Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes. Generally, CG residents want it to remain closed and, not surprisingly, residents in the surrounding areas which have been adversely affected by the closure want to see it opened.


The council want it to open with traffic lights to reduce the volume of traffic.

I'm not sure completely banning cars is an option. Wouldn't it great if we could do that everywhere. Imagine LL without any cars. How pleasant would that be? For a start you could sit outside the Bishop without feeling like you are smoking a car exhaust. The reality is we are stuck with cars so it's a case of how best to manage this. In terms of the Grove, some form of traffic management to reduce volume as proposed by the council seems like a sensible compromise.


When I read statements like this (which is often) I'm never sure if I agree or disagree. The fatalism destroys me but the realism brings out the practical side of me...


Cars are like a lot of things with me - Xfactor, Coldplay, Cars, The Sun (maybe not that last one eh) - I wouldn't be so bothered by any of them if the people who consumed them also did OTHER things


Don't write back in green ink and say that you do do other things - I already know that - I'm talking about the majority

"Ggggrrrrrrrr traffic lights. How do traffic lights REDUCE the volume?"


They could only reduce the volume of traffic crossing the bridge at any one time, thus reducing the volume of traffic on the bridge at any one time. If they're not going to renew the bridge, and it can't be strengthened to take the previous weight of traffic, this seems like a sensible option. However, full closure to traffic is not an option as far I'm concerned, and it would be interesting to hear the views of the emergency services on such a proposal.


As for being stuck with the car in the future, we are undoubtedly stuck with independent personal transport of some means or another, whether is will be cars in the future is anyone's guess.

Funnily enough, I think the councillors (for south camberwell) that are participating in the campaign for closure actually live on the Grove.


The Bridge is fixed but can only take a reduced volume of cars which is why there needs to some form of traffic control (lights or otherwise). You'd thing the CG residents would be happy with that given that it should lead to less cars on the road.

"Funnily enough, I think the councillors (for south camberwell) that are participating in the campaign for closure actually live on the Grove."


I hope they declare their personal interest in this issue.


"You'd thing the CG residents would be happy with that given that it should lead to less cars on the road."


No, they won't be happy unless they get their way. They'll probably be wanting CG to become gated next, to keep out any riff raff. If closure goes ahead it will almost certainly be a class issue, as it hasn't happened anywhere else in the area (other than at Kings), but then other roads don't house the local MP and similar people.

For me - a passing traveller on the way home - it has become another reason why it takes me an extra 10-15 minutes to get home on what should be a 20 minute drive (tops). It's as unenvironmentlaly friendly as the rest of these measures which bottleneck traffic on linear roads.


And no I'm not anti - green just realistic.

The Lib Dem Councillors who lived in a nice road near my old estate got it closed off with the result that all the traffic went through our council estate. In the fight to get it re-opened one admitted to living in the area benefitted and I forced them to admit the personal interest of one that had moved since the closure, but who lived there at the time. She still had a daughter living there.


The people in the nice houses and new gated developments attended the meeting in force, and despite the danger to our kids on our estate campaigned hard to keep their peace and quiet.


They make me sick.

In Johannesburg there are a lot of gated communities with 24hr security for the wealthy. Kind of Golden Jails. Then the slightly less well of whites in some areas have decided to erect booms across the road to divert traffic and improve security. Totally illegal of course and certainly Jo'burg (not alone) is a series of segregated ghetto's.


Maurice are you suggesting this is the future?


If you erect a high fence then you must have something to hide and that makes me curious so I might decide to come over the top. Then you might install razor wire and an electric fence and I'll go and get a AK47.


Think again. Surely society needs to be more inclusive and less exclusive if we're to solve some of the issues that make you feel unsafe and insecure?

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

    • For every person like OP that moans their doorbell was rung and there was a knock on the door, there's someone else moaning that they didn't hear the delivery drivers. If you've ever done delivery work you'll know that loads of people's bells don't work. The delivery drivers probably goes to a hundred doors a day: press bell, knock door, drop package, move on. If you don't like delivery drivers, insist on delivery by Royal Mail where the workers have wages and a union - or just stop ordering shit online that's artificially cheap. But most of us (me included) don't want that
    • If someone comes to my house and bangs my door and slams my gate, I'd speak to them about it nicely and ask if they would please not do that. And then subsequently less nicely if they keep doing it, ending in reporting them.  We don't slam doors at home and I don't put up with that either. I can see us moving to a culture where we bribe drivers to be nice by tipping them, but we shouldn't have to. It's not necessary - does not matter if they are on minimum wage or not, or if society means that delivery services are outsourced or whatever reason anyone would like to concoct.     
    • We’ve got a gap on the roof of our shed that needs patching  don’t want to buy a huge roll so hoping someone has some leftover  happy to collect/reimburse 
    • I never said I thought it was targeted or deliberate. There also has never been a “stand off” or confrontation, we’ve spoken to them in a friendly manner about it. Our experience is they don’t seem to care. That’s the frustrating thing for us, if someone politely raises a concern at least take a second to reflect. Treat others how you would want to be treated.  I don’t want them to lose their job, far from it. But considering it could cost me a days work to fix any damage, I’m within my right to try prevent it.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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