Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale

[@Woodwarde]

wulfhound Wrote:

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

> "According to a friendly workman, TfL has said

> that a cycle lane with barrier would make Townley

> Road too narrow

> for traffic and this is why it has been refused."

>

> Well it's too narrow now.. but only after they've

> gone and made the pavement about 6ft wider.

> Massive fail.

>

> The one bright spot is that tightening everything

> up seems to have reduced the right-hook hazard for

> southbound cyclists (Green Dale on to Townley)

> considerably - and even more so if/when the cycle

> traffic lights get the early start we were

> promised. Much better visibility between

> northbound and southbound queues.

>

> If there's no cycle lane or barrier, what on earth

> was the point of digging up the planted area at

> the top of Calton?

I see that the cycle lanes are not mandatory ones - which is what the scheme proposed. They are broken lines rather than solid lines. Does this make much difference for cyclists generally?

The pavement area still seems to be shared pedestrian/cyclist use which I thought was to end with the new cycle lane.

[edhistory]

Have less materials been used in the delivered changes and hence a reduction in contract price?

[fazer71]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> Have less materials been used in the delivered

> changes and hence a reduction in contract price?

No chance. Lol

[nxjen]

edhistory Wrote:

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

> Have less materials been used in the delivered

> changes and hence a reduction in contract price?

Conway would have procured materials as per client specification. Any surplus materials would now be the property of the client. Of course, these materials can then be used for future jobs but I've a feeling it won't work that way.

[fazer71]

Lol.

Clueless.

Conway will definitely have charged more for the reduced scheme any changes from the original will cost more even if there is less work and less materials.

That's how it works.

Contractors NEVER charge less they are not geared up for on the fly change pricing.

It's all in their contract.

The junction wasn't broken ! It didn't need fixing.

The system works for the local authority department staff and contractors not for the benefit of the environment or those who pay the taxes or use the services.

Result = change for the sake of change . Not improvement.

In a couple of years the junction will be ripped apart at a cost of ?500,000 to try a new idea thought up by new staff and new contractors.. And the money go round will march on and on.. And our taxes will be wasted again and again on useless changes and environmental damage "manufacturing cement burning fossil fuels etc" for zero gain.

Insanity

[edhistory]

This lunchtime a short wheeled base coach driver was trying to turn left from Townley Road into East Dulwich Grove.

He couldn't do it because of the new build-out and the correctly placed car waiting at the red traffic light to continue to Lordship Lane.

Where are the cycle lanes, or even safety features for cyclists?

Is the name of the person who designed the junction known, and, if so does this person have any professional qualifications?

John K

[Tessmo]

If Council officer Matt Hill is going to answer questions at the Dulwich Community Council meeting this Wednesday 9 September (agenda below), I think we should all try to go to see if we can make sense of what he says.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=176&MId=5157&Ver=4

The cycle features on the plan approved by councillors in March are nowhere to be seen. Some may be added later. Some won't be. Is what's there now safe for cyclists?

The Traffic Management Order talks about a mandatory cycle lane, which is definitely not there at the moment. Shouldn't a TMO apply to what's there rather than what was on the plan or might be there in the future?

Have safety audits been done on what's actually been built?

[Zebedee Tring]

Just as importantly Matt H should be quizzed about the apparent difficulty for coaches in turning left into EDG. He should not be allowed to suggest that the solution to this problem is a right turn ban.

[Joe Millis]

Can anyone tell me whether the coaches that ferry pupils from Alleyns to Dulwich College are still able to turn into Turney Road/Calton Avenue? They are a blight and make crossing the road difficult for Dulwich kids walking to local schools

[edhistory]

Perhaps Clarke's will buy a new fleet of short coaches:

http://www.clarkescoaches.co.uk/schoolservices/schoolrun/

[Joe Millis]

Would that it were only Clarke's. There's one company that takes double-deckers down Calton Avenue.

[Helga Hughes]

I have read most of the comments on this subject and have not learned much. Is it about "safety for the Cyclist" and/or

the "laid-on Buses" collecting our school children from JAGS? I am all for Safety and agree with the many Bumps (sleeping Policeman)and the recently introduced restriction 20mph in and around the Dulwich area. I truly believe that

is "Safety" for all. Why spend all this money and where does this money comes from? Yes, it is vital that our Roads and

Foot-Pathes are in good order to avoid accidents. Otherwise 'do not fix what is not broke'.

