Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm not sure I now really understand the purpose of the Rye Lane closure with the changes that have been put in place from last week - not sure if this is formal or informal but every morning, someone from Conway removes the barrier at the top end of the Lane to allow delivery trucks and vans down for a few hours during peak times, and every evening (after about 7.30/8pm) one of the barriers is removed again allowing car and small vans access.


I can see why this is needed for shop deliveries, but the only vehicles that aren't allowed down at some point are buses, which definitely is stopping people from travelling to the area to shop just based on the numbers you see on the street.


Generally it's working well as a shared space for pedestrians and cyclists but both groups need to be prepared to jump out the way when a van comes barrelling towards you at speed on a supposedly vehicle-free space. I was cycling home about 9pm last night when a delivery van clipped a young guy on one of those electric scooters - the van didn't see him and the scooter wasn't expecting a van to be in the road. Luckily both were fine and no damage done but it's going to happen if the space isn't really vehicle free as intended.

They were doing this for the Scaffolders originally (someone has scaffolding up in the closed area)


It seems to have expanded a bit - maybe the delivery drivers picked up on it. A certain pool bar owner was interviewed in Southwark News too about deliveries and taxis.


https://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/do-they-want-to-kill-the-business-peckham-nightclub-owner-hits-out-at-rye-lane-closures/

Not sure why this is hidden in the Covid section - closing roads was happening in any case and I almost missed on this thread aka "we hate cyclists".


I've never been fond of the pedestrians walking across the cycle path, buses driving on it and taking down the curb, the poor sequencing of the lights and the way that many motorists ignored that Rye Lane was supposed to be bus only and would compound matters by parking in the double yellows. Well we have one of those out of the way.


Really enjoying the road closures and look forward to the time when public transport returns to some sort of normality and we have less cars on the road. Well done Southwark, and some of the other inner boroughs.

Oh my word, I've been using the wrong spelling of kerb. I must curb my enthusiasm.


Perhaps you might not have noticed that there has been a big decline of the use of public transport since March. In the early days it was great when the roads were empty, not so great now with cars back on the road. So you have got a difficult dynamic of closing roads when car use is rising and capacity/use of public transport has fallen.


I'm confused about your general point on normality. I shouldn't have used the term, which is relative rather than absolute. But I do look forward to a new normality when there is less use of, and dependence on, cars. I hope my syntax is correct this time but by all means do correct me again.

Was it you who tried to mow me down on an electric scooter Clutter Queen? I'm gently cycling down Rye Lane, getting a good feeling about how the pedestrianisation is going, noting the need to turn the traffic light crossings lights off, when I almost get taken out by a speeding scooter. Now there is a topic for a new thread. I'd clocked a couple of coppers on bikes who were totally unaware of the scooter. No fear there for speeding and illegal scooter riders.

No, I'm not a teenager/young person so that must have been somebody else!


Sounds good that you were able to gently cycle down the lane before you were nearly mown down.


I spent exactly an hour travelling from the Tesco Express on Copeland Road to the exit on the other side trying to get to Morrisons car park. Buses and company vans all held up. Horrendous traffic jam caused by the closure of Rye Lane.

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/2020/jul/rye-lane-temporary-closure

It's indefinite.


I was down there yesterday. I think the pedestrian lanes could be better marked e.g. with the symbol for pedestrians...


However, it'll be a while before I go there again. Seems like none of the shopkeepers and few of the shoppers are bothering to wear masks or limit capacity. Rye Lane is grubbier than the Walworth Rd these days. It definitely needs a rocket up its bum to stop becoming grubbier or (just as bad) becoming a strip of chain stores.

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

    • But actually, replacing council housing, or more accurately adding to housing stock and doing so via expanding council estates was precisely what we should have been doing, financed by selling off old housing stock. As the population grows adding to housing built by councils is surely the right thing to do, and financing it through sales is a good model, it's the one commercial house builders follow for instance. In the end the issue is about having the right volumes of the appropriate sort of housing to meet national needs. Thatcher stopped that by forbidding councils to use sales revenues to increase housing stock. That was the error. 
    • Had council stock not been sold off then it wouldn't have needed replacing. Whilst I agree that the prohibition on spending revenue from sales on new council housing was a contributory factor, where, in places where building land is scarce and expensive such as London, would these replacement homes have been built. Don't mention infill land! The whole right to buy issue made me so angry when it was introduced and I'm still fuming 40 odd years later. If I could see it was just creating problems for the future, how come Thatcher didn't. I suspect though she did, was more interested in buying votes, and just didn't care about a scarcity of housing impacting the next generations.
    • Actually I don't think so. What caused the problem was the ban on councils using the revenues from sales to build more houses. Had councils been able to reinvest in more housing then we would have had a boom in building. And councils would have been relieved, through the sales, of the cost of maintaining old housing stock. Thatcher believed that council tenants didn't vote Conservative, and home owners did. Which may have been, at the time a correct assumption. But it was the ban on councils building more from the sales revenues which was the real killer here. Not the sales themselves. 
    • I agree with Jenjenjen. Guarantees are provided for works and services actually carried out; they are not an insurance policy for leaks anywhere else on the roof. Assuming that the rendering at the chimney stopped the leak that you asked the roofer to repair, then the guarantee will cover that rendering work. Indeed, if at some time in the future it leaked again at that exact same spot but by another cause, that would not be covered. Failure of rendering around a chimney is pretty common so, if re-rendering did resolve that leak, there is no particular reason to link it to the holes in the felt elsewhere across the roof. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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