Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Basically the road is now divided in to three.

The park side is now all for parking.

The other two lanes are driving / riding / cycling up or down.


And there are pinch points up the road, which are now rather pointless since one lane is for parking.


I think it must be much more dangerous for cyclists, but as a biker I am loving the smooth new road quality.

It will mean that you can't bomb along it when caught behind the 343 or 484 but as someone mentioned about Barry Road, there's a khama element there when being made to slow down behind a bus!

By making one side double yellow lines along a stretch that was previously parking both sides, they've effectively made it easier for cars to speed up that side of the road (something I pointed out in the consultation process). Parking on both sides was in itself a form of traffic calming but it should be safer for cyclists now who won't need to swing out around parked cars (so maybe that was the thinking). I agree with PB that the pinchpoints seem to be designed to facilitate pedestrian crossing but then why not have just have zebra crossings?

I disagree, there won't be room for cyclists to do much overtaking when technically they only have one narrow lane, cars parked on one side and on-coming traffic on the other.

This may be why I have seen more cyclists on the pavement and the park recently. And I don't mind either as long as they don't ride aggressively and expect you to move, which some teenagers do, and most adults do not.

It's lovely having a smooth road to ride down! Enjoy it while it's there before the council put a stop to it!

MrPR Cyclist disagrees with this being safer for cyclists and so would I. Now everyone has just one lane. Putting a painted picture of a bicycle on tarmac does not make it safer for cyclists.



Renata Hamvas Wrote:

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

> These measure were implemented in order to make

> safer for cyclists. The current thinking is that

> informal crossing points are safer than zebras

> (I'm not expert on this!).

> Renata

I only cycle a short section of that road, but for what it's worth, the new surface is very welcome indeed. As for the parking only on one side, and how that affects traffic lanes/room for cyclists, the simple fact is that it is not a wide road. Two lanes of traffic, lots of which is buses, plus parking - that's never going to be a particularly nice place for cyclists to be.


My main concern has already been mentioned above, and that is the cars going up the hill away from the Peckham end who now see clear road and just put their foot down. It's happening already, I've seen it. Those calming devices dont' seem to pose much of an obstacle. Agree with DJKQ - zebra crossings make most sense. Those new crossings are not good enough.

I agree Tomy...the now 'clear' road travelling south seems likely to encourage speeding. A speed calming ramp has been put in at the Solomon's passage point so maybe that will counter that a little. I think we should wait and see how it works out especially with the busy summer coming and the increase in park use that brings. There were very few accidents before when cars, busses, cyclists and pedestrians had to negotiate parked cars that forced then to slow down. If we now see accidents occuring then there will be a good case for lobbying the council to reverse some of the changes.


What I don't want to see is the parking on the park side ever becoming pay and display though.

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

    • Link to petition if anyone would like to object: Londis Off-License Petition https://chng.it/9X4DwTDRdW
    • The lady is called Janet 
    • He did mention it's share of freehold, I’d be very cautious with that. It can turn into a nightmare if relationships with neighbours break down. My brother had a share of freehold in a flat in West Hampstead, and when he needed to sell, the neighbour refused to sign the transfer of the freehold. What followed was over two years of legal battles, spiralling costs and constant stress. He lost several potential buyers, and the whole sale fell through just as he got a job offer in another city. It was a complete disaster. The neighbour was stubborn and uncooperative, doing everything they could to delay the process. It ended in legal deadlock, and there was very little anyone could do without their cooperation. At that point, the TA6 form becomes the least of your worries; it’s the TR1 form that matters. Without the other freeholder’s signature on that, you’re stuck. After seeing what my brother went through, I’d never touch a share of freehold again. When things go wrong, they can go really wrong. If you have a share of freehold, you need a respectful and reasonable relationship with the others involved; otherwise, it can be costly, stressful and exhausting. Sounds like these neighbours can’t be reasoned with. There’s really no coming back from something like this unless they genuinely apologise and replace the trees and plants they ruined. One small consolation is that people who behave like this are usually miserable behind closed doors. If they were truly happy, they’d just get on with their lives instead of trying to make other people’s lives difficult. And the irony is, they’re being incredibly short-sighted. This kind of behaviour almost always backfires.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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