Pavement widening outside M&S nr East Dulwich station...

[first mate]

We are going to need more of that given the huge development planned for that area, which will put a lot more pressure on existing drainage infrastructure.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Glad you welcome their introduction.

Something we can agree is a positive / necessary change.

Edited May 13 by Earl Aelfheah

[ab29]

What is the point of the pavement / concrete in front of the dulwich station / m&s? More and more space taken away from nature.

Fancy cars parked directly in front of the shop.

Concrete, concrete and more concrete.

@march46 and it is funny because...?

Edited May 13 by ab29

[spider69]

How did the old previous road and pavement help nature? Its always been asphalt and paving slabs?

[teddyboy23]

8 minutes ago, spider69 said:

How did the old previous road and pavement help nature? Its always been asphalt and paving slabs?

More weeds

[march46]

3 hours ago, ab29 said:

What is the point of the pavement / concrete in front of the dulwich station / m&s? More and more space taken away from nature.

Fancy cars parked directly in front of the shop.

Concrete, concrete and more concrete.

@march46 and it is funny because...?

It’s funny because you’re claiming space is being taken away from nature without acknowledging the space was previously tarmac.

The council is putting in rain gardens with SUDs which will mitigate against flooding, and there will be new trees to provide shade on hot days like today. Have you seen the plans?
 

 

Edited May 13 by march46

[ab29]

2 hours ago, spider69 said:

How did the old previous road and pavement help nature? Its always been asphalt and paving slabs?

Surely even the cyclists have heard about the climate change (?)

The pavement in front of the M&S near East Dulwich station was widened and no one knows why exactly -  so some cars can park in front of the shop?

9 minutes ago, march46 said:

It’s funny because you’re claiming space is being taken away from nature without acknowledging the space was previously tarmac.

The council is putting in rain gardens with SUDs which will mitigate against flooding, and there will be new trees to provide shade on hot days like today. Have you seen the plans?
 

 

No I have not seen the plans - frankly, I have beyond zero faith in what you / the council are doing, especially after ltn - in fact, I am absolutely dreading anything the council has in mind

52 minutes ago, march46 said:

It’s funny because you’re claiming space is being taken away from nature without acknowledging the space was previously tarmac.

The council is putting in rain gardens with SUDs which will mitigate against flooding, and there will be new trees to provide shade on hot days like today. Have you seen the plans?
 

 

The space was not previously a tarmac - it was a garden center

[spider69]

Which was sold many many years ago to build flats and the library. Southwark and builders did not worry about nature then. 

[ab29]

18 minutes ago, spider69 said:

Which was sold many many years ago to build flats and the library. Southwark and builders did not worry about nature then. 

But maybe we should care now?

Edited May 13 by ab29

[Sue]

1 hour ago, ab29 said:

But maybe we should care now?

How do you connect pedestrian space being increased near the station with no longer caring about nature? 

Have I missed something here?

[Earl Aelfheah]

17 hours ago, Sue said:

How do you connect pedestrian space being increased near the station with no longer caring about nature? 

Have I missed something here?

Especially when the works include SUDs, with brand new planting / additional green space.

[pebs]

Just come across the thread. I'm pretty frustrated but prepared to put up with some road works by M&S. Not sure they are really necessary and I think the council is spending their budget for the sake of it. However what is incredulous to me is that it seems they are narrowing the main road (Grove Vale) next to the Cherry Tree. Why? This is a (the) major thoroughfare! I was on the bus this am travelling from Heber road to Denmark Hill station. Traffic all backed up. Council - people have jobs, they have to get into the centre of London. If you want to improve the general environment then ok but don't restrict the traffic flow. Insane! Who makes these decisions? (Don't get me started on LTNs).

[spider69]

People who probably do not live in the area and look at google maps in Council Offices to see where they can change things without knowing how the area works.

If you look around have you noticed when things get changed they never quite work as well as before.

 

[march46]

2 hours ago, pebs said:However what is incredulous to me is that it seems they are narrowing the main road (Grove Vale) next to the Cherry Tree. Why? This is a (the) major thoroughfare! I was on the bus this am travelling from Heber road to Denmark Hill station. Traffic all backed up. Council - people have jobs, they have to get into the centre of London. If you want to improve the general environment then ok but don't restrict the traffic flow. Insane! Who makes these decisions? (Don't get me started on LTNs).

