Proposal Lordship Lane walkability

[pbg212]

Now that Lordship Lane has been resurfaced, it seems the right time to rip it up with an idea for making it a nicer place to visit. Or at least hear some opinions. 

What is the parking on Lordship lane was reduced to be on a single side, and footpaths made wider. Given how tight some of the footpaths are, and how busy it gets (which is wonderful for the local shops, employment and just adding to the vibe) - how about Lordship go to single side parking. The footpath on the Western side of the road would benefit from a bit more width. 
What else would need to change - I suspect ensuring that the remaining parking is limited to 2hour slots (no return) so that people who do need to drive get parking, rather than the shop's vans being on a major shopping thoroughfare all day. 

I'm sure there are other great reasons for it (and possible one or two against it). What else would elevate Lordship Lane to a Baron's Boulevard? 

[march46]

I agree the pavements could really do with widening - in some spots they’re particularly narrow for the amount of footfall, eg. around the bus stop outside FitFor gym. It can make something as simple as walking with young children feel more stressful than it needs to be. The pavements generally need work, they’re very uneven in places and there are plenty of puddles on the eastern section.

It would also help if the bus lane was properly red-routed, so people travelling by bus aren’t held up by the few drivers who park there. A bit more space and care for people on foot would make the high street a much nicer place.

[first mate]

Don't you think we have suffered enough road and pavement upheaval, for now? Why not have a break? That said, I do agree the pavements need mending as in many places they are a major trip hazard, but widening, no.

[Earl Aelfheah]

Totally agree with this. The pavement widening that was put in place during COVID, should have been made permanent imo. I would also make the bus lane 24/7. At the moment, it's nearly always got cars parked in it.

Widening the pavement and removing some of the parking opposite the bus stop would also improve traffic flow.

Edited Tuesday at 07:34 by Earl Aelfheah

[Katherty]

Why is it that cars can park in a bus lane? Seems bizarre. It just means the buses are held up by a single parked car. 

[first mate]

The timing of all this is interesting. After the second ED consultation when the council decided to make three roads a CPZ, they stated that they would be allowing timed paid for parking slots along LL, to help shoppers. I had queried at the time whether this would hinder bus travel.

Pavement widening will mean shoppers are likely to find it harder to park on LL and more of them will probably try to park on residential side streets, especially for free parking, or perhaps not visit at all. Of course, placing parking pressure on side streets will also probably propel more streets to go for CPZ, something the council wants.

The council has also stated that it will put in more double yellows everywhere (it says for safety but a handy side effect is to further reduce parking). It also says that in the interests of fairness and to balance the needs of shoppers who drive against those of residents, it will place paid for parking slots on residential streets off LL.

I am not sure I am in favour of the knock-on impacts of pavement widening. Surely it would increase congestion on LL at certain times, as well as residential side streets, as shoppers and residents drive round looking for places to park.

 

 

 

[Spartacus]

I agree @first mate, pbg212's post does feel like a clumsy council intervention (and apologies if it isn't)

In my experience, Lordship Lane works fairly well as it is, people tend to give way to others when walking past each other and generally footfall is good for a town centre this size.

Reducing or removing parking would have a detrimental impact on businesses as it currently allows those who live outsude the town centre to use it, and if businesses suffer, so does the town centre offering.

Personally, Southwark should leave East Dulwich alone to continue its organic growth as tinkering will only cause problems or drive out independents leaving only chains and charity shops🫣

[march46]

Is there actually any solid evidence that removing parking has a detrimental impact on local businesses - or is this more a case of unfounded fear?

I suspect many people overestimate how many shoppers and visitors arrive on Lordship Lane by car, compared to those who come on foot, by bike, or by public transport. If we want our high street to thrive and feel welcoming, it makes sense to rethink how we use public space - and to prioritise walking, cycling, and public transport over car storage. 

[Spartacus]

Laughing @march46 as you mention parking for shoppers in the same post as car storage. Which is it ? Make up your mind...

Evidence, nothing on Lordship Lane but other areas where parking has been restricted or removed have reported anecdotal drops in visitors. 

Dare you risk it and ruin a thriving town centre?  

 

 

[march46]

On Lordship Lane there is both - 30 mins restricted bays for shoppers, and slightly further south there is unrestricted parking where the vehicles don’t move for days, if not weeks.
 

