Time to open Wood Vale and Underhill to right turns from and into the South Circ

[Forest Hill Climber]

The No Right Turn from A205 South Circular into Wood Vale has, I believe had a huge impact on other roads locally. I understand that the decision was taken in order to 'Keep London Moving' (TFL's old motto). 

 

There are very few options for turning right off the South Circular especially from Catford to Dulwich. Devonshire Road (Forest Hill) was heavily impacted by the Wood Vale decision, and I think has been further impacted by the Dulwich LTN. 

 

On the whole Southwark does a great job nudging traffic into neighbouring Lewisham which seems oblivious.

 

TFL hasn't helped us by reducing speed on the A205 to 20 MPH, which removes any incentive there was to stay on the main road.

[malumbu]

20mph actually increases the capacity of major roads.  I'm starting to get into AI as it seems to agree with me:

• Improved Traffic Flow:

  Lower speeds mean drivers can maintain closer following distances and react more quickly to changes in traffic flow, leading to smoother and more efficient traffic movement.
• Enhanced Junction Capacity:

  At junctions, it's easier for drivers to merge into slower-moving traffic, reducing congestion and improving the overall capacity of the junction.
• Reduced Bunching:

  Lower speeds reduce the "bunching" effect where vehicles tend to group together, which can lead to stop-and-go traffic.
• Increased Safety:

  Lower speeds also improve road safety, as drivers have more time to react to hazards and the severity of accidents is reduced.
• Encourages Active Travel:

  20's Plenty for Us says that safer streets encourage more people to walk, cycle or wheel, which can reduce congestion and improve air quality.

[Forest Hill Climber]

10 minutes ago, malumbu said:

20mph actually increases the capacity of major roads.  I'm starting to get into AI as it seems to agree with me:

• Improved Traffic Flow:

  Lower speeds mean drivers can maintain closer following distances and react more quickly to changes in traffic flow, leading to smoother and more efficient traffic movement.
• Enhanced Junction Capacity:

  At junctions, it's easier for drivers to merge into slower-moving traffic, reducing congestion and improving the overall capacity of the junction.
• Reduced Bunching:

  Lower speeds reduce the "bunching" effect where vehicles tend to group together, which can lead to stop-and-go traffic.
• Increased Safety:

  Lower speeds also improve road safety, as drivers have more time to react to hazards and the severity of accidents is reduced.
• Encourages Active Travel:

  20's Plenty for Us says that safer streets encourage more people to walk, cycle or wheel, which can reduce congestion and improve air quality.

 

Quote

I'm starting to get into AI as it seems to agree with me

AI tells you what it has 'learned' from various sources, doesn't mean it's correct or true.  Increased capacity can also mean that for any individual vehicle, the route is slower and best avoided

Edited March 28 by Forest Hill Climber

[malumbu]

Smoother, slower driving, at loosely a constant speed, allows for more vehicles on the road.  It messes up when drivers get into the accelerate/brake mode, as many do, particularly on traffic calmed roads.  I was always tempted to take a video on Court Lane, when it was a through road, driving between 16 and 18 miles an hour, and not braking once.  And then compare to virtually everyone else who accelerate between speed bumps, and banged the brake on just before.  Taking just as long, but this would allow for less vehicle density.  The problem is with all the theory of slower speeds, traffic calming and the like, that most people aren't very good drivers, in terms of smoothness.

I'd beat most of you in a competition on fuel economy. 

[jazzer]

Just takes longer, slower idling speeds = More Pollution and slower journey times. 

[malumbu]

Totally the opposite, engine isn't labouring due to constant slowing down and speeding up meaning less nitrogen oxides, higher fuel economy, a smoother ride for the occupants, safer roads, less wear and tear including brake wear which contributes to pollution.  Trouble is the masses are ignorant of things like this,  And many simply don't care about harmful emissions.

If you go in the M4 out of London you will see that the 60mph restrictions which discourages speeding and aggressive acceleration, as this leads to more nitrogen oxides.

I've worked in the field for a long time.

This has no particular relevance to a simple question asked on this thread. 

[jazzer]

I'm amazed at the detail, research, time you seem to spend on this and other topics arguing, is traffic, roads etc a fascination to you?

There's a whole world to explore, things to do, places to go, people to see...........................................

Edited March 28 by jazzer

[malumbu]

It's my profession.  That's why I know a lot.  I present facts or opinion based on my understanding.

But I have no great interest in the fine detail of vehicle counters and all that dull stuff that gets discussed ad nausium on other threads.  

Edited March 28 by malumbu