Why so much traffic on Lordship Lane?

[grabot]

I've lived in East Dulwich for many years. But, in the last year I believe that I have observed an ever growing volume of traffic going on Lordship Lane. During the day it is pretty much permanently gridlocked. This seems to coincide with growing numbers of accidents; I find cycling down it genuinely frightening. What's going on? Where is this traffic coming from? Where is it going to? I don't think it is part of a national trend as on the whole car usage is declining.

[Mrs TP]

As an occasional car driver down Lordship Lane, the Goose Green end has become particularly clogged with all the new crossing points and I now tend to use Barry Road instead to get up to the top end of Lordship. As a pedestrian I love all the new crossing points!

[kford]

More traffic lights. A trade-off for more safe crossing points I suppose.

[grabot]

I guess that might be right. Hopefully in the long term the lights will put motorists off.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

grabot Wrote:

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

> I guess that might be right. Hopefully in the

> long term the lights will put motorists off.

Put them off from what exactly? Heading towards Camberwell? To Forest Hill? Going about their business?

Perhaps it will put us off commuting from East Dulwich station to London Bridge as you now need to leave 20 minutes earlier if you get the bus from further up Lordship Lane due to the congestion caused by the traffic calming measures.

Causing congestion adds to pollution levels so the payoff for those who couldn't be bothered to use the crossings we all ready had is to add significantly to the pollution their cherubs inhale.

Lordship Lane is, and always has been, a main road. You might as well hope to put motorists off using the South Circular.

I was asked to sign a petition recently for a crossing on East Dulwich Road at the junction of LL as it is "more dangerous now". When I pointed out that the new crossing on the Lane at this point has caused this problem, you'd have though I was speaking in Chinese.

[KidKruger]

The new calming measures haven't added an extra 20mins to the journey between upper Lordship Lane and ED station, that's an exaggeration. Unless you're travelling late in the morning like 0800 or after, there's hardly a difference.

Chinese is not a language, just like 'African'.

[civilservant]

You've got the option of walking to the station instead. It shouldn't take more than 20 minutes from the Plough as its downhill pretty much all the way

[Zebedee Tring]

In spite of the installation of the new pedestrian crossings, lots of people are still jaywalking across LL towards the Goose Green end. Perhaps if they installed lights every ten yards or so, this would stop this habit (irony alert).

Personally I am very much in favour of the new crossings, since these days I am far more often a pedestrian than a driver.

[macrobana]

Check out the quality F.M.Conway road surfacing.

[DJKillaQueen]

I think it's a combination of things. Three main intersections come together at goose green and LL is a vibrant shopping high street. It's no use pedestrians claiming priority over road and vice versa. Everyone just has to use the space equally. I drive up and down LL regularly and have done for years (and cycled too) and really can't see any major problem or increase in traffic.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> The new calming measures haven't added an extra

> 20mins to the journey between upper Lordship Lane

> and ED station, that's an exaggeration. Unless

> you're travelling late in the morning like 0800 or

> after, there's hardly a difference.

Like I said, commuting so exactly around that time. I used to allow 20 minutes to easily get the train, now that's not enough.

And as far as I'm aware, Chinese is a language albeit one that has many regional variations and dialects.

@Civilservant - On the days I commute into town I have a heavy kit bag with me that I don't fancy lugging down the Lane. Would you suggest the same to all the mum's with buggies?

[Bic Basher]

civilservant Wrote:

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

> You've got the option of walking to the station

> instead. It shouldn't take more than 20 minutes

> from the Plough as its downhill pretty much all

> the way

I'd go for 30 mins and maybe less if you cut along Melbourne Grove instead of walking along LL. It may be better for people to use Forest Hill station if you live at the Plough end of LL anyway.

[Townleygreen]

ED - NAGAIUTB Chinese isn't a language! There are 2 main languages that the chinese speak - Mandarin and Cantonese.

[henryb]

There are actually 292 languages, belonging to of 9 different language families, spoken in China. Mandarin is a group of languages. Beijing Dialect Mandarin or Pekingese is is the bases of what is sometimes called Standard Chinese.

[Jeremy]

Stupid argument... splitting hairs. I know both Mandarin and Cantonese speakers who refer to their native language as "Chinese".

[civilservant]

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

On the days I commute into town I

> have a heavy kit bag with me that I don't fancy

> lugging down the Lane. Would you suggest the same

> to all the mum's with buggies?

OK, maybe it might take more than 20 mins with a heavy kitbag - poor you.

For the unburdened, my suggested timing of 20 mins from the Plough pub to ED station is generous compared to the 18 mins that Walkit.com suggests.

I would suggest exactly the same to a mum with a buggy. When I was one myself, I found that pushing a light pushchair (not one of the heavy Bugaboos) speeded up my walking no end, so I'd probably have covered the distance in something like 15 mins on foot.

And it would well have been a lot easier to walk than to wait until a bus was prepared to let me+buggy on, then get on, park the buggy, put up with all the commuters who think the buggy is taking up 'their' space, entertain baby fed-up with stuffy uncomfortable bus ride, and then disembark with the buggy.

[ED - NAGAIUTB]

civilservant Wrote:

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

> OK, maybe it might take more than 20 mins with a

> heavy kitbag - poor you.

civilservant - what a sanctimonious s**t you are.

[Sue]

ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

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

>>

> civilservant - what a sanctimonious s**t you are.

xxxxxx

And that post says rather more about you than it says about civilservant .....

[neilson99]

Play nicely! Tis the season and all that (or at least was!)

Back to subject in hand, isn't there a TFL/Southwark Council policy to slow down traffic on London streets? Otherwise I'm not sure that they could justify the continual gold plating and over investment in the road/street infrastructure.

I think there is a general view on this forum that anyone who doesn't ride a fixed wheel or s Brompton and uses four wheels instead is some kind of Jeremy Clarkson type/sociopath with no regard for women, children, small animals, yurts and rain forests. Which is a shame as some people don't have a real choice. London's public transport is fantastic but there are occasions when alternatives need to be used. If this is a car then surely the journey should be as easy as possible, not as difficult as it could be?

[Huguenot]

neilson99 I'm not sure it's as simple as that - most people make a cost/benefit analysis when choosing how to get from A to B.

When sufficient vehicles are available then traffic will simply rise to the point that traffic jams favour alternative forms of transport - for example on foot.

People don't use private cars because no other alternative is available - they do it because it's convenient.

In whether continued investment should be made to support ease of private car usage, I think it behoves upon government (local or national) to take a medium term view. Private car users don't. The reality is that private car users don't even carry the full cost of their choice in terms of environmental impact or global unrest cause by unequal distribution of resources, and are consequently making poor cost/benefit analyses.

So no, bearing that in mind and until car owners start to pay the real price for their choices, I don't believe that government should invest any further in private car convenience whether it parking spaces or car friendly roads.

BTW, introducing top speed restrictions doesn't necessarily slow cars down - often it mean average journey times are down, and hence average speeds are up.

[civilservant]

Sue Wrote:

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

> ED - NAGAIUTB Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >>

> > civilservant - what a sanctimonious s**t you

> are.

>

> xxxxxx

>

> And that post says rather more about you than it

> says about civilservant .....

Thanks, Sue!

ED-whateverthingy, is that an example of your fluency in 'Chinese'?

Having taken a look at your forum archive, I now realise that I couldn't ever have been any help to you as you're burdened not just with a kitbag, but also a stonking great chip on your shoulder. Not even a Bugaboo can cope with that!

Back on topic, what Huguenot said.