Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Southwark Council have opened a consultation on the closure of the bridge on Camberwell Grove ? make your views known. I've put it on this thread as it seems relevant to the area.


"Camberwell Grove bridge, near the junction with McNeil Road, has been closed to motor traffic since October 2016, due to structural failure. Repairs to the bridge will soon be completed by Network Rail, which will allow it to be reopened for small motor vehicles (under 3 tonne) with traffic lights allowing alternate one-way flows to cater for both north and south-bound traffic.

Since the bridge has been closed, the council has heard from some residents who favour retaining the closure on a permanent basis, as well as some residents who wish to see it reopened as soon as possible, principally due to the impact of additional traffic on other residential roads in the area.

However because it will make such an impact, the council wants to hear your views before taking a final decision on reopening the bridge.

Please answer our online consultation here by 30 October."


https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/camberwell-grove-bridge/consult_view/

Absolutely ridiculous. It's taken years for Network Rail to 'fix' this, which actually they haven't (as it's still only able to accommodate 1-way traffic). They should be heavily fined for the disruption they've caused. The council shouldn't be consulting on whether the road should be partially opened. Ask any road's residents whether they'd like their street closed to traffic, and a large number will say yes. Clearly, those on the street are going to respond in the greatest numbers, skewing the likely outcome. It's a way for the Council to avoid making difficult decisions and avoiding accountability.
This road was 'temporarily' (the claim at the time) reduced to one way traffic as the result of Network Rail's negligence. Why aren't the council insisting that NWR do the repairs properly and fully and return the road to two way traffic as it is meant to be. Why wasn't this chased up as a matter of urgency years ago. Instead, it's been allowed to deteriorate further and now may never reopen, or at best, be returned to the 'temporary' state of one way traffic.

I suspect the threads will be merged but as I said on the other thread, we used to live on the Grove and have experienced it closed, open to all traffic, open only to cars.


I think the vocal minority living on the Grove is really quite small but it's vital that people take part in the consultation and lobby to reopen it (to cars only.)

Just registered in favour of re-opening. The statistics on the link show Southwark's own analysis of increased traffic on surrounding streets. I note Bellenden is mentioned, which with the curve in the road and double parking near the shops can at times be difficult to navigate. It takes less than five minutes to register your views.

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

    • 🤣 re your mystic powers! Didn't want to just put a 🤣 on your post in case people thought I was laughing because the cat had been found!
    • Hopefully, they won't wash the changing room mats poolside in future so the filters won't be overworked keeping the water clean!!!
    • I agree with your sentiment, however you are mistaken about the Dulwich Estate. Their sole purpose is to make as much money as possible to give to the schools they support, as well as the almshouses and other historical buildings. They do not care about social housing (except subsidised housing for teachers of the schools), refreshing the area, low-rent studios, charming but affordable pub, etc. While they are a charity, their purpose is very constrained/focused and whatever they do with this site, it has to make money for them. It's not that they're being nasty or stingy, it's just what their statutes tell them they have to do. Note that I am not defending them, but knowing the above helps understand why they do what they do, even if sometimes it seems to go against the wishes of the local community. They are not answerable to the local community, and their only oversight is the charity commission and the courts. And of course, like all bureaucracies (esp those with limited oversight), they look after themselves very well. 
    • Perhaps responses are made by DM?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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