Jump to content

Residents Melbourne Grove, Adys Road, Bromar Road - Traffic increases due to Champion Hill


Recommended Posts

Dun, with the increasing awareness of pollution I would be very surprised to see anyone taking a car to the local shops for a very short journey, so I don?t think the minimal impact on your very local car use would be a big consideration in warranting this scheme, versus the big impact from cars that to draw big detours around this closed link. Don?t get me wrong, I can completely see how it would be very nice to be in an almost car free area, yet still owning a car so you can drive when you want, but I really don?t think doing this everywhere is a scalesble solution for the realistic traffic needs of London.

It is so frustrating that electric car charging and free parking are not being advertised and scaled up as I feel this is just a much better longer term solution for the pollution problems. The council still seem to favour traffic calming

(Speed bumps etc) which slow cars down to a low gear and massively increase emissions.

Hi yes it is surprising the number of people who still think nothing of using the car to go to a local shop (and I am not including anyone with disabilities in this). Likewise it is surprising how many people still drive their children to school. Until people readjust their thinking (as we?ve had to re drink driving, wasting water, etc) then I think local govt needs to implement policies that people will be unhappy with until people accept that we all collectively need to change our thinking and use cars less and alternatives more. We all need to walk, bike, scoot, & use public transportation more. There will always be some occasions when cars are needed for health/work reasons but nowhere near as much as we currently use cars. So let local govt use trials like the one on a champion Hill to see what improvements can be made. It is a trial and everyone can give feedback.
In reality, all the Champion Hill road closure is doing is driving up air pollution on other residential roads and around our schools, stations and hospitals. The traffic hasn?t dematerialised, it has simply been displaced onto other roads, inhabited and used as a walking route by many more people than Champion Hill. Th? trial is causing tailbacks of up to 600m at morning peak times (yesterday all the way from Kings hospital to past the primary school on Dog Kennel Hill) with engines idling. Bus passengers are abandoning packed buses on Grove Lane to get to work, hospital or the station on time because their buses aren?t moving. This is completely unacceptable. I believe the scheme was first mooted in 2015 and rejected by TfL on the basis that it was likely to cause unacceptable delays to buses and cause tailbacks of up to 250m at a junction adjoining a primary school (Dog Kennel Hill School). The trial flies in the face of TfL?s modelling and of our understanding of how air pollution affects children living and going to school on busy roads.

Yes but it is early days and these delays etc are the things that make people reconsider how they use their cars. So if people doing short journeys then change and walk/bike/bus/train then it is worth the discomfort for the first few months. We need to change as a society and often people won?t change until they are made uncommfortable. It?s a trial, let?s see what happens 6 months and 12 months later.

It is unfortunate they started the trial so soon after the secondary school opened as there are now 2 new changes affecting traffic.

The secondary school was on site after Christmas though - this marked increase in traffic only started when the road closure was put in place.


Ordinarily i would agree that changes won't occur overnight and there will be short term pain, but in this scenario its so badly thought through and in making 1 residential street less congested / polluted it has pushed extra traffic onto roads where literally thousands of children attend schools. Also because it isn't a joined up approach, it has made driving 'a bit less convenient' but not so much that people are changing behaviour. I think unfortunatly that in this fact pattern it just can't be supportable.



Dun Wrote:

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

> Yes but it is early days and these delays etc are

> the things that make people reconsider how they

> use their cars. So if people doing short journeys

> then change and walk/bike/bus/train then it is

> worth the discomfort for the first few months. We

> need to change as a society and often people won?t

> change until they are made uncommfortable. It?s a

> trial, let?s see what happens 6 months and 12

> months later.

> It is unfortunate they started the trial so soon

> after the secondary school opened as there are now

> 2 new changes affecting traffic.

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 a while there was an unexpected glitch in planning laws that meant phone box operators (which is obviously mostly BT, but there were others) didn't need council permission to replace call boxes with small electronic billboards, so long as you could make calls from the billboard. I *think* the one on the corner of Croxted Rd and Park Hall Rd is an example of that. So the operators weren't always in a rush to remove the call boxes even when they didn't make any money on calls. I don't know if it still works like this. https://www.local.gov.uk/about/news/lga-call-crackdown-trojan-telephone-boxes-amid-900-cent-rise-some-areas
    • It is just a witch hunt. The estate agent has taken responsibility. FFS leave the poor woman alone. ETA: And please  stop calling her Rachel. You don't call Starmer Keir.
    • As said, why are you not eating humble pie for a non-story? I expect that scores of landlords are unaware or made mistakes in this territory.  And this is not just the Chancellor but a married couple.  It feels like you and others are taking joy in demonising her. The only question would be is the house suitable for renting out?  I expect it is, and if not that is up to Southwark to take action rather than keyboard warriors.  The only surprises are the expense of licensing - surely time for a thread on "is licensing a money maker for local authorities?".  I'm being facetious.  And that the cost of rental, which feels fairly reasonable based on this area. By all means go after rogue landlords.  Be my guest.  I was horrified to see some of the properties rented in London and beyond by family members.  Not all bad. Oh and another question.  Haven't I got better things to do than comment on this 'no story here' thread?  😁
    • Week 10 fixtures...   Saturday 1st November Brighton & Hove Albion v Leeds United Burnley v Arsenal Crystal Palace v Brentford  Fulham v Wolverhampton Wanderers Nottingham Forest v Manchester United Tottenham Hotspur v Chelsea Liverpool v Aston Villa   Sunday 2nd November West Ham United v Newcastle United Manchester City v AFC Bournemouth   Monday 3rd November Sunderland v Everton
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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