spider69

Do not understand why Southwark should have to hold a consultation on a major artery road and one that has been such and used as such since the first day of construction. Southwark should ,as they have stated, spend the ?!7,000 and reopen the bridge as it was before and which worked well and caused no problems. It does not need a consultation to do this. I would have thought common sense would have seen that and appreciated that is the answer. From my observations Bellenden has only had large amounts of traffic during the early morning rush hour and then it falls away to very little during a greater part of the day. This volume is again due to the bridge closure. Agree with edcam cyclists did not seem to have any problems using the bridge whilst it was open. This consultation I feel is just smoke and mirrors to hide what Southwark really has planned already.

As this is a consultation just how wide have the consultation documents been distributed? Camberwell Grove I suspect would have been fully covered. How about the rest of the area. Why are there no local notices advertising this consultation. Is this another Southwark consultation based on % returns when most people will not be aware? It is a main road artery and should be opened to all traffic.

Dave the cooker man and other appliances. 100% 07506104882 Ace

ADMIN. There are 2 threads running on this can they be combined. Thanks

Dear all I am sending you this email as you have previously commented on the current closure of the Camberwell Grove Railway Bridge. As you may have been aware from the previous website article, the intention was to undertake a full consultation prior to the September Community Council meetings and present the results at those meetings. However, we have only recently received the full traffic survey results for the diversion routes and the surrounding roads. These will require a detailed analysis in order to include a summary within the consultation pack. This will ensure the pubic are provided with sufficient details to make informed choices on the future traffic arrangements across the bridge, and make any appropriate comments which can be considered at the November Community Council meetings. The delay in consultation will not effect the timescales for any potential opening of the bridge, if this should be the final decision. I have uploaded a revised website article which hopefully is self-explanatory: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/bridges-subways-and-walls?chapter=2 All comments received so far have been collated and will be added to, either as a result of the latest article, or as a result of the consultation. Please could any responses to the article be sent to the highways team at [email protected]. Regards Dale Dale Foden Highway Maintenance Manager Environment and Social Regeneration - Highways Division London Borough of Southwark Third Floor ? Hub 2 160 Tooley Street SE1 2QH London Where is the consultation pack?

Southwark's page on the consultation does give repairs costs if my memory serves we correctly.

Following this thread I have asked neighbours if they have received notification of the consultation. As many of them live in 3 flat conversation with one letterbox they have said they have only received one form. One one person picks it up, no interest it goes in the bin. 3 votes less. Grove Park, Chadwick Road receive no benefit from the bridge being closed. Most days it resembles a motorway with jams. Agree less advertising gives those with an agenda to push for what they want. Out of interest just how many leaflets were handed out and where?

Why should it be different to what they said on camera and reported in the media?

I am 71 and was also due for my diabetic annual check.

I went for my flu jab, not mentioned at all and I have diabetes. This at DMC

Each residence is only allowed 3 permits.

"With regard to your comment on majority decision the DKH result has just been set out. 2471 letters sent out 365 replies overall. 15% Unfortunately as Southwark look for a response rate of 10% overall that have declared that they will push for full implementation of the CPZ based on yes percentages. However when one looks closely at the figures it is a joke. For our road. 98 houses in total, 14 replies, 9 for, 5 against. The against vote does not count those responses that were received outside of the consultation. I know people who only found out late and emailed and had their vote rejected which would have pushed the against vote up. If a decision to implement is carried on 3 or 4 votes it does not reflect what is correct from such a small response based on the total properties involved.. People should have voted but I only came across the consultation by accident how many other were in the same boat but my no vote was rejected. Many of the residents are only passing through by renting so have no interest. No matter how small the yes vote is if it means they have one vote majority in favour on very small turnouts they will take it as a yes vote. If people would like to take the time to look at PDF1 report for the DKH CPZ or get Southwark to send it to you you will see what aa farce this has been. Before the usual response is posted "you should have voted" perhaps Southwark should have looked at the returns and said this decision on these numbers covering such a large area is wrong. But they want a CPZ's all over the Borough. Permit fees, parking fines, tow away fines etc etc. Looking at plans the number of double yellow lines, meter parking cutting down existing parking makes your head spin. This will be coming to an area near you very soon." The above comment was made regarding our road, unfortunately if Southwark has a small opening to impose a CPZ they will and as someone has said once in it stays. The vast % of the 98 houses are rented flats, 3 flat conversions, so only 3 house's based on the above returns polling yes will get you a CPZ. The other smart Southwark move is when they say other roads are CPZ's and this will push traffic to other roads so they will have to be CPZ's as well regardless if the yes vote is a 1 vote majority. Common sense seems to go out of the window. Yellow lines over cross overs will reduce parking even more. Even if the cross overs have been in place since the houses were built in 1875. Yellow lines to stop accidents they say. Have never ever seen an accident or even close to one in all the years I have lived here which are many Read the consultation result of the DKH survey and you will see you do not have a chance to get it reversed. Good luck but I think you are peeing in the wind with Southwark.

