Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Pugwash Wrote:

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

> I think the main problem in Goodrich/Dunstans/Upland were irresponsible parking by parents. Dulwich Hill SNT spent many hours over the last couple of years trying to educate these parents, some who were very abusive to other road users and residents.


We were quite successful and not too much abuse. Day one a police officer was with us that helped. We'd hand out leaflets and try to gently persuade. A few parents, irrespective of genders or background, would give us grief, but there was also a sense that many were embarrassed. You'd keep calm, and ask them to read the leaflet in their own time. There was plenty of street parking not far away but some would find this too inconvenient. And then our kids went to secondary school and sadly the problem repeated itself with the next generation of parents.

Nigello Wrote:

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

> It is also a fact that the school head and teachers do not live near here yet seem to think that they have the right to say what ought and ought not to happen to a part of the neighbourhood that is home to people permanently.


Here's another fact -- it's called a 'School Street Programme'. So, of course, the school have the right to say that. However aggrieved you seem to feel about your mysterious monster trucks, surely even you can see that there would be no Programme on which to have a 'say' otherwise ? Where the teachers may live is considerably less relevant than the fact that many hundreds of children are travelling there every single day. So, of course, their needs are going be prioritised over yours. If you find that so egregious, then perhaps you shouldn't have elected to live directly opposite a school, 20m away from a school gate !!!


It also goes without saying that, of course, if the road safety situation on Goodrich was even remotely close to being as you describe, the school and council would have acted. If there are really big heavy lorries careering past the school gates regularly, do you think they would have look to implement a 'School Streets Programme' and ignored that ? Why ? How ? Of course not. They looked at the traffic and road safety situation thoroughly, and decided that measures other than the one which would best personally suit you, served the greater good. To suggest that the teachers have some kind of other agenda here is not just offensive, it's insane.


And that is that. For everyone's sake, I think let's move on !

I don't believe for one minute these huge lorries are going down Goodrich Road. Apps will usually send my cab along either Barry Road or Wood Vale to get to my place rather than use Goodrich or Dunstans Road as a shortcut.

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> I don't believe for one minute these huge lorries

> are going down Goodrich Road. Apps will usually

> send my cab along either Barry Road or Wood Vale

> to get to my place rather than use Goodrich or

> Dunstans Road as a shortcut.



I've witnessed large lorries, including Conway and others using the Barry Road entrances into Upland, Sylvester and Whateley roads to get to lordship lane.


I will speculate that they are coming from the rye end of Barry road and down side streets rather than going down the main roads to east dulwich roundabout. Possibly but not verified, to avoid traffic that is heavier due to the LTNs and closed streets.


No traffic studies are bring conducted to look at weight of vehicles using our back roads vs main roads

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> I don't believe for one minute these huge lorries

> are going down Goodrich Road. Apps will usually

> send my cab along either Barry Road or Wood Vale

> to get to my place rather than use Goodrich or

> Dunstans Road as a shortcut.


The GPS systems used by hauliers 'usually' default to roads only suitable for HGV's, much like on Waze you can choose car/cycle/walk routes.


I've seen John Lewis vans etc and the odd delivery of steel for extensions or loft conversions but never anything bigger than that. Not saying that once in a blue moon you don't get the odd driver of anything bigger trying to take an ill advised short cut but I wouldn't say it was a regular thing (source: resident for nearly 30 years)

I do wonder if people see a large lorry and automatically presume it is taking a shortcut when in fact it is making a delivery that cannot be done in a smaller vehicle. Conway lorries are a good example, I have seen them being used to deliver materials for the plethora of pavement replacement works that have been going on across East Dulwich over the last few years.


I very much suspect HGV drivers don't take shortcuts down side-streets as they know how easily they can get stuck - if they meet something coming the other way they have a problem.

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

> Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> -----

> > I don't believe for one minute these huge

> lorries

> > are going down Goodrich Road. Apps will

> usually

> > send my cab along either Barry Road or Wood

> Vale

> > to get to my place rather than use Goodrich or

> > Dunstans Road as a shortcut.

>

> The GPS systems used by hauliers 'usually' default

> to roads only suitable for HGV's, much like on

> Waze you can choose car/cycle/walk routes.

>

> I've seen John Lewis vans etc and the odd delivery

> of steel for extensions or loft conversions but

> never anything bigger than that. Not saying that

> once in a blue moon you don't get the odd driver

> of anything bigger trying to take an ill advised

> short cut but I wouldn't say it was a regular

> thing (source: resident for nearly 30 years)


I had a chat with an HGV driver stuck on the corner of Maxted and Nutbrook. He was very embarrassed and waiting for the police to guide him out. He said that his companies commercial route planning software had sent him down that route even though its unsuitable for HGVs. The answer is for the council to designate the roads access only for HGVs which will eventually filter into the route planners and satnavs

Rockets Wrote:

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

> I do wonder if people see a large lorry and

> automatically presume it is taking a shortcut when

> in fact it is making a delivery that cannot be

> done in a smaller vehicle. Conway lorries are a

> good example, I have seen them being used to

> deliver materials for the plethora of pavement

> replacement works that have been going on across

> East Dulwich over the last few years.

>


One lorry I could agree but on one day this week I saw four Conway large lorries going past on one street so unless they are digging Criss rail 3 or a new underground station in East Dulwich then I dispute the assumption that they aren't taking short cuts but working on the pavements.

Im going to be contentious here...Other than the side streets being narrow, why would anyone object to lorries going down them anyway? Barry Road is wide but it is residential. Lordship Lane is also residential(I live on it). Would it not be fairer to share out the traffic evenly?

And perhaps enforce the 20mph speed limit.

devs Wrote:

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

> Im going to be contentious here...Other than the

> side streets being narrow, why would anyone object

> to lorries going down them anyway? Barry Road is

> wide but it is residential. Lordship Lane is also

> residential(I live on it). Would it not be fairer

> to share out the traffic evenly?

> And perhaps enforce the 20mph speed limit.


In a nutshell side streets are narrow, without passing room for a lorry and car to go in opposite directions so one or the other will have to back up or cause a log jam of vehicles


The lorries thunder down the roads (not respecting the 20 mph limit) and if they hit a pedestrian not expecting them on a quiet street then it will be quite nasty.


Basically side roads aren't designed for regular use by big lorries

Of course, you're right. Most side roads are too narrow (although I reckon Court Lane is almost wide enough to be a main road) I just think that rather than the closure of side roads, traffic should be more equitably distributed over ALL roads. Furthermorr, Lordship Lane is supposed to be 20mph. Why have a speed limit if its not enforced?.Money could have been put into this enforcement rather than the divisive LTNs.
  • 2 months later...

In case anyone isn?t aware the consultation on the Dulwich road measures is open until 11 July https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/dulwich-review/


I may have missed this on a post on this thread, and if so apologies, but as I walked along East Dulwich Grove today I had a thought that a one way system might work for the Council and for those using the roads. Although I live in the area and walk down Melbourne Grove every week I?ve not driven down it for years - since the footway parking was removed.

Elsie Road could stay closed off - this is used by children to access the primary school. Derwent Grove and Melbourne Grove could be reopened and made one way in opposite directions. This would halve traffic on each of these roads, reduce traffic on East Dulwich Grove and provide access to businesses / parking. The older children should have / need to develop road sense.


We live in London and its never going to be traffic free. The status quo doesn?t work. Closing streets to traffic, with timed restrictions or planters, doesn?t work for all locations.

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

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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