Crossroads roadworks - EDG/Dulwich V/RP Hill etc

[ed_pete]

Anyone know what the purpose of the roadworks are at the East Dulwich Grove/Village Way/Red Post Hill/Dulwich Village ?

The temporary lights are causing major tailbacks and it looks from the signs that they're going on until late April.

[Bicknell]

think to make 2 lanes going north, so that traffic can turn R when others go straight on. means that 1 lane goiing south will be made narrower. not sure how tghat will work

bus stop outside dv north closed

 

[Rockets]

Is this not the works to remove the pedestrian refuge to accommodate new cycle lanes?

Does seem ridiculous that these works are happening at the same time as the A205/Lordship Lane works - Dulwich is becoming encircled, entrapped and gridlocked by works involving weeks of disruption all at the same time.

[march46]

There are no new cycle lanes.

The pavements on each of the 4 corners are being widened and pedestrian countdown timers are being added. It should be much better for the heavy footfall that junction gets. 

[Rockets]

March46 - did they remove the plan for the cycle lanes at the revised junction then because that was the catalyst for the original works proposals was it not? 

Can you post the link to the latest plans, do you know why the council changed the plans because the original said the refuge was being removed to accommodate a cycle lane - it was discussed at length on the forum?

 

 

[march46]

There was never a plan for a new cycle lane. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Rockets, please can you make even the slightest effort to check stuff before spreading misinformation across this section. Even just a quick google search?

[Rockets]

@Earl Aelfheah be nice - you have to per the forum rules. I think you owe me an apology because I very much did do my research - back in January 24 and I remember reading the council's document and it did say that the refuge was being removed to facilitate the advance cycle box/lane.

The consultation pdf has been moved - has anyone got it? https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/dulwich-village-phase-3-design/supporting_documents/Red Post Hill Junction Consultation Plan.pdf

 

@march46 you seem to have a hotline to the council - do you have it?

 

 

[first mate]

March, you always seem to be across the detail of council plans and immediately stated there were no plans for a cycle lane, so presumably you have access to that detail you can share? This may be down to your superior internet research skills but please share with us? 

[march46]

It took less than a minute to do a Google search to double-check the things I remembered reading from the consultation docs awhile ago. This isn’t hard. 

Edited March 19 by march46
Spelling

[Earl Aelfheah]

13 minutes ago, first mate said:

March, you always seem to be across the detail of council plans

Actually googling stuff and reading the material before making a judgement is not dark magic. It's just rationality

[first mate]

The simplest thing would be to share that material. To not share it seems odd if it would settle the question of whether or not a cycle lane was mooted. What is there to gain by not sharing?

[Earl Aelfheah]

Repeated pattern on this section. State something without evidence. Then demand others prove it wrong. It is not good faith debate.

Edited March 19 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

So @march46 do you have the consultation docs - if so please do share them as they have moved and are no longer where I orginally read them and I did not download them?

 

@Earl Aelfheah you accused me of not doing any research when clearly I had - not at all sure how that is not a good faith debate.

[first mate]

I was not involved in this from the outset, so had not researched and I certainly made no "judgement". I just expressed an interest in knowing whether a bike lane had been mooted or not, and given March seems to have that evidence I thought they would share it. Why would you not?

[Rockets]

Because the original consultation document did call out needing to remove the central pedestrian refuges to facilitate the cycle infrastructure. It's why I started the thread in January 24 - yet I am the one accused of spreading misinformation.....amazing.....

[first mate]

Well, I think you must be right otherwise someone would have by now posted the link to the documents you asked for and which, according to them, they had googled and checked in a few minutes.

[alice]

I do remember the right turn being cancelled to allow for a bike lane a while back then of course the need for a right turn became obvious and so back to square one

[Rockets]

Yes the council added the cycle wand lane at the junction heading from Dulwich Village to Red Post Hill and reduced two lanes to one then had to add the right-turn filter to the traffic lights due to the congestion the reduction to one lane was causing in Dulwich Village as cars could no longer pass to the left of traffic turning right onto EDG.

 

[march46]

The cycle lane was already there, but most drivers ignored the painted lines. It wasn’t two lanes of traffic reduced to one. It became much safer and more accessible with wands. 

The wands were added quite a few years ago. To confirm, there is no new cycle lane as part of the current junction improvements works as Rockets claimed above.

[Rockets]

@march46 but the initial consultation document did say that the removal of the pedestrian refuge was necessary to accommodate the advanced cycle box didn't it?

You seem to have a Iot of knowledge on all the council's plans around cycle infrastructure so can you tell us if the advanced cycle box still part of the works being carried out at the moment?

10 minutes ago, march46 said:

The cycle lane was already there, but most drivers ignored the painted lines.

Might this have been because there were never any cyclists using it? The addition of the wands did cause significant congestion in Dulwich Village and they had to add the right filter to relieve it didn't they?

Edited March 20 by Rockets

[march46]

My knowledge comes from looking at the publicly available plans. It shows exactly what the junction improvement works are (again, no new cycle lanes). 

[Rockets]

What about the advanced cycle box?

Would you mind posting the links to the information you have found as all I can find on the Southwark website is the following:

The Red Post Hill/Dulwich Village junction, which was part of the Phase 3 consultation, is still being developed and we hope to implement this in early 2025.

 

Page last updated: 10 September 2024

Edited March 20 by Rockets

[march46]

You initially claimed a new cycle lane was the reason why pedestrian islands are being removed - not true, there are no new cycle lanes.

Now you’re pivoting to advanced cycle boxes being the reason. Again, not true.

Suggest you do your own research before making any further claims. 

 

[Rockets]

@march46 why is it so difficult for you to share the link to the public information you claim you have? I cannot find details of the works on the Southwark website, since the redesign of the website it’s impossible to find things now. Surely if the info you have is public and confirms what you are saying then sharing it resolves this, I am struggling to understand why you don’t share the link.

So are you confirming that there are no longer plans for an advance cycle box - that’s what I meant when I referred to a cycle lane - it was clumsy language use by me - but that what was cited in the original consultation document as the reason for the need to remove the pedestrian refuges.

I found this on the Dulwich Residents Association website that clearly shows the plans for the advanced cycle boxes, so are you confirming these are no longer in the plans?