Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Removing parking and pedestrian refuge islands to make the traffic more free flowing on these rat runs but then countering this with more speed humps is very old school highway engineering.

The ideal would be reduce traffic. This is how they successfully make cycling on back roads more popular - and has been done to great effect in Hackney.

Either a hard blockage or CCTV monitoring. I'd favour the latter allowing Southwark registered cars to pass unhindered. Non-Southwark cards during rush hours pay a fee.

James - Thanks, I agree. Also speed humps massively increase the noise and pollution from the traffic from the braking, accelerating and banging over the humps. Is there any chance you could push officers to adopt a more sensible approach?


It would be nice if the Lane Ward councillors were engaged on this topic in any way, have you spoken to them about this?

Alex - last year when Southwark were consulting on the Bellenden one-way one of the Lane councillors did post on the thread - user is Jali1, you could try to get in contact with her.



This is what she said at that time:


A couple of points on the Bellenden Road Consultation


Hi everyone, I am a Lane Ward Councillor living on Chadwick Road in the middle of the Bellenden Road area. I have been actively working with residents and the council to find a way forward. As a mum of two young children I would like more road safety measures to be put in. I am hopeful that the consultation, the council and Dutch - Mobycon consultants will come up with a sensible solution that will help pedestrians, cyclists, drivers and public transport to co exist in a way that works better than it does now and helps all of us to stay safe.


I attended the meeting last night and took down many questions and notes, all of which I have fed back to the cabinet member, fellow councillors and officers at the council. I can confirm that they ate all committed to finding the best way forward for all of us.


I understand Mobycon are producing a report of their consultations and ideas to date. As soon as this has been produced the council will come back with the next steps.


I remain positive that we can all work together to make the Bellenden Road area better and safer for all residents. If you have any further issues that you would like me to flag with my fellow councillors, the cabinet member and the council officers, then please do email me on [email protected] and put Bellenden Road in the title.


With thanks and best wishes, Jasmine Cllr Ali

Most of this proposal for a 'flagship cycle route', first announced in 2014, seems to be painting a few cycle logos and hoping it will make a big difference. Yeah right.


But the bit around the Bellenden one-way system is bonkers. Separating cyclists from drivers then merging them again at junctions is about as stupid an idea as is imaginable. The official design report on the scheme even states: 'there are safety concerns at the location where the protected cycle lane merges with general traffic. It is important to ensure sufficient visibility and a slow operating speed to enable cyclist and car driver to anticipate each other?s movements.' Do councillors really think what would effectively be a game of chicken is going to encourage kids to cycle?

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/roadworks-and-highway-improvements/street-improvements/bellenden-gyratory


The other fundamental problem is that it's a terrible use of road space: the cycle tracks would be too narrow to cope with rush hour cycle flows (even before any further increase), while loading vehicles would block the reconfigured carriageways. The report acknowledges 'the lack of road width would result in issues with delivery vans and minibuses stopping in the roadway. These would block traffic, causing congestion. The next design phase should address these issues by providing enough loading zones at appropriate locations. This could also be enabled by designing loading zones that are located partially on the footpath'

That was back in 2016 and the problem has just been brushed under the carpet.


Southwark Cyclists are highlighting the problems here https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/new-southwark-spine-proposals/ and calling for people to respond to the consultation before 4 December by rejecting the proposals and taking action to both remove the one-way system and reduce rat-running.

https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/demand-a-safer-spine/

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

    • Per Cllr McAsh, as quoted above: “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution. " Is anyone au fait with the Clean Air Act 1993, and  particularly with the state of 'Smoke Control' law and practice generally?  I've just been looking  through some of it for the first time and, afaics, the civil penalties mentioned  were introduced into the Clean Air Act, at Schedule 1A, in May 2022.  So it seems that, in this particular,  it's a matter of the enforcement policy trailing well behind the legislation.  I'm not criticising that at all, but am curious.  
    • Here's the part of march46's linked-to Southwark News article pertaining to Southwark Council. "Southwark Council were also contacted for a response. "Councillor James McAsh, Cabinet Member for Clean Air, Streets & Waste said: “One of Southwark’s key priorities is to create a healthy environment for our residents. “To achieve this we closely monitor legislation and measures that influence air pollution – our entire borough apart from inland waterways is designated as a Smoke Control Area, and we also offer substantial provision for electric vehicles to promote alternative fuel travel options and our Streets for People strategy. “We as a council support the work of Mums for Lungs and recognise the health and environmental impacts of domestic solid fuel burning, particularly from wood-burning appliances. “We are currently updating our Enforcement Policy and changes will allow for the issuing of civil penalties ranging from £175 to £300 for visible smoke emissions, replacing the previous reliance on criminal prosecution.  “This work is being undertaken in collaboration with other London boroughs as part of the pan-London Wood Burning Project, which aims to harmonise enforcement approaches and share best practice across the capital.” ETA: And here's a post I made a few years ago, with tangential relevance.  https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/278140-early-morning-drone-flying/?do=findComment&comment=1493274  
    • The solicitor is also the Executor. Big mistake, but my Aunt was very old, and this was the Covid years and shortly after so impossible to intervene and get a couple of close relatives to do this.  She had no children so this is the nephews and nieces. He is a single practitioner, and most at his age would have long since retired - there is a question over his competence Two letters have already gone essentially complaining - batted off and 'amusingly' one put the blame on us. There are five on our side, all speaking to each other, and ideally would work as a single point of contact.  But he has said that this is not allowed - we've all given approval to act on each others behalf. There are five on her late husband's side, who have not engaged with us despite the suggestion to work as a team, There is one other, who get's the lion's share, the typicical 'friend', but we are long since challenging the will. I would like to put another complaint together that he has not used modern collective communication (I expect that he is incapable) which had seriously delayed the execution of the will.   I know many in their 80s very adept with smart phones so that is not an ageist comment. The house has deteriorated very badly, with cold, damp and a serious leak.  PM me if you want to see the dreadful condition that it is now in. I would also question why if the five of us are happy to work together why all of us need to confirm in writing.             The house was lived in until Feb 23, and has been allowed to get like this.
    • Isn’t a five yearly electricity safety certificate one of the things the landlord must give for a legal tenancy?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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