As long as Southwark get the min % they have laid down to get a CPZ regards less of what makes sense you are legged over seven ways to Sunday. Common sense went out of the window long ago. It will only get worse

Double yellow lines as far as I can recall.

Unfortunately Chadwick Road and Grove Park are the last part of the jigsaw that will see the completion of a full CPZ for this part of the neighbourhood. Southwark wants all areas to be revenue producing so I suspect you are correct and it will be pushed through no matter what. It would be interesting if people could comment on this as if there is no response Southwark will have won again although from talking with other residents it is not required or wanted. What is interesting, to me at least, is there is a lot of Southwark interest focused on this CPZ plan overall and the closure and reopening of the bridge on Camberwell Grove. Southwark have a plan and will push it through no matter what. It will happen if people do not comment or respond. Southwark have said if residents do not want it, it will not happen. If you do not respond and others in favour do it will happen as per their plan. The consultation has closed if you did not respond those that have an agenda have won.

"The dispute between the residents of Camberwell grove and those of Lyndhurst Grove seems a dispute between two sets of NIMBYs: no one wants traffic on their road, but there is no consideration whatsoever for what might be best for the city as a whole, nor why..." I do not think it is a case of being a NIMBY, apart from the Grove residents as most other people just want the bridge to open to get traffic flows back to how it was before this recent closure. Until the bridge closed there was not a problem regarding traffic flows in all the surrounding areas. Bridge open..no problems, bridge closed.. massive problems.

In an article in todays Southwark News regarding the coal line the designers of the coal line have stated "Although the proposed nine news houses would not impede the coal line route, Nick and his team was surprised his team was not consulted and was "surprised" to learn of Bluecrofts plans only on Monday despite details of the Coal Line proposals being in the public domain since 2016" Why is the heading of this thread shown as The Coal Line is under threat from developers? when it appears it is not. Interesting article in the Southwark News which should be read to give a better overview of the whole matter.

Out of rush hour this system is virtually empty. Unfortunately the closure of Camberwell Grove has funnelled large amounts of traffic through this system at the moment. If it was not there it would be chaos. I also do not find it a threat. RH idea should have been thought of a long while ago. uNfortunately Southwark has put in a pavement which has narrowed the road. Perhaps the local Cllrs might have put this forward to residents however up till now no contact has been made in relation to Bellenden Road consultations. As others have mentioned there has never been accidents on this system.

Auntie Bessies in duck fat

craigyboy71 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Oh well.... I'll prepare myself for the HGVs and > the demolition work! Has anybody noticed just how traffic monitor strips have appeared on roads across the borough? Southwark will keep on going this until they get the right numbers to push through traffic and road controls. Since Camberwell Grove has been closed surrounding streets have these across the road. Traffic will of course get greater, more ammuntion for their cause to close roads to traffic. It is time residents took back control of their neighbourhoods and not faceless officials in the Council decide what they want. It seems to have got worse since the continuing reorganisation when experienced Officers have been pushed out for less experienced and cheaper staff. If you don't react don't complain.

Could have paid wages for a time whilst sitting in a coffee shop. What is the story?

I find it very strange that you have suddenly appeared on this forum. You have never written before and have not commented on this scheme or advised of meetings that gave taken place. What I and other residents find out of order is this matter is this matter was agreed at the last consultation and yet Southwark and you as Cllr have decided to alter the plan yet again. It is very hard to ever find out when these meetings take place and I suspect the information is only given out to those whose agenda mirrors the Council. Why are Dutch Consultants being used in this instance when local residents are fully aware what is required. The system that has been in place since 1989 works well and has been fully tested. All that is required is the junctions be modified. When Consultants are employed it usually means people, Southwark Officer in this case, can say when it does not work, we took expert advice. Not my fault Guv. Surely the highly paid Southwark Officers are capable of understanding what is required. Please tell us why you have decided to make yourself known regarding this matter and not from the start? Southwark has an agenda and it will go forward.

This is how the Council normally works. Get a small group of people and then put their views which mirrors their own views forward as that of the majority. As has been pointed out before very few people ever heard of the scheme from the start. The road scheme has worked well since it was put in in 1989 and would only have need looking at the junctions although they still work if used properly.

Why have Southwark employed and no doubt paid Dutch Traffic Consultants to advise on a road system that local people have already been consulted on and their views were agreed to at the last consultation. Bellenden Road is not part of Holland, the traffic and flow make up is completely different and the local residents who live and use this road system have spoken as to what is needed. Southwark Council officers have their own agenda regarding roads and traffic and will do and use whatever it takes to get these plans through. Why after the last consultation are they still trying to push this through? think about it. Apart from inserting new crossings at all the junctions nothing more needed to be done. As the money came from a grant for this scheme it looks like they have to spend it or lose it or at worst have to pay it back if things are not fully implemented. This will continue until Southwark wears everyone down and get their way. Makes you wonder why the some parts of the Holly Grove works were never completed in full. A waste of time effort and money from a grant that could have been used elsewhere.

Why does all this traffic instruction have to be spelt out these days when in the past it seemed to come naturally. As someone said this roundabout has been there since the creation of time. Do people these days always need to be instructed or lead?