Camberwell Grove rail bridge consultation

[CityMum]

Work on the Bridge which has been closed since last year has started. Once again, as long-time residents will remember, there is a move by well-organised minority of residents in the area to turn Camberwell Grove into some kind of exclusive gated community and keep the bridge closed at the expense of the wider surrounding community. The impact of the closure has had a huge environmental impact on many other roads which are narrower and less able to take the additional traffic. I know some people on this forum will remember the 'lively' and packed meeting a few years ago at which the message was loud and clear - the bridge should be open. So here we are, being asked the same question again. The only thing which will keep it closed is a lack of response, so have your say at https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/ - the consultation closes on 30TH OCTOBER.

[Beulah]

My road is probably one of those that has been "impacted" by the closure of Camberwell Grove but I think it should stay closed.

And I have voted in favour of it staying shut.

Hopefully it will be the start of other traffic calming measures in the surrounding area.

Many of the roads around there are used as rat runs (and have been for years) which increases pollution and makes the roads more dangerous for me, my family and neighbours.

The solution to increasing traffic and pollution is not more road space - it's limiting vehicle use.

And before you ask: I do drive and own a car.

[Abe_froeman]

That just pushes traffic onto other people's roads as you have experienced yourself Beulah, and the increased traffic means increased pollution. Pollution which harms the children living on the roads with increased pollution but not those of the NIMBY's keeping their road closed.

I have voted for it to be re-opened.

[Nigello]

Reopen it! It is fairer for all.

[intexasatthe moment]

I have responded and indicated a wish ( we're not voting here ,it's a consultation ) for it to be reopened .

It's a nice straight road ,good visibilty and width .Most of the properties are set well back from the road with mature trees affording additional screening from pollution and noise . It's a much more suitable route for traffic than the current diversion down narrow heavily parked side streets .

[Charles Notice]

I got a crumpled notice stuffed through my letter box which would have gone straight into the junk bin if my wife had not for some reason smoothed it out.

How many others like this?

Southwark and Camberwell Grove I suspect are hoping for a lack of a response from the area. I too suffer from vast amounts of traffic on my road since the closure. For some reason this morning it resembled the M1.

Has anyone noticed any signs on lamp posts, notice boards etc advertising this? I have not.

Remember Southwark/Camberwell Grove want a lack of response.

The last meeting at the church was rammed because people knew about it and it was firmly rejected out of hand. This is not the case this time.

If people are not aware how can they respond. No doubt Camberwell Grove has already been in touch with the Cabinet Member who will make the decision.

Camberwell Grove is a main road, always has been, and should reopen on a one way basis as before.

This road did not appear over night as some people would have you believe.

[jimmyraj]

It should be reopened for the simple reason that the closure creates a far greater negative impact on a greater number of local people than are benefited. Essentially, the re-routed traffic bottle necks down Lyndhurst Grove, Lyndhurst Way and onto Bellenden and up via Maxted / Adys or Avondale / Danby / Choumert - adding to already bad congestion and pollution in those areas, which include several schools.

The beneficiaries mainly seem to be the residents of the top half of Camberwell Grove and perhaps Grove Park / Grove Hill Road.

Vote for it to be reopened for the benefit of more of society!

[edcam]

I added my voice. It should definitely be reopened. We used to live on Camberwell Grove and were there when it closed before, so have experienced it open to all traffic, open only to cars and closed to all traffic and I can tell you it was much easier all round when it was only open to cars and that's how it should be again.

I'm baffled by Beulah's comment above, as this situation has turned all the surrounding roads into rat runs and much more overloaded ones than Camberwell Grove ever was. I don't know how anyone living nearby could think it was a good idea to keep it shut.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The bridge was only made 1-way because of structural issues. We were told at that time that the 1-way was only temporary. It later became permanent. Then it closed completely and we were told it would be reopened. Wonder what will happen? Network Rail have been allowed to get away with negligence for years as it's suited the council's agenda and the narrow interests of some vocal Grove residents. The consultation is irrelevant.

[Beulah]

My point is not that the current situation is great: It's not.

I'm hoping that by keeping CG closed it will lead to other traffic calming measures in the surrounding area that will create a less-polluted, quieter and safer environment for more residents.

Surely that's got to be better than encouraging more traffic to use our residential roads?

You may be happy with vehicles using our streets as a rat-run, I'm not.

[spider69]

Following this thread I have asked neighbours if they have received notification of the consultation.

As many of them live in 3 flat conversation with one letterbox they have said they have only received one form.

One one person picks it up, no interest it goes in the bin. 3 votes less.

Grove Park, Chadwick Road receive no benefit from the bridge being closed. Most days it resembles a motorway with jams.

Agree less advertising gives those with an agenda to push for what they want.

Out of interest just how many leaflets were handed out and where?

[edcam]

But it won't lead to traffic calming measures in the surrounding area. Current conditions show that very clearly.

Beulah Wrote:

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

> My point is not that the current situation is

> great: It's not.

> I'm hoping that by keeping CG closed it will lead

> to other traffic calming measures in the

> surrounding area that will create a less-polluted,

> quieter and safer environment for more residents.

> Surely that's got to be better than encouraging

> more traffic to use our residential roads?

> You may be happy with vehicles using our streets

> as a rat-run, I'm not.

[James Barber]

The consultation states overall traffic is down 15%.

to repair the bridge would involve significant closures of the railway line and cost. Unfortunately the consultation didn't explain those costs and closures.

[spider69]

Southwark's page on the consultation does give repairs costs if my memory serves we correctly.