It’s very easy to argue that those parking spaces are doing nothing to benefit the businesses, it is simply storage for private vehicles. The space was extended pavement during COVID, and it’s a real shame it wasn’t retained. 

[march46]

6 hours ago, Katherty said:

Why is it that cars can park in a bus lane? Seems bizarre. It just means the buses are held up by a single parked car. 

Parking restrictions within the bus lane apply between 7-10am Monday to Friday - so the bus lane should be free flowing then, but sadly they are often ignored by drivers. A parking ticket gives no comfort to the many people delayed on buses everyday, trying to get to work / school on time.

At the weekend the bus lane isn't available for buses at all, as the parking restrictions don't apply. It makes no sense and needs reviewing.

[Sue]

2 hours ago, Spartacus said:

I agree @first mate, pbg212's post does feel like a clumsy council intervention (and apologies if it isn't.

Obviously I can't speak for them, but they have been a forum member for some years, and none of their other posts imply a connection with the council.

Edited Tuesday at 14:34 by Sue

[Rockets]

Clearly, something should be done about Lordship Lane as it is starting to feel very tired and, despite lots of money spent elsewhere, hasn't really had much in the way of investment for a long time now. What this cannot become though is a trojan horse to implement a load of active travel measures by stealth...it doesn't, for example, need a pedestrian crossing every 50 yards......and already the  "remove the car storage facilities on Lordship Lane" narrative is gathering pace. It'll be a brave councillor who stands in front of the Lordship Lane shopkeepers and pitches that one....they tried it once before and it did't end well....

[alice]

What a load of rubbish Lordship Lane is probably one of the busiest little shopping streets within a couple of miles. Pedestrian crossings every 50m? more rubbish - there’s been a long time requested crossing at the junction with East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane a very dangerous corner still no crossing. Personally, I think it doesn’t need money spent on it council money should be spent on deprived areas first.

[exdulwicher]

13 minutes ago, Rockets said:

it doesn't, for example, need a pedestrian crossing every 50 yards......

The northern end (Townley up to Goose Green) is actually not too badly served, average distance of about 180m between crossing points (they're closer further north, a bit further apart at the southern end up to Townley). After that though, there's no provision at all until you get to The Plough which is over 500m away. It's more residential at that end so more people coming out of a house and needing to cross to the adjacent bus stop for example. There's a day care centre, a church, then up towards The Plough is Sainsburys and various other busy shops. There's always people running out from behind parked cars and pulled-in buses along that stretch.

And from the Library, there's nothing else until you get to Overhill Road, another 500+ metres of wide road, mostly residential so people wanting / needing to cross at regular intervals. Same again from there to the South Circ junction, that's 300+ metres of no provision.

I'd argue that from Goose Green to Townley, it's not too bad but from there on heading south, it's a disaster and needs at least another 4 crossings.

[pbg212]

6 hours ago, Spartacus said:

I agree @first mate, pbg212's post does feel like a clumsy council intervention (and apologies if it isn't)

In my experience, Lordship Lane works fairly well as it is, people tend to give way to others when walking past each other and generally footfall is good for a town centre this size.

Reducing or removing parking would have a detrimental impact on businesses as it currently allows those who live outsude the town centre to use it, and if businesses suffer, so does the town centre offering.

Personally, Southwark should leave East Dulwich alone to continue its organic growth as tinkering will only cause problems or drive out independents leaving only chains and charity shops🫣

No council links for me (maybe the word proposal in the title feels formal?)  - just notice how tight it can be going along the paths (near fit for, and Oru on west side; and also in front of CheeseBlock/SMB on East side, and how many cars seem to be regulars/not move. Though I probably notice it more than others due to often walking with dog on a lead. 
 

Some interesting points. I moved to the area after covid so wasn’t around for the changes then that people mentioned. I would be shocked if much of the passing trade on LL comes from cars/parking - given how hard it looks to find parking now (and the struggles of those who try to reverse in with a bus up their tail), which makes me think it wouldn’t actually  make a huge difference to visitors, but would improve the space no end.  Though I suspect would be a long way and many surveys off. 🙂

Edited Tuesday at 18:46 by pbg212

[first mate]

The pavements definitely need mending along stretches of LL, I have known a few people come a cropper as a result of cracks and uneven walking surfaces. I would though resist pavement widening; I think it may create more problems than it solves. However, I suspect the Council would be all ears at the suggestion.