Is there a guarantee after having invested this vast amount of money, that it will indeed be an improvement to the

Junction as mentioned above??? What if it was bad planning and all that money was spent. What then?

[Penguin68]

It is worthwhile perhaps noting that this whole mess (now abandoned cycling improvement notwithstanding) was mainly started in order to 'improve' conditions for those travelling to and from the two schools (Alleyn's and Jags) - thus impacting approximately one hour a day of usage - weekdays only, school time only - or approximately 210 hours a year - which were also the hours when this junction was 'traffic awkward'. At other times it offered no general problems.

The fact that the coaches serving the schools are now hugely adversely impacted (i.e. turning circles) with the impact on other traffic and particularly cyclists, that (by report) the diagonal chosen for pedestrian crossing ins't the one that pedestrians actually choose to use and that normal traffic is now travelling more slowly and (for cyclists at least) apparently more dangerously does suggest that, were this not something undertaken by a 'public' (and hence, in reality, unaccountable body) then people would lose their jobs. If I had agreed a project with employers, and then done something entirely different, my feet wouldn't have touched...

[wulfhound]

The cycle features on the plan approved by councillors in March are nowhere to be seen. Some may be added later. Some won't be. Is what's there now safe for cyclists?

At the moment - not much better than before, not much worse than before, lousy way to spend ?250k of cycling budget if that's where the money came from.

I see that the cycle lanes are not mandatory ones - which is what the scheme proposed. They are broken lines rather than solid lines. Does this make much difference for cyclists generally?

If I remember right, the scheme proposed "light segregation", sometimes known as armadillos. They're big rubber lumps about eight inches long by four high that are glued or bolted down on to the white line. Like a rumble strip but chunkier. Painted mandatory cycle lanes help a bit, but as with unenforced traffic laws in general, it comes down to respect or a lack thereof. A mandatory lane with light segregation, which physically prevents or makes it difficult for traffic to intrude on to the cycle lane, is the ideal here.

The pavement area still seems to be shared pedestrian/cyclist use which I thought was to end with the new cycle lane.

Indeed. I wonder if they just haven't got the additional legislative things through to de-designate the pavement for cycling & designate the cycle lane as mandatory, which would then perhaps allow for the installation of the armadillos per the original. If the TMO was Sep 1st, they couldn't (at least, shouldn't) start construction on that lot until after it was signed off.

[sandyman]

I've just driven from Townley Road left onto EDG and it's harder and tighter for a car to turn left, never mind a coach. There is a left turn from New Cross Road into Pomeroy Street which is nowhere near as sharp and has been made no left turn in recent years. Who makes these decisions?

Also as a pedestrian surely it would be more assuring to have the islands in the middle of each crossing. Why have they gone?

[fazer71]

Lol the funniest thread of the year... Lol

[carolb]

I have not driven or cycled at this junction recently so cannot comment on this particular junction - this is a general comment about these narrow roads and consequent tight turns.

I find tight left turns are a complete nightmare because any vehicle which is longer than a hatch back ends up going over the middle white lines of the road that they are turning into. (Either that or they drive over the corner of the pavement.) I encounter one on my cycle route to work where I have to turn right into the road that the vehicle is emerging from turning left ? very scary if you have positioned yourself for your right turn only to see a vehicle approach the junction and you know it is going to have to come out into your path. You can be decked out like a Christmas tree and still not be seen in such a situation.

And while I am at it ? related topic ?.. there is another right turn on my cycle route to work where I used to feel quite comfortable waiting in the middle of the road for a gap in the oncoming traffic to do my right turn ???. until Southwark narrowed the road. Now I am too scared to wait in the middle of the road because the traffic on my left passes too close so I get off the bike and cross on foot at the nearby crossing. Another example, I used to feel comfortable cycling into Peckham (I?m referring to the stretch of road from the East Dulwich Road/Peckham Rye junction heading towards Peckham) ? again until Southwark narrowed the road. Since the road was narrowed the traffic is passing much closer (it?s not going any slower) ? it feels more dangerous.