[spider69]

Dear all

I am sending you this email as you have previously commented on the current closure of the Camberwell Grove Railway Bridge.

As you may have been aware from the previous website article, the intention was to undertake a full consultation prior to the September Community Council meetings and present the results at those meetings. However, we have only recently received the full traffic survey results for the diversion routes and the surrounding roads. These will require a detailed analysis in order to include a summary within the consultation pack. This will ensure the pubic are provided with sufficient details to make informed choices on the future traffic arrangements across the bridge, and make any appropriate comments which can be considered at the November Community Council meetings. The delay in consultation will not effect the timescales for any potential opening of the bridge, if this should be the final decision.

I have uploaded a revised website article which hopefully is self-explanatory:

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/bridges-subways-and-walls?chapter=2

All comments received so far have been collated and will be added to, either as a result of the latest article, or as a result of the consultation.

Please could any responses to the article be sent to the highways team at [email protected].

Regards

Dale

Dale Foden

Highway Maintenance Manager

Environment and Social Regeneration - Highways Division

London Borough of Southwark

Third Floor ? Hub 2

160 Tooley Street

SE1 2QH

London

Where is the consultation pack?

[wulfhound]

Reopen it! It is fairer for all.

Including the 50% (South Camberwell), 60% (Brunswick) of households without a car or van? (per 2011 census data).

[jimmyraj]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> The consultation states overall traffic is down

> 15%.

>

> to repair the bridge would involve significant

> closures of the railway line and cost.

> Unfortunately the consultation didn't explain

> those costs and closures.

The consultation states "a 15% increase in traffic volume in the area of influence compared to the 2015 baseline".

[spider69]

ADMIN.

There are 2 threads running on this can they be combined.

Thanks

[SpringTime]

wulfhound Wrote:

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

> > Reopen it! It is fairer for all.

>

>

> Including the 50% (South Camberwell), 60%

> (Brunswick) of households without a car or van?

> (per 2011 census data).

Owners of motorvehichles included please. If I lived on Camberwell Grove as a driver I'd want it open. The hassle of making pointlessly long journeys into Peckham, Champion Hill, Grove Hill Road and Denmark Hill can be relieved - along with its fumes.

[MissWiggy]

We've got "traffic calming measures" on our road and, as they are the humps with the gaps in the middle as opposed to a solid hump going across the width of the road, they do nothing to calm the traffic. You can see / hear cars whizzing past at all times of day and night.

Of course the residents of CG want their road closed - if I had the option I'd (selfishly!) love my road to be closed to traffic, even if it did mean longer journeys on occasions. However CG has always been a main route and to take advantage of the fact it has been closed for works for a long time does not serve the wider community.

Beulah Wrote:

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

> My point is not that the current situation is

> great: It's not.

> I'm hoping that by keeping CG closed it will lead

> to other traffic calming measures in the

> surrounding area that will create a less-polluted,

> quieter and safer environment for more residents.

> Surely that's got to be better than encouraging

> more traffic to use our residential roads?

> You may be happy with vehicles using our streets

> as a rat-run, I'm not.

[Beulah]

But that's kind of the point...The non-residents using your street as a daily short-cut aren't part of the wider community, unless you take in all the millions of Londoners.

We're not talking about main roads here, these are residential roads for people to live in.

Why should drivers' rights take precedence over your peaceful enjoyment of where you live?

Surely their insistence to drive fast and pollute your road is just as selfish too.

[BrandNewGuy]

spider69 Wrote:

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

> ADMIN.

>

> There are 2 threads running on this can they be

> combined.

>

> Thanks

Indeed. I put my thread in the Lounge because it's not about East Dulwich.

[MissWiggy]

Beulah - I was addressing your point (which perhaps I have misunderstood) that keeping CG closed would prompt Southwark to implement traffic calming measures on other roads. First, we have no idea whether that will be a knock on effect, and second, even if they do, in my experience they don't make much difference.

We all have to drive along roads that are residential in order to get somewhere - that is never going to be restricted. And who knows whether drivers are local residents or travelling from further afield? The reality is that CG is a wide road, with houses well set back with large trees to assist with traffic noise. The resident are simply trying to seize on the opportunity that it has been closed for a year in attempt to keep that closure permanent. As I said I can understand why from a selfish point of view but am yet to hear a logical reason as to why it should be.

I'm not saying that driver's rights should take precedence but we can't keep them off the roads either. Trying to squeeze the same number of drivers on to smaller / fewer / narrower roads simply doesn't make sense.

Beulah Wrote:

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

> But that's kind of the point...The non-residents

> using your street as a daily short-cut aren't part

> of the wider community, unless you take in all the

> millions of Londoners.

> We're not talking about main roads here, these are

> residential roads for people to live in.

> Why should drivers' rights take precedence over

> your peaceful enjoyment of where you live?

> Surely their insistence to drive fast and pollute

> your road is just as selfish too.

[edcam]

This is a great argument for reopening Camberwell Grove. Granted, it's also residential but it's more of a main artery than the roads which are currently clogged up by its closure. Reopening would even things out greatly.

Beulah Wrote:

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

> But that's kind of the point...The non-residents

> using your street as a daily short-cut aren't part

> of the wider community, unless you take in all the

> millions of Londoners.

> We're not talking about main roads here, these are

> residential roads for people to live in.

> Why should drivers' rights take precedence over

> your peaceful enjoyment of where you live?

> Surely their insistence to drive fast and pollute

> your road is just as selfish too.

[nxjen]

I find it very bizarre that residents on a street are even able to request that their road is closed permanently to through traffic. See also Melbourne Grove.