Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...

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.

  • Agree 1

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?

 

 

@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?

 

 

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? 

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.

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?

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.....

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.

 

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.

@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 by 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 by Rockets

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. 

 

  • Agree 1

@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?IMG_0445.thumb.png.e5335a8ff40e5dccd1f2e54c7ce95250.png

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

    • Dog kennel isn't a great name for a school. I agree that it's ridiculous for the name to put anyone off going there, but don't see any issue with them rebranding if the parents and children prefer a new name. The school is surrounded by historical 'groves' (reflected in the names of Camberwell Grove, Grove park and Grove Vale for example), so it's not a totally random name. 
    • It might help if there are body cams to record evidence and a presence maybe a deterrent but I very much doubt a park warden would intervene with obnoxious and violent thugs - children or not. We need police for that.  
    • I had a leaky toilet cistern and Niko came out the same day and not only fixed the leak but thoroughly cleaned off the years of calcium build-up. His attention to detail was matched by his kind humanity. The result was a completely renovated toilet which has never worked more efficiently as well as 'service with a smile'. MANY THANKS NIKO!!!  
    • I am trying to find out about people's experiences of the 4+ and 7+ assessments. I am a teacher and have a wealth of experience tutoring for theses assessments (including my own son), but it's always good to keep on top of things as they always make tweaks to them. TIA! 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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