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

[bonaome]

QueenMab - there have been 3 incidents at this junction, all severity=slight, since 2005.

It doesn't appear to be a dangerous junction.

Nunhead_man - it's simple, easy and quick to hop off a bicycle and wheel it over a pedestrian crossing if you're not feeling confident about riding through it. It's not possible for most people to push a car. And I think comments like yours just add to the general sense that many none cyclists seem to have that cyclists are self obsessed idiots with no sense of perspective.

Declaration: I drive, I cycle, I use that junction very often.

[wulfhound]

It looks to me like too many "special interest groups" got involved in the pre-consultation, which is also what killed the redesign six years ago.

I've seen this phrase crop up a few times now on this thread, and the idea that walking or cycling around the place in safety is considered by some to be a "special interest" is rather worrying. Whether or not you agree with the design, respecting the wishes of those who wish not to be killed or injured is just basic human decency.

Asking that cyclists can dismount is an admission of failure in junction design. If I'm cycling and dismount, I'm not a cyclist, I'm a pedestrian pushing a bike. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but nobody can legitimately claim that a junction design is "safe for cyclists" if it requires them to become pedestrians in order to negotiate it. It's like the Garden Bridge claiming it's "designed for cyclists" when they mean "get off and walk across".

[BrandNewGuy]

I didn't think the Garden Bridge was designed for cyclists, but there you go... Rather than worry about 'too many' special interest groups, I'm glad the consultation has been thrown open. Southwark Council have shown that one or two 'special interest' groups (in this case cyclists) can sway them into action before all other relevant parties have been consulted. Then it becomes a bun fight. This was exactly the same with the proposed CPZ, where a few residents on a few roads managed to get the whole thing in motion. I don't blame the cycling groups, but I do question Southwark's ability to seek all views and do some basic groundwork before launching a scheme and then asking for comments.

[QueenMab]

Bonaome, all I can say is that I cross that junction almost EVERY DAY, from Green Dale over to Townley Rd, and I never feel completely safe doing so when there is oncoming traffic. Are you disputing the number of near misses I've had? Do we have to wait for a fatality before what we already know is "proved", i.e. it is dangerous? I've been cycling in London for 15 years and I am pretty much fearless, but it's obvious to me this this junction is poorly designed and needlessly dangerous.

It simply needs to be safe for EVERYONE.

I do also wonder why Alleyns and JAGS can't be asked to find room on their ample acreage for the excessive number of coaches lining Townley Road each day, it makes that road slow and unsafe for everyone at critical times. It also doesn't strike me as the safest place to have kids boarding and alighting coaches either.

[Charles Notice]

Do these coaches actually block the junction and block the view of traffic?

Common sense is needed which seems to be badly lacking.

[bawdy-nan]

Charles Notice - the coaches park on double yellow lines and on zig zag lines requiring cars and cyclists (many of them children also trying to get to school) to pull out around them into oncoming traffic, negotiating crossing islands and pedestrians.

Queen Mab - I can see absolutely how crossing from Greendale into traffic turning right (which often doesn't "expect" there to be oncoming cycles) is precarious and dangerous. But. Is banning a right turn the answer? Or the best answer? I think doing so would have terrible knock on effects at the equally precarious junctions in the village and the other end of Townley Road.

Wouldn't a proper cycle lane with crossing work well there (like CS 3, for example)?

[@Woodwarde]

http://www.jags.org.uk/about/facilities/index.html

JAGS are going to build a new music hall which will remove their parking access from East Dulwich Grove. They plan to use the Scout hut area on Green Dale I understand.

This is part of the debate I think.

[Townleygreen]

Yes but the point is, that JAGS building will take away a large number of parking spaces, adding pressure onto Calton, Townley etc etc.

The Sea Scout hut area is already used for parking so that is a red herring.

[alice]

most central london schools dont have parking for staff - they manage - why should it be different here?

[@Woodwarde]

They are the advocates - see attached.

[Townleygreen]

We're not in central London, Alice. Do YOU favour a wretched CPZ then?

[macutd]

Has anyone mentioned the coach parking on EDG in front of Jags?

If ever there was a dangerous bottleneck (caused by the coach parking)This is it!

There is NO room for cyclist when passing these coaches.They should not be parked up on this very busy already dangerous road.

WHY can they not park in the grounds of Jags or maybe Greendale, but not on the main road where there is Not room!

[spider69]

Why is this post discussing teachers parking, coaches, CPZ, local traffic when the thread should be about

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

to allow people however powered to cross the road from A to B. Crossing the junction

Perhaps there are too many separate interests at work to ever produce a viable solition.

My children went to Alleyns 25 years ago with the same situation as now with no problems. Why has it suddenly now become a major issue?

[Townleygreen]

that's the EDF for you, spider

[bawdy-nan]

I think the coaches and parking has been brought into this because of the public statements of the jags and Alleyns heads regarding their vehement support of the changes because of their overwhelming support for safe ways of getting to school and safe cycling. One of the major dangers to children trying to get to school, especially by bike, is the illegal parking of the school coaches. So , it may be the hypocrisy that has drawn out the comments . If the schools were genuinely interested in the safety of children I. the local community and at their schools they have it within their power to make a huge impact.

