Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Over the last 2 days new, full road width speed bumps and a cycle lane have appeared on Henslowe Road. What a complete and utter waste of tax payers money!!! We already had perfectly good speed bumps. It's a one way road that no one would want to use as a cut through. In the 4 years I have lived here I've never seen anyone speed. I've also rarely seen any cyclists use the road. Who asked for these pointless and quite frankly, useless additions???? Please step forward. I'm all ears to rational reasoning.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/41692-henslowe-road-bike-lane-why/
Share on other sites

The works are to calm speeds and also to allow cyclists to cycle both ways along Henslowe Road.


Last traffic count September 2011 average of 429 vehicles as day - busiest day 1,109 vehicles. Average speed 21.3mph but 85th percentil speed of 27.3 which means the remainder are travelling at sped great than 27.3 mph.


Removing the one way ness was felt it would recreate the original problems making it a rat run despite Friern Road closures.

Thanks for the reply James. The last traffic count is irrelevant. The vast majority of those cars would be the ones turning off of Peckham Rye onto Upland/Frien and then cutting down Henslowe. The Peckham Rye/Upland/Frien juctions were closed off in Nov 2011 (after the last count). Right now, the only reason for anyone to cut down Henslowe would be to get to Underhill Rd if Barry Road was shut - otherwise you'd just stay on Barry Road.


My point about speed bumps is we already have them and given that your census shows that the average speed down Henslowe was 21.3mph, they appear to have been doing their job quite nicely. Oh and you can still go 30mph quite happily over the new ones so I have no idea how they'll change anything.


The cycle lane is not only pointless but it's actually dangerous for cyclists. It's going against the traffic, which is fine, but it's been marked up on the right handside of the road (if you're driving the right way). Being a one way road this means cars that are parked on the right will need to swing across the cycle lane to get out. Being right hand drive, you cannot actually see what's coming towards you until you're already in the cycle lane which is too late for the poor cyclist speeding down the new lane without a care in the world. As I mentioned, cyclists rarely use Henslowe anyway and surely the safest place for them to be is in the middle of the road to avoid exactly what I describe above. They can move over if they see a vehicle coming down the road. Why do they need a cycle lane - it's common sense. I'm not a cyclist, but if I was I certainly wouldn't use the new lane.


The only thing that needed to be changed was at the junction of Henslowe and Underhill where it's a nightmare pulling out because parked cars on Underhill mean you can't see anything. They have painted double yellows on the right but on the left they have done nothing meaning you still cant see a darn thing. What they have done however is painted double yellows at the end of Henslowe Road where there was no issue with visibility and have thus only succeeded in taking away valuable parking spaces.


So to summarise, new speed bumps - pointless, new cycle lane - pointless and dangerous, new double yellows on Henslowe - pointless and have now created a parking issue.


Exactly how much did these works cost???

The problem is the 3 abreast 'Cushions'.


The outside ones are covered by parked cars.


The middle on allows vehicles to fly down the centre of the road at full speed.

So total waste of money..


Systems being designed by bureaucrats and not by engineers.


DulwichFox

What would have been useful, rather than traffic calming based on a census carried out 'before' a major road, which made Henslowe a rat run, was blocked off and digging up road bumps that kept the speeds to an average of a quite respectable 21.3mph and replacing them with bumps that you can drive over comfortably at 30mph and creating a dangerous and pointless cycle lane and taking away parking by painting double yellows where they weren't needed instead of painting them where they are needed, would have been to repair the badly damaged and hazardous pavements on Henslowe!! Now that would have been a genius idea.


James please do confirm the cost of the works on Henslowe, I'm eager to know exactly how much was spent so I can get even more wound up.

Message to James Barber.

Why is it that there seem to be limitless funds for daft road "improvements" such as endless moving of islands, humps etc.(and often back again the next year) when the roads are in an appalling state. There are dangerous deep potholes everywhere which are ignored by the jobsworths.

Endless no left turns, no right turns, no entries, mindless one- way systems.

Drivers are driving around Lost..


Classic example:-

Oakhurst Grove used to run into East Dulwich Road. Last 50 metres cut off.


Now it's a right into Kelmore rd, left into the Gardens, left onto Peckham Rye (heavy traffic)

then Left again onto East Dulwich Rd. and then 2 more sets of lights to get back to the end of Oakhurst.


.. whilst the 'Experts' sit at their computer screens engaged in some kind of Giant Sim City game.

and getting paid for it..


and all of them and local councillors sitting around sipping tea and patting themselves on the back

thinking what a great job they are doing.


This is not traffic easing.



DulwicFox.

I would opt for enforcement and education? Spend money on a lot more police to arrest dangerous drivers and on campaigns to change the culture around speeding (as we did successfully for drink driving).


The problem with just putting speed bumps everywhere is that councils and police feel that to some degree they've discharged their responsibility for the issue and drivers start to act as though they're OK to put their foot down if there aren't any speed bumps about.


It is one of the bluntest of tools - effecting everyone, regardless of whether they drive under the limit or not and costs a lot of money which IMO would be better spend on tackling the causes of speeding.


James Barber Wrote:

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

> i couldnt agree more rahrahrah.

> But while people speed what do you do?

I was excited by the prospect of new road humps on Henslowe road because I live on said road, have 2 small children and have witnessed DAILY occurrences of cars driving in excess of 40 mph and occasionally much faster. The old humps were completely useless as they were driven over. I agree the new humps are utterly crap. They have made the road faster. I asked the workmen why the humps were barely humps and they said "for the cars not to get damaged" Lovely. Please can we have proper humps that stop idiots driving at ridiculous speeds up the road. It's simply used as a short cut/rat run by most people who drive speedily because they are pissed off by having had to double back from Friern Closure.
Henslowe never was a rat run. It was made one way the same time the Friern/ upland closure went in which was part of the TFL South Circ scheme. - which may have diverted traffic into Friern. I guess it may protect from those who might divert off Friern and onto Henslowe. Works on Henslowe are a waste. Not sure why Cyclists can't use Friern section which is pretty quiet now as it goes nowhere and is a Designated South London Cycle Route.
Hear hear apbremer. I understand motorists in Islington have successfully claimed the cost of new suspension from the council after they carpet-bombed much of that borough with them. I'd sooner see road-narrowing schemes rather than bumps. There really seems to be no standard for how these things are laid: there's so much variation between different sites. Some have a dangerously acute ramp which is barely safe to cross at 10mph let alone 20. Others are, as people have said, barely perceptible. As far as I can tell, it's entirely up to the contractor how much spoil to dump across the road before tarmaccing it. Is there actually an approved standard with a BS or ISO prefix of some kind??

Road narrowing schemes don't always slow traffic down either. They just encourage drivers to speed between narrow sections and then play 'chicken' to get through the narrower gap first. They are far more dangerous for cyclists than humps - although it would be nice to have a gap at the end of the bump to save thumping up and down on the bike. They narrowed Railton Road in Brixton a year or so back and it's far more unpleasant now to drive or cycle down.


The other thing that I don't get with bumps is when it snows, it means that the road can't be ploughed properly.

Admittedly, the snow plough incident wasn't in Southwark. But the local council had to rip up lots of speed bumps the next year. But bumps don't help in any snowy weather - I remember watching cars getting stuck on Court Lane the other year because they got stuck at the bumps.
The double yellow around the corner - in Underhill Rd to the right - is a definite improvement. There was often a transit sized van or minibus at that junction obstructing view towards Barry Rd when pulling out from Henslowe Rd. No need for yellow lines in Henslowe Road. No need for a cycle lane, the blocked Friern Rd is a much better and safer cycle route.

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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