Jump to content

overhill road bicycle contra-flow


Recommended Posts

It seems that bicycles will now be allowed to go down Overhill Road. See website below.....


They already do it anyway so it might make sense for it to be allowed as long as it does not interfere with parking or upward flow of traffic.


www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200431/street_improvements/3657/overhill_road-_proposed_contra_flow_and_highway_improvements

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems like some fairly sensible improvements. I'll be objecting to the widening of the junction mouth with Lordship Lane. It's a shame they aren't prepared to close it entirely as a through route for motor traffic. But otherwise supportive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I live on Overhill Road and wouldn't want it closed for a through route, albeit that cars do go too fast down the hill. I would like to see the road re-surfaced as it seems to miss out whilst other roads are being re-surfaced. As a busy road, it could do with some TLC. As for bikes being allowed to go down the one-way, I think this is a fair suggestion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a shame they aren't prepared to close it entirely as a through route for motor traffic.


There are precious few ways of getting in or out of Lordship Lane into and out of the roads that lie broadly north-east of it there - any one being blocked puts a lot of pressure on the others. Proper 2 way routes are now only Friern, Upland, Underhill and Woodvale. Coming from Forest Hill along London Road and Lordship Lane it is now only possible to get (legally) to that part of East Dulwich via Honor Oak Road and then Overhill - all other roads are either illegal to turn into, blocked-off or one-way the wrong way. Coming from Sydenham, Overhill is the first legal turn you get to. Channeling that traffic into Friern, Upland or Barry (particularly when these routes take you away from where you actually want to be) would be very unhelpful. For people who live in Overhill accessing it (if coming along Lordship lane or London Road) would require, again, a significant diversion through other small streets. No existing routes are ideal, to remove yet another would simply add further pressures to those that remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

+1 for what Penguin says. Since Melford became one way in part, the Overhill Road turning is the only way to get to this set of streets if you're travelling from FH towards ED. I responded to the original consultation which was a while back and as far as I know it's going ahead - and it does involve resurfacing of the road which is in a shocking state.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for your guys, in my benign dictatorship you can have residents exemptions to the no through road. I would also close Friern. That way motor traffic would have Barry and Underhill to get between Peckham Rye and Lorship Lane. More than enough and then we wouldn't have all the rat running that plagues that area.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That way motor traffic would have Barry and Underhill to get between Peckham Rye and Lorship Lane. More than enough and then we wouldn't have all the rat running that plagues that area.


Oh, thanks, as someone who lives in Underhill you are planning to get all the rat-running past my front door (and no doubt take the share of it away from yours)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah pretty much. Too much rat running and school running down Friern in the mornings and evenings. Sorry, it's for the greater good. With a bit of luck it'll achieve enough of a modal shift to cut out rat running all together.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed Wulfhound. Given the proximity of Barry to Friern (and CP road for that matter) there really is no good reason that the latter is still available for rat running. A few sensibly placed modal filters (like the one near the bottom of Friern) would do the trick without major expense.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buses are allowed to make the turn into Underhill coming from FH. Would it add that much more traffic to allow cars to do the same? I cycle so am fortunate that I can take the cycle crossing near Wood Vale and legally turn but on the occasions where I am with a driver it is really convoluted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a pedestrian, only allowing the 363 bus makes crossing Underhill Road safer as you only have to look to see if cars are coming from The Grove. If the right turn was allowed, it stop the controflow of traffic on the left lane towards Dulwich Common as cars go into the left lane, then back into the right lane.


Remember that TfL manage that section of Lordship Lane, where their interests are for the car user and not pedestrians as shown by their lack of interest in resolving the crossing issues at the LL/Dulwich Common junction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please don't force more rat running onto Underhill Road. Even with traffic calming measures most cars exceed the limit.


Potential idea - close Underhill halfway along so its no longer a "through" road, and residents can access from the appropriate end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

bobbsy Wrote:

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

> Please don't force more rat running onto Underhill

> Road. Even with traffic calming measures most cars

> exceed the limit.

>

> Potential idea - close Underhill halfway along so

> its no longer a "through" road, and residents can

> access from the appropriate end?



