malumbu

It's a forum to discuss issues rather than hurl insults. I live very close to you so I am very well informed. If you give me your description I'll give you a cheery hello or wave when I cycle past, buying our paper from Wood Vale News, having a shandy at the Moor Park Hotel, catching a train from Honor Oak Station (not HOP), a Sunday stroll around Camberwell Old Cemetery, or when we are at the bus stop waiting for the P13, or 363.

A tedious thread that adds nothing to life. But on a separate matter perhaps some refresher driving lessons seem appropriate. I've driven and cycled on Sydenham Hill in recent times and have had no problems.

Popped into EDT tonight, as it was crowded and they didn't give me free booze and food on our arrival went elsewhere. It had a certain decrepit charm before. I'm sure it will be more profitable but I am less likely to visit. Pub sign is awful.... In my opinion.

@RocketsCan you please not ambush this thread. You, and your supporters, have plenty of other threads to talk about vehicle counters, and other esoteric stuff. I'm talking about three loosely parallel roads that could give access to the South Circular from traffic, from Peckham, parts of East Dulwich and the like One is essentially a glorified farm track - Wood Vale. This is in Lewisham. Traveling from Forest Hill Road involves up a steep hill, right at a nasty junction, or cutting through the Horniman area, full of narrow residential roads. The other two roads, Wood Vale and Underhill Road, are wide, and some would say leafy (a term often used on some threads to describe roads in the Village. They are in Southwark. You can no longer turn right into, and from the South Circular into the Southwark Roads. You would have been able to once. Lights were introduced on the SCR/Honor Oak after changes due to a pinch point. The junctions with Wood Vale and Underhill are no worse in layout than that with HOR. One could argue that they are better as there isn't a filling station/shop on the junction which complicates things. Buses already turn into and out of one of them. Lights could be introduced and phased with the junction with Sydenham Hill. This is not about closing roads, or banning cars, but just a more sensible layout. And @Penguin you have many other threads to complain about cyclists so leave it out on this one please.

Sorry to hear. I was surprised by some of the vehicles on Half Moon Lane itself, cutting you up and then turning left rather than simply waiting a couple of seconds for you to pass the junction. And due to being so wide the odd car hammers along Burbage. There are huge swathes of London where the traffic is fairly predictable and happy to share road space. And then you get the occasional road like the ones above. It tends to be wider roads that are relatively free flowing. Or the ones where there are sometimes a race to get through the lights - Herne Hill Road being a good example. Red Post Hill is so traffic calmed it can be a pain in whatever mode you are in,

My least favourite pub on the planet, and there are some awful places out there. I'll give it a miss.

You are going to have difficulties getting a meal in a greasy spoon for eight quid nowadays. Prices gone up by maybe 30 % since Covid

It's busy in the rush hour, it always has been. it will return to normal when the various roadworks have been completed. Some people do speed round there. It was my commute for many years. P13 is a very underrated bus and wish it was more frequent.

Oh dear. I've been there numerous times, it's hit and miss. Generally OK so I wouldn't judge it on one occasion. Perhaps they aren't great at scaling up for sunny days. The Woodhouse used to be like that when it was a great pub in the old days. Sun would come out and families turn up, with no extra staff. It's horrid now You can order the Backyard pizza at the Castle and I expect they still have Van Dough at the Blythe; under Co you could also bring your chip supper into the garden.

Do you have anything useful to say? Otherwise just stick to your usual hobby horses. Be my guest. I thought a time of reflection may have changed things. It appears not to have done.

