Pavement widening outside M&S nr East Dulwich station...

[Angelina]

Spot on - people choose to drive from convenience, or because they need their vehicles (work, care, etc).

There are many who drive from convenience when there are other means or getting about.

Any measures to reduce car emissions, pollution and number of unnecessary journeys is welcome.

 

The council is right to improve the pedestrian area. 

[malumbu]

With our road network there is always a balance to strike between the flow of vehicles, encouraging sustainable and active transport, pedestrian safety and access to amenities,

Transport planers will do fine tuning with respect traffic controls, restrictions such as one way or no right turns, traffic calming, bus and other road user priority, traffic light sequencing etc etc.  But ultimately it is the sheer number of vehicles on the road that leads to congestion.  Which is my point that if we made smarter choices that would be beneficial for a number of reasons.

Traffic calming is a whole subject of its own, and it is a shame that this is needed as too many would speed without it.  Worse still there can be a negative impact both due to the severity of some traffic calming, and the simple reason that too few know how to drive smoothly over both traffic calmed roads and sadly on urban roads as a whole.

It's right to prioritise pedestrians, over bikes, over buses, over essential transport such as deliveries, over motorists as a whole.  Not sure how a simple widening of a pavement has led me and others to discuss road congestion.  That's me lot.

 

Just adding after seeing Angelina's post that many will automatically drive due to actual or perceived convenience, often incorrect cost assumptions (fuel used rather than whole life costs) and as it is is a habit.  And a hard one to break.

[jazzer]

You always want to be right whatever the subject and this one is your job.

I want to see traffic flow not be congested due to daft road  widening schemes which INCONVIENIENCE people and make journeys longer wasting peoples time. 

[Sue]

I just passed there on the bus this morning, and the wider pavement didn't look any wider than it already is a bit further up the road?

[spider69]

Is the bus stop outside the station open and opposite the diy shop?

[jazzer]

Yesterday both where closed

[Sue]

2 hours ago, spider69 said:

Is the bus stop outside the station open and opposite the diy shop?

Stop outside the station was closed this morning

[march46]

This webpage has the details of the works underway. 
https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking-streets-and-transport/improving-streets-and-spaces/making-our-streets-greener/east-dulwich

[first mate]

Traffic backed up, bumper to bumper, yesterday, along the length of the road. The hope is this does not continue once the works are complete. This is a main route into and out of ED.

[Sue]

7 minutes ago, first mate said:

Traffic backed up, bumper to bumper, yesterday, along the length of the road. The hope is this does not continue once the works are complete. This is a main route into and out of ED.

There were no hold ups at all when I passed about 8.30am yesterday morning towards Denmark Hill, nor coming back towards ED about 10am.

Though there wasn't a lot of traffic.

[Cyclemonkey]

25 minutes ago, first mate said:

Traffic backed up, bumper to bumper, yesterday, along the length of the road. The hope is this does not continue once the works are complete. This is a main route into and out of ED.

May be it is a Council plot to stop you leaving East Dulwich.

[spider69]

Road down to one lane today. Traffic well and truly backed up.

[first mate]

5 hours ago, Cyclemonkey said:

May be it is a Council plot to stop you leaving East Dulwich.

Nah, 'maybe' just another example of council profligacy and incompetence.

5 hours ago, Sue said:

There were no hold ups at all when I passed about 8.30am yesterday morning towards Denmark Hill, nor coming back towards ED about 10am.

Though there wasn't a lot of traffic.

I was there around 2pm and the queue of stationary traffic was very long. Glad it was not all day!

[teddyboy23]

Wait till the schools reopen next week 

[Ashlar]

On 15/04/2025 at 04:38, Angelina said:

Spot on - people choose to drive from convenience, or because they need their vehicles (work, care, etc).

There are many who drive from convenience when there are other means or getting about.

Any measures to reduce car emissions, pollution and number of unnecessary journeys is welcome.

 

The council is right to improve the pedestrian area. 

Something that is rarely discussed when demonising car drivers is safety. As a single woman who is often travelling alone at night, a big factor of my transport choices is safety. I do not feel safe on public transport at night and without my car I would simply stay at home

[malumbu]

Most of us are not demonising drivers as a whole.  Happy to demonise selfish, dangerous and inconsiderate drivers 

Incidentally it's a shame that you do not feel safe on public transport at night.  I and our family have never had any serious issues over the years.  

