Jump to content

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ArchieCarlos said:

An absolute specimen decided yesterday to ram the plastic fences by Derwent Grove and drive his Golf over them

IMG_8730.JPG

Is that the car involved? Knowing nothing about cars, I can't tell if it's a Golf.

The number plate is clearly visible.

2 hours ago, ArchieCarlos said:

An absolute specimen decided yesterday to ram the plastic fences by Derwent Grove and drive his Golf over them

 

Did you actually see it happen?
I ask because the evidence in the photo suggests that all the cones and green barriers appear to be pushed over from the left  to the right -possibly by a pedestrian. They would have been used to cordon off the area on the left where materials are being stored. 

The cones and green barriers are also in  are all in a straight line whereas if they were rammed by a car then they would have been scattered randomly more to the left.

On 26/05/2025 at 17:46, malumbu said:

Sad that I am interested in this apparent excessive signage, sad that it may exist (I'd like the evidence) or sad that it may be a distraction to motorists?  Or all three?

Back in about 2016 there was a rewrite of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directives (it's not exactly a fascinating read, I warn you now...) that required certain signs - things like "New Road Layout Ahead" or "Changed Priorities Ahead" - to have a yellow sticker on the back with a note that they were temporary signs and they should be removed by [date]. And to have a contact number for the council on there. 

So any of those can easily be reported. IN theory, councils are supposed to have a record of this stuff but in practice, most no longer have the resources to manage small scale highways assets effectively. Thanks, austerity.

  • Like 1
6 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

Back in about 2016 there was a rewrite of the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directives (it's not exactly a fascinating read, I warn you now...) that required certain signs - things like "New Road Layout Ahead" or "Changed Priorities Ahead" - to have a yellow sticker on the back with a note that they were temporary signs and they should be removed by [date]. And to have a contact number for the council on there.

Thanks, yep there is good guidance out there.  But to date I've not seen signage that people have complained about that is not obvious. I understand there had been some confusion over the timing of restrictions but not that it is not clear that there are restrictions.  Of course in more rural areas I've seen signage obscured by foliage and the like.

9 hours ago, ArchieCarlos said:

An absolute specimen decided yesterday to ram the plastic fences by Derwent Grove and drive his Golf over them

IMG_8730.JPG

I really try not to get into us Vs them but stories like this do get my hackles up about entitled motorists.  There is also the case of not alienating motorists when reasonable people get done, including me, for relatively innocent stuff yet*, yet there are some who couldn't give a fig who park on double yellows, on pavements, drive up bus lanes and the like and get away with this.  Two out of the three because local authorities generally do not enforce parking restrictions at night, and this has long since been a police priority.  The third when they know there is no camera.  At the worst when they have illegal number plates that cannot be read by ANPR.

Whilst I am on the subject of entitlement smoky exhausts get my goat, usually because the particulate filter has failed or worse still been removed.  Police, again, no longer stops such vehicles, and there is always a friendly MOT inspector where you can get away with this.

* I've admitted to my fines on chats and now just take a lot more care.  Or just don't drive!

Edited by malumbu
Typing too quickly
On 28/05/2025 at 18:30, ab29 said:

Is this not a regular Southwark council BAU - we are now back in 70ies? 

 

On 28/05/2025 at 18:30, ab29 said:

Is this not a regular Southwark council BAU - we are now back in 70ies? 

Traffic cones and traffic fences seem like a motif this year; some have been there for months and months - council is really busy wasting taxpayer money 🤔

IMG_9366.jpeg

IMG_9025.jpeg

IMG_9280.jpeg

IMG_8963.jpeg

IMG_8957.jpeg

IMG_8924.jpeg

IMG_8919.jpeg

IMG_8908.jpeg

IMG_8856.jpeg

Edited by ab29
4 minutes ago, march46 said:

The new zebra crossing makes it easier, and much safer for pedestrians to cross the road. It’s really great to see the council prioritising pedestrians as they should in the hierarchy of road users. 

Was there a pedestrian crossing there before?

 

On 05/06/2025 at 20:40, march46 said:

The new zebra crossing makes it easier, and much safer for pedestrians to cross the road. It’s really great to see the council prioritising pedestrians as they should in the hierarchy of road users. 

This new crossing is totally unnecessary, surely.

Just a few metres down the road, towards the station, there is a pedestrian island. I just used it this morning after having walked down Melbourne Grove.

OK it's not a zebra crossing, but it's a perfectly safe and easy place to cross East Dulwich Grove.

Why on earth are so many  places for pedestrians to cross needed on such a short stretch of level road?

On 26/05/2025 at 10:56, jazzer said:

SAD

Has Jazzer morphed into Trump?

On 10/06/2025 at 13:08, march46 said:

It’s not a pedestrian island, nor a safe place to cross. It’s an island to protect people cycling whilst they wait to turn right. Not where you would want children crossing the road. 

Eh? 

Islands like this  are all over the place, or used to be - nothing to do with cyclists, or didn't used to be.