The closure many years ago had a detrimental impact sending traffic up Honor Oak Road; in parts a glorified farm track and of course the location of Fairlawn school, which some of you may, or may have, sent your kids to. The wide leafy boulevards of Wood Vale and Underhill Road are much better designed as through roads. @Rockets perhaps could you check your sources to see whether it was a botched consultation by TfL or Southwark that led to this? I sense that this would be a better thing to campaign on, and improvements to Brenchley Gardens, than other recent road changes by Southwark and TfL

@Rockets As you are very interested in the Sydenham Hill cycle lane, what do you reckon to Brenchley Gardens? I think it is awfully designed, the narrowing, which is intended to slow motorised vehicles down, is a hazard to cyclists as there is not enough room for vehicles to pass cyclists with appropriate room if there are vehicles coming the other way, Cyclists should therefore adopt the primary position, although this seems to p some motorists off. Surely you will agree that Southwark has got this wrong, and on this occasion a dedicated cycle lane, or alternatively shared footpath, would be appropriate. This is about the design of the road irrespective of how motorists use it.

Good heavens, it's been relatively quiet on this forum but since you have started posting again it's gone crazy, From a quick tally today across three threads you have posted 18 times Exceeded by FM - around 24 and Earl 28, although much of this was a ding dong between the two. I'm a mere 8, one more than Cycle Monkey and twice that of Snowy. I doubt if the debate has moved on one jot, and what else does it say? Me included there are other things going on in life, not only on the geopolitical front but, spoiler alert, a very close University Challenge tonight.

It's meant to slow the traffic. Narrows the road, so naturally slows the traffic. That is because before it was a race track up to the cameras. Much nicer now.

I think they are fairly reasonable in this situation.

They've been sold a dream, a lifestyle dream. Not one person owning/running a SUV has posted on this thread to say why they love them. I wager whichever side of this debate you are on, you don't have one. Don't be naive to believe that the manufacturers of virtually any product are not trying to get you to upsale/upscale/gold plate etc, that's how they make the greatest profit In the days before Top Gear got silly, they did an excellent programme on the ideal city car, comparing the main models on sale, and finishing with a line of Fiat 500s, as this ticked all the boxes.

That is getting tedious. Why are you just pursuing your political hobbyhorse?

Small EVs should be the future in metropolitan areas. The first EV I drove was a Leaf. It was wonderful. Only surpassed by the first time I went on electrically assisted pedal cycle. Around the same time I test drove a Tessla model X or S, around the dealership in Shepherds Bush. That was just silly, totally unneeded in the urban environment. But as I pointed out elsewhere, how has much of the industry responded? By developing large SUV variants. Shame on them.

Surely you are not that naive, most politicians put a positive spin when speaking in the public. How have you stopped the small boats? This government has a record investment in surveillance of the English Chanel. But has it stopped the small boats? So ULEZ is good for London. That will do me.

Fortunately this forum is very helpful in pointing out consultations. Thanks for this. I don't need to be told by any group to respond, I am not a number I am a free human.

It has improved air quality, it's ludicrous to say otherwise. The three phases of ULEZ have reduced the number of, and mileage of, older polluting cars. Unless they travel around London, and in this case it is the home counties' problem, then there is nowhere for older more polluting cars to go without paying, unless they are a minority of those obsessed with short journeys that miss out any of the numerous ULEZ cameras. Can you not just agree that in principle it is a good concept.

That's worrying, who are these activists? Why have they come to our part of SE London? Unlike me I bet they don't even know the roads affected, use the shops, the 176/185/P13, drink in the Castle, occasionally go to DHFC (much more in the past). Out of interest who amongst us actually live on Melbourne Road? I'm a mile or so away but it was once one of my commuting routes and I now use it when over at TJ.

As in my earlier post I can't be assed to read the report but with a reduction of older polluting vehicles this has to be good for those living on the South Circular as this was formerly a boundary road. I couldn't give a fig about the outer boroughs, were they to introduce 20mph on all residential roads and provide more infrastructure for cycling I may think differently.

Ah, good reminder to post about that cycle lane. It's as much as narrowing the road to deter speeding, to pretty good effect. Rather than criticise I'd congratulate Southwark for some joined up thinking. What is your problem with that, surely there must be something you like about Southwark. As a cyclist do you not welcome safer cycle routes?

Yes it is right to discourage unnecessary journeys and smarter use of vehicles. Suggesting that the authorities make road repairs and improvements longer is conspiracy theory territory.