these ten year plans or five year plans or schemes the council runs are just talking shops and make out like they're open to us all to justify the enormous amounts of money they get to do what THEY want to do anyway.

Soooooo to cut the rest of the longer story short, the traffic lights at the bottom of Peckham Rye SE15 stay, and despite our efforts, they won't even put in a right turn filter light for our safety.

As well as your previous emails above suggesting you write to councillors (who are pretty ineffective), you might care to bombard the following two people with your concerns (and mine). They are involved with street management.

[email protected]

[email protected]

They ignored me too, but not everyone knows they email address and now you all do. If we all bombard them, they may listen.

PeckhamRose

[kford]

Generally, 'consultation' means 'we're going ahead anyway but we have to pretend that this is a democratic process'. However, a friend of mine in Kingston, when faced with the prospect of an unecessary traffic calming system in his quiet cul-de-sac, rounded up his neigbours and and went along to the consultation meeting mob-handed. The councillors weren't expecting such resistance and relented.

[PeckhamRose]

It's great when that happens, but it rarely does. Southwark Community Councils and also everything to do with traffic schemes are already done and dusted and - as people here have noted - NOT up for consultation before hand. It takes a death sometimes to change things. Hope it ain't mine! If we all turned up to Dulwich Comm Council (is the SE22 side Dulwich or Nunhead/PeckhamRye?) the people responsible for the roads would not be there, and the councillors wouldn't have much power.

[She'llsurvive]

When the council tried to reroute the 37 bus down derwent grove, pretty much everyone from the street responded to the consultation and turned up to the community council meeting. Not sure whether this helped but they dropped the plans.

[susyp]

my only experience of these new lights was this morning- as i was crossing the road (the side road not forest hill road) - with a red light stopping the traffic to my right -- and nothing coming right or left into the road as i started to crss. some complete tosser whizzed down forest hill road and turned right as i was half way across the road- i had to jump out the way. some middle aged idiot bloke who didn';t even look at me as gesticulated wildly at him. complete p***s. (6)

[kford]

penis?

[Asset]

Apparently pedestrians crossing side-roads generally have right of way over traffic and cars are supposed to wait for you to cross. In practice though it never happens and I wonder how many drivers are actually aware of this? It's at side-roads where there is a hatched line across the road. There you go. Off topic, sorry, but a bit of trivia nevertheless.

[susyp]

Yes I always thought it was right of way if you had begun to cross. Hence why this man was a total p***s. I'm going to go looking for his car tonight and let the tyres down.

[Cllr Richard Thomas]

This junction is in Peckham Rye ward (Nunhead and Peckham Rye Community Council)- not technically my patch but I have made enquiries and received the following response:

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

From: Waters, Des

Sent: 04 September 2007 12:08

To: Thomas, Richard

Subject: RE: colyton road - traffic calming removal

Dear Richard

The works on Colyton Road and at the junction with Forest Hill road are temporary and being undertaken to facilitate the London Water Ring Main Project being undertaken by Thames Water. A number of briefing sessions were held with members of Nunhead & Peckham Rye and Dulwich Community Councils back in 2006, at which Thames Water outlined the works.

The number of lorries using Colyton Road and the junction with Forest Hill road is estimated at 8 No./hr (4in/4out), hence the removal of raised speed cushions to reduce the noise & vibration from the vehicles affecting residents. To enable these vehicles to access & egress off of Forest Hill Road it was necessary to remove the zebra crossing centre island, which we perceived presented an unacceptable risk to pedestrians. So it is for this reason that traffic signals, with a pedestrian phase, are being installed, hence the need to remove the raised table & kerb build outs at Colyton Road. The signals should be operational by mid-late July, to coincide with the increase in vehicles to the LWRM site for construction of the shaft & tunnel. The Thames water project is scheduled for completion by the end of 2009.

All these measures are 'temporary works' funded by Thames Water, so at the end of the project the prior road layout will be reinstated. However we will take the opportunity to see if the signals provide a better solution at the junction with Forest Hill Road and if so consideration could be given to retaining them.

