Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Do any of the local councillors have any idea how long the "temporary" traffic lights at the Colyton, Dunstan and Forest Hill Road Junction are going to remain and when the zebra crossing is going to be re-introduced to allow the removal of the "temporary lights". I know the lights were installed to allow big lorries to turn right into and left out Colyton Road during the water main work took place. As this is complete what is going to happen to the lights, is it down to council officers to arrange their removal?


The sooner these lights are removed, this will significanly improve the traffic flow on Peckham Rye and Forest Hill Road, thus improving movement of 63 and 363 buses.

Have you seen Renata's latest update on July 20 - in one of the threads that penguin68 refers to?


http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,704268,708677#msg-708677


Edited to say, I guess you must have because you replied to the thread further on. As I understand it, no decision is being taken on the lights for the foreseeable future (i.e. they stay) until the Council decide what plans they have for Forest Hill Road and surrounding roads generally.

Renata Hamvas Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The fate of these lights will depend on the

> outcome of the consultation on traffic

> flow/calming/crossing etc for the whole of Forest

> Hill rd from Colyton Junction up to One Tree Hill.

>

> Renata


Isn't this the answer dbboy?


Without wanting to pre-judge the outcome of this consultation, i'd hazard a guess that it's extremely unlikely these lights will be moved - they look pretty permanent to me!

dbboy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Councillors, I am STILL waiting for your response,

> Where are you hiding???????????????????????


They might be on holiday from checking all threads on public forums just incase input is

Demanded. They have ward surgeries why not goto one, or pm someone.

  • 3 weeks later...

I can now update that the consultation is due to start in 3-4 months (not much info, but this is what I have been told by council officers, zero details so far), this will be on the lights and various other measures for Forest Hill Rd to sort out crossing, speeding etc.


Renata

If the whole road is to be reviewed - fine. If it's just the Colyton Road lights - get rid of them. Traffic flow has been far worse and, in consequence, more dangerous including high speed rat runs.


A comprehensive review looking at the needs of road users (cars & motor bikes & cycles & buses), pedestrians, shops and residents on Forest Hill Road and adjacent roads should / could come up with a far better solution than the current mess.

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

    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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