I don?t understand why Southwark are narrowing all these roads. As a cyclist it has not made me feel safer. For drivers it causes unnecessary hold ups as a vehicle with a long wheel base has to wait for a gap in both directions before executing a left turn. I can?t see the benefit of this endless tinkering ?? and it must be costing a fortune. There seems to be an endless supply of money for road changes of dubious benefit while at the same time we have talk of cuts to front-line services such as discontinuing food recycling bags and charging for waste collections.

[spider69]

Its part of a plan to drive motorists off the road by Southwark Labour.

As soon as a hair brained plan is suggested both the Council and Cllrs embrace it 100% if it effects drivers.

[hopskip]

wulfhound Wrote:

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

>

> Indeed. I wonder if they just haven't got the

> additional legislative things through to

> de-designate the pavement for cycling & designate

> the cycle lane as mandatory, which would then

> perhaps allow for the installation of the

> armadillos per the original. If the TMO was Sep

> 1st, they couldn't (at least, shouldn't) start

> construction on that lot until after it was signed

> off.

Don't think so. The week before Matt Hill issued a letter to to the schools referencing technical and legislative challenges. This combined with a TMO for 'mandatory' cycle lanes sounds very muddled. Certainly not clear how Southark can sign this junction off as approved by the Statutory consultees as safe.

Southwark's explanation at the DCC this Weds evening should be well worth hearing and should be questioned carefully. No doubt it will be indicative of issues yet to happen over the Quietways.

[spider69]

Postcode: Name

Which of these is the most common way you travel on Champion Hill?

Walking / Scooting /Cycling/Driving Other:

How would you rate your experience of using Champion Hill?

(1 = Very bad and 5 = Very Good) 1 2 3 4 5

Do you agree or disagree with the following statements about Champion Hill?

Agree Disagree Not Sure

Traffic is too fast

There is too much traffic

Road safety is an issue

The route is easy to cycle

The route is easy to walk

Are there any parts of

Champion Hill that you find

particularly uncomfortable to use?

(Safety/convenience/comfort)

Do you have any thoughts on how

these issues could be improved?

Do you think a road closure on

Champion Hill at the junction with

Dog Kennel Hill is a good idea?

Yes No Not sure

Or a one-way system for

southbound vehicle traffic (two-way

for cyclists) between Denmark Hill

and the raised junction on Champion

Hill?

Yes No Not sure

What three words would you use to

describe using Champion Hill?

If you can?t attend a drop-in have your say about

Champion Hill by filling out our survey

Please fill out the survey by 31st Aug and return to us in the enclosed

The above is a consultation which was not widely shared. I did not get it. It refers to quiet ways and traffic.

All roads seem to be under attack. One thing is for sure if people do not comment it will happen. If your Cllrs is pro do not expect any help

Having lived on and around Champion Hill for the last 69 years I fail to see why this scheme should ever see the light of day. It works well and always has done in my lifetime.

Why should all these new changes suddenly be desired They have put in pinched points and again closing off the road is. there. Melbourne Grove any one. Its these changes that have caused all the problems.

Every where you turn green behind the ears planners know better than residents.Looks good on paper with a red felt pen line.

God knows where they think the traffic will be diverted to.

Change for the sake of change.

How come past generations seemed to manage.

[edhistory]

spider69 Wrote:

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

> Postcode: Name

> Which of these is the most common way you travel

> on Champion Hill?

[...]

> The above is a consultation which was not widely shared. I did not get it. It refers to quiet ways and traffic.

Does Mr James Barber still live on Champion Hill?

John K

[@Woodwarde]

Spider69

Exactly the same wording for all the Quietways. One just happening now for Calton Avenue and Turney Road. See separate thread. Leading questions with huge potential for the answers to be interpreted to suit.

Hence importance of understanding Southwark?s process.

[Curmudgeon]

I don't understand what has changed apart from the diagonal pedestrian crossing and a bugger of a left hand turn that makes it more dangerous for cyclists rather than less unless they are supposed to go on the pavement to go left

The school kids aren't even using the diagonal crossing as far as I can see

[edhistory]

> I don't understand what has changed

F.M.Conway is richer.

[fazer71]

^ this is exactly what has changed oh and a few road "specialists" at Southwark have another 12 months work.

Socialism in action.

????????????????????%% wasted ..