Some good news here!

[Sue]

Traffic lights and pedestrian crossing at the junction of East Dulwich Grove/Lordship Lane! And more!

Including an East Dulwich Square at the station, whatever that is going to be ....

https://mailchi.mp/182c9451222c/goose-green-labour-newsletter-january-10055305?e=38102f0cef

[Earl Aelfheah]

That is good news about the crossing. Also a feasibility study for EDG cycle Lane. Great!

[Serena2012]

I listened in on the relevant meeting and understand that it?s a feasibility study that has been commissioned on the EDG/ LL crossing (which they can?t meaningfully do until the tail end of the year when decisions have been taken on the local LTNs). The amount of money allocated in the recent round of funding is far short of what they would need to install a crossing here.

[heartblock]

Cycle lane EDG .... yes please. So many cyclists on this road, please make it safer for them. The crossing will be great, that junction is so dangerous for us pedestrians.

[Sue]

It's weird, because if memory serves they have being saying for years that it was not possible to have a crossing there.

I can't remember their reasons.

[legalalien]

I think I heard somewhere that the funding is for a feasibility study rather than putting in the crossing at this stage. But I'm not sure where.

[ianr]

Serena2012 mentioned above and

legalalien added:

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

> I think I heard somewhere that the

> funding is for a feasibility study

> rather than putting in the crossing

> at this stage. But I'm not sure where.

That seems to me more likely, given the ascribed cost of ?12,000 and the list of project types that can be considered, at page 40 of the South multi-ward forum Public report pack available at http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgChooseDocPack.aspx?ID=6871:

5. Commencing in 2017/18, the scope of the fund has been widened to

permit the full range of minor traffic and highway capital schemes rather

than solely like-for-like repair and replacement. Examples of the types

of works which can now be funded include:

? Footway and carriageway resurfacing;

? Traffic calming;

? Localised repairs;

? Accessibility improvements;

? Footway buildouts;

? Cycle hangars.

[alice]

heartblock Wrote:

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

> Cycle lane EDG .... yes please. So many cyclists

> on this road, please make it safer for them. The

> crossing will be great, that junction is so

> dangerous for us pedestrians.

Totally agree but until dulwich routes are open again is there enough room for bus and bike lanes?

[heartblock]

Cycle lane.. not along all of it, but probably from the bend up to the crossing, so from where the Dutch estate starts up to the Half Moon crossing, take off street parking away from the left hand side as not used so much after the parking zone, there is unused parking on the rail track side of the Dutch estate that could be opened up to local residents- but yes EDG is very busy with traffic due to the 4 LTNs so opening those roads would be better for cyclists generally. Unfortunately the LCC will not agree......

[alice]

Is anyone using street space to make such suggestions. I am.

[Serena2012]

Sue Wrote:

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

> It's weird, because if memory serves they have

> being saying for years that it was not possible to

> have a crossing there.

>

> I can't remember their reasons.

This is where (according to a Google search) they got to last time. I suspect the consultation was canned due to Covid-19. Many of the previous issues re: visibility of the crossing; the fact that the lights on Lordship Lane, South of the junction are in the wrong place; the narrowness of the pavement & TFL objections in view of potential delays to bus journey times are likely to persist, hence why a feasibility study as opposed to a solution is what is currently being proposed: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/status_of_request_for_pedestrian

[kford]

Traffic will be backed up to Heber Road with lights there

[Sue]

kford Wrote:

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

> Traffic will be backed up to Heber Road with

> lights there

People said there would be problems with the two (then) new pedestrian crossings in Lordship Lane, but to the best of my knowledge there haven't been any issues?

[kford]

The crossings' reds aren't on for as long as they would be for the two ways at that junction, which would presumably also have a right filter green from LL plus an all-green pedestrian cycle.

Sue Wrote:

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

> kford Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Traffic will be backed up to Heber Road with

> > lights there

>

> People said there would be problems with the two

> (then) new pedestrian crossings in Lordship Lane,

> but to the best of my knowledge there haven't been

> any issues?

[Serena2012]

Just to add that I don?t think the introduction of a signalised crossing at this junction is guaranteed. When presenting this, Charlie Smith implied that they were also contemplating a zebra crossing. Whatever ends up being proposed will need to be discussed with TFL and is likely to be subject to public consultation.

[Sue]

A zebra crossing would maybe work, but cars often just ignore the fact that a pedestrian is on the crossing.

Also, on busy days, cars would never get over the crossing!

[Serena2012]

Sue Wrote:

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

> A zebra crossing would maybe work, but cars often

> just ignore the fact that a pedestrian is on the

> crossing.

>

> Also, on busy days, cars would never get over the

> crossing!

It?s far from straightforward, which I?m guessing is why it?s been debated for years and yet no panacea has been identified. It will be interesting to see what comes out of the feasibility study.

[Sue]

The thing is, like the terrible dangerous (for pedestrians) junction where the South Circular meets the continuation of Lordship Lane by the derelict pub, if someone was killed or seriously injured here, they would come up with a solution PDQ.

Speaking of which, I thought it had been agreed to install pedestrian crossings at the South Circular junction. Does anybody have an update on that? I can't remember what the timescale was.

[James Barber]

During my time as a Councillor we looked at this several times. We even had a report commissioned by Southwark Council. Hopefully they won't blow money repeating it!

To put traffic lights there we were told Lordship Lane would have to have no parking from Goose Green roundabout to outside the Coop. Even then it was extremely likely TfL London Buses would block such lights.

It would also mean pedestrians having to wait uptimes o 2 minutes to cross East Dulwich Grove. Effectively downgrading the pedestrian priority.

The Pelican crossing and raised junction was an attempt to get some improvement. My lot thought a Zebra crossing right on the pedestrian desire line was needed - probably with a pavement build out into Lordship Lane. This would maximise pedestrian priority.

[Burbage]

TfL 'tentatively' aspires to commence work on the Lordship Lane/Dulwich Common junction (aka The Grove Tavern junction) in 2020.

Though, given the government's just getting started on another round of austerity and spectacularly raised the bar in terms of dismissable deaths, I strongly doubt they're doing much more than waiting for the money to run out. It is, after all, a fairly expensive project as it doesn't just involve nailing a button to a lamp-post but building four separate staggered walkways which are necessary, I gather, if pedestrians aren't to get the impression that their time is as valuable as anyone else's.

We have, after all, been here before, with an approved, and fully-funded, improvement project all signed and sealed and teetering on the brink of actuality until it all magically evaporated when our dear friends and neighbours chose to elect Johnson as our mayor. A surprising number of people, it seems, would prefer children not to access nature until they've had a good chance of being killed or injured first and, perhaps unsurprisingly, their arguments seem to hold weight in all the best corridors of power.

[Sue]

DulwichDaddio Wrote:

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

> If this is an example of good news, then the OP

> must lead a really, really boring life.

Ah, a "new" poster, just joined under this name today.

How lovely. Wonder how long it will be before this incarnation gets banned?