Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Minor Road works  have been drifting along seemingly for months outside West Dulwich station causing massive tail backs and severe pollution on the South Circular and Croxted Rd. There seems to be no control  or sense of urgency whatever with what appears to be a meandering exercise to fiddle around with a couple of traffic islands. What is going on.??  Why are we governed by such half wits?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/328585-road-works-shambles/
Share on other sites

It seems ironic that we are all being shafted by the mad net zero obsession whilst local indolent highways jobsworths can still create massive delays and  pollution when ever and where ever they choose by dreaming up yet another expensive and unnecessary road excavation.

  • Confused 1
21 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

Is it the Labour Council or the Labour mayor you are calling a halfwit?

Both. In my case. If the work needs doing it should be done quickly. A few years ago the South Circular could have been closed (possibly just for a couple of days, or even over-night) and a diversion put into place to allow the work to be completed quickly - but with Southwark closing off so many routes with LTNs, and the Mayor turning the South Circular into a tariff boundary that isn't possible. And with no authority prepared to put pressure on whoever is doing the work, and for whatever reason (because, perhaps, it's in two 'domains' that don't, or won't, talk to each other) we have the ordinary voters and tax payers paying the consequences.

52 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

Is it the Labour Council or the Labour mayor you are calling a halfwit?

The South Circular is a TFL road and I think Croxted Road is governed by Southwark council.

 

The roadworks permit was granted by Lambeth (as it's in their borough), the applicant was TfL. The basic permit says "highways repair and maintenance" scheduled to last until 6th July. 

  • Thanks 1

Here's guidance from TfL on managing streetworks, worth a read.  https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/urban-planning-and-construction/our-land-and-infrastructure/roadworks-and-street-faults

Regulations introduced recently by government to improve the handling and quality of repairs by utility companies

www.gov.uk/government/news/new-street-works-regime-to-clamp-down-on-pothole-pain

And the road rental scheme (restrictions on those carrying out repairs) introduced by TfL following support from government

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/lane-rental-scheme-document-20210501-final.pdf

 

I thought I'd find something in the government's manifesto but the only thing in 2019 was "Get Brexit Done"

 

  • Haha 1
18 hours ago, Dogkennelhillbilly said:
22 hours ago, Penguin68 said:

but with Southwark closing off so many routes with LTNs, and the Mayor turning the South Circular into a tariff boundary that isn't possible.

See, the problem with this is that you've just made it up.

I have just made up that the South Circular is the tariff boundary for the currently extended ULEZ - really? - and thus that diversions off the South circular through bits of Dulwich wouldn't carry tariff penalties? I have just made up that Southwark's LTNs (which I am sure exist, there's been so much written about them here) stop many diversions off and back onto the South Circular for at least part of the day - are you really suggesting that? These are two actions which make traffic re-routing flexibility at the time of need very difficult or costly (to the motorist). That is a clear downside to the traffic alterations instituted by the Mayor and Southwark independently of each other.

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

    • I'm sure one can always find things which a party or an individual within it could have done better or shouldn't have said. If one was going to use those things as a reason not to support the party, one would never support any party, and would never vote. So far as I am concerned, the Greens represent my views on most issues better than any other party that I am currently aware of. I really am not interested in dissecting the details of one or two specific instances,  for many reasons, not least that I have no direct knowledge of them and don't know what may be a reliable source.
    • Was it the promise to act as a "strong voice" for Muslims that sealed the deal? The Green Party hired Abi Wilkinson from the Sultana wing of Your Party just before the Manchester by-election. She's on record as denying sexual violence during the 7 October 2023 attacks on Israel by Hamas, which is not true. I wonder if she was also responsible for the dodgy text of the Urdu and Bengali comms the Green Party pumped out in the last days of the campaign? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_and_gender-based_violence_in_the_October_7_attacks https://www.reddit.com/r/ukpolitics/comments/1rhrd36/fury_as_green_party_spin_doctor_denies_women_were/
    • Good to see a Blue Tit investigating my camera bird box for a potential family plot this season. 
    • I joined the Greens yesterday. I'm now a paid up member.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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