For information at a recent TWU/Residents forum a comment was made that residents considered that vehicle speeds on Colyton Road had increased, a comment that Thames advised me off. In light of this I have approached Thames to request they consider funding the installation of two speed activated signs advising of the 20mph limit and to slow down, and I'm awaiting there response.

[Nero]

All these measures are 'temporary works' funded by Thames Water, so at the end of the project the prior road layout will be reinstated. However we will take the opportunity to see if the signals provide a better solution at the junction with Forest Hill Road and if so consideration could be given to retaining them.

This is the killer sentence. Please can someone print this out (I can't right now and would do if I were going to be at work for the next few weeks, but am not!) and keep it!

Nero

[kford]

1000GBP says they'll still be there after the works are done.

[everyman]

I am absolutely amazed by the reaction to these lights and I am stunned by some of the comments. Do we really have to consider a road dangerous only when there have been injuries and deaths? I have witnessed three accidents in the last three months - one of which involved both cars being written off and frankly it was a miracle that all drivers and passenger walked away. How many near misses do we ahve to have until someone does get killed?

I do not believe that the traffic isis now particularly worse. At busy times cars have to wait a bit longer - but hey, this is London, it's the rush hour what do you expect?

Fine - campaign to get rid of the lights if you feel that you weren;t consulted. Fine if you think these lights may not be the answer to the traffic problems - but please, please keep in mind taht those of us who know this stretch of road do consider it to be dangerous and strongly believe that something needed to be done to keep the speed down. If traffic is queuing then it is slower and if it is slower it is safer.

[strictteacher]

These traffic lights are the most pointless thing to have been done roadwise in the area for some time. They are completely pointless! There already was one set of traffic lights which was perfectly satisfactory. The tailback of traffic is awful now, where once there never was one.

This is such a bad decision by Southwark Council (I am presuming it is to blame?) but hey, what's new?

[Marmora Man]

everyman Wrote:

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

please, please keep in mind that

> those of us who know this stretch of road do

> consider it to be dangerous and strongly believe

> that something needed to be done to keep the speed

> down. If traffic is queuing then it is slower and

> if it is slower it is safer.

I know the road too. I cycled alomg it for 18 months going to work in London. I use the bus 3 times a week to get into LOndon and I regularly drive / cycle along it on local trips. I have never seen an accident.

The lights add nothing and take away a lot. Fortunately it's probable that they are only temporary - tho' the council is hedging its bets.

Get rid of them I say.

[Asset]

queueing traffic causes frustration which leads to road rage or reckless driving.

[*Bob*]

What about that bit at the bottom of Friern Road.. where it curls round into Upland Road? A blind corner. I believe it to be very dangerous.

I mean.. I don't think there's ever been an accident there.. but just in case, perhaps we should put in a crossing? Or make it one way? Yes - one way.. all the the down. Just in case.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

May I just say thank you to Cllr Richard Thomas for coming online as himself and trying to help, even though this is not his patch. [This from a rabid Tory]

[SimonM]

All this messing around appears to have arisen from the fact that the lorries needing to "access and egress off of " (sic) Colyton Road could not cope with the island halfway across the pedestrian crossing. I just wonder why said lorries could not access the site from the Nunhead corner of Peckham Rye, turning right into Colyton Road? Omce again the poor old pedestrian has to suffer...

And the answer to speeding cars is enforceable speed limits, not creating a mini-gridlock twice a day.

[everyman]

Bob, as I peer through the fog of your sarcasm I note the all important words "I don;t think there has ever been accident there". I am saying there have been accidents and ones hwere people have been lucky to walk away. I am not saying the lights are the right solution - but nor is ignoring the problem and the lights improve matters.

And, Asset, as for the idea that queueing causes frustration and reckless driving so that's why the lights should go I would suggest that as traffic lights are not uncommon sight in any London commute then if someone is going to be affected by one more set they really shouldn;t be at the wheel. But hey, let's pander to them rather than think about the safety of lcoal residents.

[*Bob*]

I was kind-of hesitant to condemn the new system without the voice of popular opinion, so I asked for it, and the result seems to be that (so far) the forum is full of people who live near to and who use the junction every day, and they all seem to think it was fine as it was.

When I add this to my own experience of over-protectively pushing a pram over it and back several times a week, I have to say I agree with them.

You can see my point..?