Sorry realised that I said I would post about motoring on a thread that is about a pavement.  

[EDmummy101]

On 05/04/2025 at 14:10, LurkyMcLurker said:

It seems way more likely they'd park the lorry right next to the shop on Railway Rise. How did you come to the conclusion they'll simply block half the road?

Ultimately I think this is a good change. More space for people walking around the station. I commute to/from work via ED and a lot of people exit the station and turn right towards lordship lane. Even beyond the daily commuters there's all the students from the nearby secondary school and any time there's a DHFC match it gets busy.



 

Have you seen the size of those lorries? Lorries that deliver (or collect?) from Jewsons hardly squeeze down Railway Rise near the tyre shop and crash into the first floor corner flat at least once a year...

[alice]

They park in front of the shop just where they used to park. So why the curb? why the expensive resurfacing?

Edited Wednesday at 19:59 by alice
Punctuation

[EDmummy101]

On 07/04/2025 at 12:56, teddyboy23 said:

A few shop keepers mentioned works finished by may.i passed through grove vale about an hour ago not sure but thepavement looked done?

.

 

Pavement widening is ongoing just moving up Grove Vale I think...

On 15/04/2025 at 10:38, Angelina said:

Spot on - people choose to drive from convenience, or because they need their vehicles (work, care, etc).

There are many who drive from convenience when there are other means or getting about.

Any measures to reduce car emissions, pollution and number of unnecessary journeys is welcome.

 

The council is right to improve the pedestrian area. 

The LTNs don't reduce pollution aside from on the roads they've closed. Minority benefit whilst majority suffer from slower moving traffic on Lordship Lane as an example. I don't drive, we don't own a car but the buses crawl down the main road since the implementation of LTNs and residents were not properly consulted before they came about. 

[Dulwich dweller]

On 14/04/2025 at 16:11, jazzer said:

Why do you intentionally misinterpret what was said.

In my opinion and experience when debating with him it's because he's a muck stirrer, disingenuous, dismissive ,evasive, condescending and selective with regards to answering quoted posts. It's almost like he's trolling for attention and to agitate. 

Edited Thursday at 02:34 by Dulwich dweller
Spelling

[Angelina]

the answer to slower traffic is for people to avoid unnecessary car journeys and for people to use public transport.

Pedestrians and school children should not have to have narrower pavements so we can have wider roads to accommodate heavy traffic.

Safety on public transport - for the public and staff is a priority for TfL.

[first mate]

We'll have to see how that rationale stands up when we have more e-bikes and delivery e-bike/motorcyles using the 'pedestrianised' areas as useful cut-throughs, who, I wonder will take precedence?

Motorbikes and cars are not allowed to use these areas yet we see e-bike/motorbikes use them daily.

[Angelina]

I agree - do you know if the council are taking steps to prevent that?

 

It seems an obvious income stream if the council were to issue fixed penalty notices, with Community Support Officers out and about.

Edited Thursday at 09:57 by Angelina

[jazzer]

4 hours ago, Angelina said:

the answer to slower traffic is for people to avoid unnecessary car journeys and for people to use public transport.

Pedestrians and school children should not have to have narrower pavements so we can have wider roads to accommodate heavy traffic.

Safety on public transport - for the public and staff is a priority for TfL.

Yep, BUT slower journey's INCLUDES slower bus journeys if traffic moves slower, then everything in that traffic queue will move slower and take longer, your point does not hold tight

10 hours ago, Dulwich dweller said:

In my opinion and experience when debating with him it's because he's a muck stirrer, disingenuous, dismissive ,evasive, condescending and selective with regards to answering quoted posts. It's almost like he's trolling for attention and to agitate. 

It's not debating, its putting a counter argument that is then swiftly dismissed. 

[Angelina]

Absolutely Jazzer. As more people realise it takes too long to do their unnecessary trips in the car, they’ll look at doing things differently- possibly driving at different times, not driving etc - and this will help clear the traffic and make it easier to travel by bus. 
Fewer unnecessary drivers means less traffic.