Camberwell Grove - road closure / opening (Lounged)

[Mr Bojangles]

In case anyone is interested and affected by the road closure, there will be a joint council and public meeting to discuss whether the bridge should be re-opened at 7pm on 1st November to be held at the Camberwell Grove Chapel next to the bridge.

[figgins]

It's been closed for over a year now, hasn't it? Are the residents of "SE5's most desirable road" that bothered? Have they got used to it? Probably life is a lot quieter for them now.

[Mr Bojangles]

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.

[Maurice]

Keep it closed! One step closer to seperation from Camberwell for us Grove residents.

[Alan Dale]

Should definitely keep it closed. Much more pleasant along there recently.

I think they should completely ban cars from Camberwell Grove and have purely cycle and pedestrian access.

Maybe let the Ocado vans in between 9pm and 7am...

[Mr Bojangles]

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.

[Frisco]

Open it as soon as possible, there's no need at all for it to be closed. The only restrictions should be on vehicle width and weight.

[SeanMacGabhann]

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

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Does Oscar Wilde live?

[East Dulwich Angst]

Wasn't it was closed due to a weak bridge?

[PeckhamRose]

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

We've seen this problem with Forest Hill Road!

A roundabout surely would be better.

> The council want it to open with traffic lights to

> reduce the volume of traffic.

[Maurice]

Because dear rose, traffic can only go one way due to the bridge issues. So a light signals green for one direction to go, then the other. Imagine roadworks when one lane is closed.

[Frisco]

"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.

[SeanMacGabhann]

2 ways. Twicefold. Dually (etc etc)

by volume at anyone time

by discouraging people from driving

et voila

[Michael Palaeologus]

Full closure with some access for emergency vehicles.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Now the traffic goes past the council estate polluting them instead of past the nice houses so I guess the lib dems will vote to keep it shut.

[Mr Bojangles]

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.

[Frisco]

"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.

[downsouth]

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.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

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.

[Maurice]

If only the closure kept the riff raff out. At least we don't have the 'boom boom' cars and yes, we'd like to keep it that way.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Go on Maurice you can do better than that. Your condecending posts aren't usually as crass and clumsy as that.

[Administrator]

Stay on topic please

[Maurice]

I'm simply stating what many won't. We would like to see the closure continue and yes, a big part of it is we've come to appreciate the value of creating a ghetto of our own.

[lozzyloz]

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?