[Penguin68]

It is also worth noting that, based on recently previous posts, this is all about (particularly) the morning rush hour - when work and school traffic (including parked-up coaches) coincides - so say an hour, 5 times a week for about two thirds of the year. The afternoon coach parking tends not to impact the later back-to-home work traffic, though clearly does impact the retruning school traffic. This is quite a draconian set of measures to address 2% (or 4% if you include the afternoon 'rush') of the year (though granted much of the remaining 98% is at night etc.).

It does strike me that directly addressing the apparent proximate cause of the problem (traffic, particularly coaches, delivering to two schools) would be more sensible than making permanent changes to road layout etc. which, for - say, being generous, 95% of the time - aren't necessary.

Edited to add:- If you are on the Embankment travelling east, if memory services, right turns onto Albert and Battersea bridges are not allowed at certain times of day, could not a forbiden right (if we can't avoid this) be time-limited - to say 8:00-10:00 am; 3:00-5:00 pm to 'save' the school time traffic from peril? - but not at weekends/ holiday time?

[Zebedee Tring]

Someone may have made this point already. However, it would surely be feasible to rephase the lights at the junction so that traffic would emerge from Calton Avenue into EDG while the traffic coming from Greendale was held at red; the traffic from Calton Avenue would then be held at red while the traffic from Greendale could then emerge into EDG (only a relatively limited time for this traffic would be needed because there is not much traffic leaving Greendale).

This would then eliminate the need for a ban on a right turn from Calton Avenue into EDG, i.e. by far the most controversial aspect of the proposals.

[James Barber]

Hi ZT,

Good idea except their is only so long traffic will wait. Adding another phase to these traffic lights will lengthen the whole cycle accordingly.

For those that suggest leave the junction alone. Southwark Council I've been assured has had safety audits of it which showed it to be a dangerous junction. I haven't a copy of the audit.

I cycle both way across the junction and I don't feel very safe. But diverting right turning traffic elsewhere is likely t just shift the problem - much I suspect would use Lordship Lane and then Melbourne Grove. And the Melbourne Grove/East Dulwich Grove junction already has more crashes than this junction. So this aspect to me appears flawed.

[Charles Notice]

Could you get and post a copy of this audit.Would make sense.

[Zebedee Tring]

James, adding a further, short phase to the lights would be better and safer for traffic than having to negotiate a potentially lengthy diversion and (human nature being what it is) the danger caused by unauthorised u turns.

[alice]

Townleygreen Wrote:

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

> We're not in central London, Alice. Do YOU favour

> a wretched CPZ then?

that's not my point - It just seemed to me that the needs of the school - staff not pupils - was dominating this discussion - the parking of the coaches and staff cars.

[@Woodwarde]

James Barber said

>> For those that suggest leave the junction alone. Southwark Council I've been assured has had safety audits of it which showed it to be a dangerous junction. I haven't a copy of the audit.

Question: This is presumably publicly available. Such statements support our questions around availability of evidence that have been put to our councillors to enable local engagement on this. Assurance is a word but it is not substantiated evidence. Evidence and data is key to building local support/confidence and our ability to support and refine the proposals.

>>I cycle both way across the junction and I don't feel very safe. But diverting right turning traffic elsewhere is likely t just shift the problem - much I suspect would use Lordship Lane and then Melbourne Grove. And the Melbourne Grove/East Dulwich Grove junction already has more crashes than this junction. So this aspect to me appears flawed.

SO - how do our councillors express the opinion of their Wards - Village, College and East Dulwich, This is the composition across the wards: ie Village 2 Conservative, 1 labour; East Dulwich: 2 Lib Dem, 1 labour; College 3 Labour. Do they put forward the opinions of the local residents who appointed them or do they take the party Whip? We do elect on the basis that our voice is heard...

Constitution see:

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?FN=WARD&VW=LIST&PIC=0

[roywj]

I agree with ZT's suggestion.

Having three separate phases will enable traffic to flow from Greendale and Calton Avenue more smoothly and this will actually save time for road users. The Greendale/Calton Avenue junctions do not directly face each other causing problems for road users.

I find the three separate light phases works well at Camberwell Grove, which also gets very busy in the morning.

The congestion caused by the school coaches should also be considered during this consultation. I am shocked at the way they are allowed to block Townley Road. Parking the coaches on Greendale is not a viable option either, it is simply not big enough and there is already a problem with drivers double parking during rush hour.

[macutd]

Alleyns and Jags should park their coaches on their land. They both have room if they wanted to use it!

[macutd]

I also agree with ZT's suggestion. It seems such an obvious answer.(below)

Someone may have made this point already. However, it would surely be feasible to rephase the lights at the junction so that traffic would emerge from Calton Avenue into EDG while the traffic coming from Greendale was held at red; the traffic from Calton Avenue would then be held at red while the traffic from Greendale could then emerge into EDG (only a relatively limited time for this traffic would be needed because there is not much traffic leaving Greendale).

This would then eliminate the need for a ban on a right turn from Calton Avenue into EDG, i.e. by far the most controversial aspect of the proposals.