Traffic is backed up due to the temporary traffic lights, understand it’s frustrating now but when the work is finished it will be back to normal 

Re the pavement widening by the Cherry Tree, have you seen the plans? They’re putting in a new pedestrian crossing which is surely something we can all agree is a positive?

[Penguin68]

That surely is very close to the controlled crossing by the railway Bridge. Do we need two crossings within, I'm guessing, 100 yards of each other? 

[alice]

Pedestrian crossing always good. pavement widening unnecessary expense unless Dulwich Hamlet is paying for it 

[Rockets]

18 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

That surely is very close to the controlled crossing by the railway Bridge. Do we need two crossings within, I'm guessing, 100 yards of each other? 

And close to the controlled crossing at Oglander too - that's a lot of crossings in a short stretch of road - the new one does make a lot of sense in terms of location but will the council need to remove one of the others?

[alice]

38 minutes ago, Rockets said:

And close to the controlled crossing at Oglander too - that's a lot of crossings in a short stretch of road - the new one does make a lot of sense in terms of location but will the council need to remove one of the others?

😃

[march46]

Whilst a 100 yard walk to a safe crossing point might be ok for some, it won’t be for everyone. For some, it makes a real difference. A strategically located crossing ensures that all members of the community - including elderly people, parents with prams, wheelchair users, and others with limited mobility - have a safe and convenient way to cross.

As well as improving accessibility it will also be safer - every time a person has to walk out of their way to reach a crossing, there’s a higher chance they’ll be tempted to cross at unsafe points. This is especially true in areas with heavy footfall, families with children, older residents, or people with mobility issues. A well-placed crossing reduces these risks dramatically.

 

Edited May 15 by march46

[alice]

That makes total sense, doesn’t explain why that treacherous corner on East Dulwich grove and lordship lane remains or why  the harvester crossing has taken maybe 30 years or more to sort. 

[Penguin68]

49 minutes ago, march46 said:

Whilst a 100 yard walk to a safe crossing point might be ok for some, it won’t be for everyone. For some, it makes a real difference.

I didn't hear that level of compassion offered when disabled people were impacted by LTNs and their mobility parking disks ignored. It was all 'the benefits of active travel' then.

[malumbu]

52 minutes ago, march46 said:

Whilst a 100 yard walk to a safe crossing point might be ok for some, it won’t be for everyone. For some, it makes a real difference. A strategically located crossing ensures that all members of the community - including elderly people, parents with prams, wheelchair users, and others with limited mobility - have a safe and convenient way to cross.

As well as improving accessibility it will also be safer - every time a person has to walk out of their way to reach a crossing, there’s a higher chance they’ll be tempted to cross at unsafe points. This is especially true in areas with heavy footfall, families with children, older residents, or people with mobility issues. A well-placed crossing reduces these risks dramatically.

 

Thanks, it's good to have such a positive view 😊

[Rockets]

59 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

I didn't hear that level of compassion offered when disabled people were impacted by LTNs and their mobility parking disks ignored. It was all 'the benefits of active travel' then.

Surely a 100 yard walk would be better for active travel purposes.....!

Gotta love the responses to my message but then when your world revolves around trying to turn every road into a permanent pedestrian crossing then what can you expect...........;-) Three crossings in such a short space is ludicrous and utterly unnecessary - I can't think of three crossings in such short succession even on streets like Oxford Street!

I wonder if the same people would be so keen to see a pedestrian crossing put in on Dulwich Square across the cycle track which is clearly urgently needed - I doubt it as they would say it would hinder active travel growth!!!

Edited May 15 by Rockets

[malumbu]

It would be useful to have some perspective, it is silly to say that there are people who want to turn every road into a pedestrian crossing.

[Rockets]

The perspective is very clear @malumbu - there are three crossings within about 100 yards of each other on a single stretch of road. I said that the new location makes perfect sense from a footfall perspective but that it probably makes one of the other two redundant - do you not think that is the case - if so what is the rational for your argument - perhaps you would like to share?