On another note, wouldn't it be great if the Council could reinstate street upkeep, like leaf sweeping. The leaves have been a bit of a slip issue this year. Others can correct me, as I am not sure, but could some of the substantial council parking fine slush fund be used for this sort of essential pavement upkeep?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I suspect that improving the bus flow along the lane would do a lot more for the shops than providing half a dozen spaces for car parking and storage (and creating squeezed and crowded pavements to accommodate them). 

The pavement outside Bruno's, Oddono's etc. get's incredibly busy / difficult to navigate at weekends. It was widened during COVID and I have no idea why it wasn't made permanent.

Also agree with first mate on maintenance. A lot of broken, uneven paving. 

[Sue]

2 hours ago, first mate said:

 

On another note, wouldn't it be great if the Council could reinstate street upkeep, like leaf sweeping. The leaves have been a bit of a slip issue this year. Others can correct me, as I am not sure, but could some of the substantial council parking fine slush fund be used for this sort of essential pavement upkeep?

The leaves are swept, but at this time of year it's virtually impossible to keep on top of it.

[ianr]

The leaves were swept last year, and every year I remember.  Why  'reinstate'?

The schedules are published at https://www.southwark.gov.uk/parking-streets-and-transport/street-care/autumn-leaf-collection.  I am not a council member, employee, adviser, agent, representative, publicist, stooge,  or related to any of these.

Edited 15 hours ago by ianr

[first mate]

I may be viewing things through rose tinted spectacles but I have not seen one road sweeper on the residential streets near me, in the past I would see them almost daily in the autumn/winter. I especially remember a lovely guy who was I think a Rastafarian. He was really diligent but I think now retired. He was celebrated by the Council a number of years back with a large banner with his face on it.

It could be that I am missing the replacement sweepers, or that automated sweepers have replaced the people, only I have not seen them and the streets near me have a lot of wet and slippery leaves along the pavement, something that cannot be safe for various types of pavement user. It also disguises dog poo that has been missed by the odd owner!

[Jenijenjen]

There's also the problem that as the trees are getting bigger they are producing more and more leaves year on year making it more difficult to keep on top of sweeping.

[Pugwash]

Do not want pavements widening in all of LL. There are a few places that would benefit this but if you are driving there are sections of the road which could not cope with certain widths of vehicles i.e 2 buses going in opposite directions. Pavement widening in these areas would not beneficial.

The difficulty outside Oro is the number of bikes on the bike stands there - some which have fallen down reducing pavement space. This plus prams etc and outside seating add to the narrowness. 

People who use mobility scooters which cannot legally be used on the road, find certain areas too narrow with competing prams, pedestrians, and outdoor seating at cafes. Outside Farmers the pavement is uneven. from Franklins to Whatley Road - chairs and tables have encroached the pavement so much leaving pedestrians/wheelchair/Mobility scooters reduced areas.

I am against the return of the Covid Widening scheme- I found that where it was near bus stops, buses could not draw up close to pavements and those like myself reliant on walking aids found it difficult to board and alight due to the drop.

 

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

37 minutes ago, Pugwash said:

Do not want pavements widening in all of LL. There are a few places that would benefit this but if you are driving there are sections of the road which could not cope with certain widths of vehicles i.e 2 buses going in opposite directions. Pavement widening in these areas would not beneficial.

I agree - I'm not sure anyone was suggesting that pavements should be widened everywhere, but along specific sections of the road.

39 minutes ago, Pugwash said:

I am against the return of the Covid Widening scheme- I found that where it was near bus stops, buses could not draw up close to pavements

I don't understand this point. If you're talking about the stretch by Oddonos etc. - if you remove some of the car spaces and widen the pavement it makes it easier for buses to pass each other, give more room to pedestrians, and should have no impact at all on the bus stop opposite.

A 24/7 bus lane would also help buses pass each other and smooth traffic flow generally.

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, Pugwash said:

I am against the return of the Covid Widening scheme- I found that where it was near bus stops, buses could not draw up close to pavements and those like myself reliant on walking aids found it difficult to board and alight due to the drop.

 

 

Are you referring to the use of barriers to widen the path during covid making it harder to get on and off public transport?