kford

"There is no doubt that they reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries on the roads." There is no proof whatsoever that this particular type of traffic enforcement camera saves lives. They are not calibrated to be speed cameras, so can only enforce minor and non-endorsable offences like no-left and no-right-turn violations, box junction blocking and parking. And how will hiding in the bushes at ED's most dangerous junction prevent an accident?

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > But in 2011 does anyone NEED a warning that > traffic enforcement is in operation. Why can't you > just take it as read? Because legally, there has to be a warning. That's why they used to tie their signs on to nearby lampposts. There are permanent ones fixed on LL now.

I've written before on here (and to Southwark) about these Orwellian devices blocking the bus lane at the junction of ED Grove and parked dangerously on the LL junction with Hansler Road. The contractors seem to have got the message as they're now almost always parked outside SMBS, in a parking bay. And they still leave their engines running to power their equipment, which itself is an offence attracting a ?20 fine (the 2010 Southwark Transport Plan wants to raise this to ?120).

"There is actually a designated parking spot (just inside the park on the left hand side) for this said car on the peckham rye/east dulwich road traffic light junction. " Hidden in the bushes too. So much for prevention rather than cure.

They are genuine, but you can find what they do cheaper online.

Postmen are trained to, for the reasons listed above.

N/bound traffic would be hemmed in by the kerb and slowed down by the red light, but I see what you mean, it could hold back the n/bound flow, allowing s/bound traffic to turn right, and there is an 'unofficial' southbound left and right-hand lane there already.

I'm with PGC, the Crawthew Grove one is a wasted opportunity - it should be located north of the ED Grove junction to ease crossing there. In the proposed location, on a red light, it will encourage vehicles to pull out of the traffic queue to turn right into ED Grove, something that happens regularly at the crossing by Denmark Hill station. Dangerous for pedestrians crossing, bikers and cyclists filtering and motorists turning left out of ED Grove.

PeckhamRose Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > English spelling teachers would be ideal....! Well, they say opposites attract...

More here: http://southsouthwarkbusinessassociation.blogspot.com/2011/05/new-crossing-proposals-for-lordship.html

In our street, cans & glass go together, plastic separate. Paper/card (but not cartons) in the bag/spare blue box. They don't collect otherwise.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I think the schools money has all been spent on > free meals for rich kids? Ha! Fair point.

Huguenot: "All hail the council" Well, you can pay for it. I'd rather the ?500k be spent elsewhere, like on schools.

@James B: "Hi kford, Referinig people to a campaign against street lighting is hardly likely to be a balanced website." I added 'to be taken with a pinch of salt' until I read the paragraph aspidistra highlighted.

Too big a unit base for commercials or magazine TV, so probably TV drama or film, like Spooks.

Try here: http://www.britastro.org/dark-skies/crime.html I think they may have been referenced on here before.

one being the fatality when the car hit > the kerb and flipped. Yep, this happened on an empty dark road at 5 in the morning, involving a driver who collided with... some traffic calming kerbing. That would almost be as spurious as Wiltshire council installing a speed camera on the basis of a fatality that involved a bloke throwing himself off a bridge onto the carriageway. "The fataliaty was such extreme driving that I really don't think its representative." Absolutely.

On the way home tonight, at 5.45-ish, saw a bemused looking van driver looking a the front of his smashed Transit Connect at the top of DKHill, with the front wheel completely ripped off. No sign of any other vehicles involved, but an unmarked police Mondeo came blasting past as I rode down towards LL.

The main path in Peckham Rye Park is also part of the London Cycle Network and is signposted as such, but a bit of courtesy never goes amiss. When I'm riding my nipper to nursery, I always keep left and slow down when passing other path users. Simple stuff really. And I've got a bell.

A40 right onto Baker Street, cross Oxford Street, turn 2nd right into Lee's Place mews (secret taxi route), onto Park Lane - Victoria - Vauxhall - Camberwell New Road - Grove Lane - Dog Kennel Hill. Best after 8pm.

Indeed. Bank holidays might offend people who keep their money under the mattress.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I hardly need to point out that a reduction in car > parking along this busy route will improve traffic > flow. Indulgent motorists parallel parking is a > major cause of obstruction for other motorists. I agree. Doesn't need ?500k worth of 'improvements' to achieve this though - just a tub of yellow paint and a traffic warden.

Lacon Road is two roads up Northcross Road away, with Blue Mountain Cafe at the top

Another reason shared spaces improve the flow of traffic is that they seldom use traffic lights. Can't see them being removed from Grove Vale

I agree. And I wish the OP would re-name this thread 'The ?1/2m Grove Vale Road Narrowing Experiment'.