Are we talking about the same thing? I can't see how cyclists would fit in there!

I'd have  been  quite happy for my grandchildren to cross there when they were younger. They are grown up now.

ETA: I looked at it yesterday while passing,  and I see it is intended for cyclists to stop there,  but given the vertical island indication (don't know what it's called, sorry) I don't think it's clear that it isn't also intended for pedestrians.

I had no idea such things for cyclists existed! 

Edited by Sue
  • Agree 2
On 05/06/2025 at 19:34, ab29 said:

What are there benefits for pedestrians?

What are the benefits to pedestrians? Of a zebra crossing and larger pedestrian area?

I guess if you flip the question it might help - is it better for pedestrians to have less space and fewer safe crossing points?

3 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

What are the benefits to pedestrians? Of a zebra crossing and larger pedestrian area?

I guess if you flip the question it might help - is it better for pedestrians to have less space and fewer safe crossing points?

No idea what this fluffy words mean. Southwark council waste my council tax money on - what exactly?

  • Haha 1

It was an expensive council error to put another crossing in that area  when there are busier roads with no alternative crossings nearby. 
 

On it is not an island? Well, it looks like an island. It acts like an island people use it as an island so I think that makes  it an island.  Aka a little safe spot where people with bikes canpause while waiting to make a safe right hand turn

  • Agree 1

I watched an online discussion between Cllr McAsh and a street planner. Cllr McAsh stated that it had been felt within the Council that they could not be upfront there was a war on cars, that this had to be kept quiet because it could lose votes. But once in his current role he had decided to be frank and clear that there is...led by him. 

He also said that his response to residents who had complained to him about the impact on street changes turning relatively short car journeys into long ones, was 'that is the point'. In a nutshell, he quite deliberately intends to make car journeys as unpleasant as possible.

 

 

Edited by first mate

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

    • Honestly, the squirrels are not a problem now.  They only eat what has dropped.  The feeders I have are squirrel proof anyway from pre-cage times.  I have never seen rats in the garden, and even when I didn't have the cage.  I most certainly would have noticed them.  I do have a little family of mice which I have zero problem about.  If they stay outside, that's fine with me.  Plus, local cats keep that population down.  There are rats everywhere in London, there is plenty of food rubbish out in the street to keep them happy.  So, I guess you could fit extra bars to the cage if you wanted to, but then you run the risk of the birds not getting in.  They like to be able to fly in and out easily, which they do.   
    • Ahh, the old "it's only three days" chestnut.  I do hope you realise the big metal walls, stages, tents, toilets, lighting, sound equipment, refreshments, concessions etc don't just magically appear & disappear overnight? You know it all has to be transported in & erected, constructed? And that when stuff is constructed, like on a construction site, it's quite noisy & distracting? Banging, crashing, shouting, heavy plant moving around - beep beep beep reversing signals, engines revving - pneumatic tools? For 8 to 10 hours a day, every day? And that it tends to go on for two or three weeks before an event, and a week after when they take it all down again? I'm sure my boys' GCSE prep won't be affected by any of that, especially if we close the windows (before someone suggests that as a resolution). I'm sure it won't affect anyone at the Harris schools either, actually taking their exams with that background noise.
    • Thanks for the good discussion, this should be re-titled as a general thread about feeding the birds. @Penguin not really sure why you posted, most are aware that virtually all land in this country is managed, and has been for 100s of years, but there are many organisations, local and national government, that manage large areas of land that create appropriate habitats for British nature, including rewilding and reintroductions.  We can all do our bit even if this is not cutting your lawn, and certainly by not concreting over it.  (or plastic grass, urgh).   I have simply been stating that garden birds are semi domesticated, as perhaps the deer herds in Richmond Park, New Forest ponies, and even some foxes where we feed them.  Whoever it was who tried to get a cheap jibe in about Southwark and the Gala festival.  Why?  There is a whole thread on Gala for you to moan on.  Lots going on in Southwark https://www.southwark.gov.uk/culture-and-sport/parks-and-open-spaces/ecology-and-wildlife I've talked about green sqwaky things before, if it was legal I'd happily use an air riffle, and I don't eat meat.  And grey squirrels too where I am encourage to dispatch them. Once a small group of starlings also got into the garden I constructed my own cage using starling proof netting, it worked for a year although I had to make a gap for the great spotted woodpecker to get in.  The squirrels got at it in the summer but sqwaky things still haven't come back, starlings recently returned.  I have a large batch of rubbish suet pellets so will let them eat them before reordering and replacing the netting. Didn't find an appropriately sized cage, the gaps in the mesh have to be large enough for finches etc, and the commercial ones were £££ The issue with bird feeders isn't just dirty ones, and I try to keep mine clean, but that sick birds congregate in close proximity with healthy birds.  The cataclysmic obliteration of the greenfinch population was mainly due to dirty feeders and birds feeding close to each other.  
    • Another recommendation for Niko - fitted me in the next day, simple fix rather than trying to upsell and a nice guy as well. Will use again
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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