Jump to content

Left turn into woodvale


alice

Recommended Posts

Lowlander Wrote:

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

> Is there not one further up?

>

> Streetview suggests there is a no right turn sign

> as well as a no u-turns:

>

>


> 78,3a,75y,297.14h,77.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sUHSorD

> FsncvLe_J1mcfyXQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656


Oh yeah - didn't see that as I came out of Woodvale and walked my bike across the road. Bit odd to have a no right turn sign as it's impossible to do a right turn without going over the central reservation anyway! But the no U-turn sign by the first gap which is on your picture definitely wasn't there today. It must surely have been pinched or something, they can't seriously have decided U turns there are now permissible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Melford Road is better as one way, but they need to allow cars to turn right into Underhill Road - it's a nightmare if you are trying to get back towards Forest Hill Road from Sydenham, traffic is so heavy - if you go down Sydenham Rise the traffic can be backed up right to Sydenham Hill, if you go down Sydenham Hill you are forced to add to the huge weight of traffic going down Lordship Lane, all the way to Overhill Road.


This is one crazy bit of Road Traffic Management.


James, if you are going to get that No U Turn sign put back, maybe you can get the one lower down taken way whilst you are at it, to ease some of the awful congestion, and let people turn right into Underhill Road.


Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the right-turn into Underhill Road is potentially very dangerous. I could see it potentially backing traffic further back up the hill, and turning through traffic across the bus-lane is a recipe for accidents. These small side roads are not made for volume of traffic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Bobbsy


Last few times I have come back down Sydenham Hill I can't turn right to go down to the South Circular as cars

are backed right up to the junction trying to get through the lights at the bottom and on to the South Circular.

It's impossible.


So instead I go down, left onto South Circular, then have to go all the way to Upland Road before I can turn right.

Adding to the weight of traffic.


There needs to be an allowed right turn before that, if need be they should put in a proper turning with lights or something.


It's madness trying to get down and across the South Circular if you want to get over towards Nunhead.


Thanks James (not) for sorting out that No Right Turn sign.


Sigh.

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...