Why? If people have paid their car licence they are entitled to use the road.


There too much let's close this and that. The road has always been a thru road long before the recent influx of people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

spider69 Wrote:

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

> bobbsy Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Please don't force more rat running onto

> Underhill

> > Road. Even with traffic calming measures most

> cars

> > exceed the limit.

> >

> > Potential idea - close Underhill halfway along

> so

> > its no longer a "through" road, and residents

> can

> > access from the appropriate end?

>

>

> Why? If people have paid their car licence they

> are entitled to use the road.

>



What's this "car licence" you speak of?


The general movement to strategically close roads in certain places is mainly because people are sick of selfish, rat running motorists bringing noise, pollution, death and destruction to otherwise quiet residential streets. I hope we see a lot more of it in ED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

VED? The thing you pay to compensate everyone else from the emissions from your vehicle?


My point is that doesn't "entitle" you to use the road. And your paying of it certainly doesn't constitute and argument against traffic calming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

davidk Wrote:

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

> spider69 Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bobbsy Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Please don't force more rat running onto

> > Underhill

> > > Road. Even with traffic calming measures most

> > cars

> > > exceed the limit.

> > >

> > > Potential idea - close Underhill halfway

> along

> > so

> > > its no longer a "through" road, and residents

> > can

> > > access from the appropriate end?

> >

> >

> > Why? If people have paid their car licence they

> > are entitled to use the road.

> >

>

>

> What's this "car licence" you speak of?

>

> The general movement to strategically close roads

> in certain places is mainly because people are

> sick of selfish, rat running motorists bringing

> noise, pollution, death and destruction to

> otherwise quiet residential streets. I hope we

> see a lot more of it in ED.


was this a location film set for Mad Max. Magic. substitute Vikings for motorist and you can see things have not changed that much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • What would I do about cyclists?  The failed Tory manfesto commitment to train all kids was an excellent proposal.  Public information campaigns aimed at all road users, rather than singling some out, to more considerately share the road, as TfL have done, is welcome too. As for crunching vehicles.  I'd extend this to illegal ebikes, illegal e-scoooters (I think some local authorities have done this with the latter) but before that I would (a) legislate that the delivery companies move away from zero hours contracts to permanent employees and take responsibility for their training, vehicles and behaviour on the road.   More expensive takeaways are a price worth paying for safer roads and proper terms and conditions (b) legislate to register all illegal e-bikes and scooters so that when they are found on the road the retailer takes a hit, and clamp down on any grey markets.  If you buy an e scooter say from Halfords this comes with a disclaimer that it can only be used on private land with the owner's permission.
    • I know a lot of experts in the field and getting a franchise was a license to print money, that is why Virgin were so happy to spend lots of dosh challenging government ten years ago when they lost the West Coast franchise.  This will not be overnight, rather than when the franchise has come to the end. Government had previously taking over the operator of last resort when some TOCs screwed up. Good, at last some clear blue water between the parties.  Tories said they were going to do a halfway house, but I've not noticed.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_British_Railways   : "On 19 October 2022, Transport Secretary Anne-Marie Trevelyan announced that the Transport Bill which would have set up GBR would not go ahead in the current parliamentary session.[15] In February 2023, Transport Secretary Mark Harper re-affirmed the government's commitment to GBR and rail reform.[16] The 2023 King's speech announced the progression of a draft Rail Reform Bill which would enable the establishment of GBR, although it has not been timetabled in the Parliamentary programme.[5] The Transport Secretary Mark Harper later told the Transport Select Committee that the legislation was unlikely to reach Royal Assent within the 2023-2024 parliamentary session.[17]"
    • Can't help thinking that regardless of whether Joe wanted to be interviewed, the 'story' that Southwark News wanted to write just got a lot less interesting with 'tyre shop replaced with ... tyre shop'! 
    • Labour are proposing to nationalise the railways, (passenger trains but not fright)  Whilst it removes them from shareholders control, and potential profit chasing, is it workable or will it end up costing tax payers more in the long run?  On paper the idea is interesting but does it also need the profitable freight arm included to help reduce fares,? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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