Ryedale SE22 - Proposal to block end of Ryedale at junction of Underhill Road - January 2026

[malumbu]

Haven't a clue what you are talking about.  Do you know the roads?  I do, and have used them for years.  If you live on a main road there is traffic.  And yes, I do agree with you, there are a lot of selfish drivers.  I was one once.

[Rockets]

34 minutes ago, malumbu said:

Underhill is a main road and therefore will have significant traffic on it.  I've used it regularly over the years, and never considered it particularly congested. 

Everyone @malumbu has spoken - it has now been decided that Underhill is, in fact, a motorway.....

Honestly, how on earth do you categorise Underhill as a main road? That is just beyond ridiculous - are you just using this as a Trump'esque distraction technique - say something so ludicrous everyone gets distracted...I mean you don't actually believe what you say do you?

Edited yesterday at 16:28 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

2 hours ago, Rockets said:

Come on @march46 it is not that difficult to understand. Let's look at one example: if you are trying to get to the A205 from Goose Green roundabout and want to avoid the congestion at the Grove Tavern junction which way do you think you are going to go?

Yeh, you're right. There was no rush hour congestion at the Grove Tavern junction of the South circular before *checks notes* a filter on Calton Avenue!?🫠

Plug that journey (goose green, to Dulwich Common) in to Waze for 6 O'clock and see where it directs you - via Dulwich Village.

There is no way that the filter on Calton Avenue is making people switch their route from Goose green to the junction of Lordship Lane and the South circular, from Dulwich Village to Underhill.

 

Edited yesterday at 16:41 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

36 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Yeh, you're right. There was no rush hour congestion at the Grove Tavern junction of the South circular before *checks notes* a filter on Calton Avenue!?🫠

Did anyone say that? But the point you are missing is that pre-LTNs the congestion would not regularly go as far back as Melford Road - the left hand lane would remain clear. The right-hand lane turning right onto the A205 now tails back much further.

This is why the council had to extend the bus lane closer to Melford as bus times were being affected due to the new build-up of congestion at the narrowing point near Melford -which in turn made congestion worse back towards Court Lane.

Anyhow, I am not sure you are aware of the road layout but your search via Waze is a pointless one because you cannot turn right out of Underhill so cannot go westbound on the A205 that way.

Try re-running the search going from Goose Green to Forest Hill.....I rest my case.....here is what LTNs do - 6 minutes quicker going via Underhill than Lordship Lane.

Edited yesterday at 17:10 by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

Oh I see. So we’re ignoring the example you gave (that was nonsense) and trying another one. OK. Do you really think that the route given by Waze to get to Forest Hill (no longer just to the grove tavern junction of the south circular) is different because of a filter on Calton Avenue? When would you ever have gone from goose green via calton Avenue to get to Forest Hill?

Waze always tries to direct people around the lights. It always has. It’s what it does on Ryedale too. 

20 hours ago, Rockets said:

congestion would not regularly go as far back as Melford Road

Are you serious?

Edited 4 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

Err @Earl Aelfheah sorry, what? You know Forest Hill is on the A205 right? How as what I said nonsense - just a reminder I said....

Let's look at one example: if you are trying to get to the A205 from Goose Green roundabout and want to avoid the congestion at the Grove Tavern junction which way do you think you are going to go?

7 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Do you really think that the route given by Waze to get to Forest Hill (no longer to the plough junction of the south circular) is different because of a filter on Calton Avenue? When would you ever have gone from goose green via calton Avenue to get to Forest Hill?

Oh @Earl Aelfheah - ok, let's break this down for you - it's not about the journey you are making - it is the journey others are making and congestion caused by that. You seem to be missing the fundamental point I was making in the post you selectively clipped- go back and read it again and see if the penny drops.

Actually, let me explain this to you by the journey you searched for on Waze - to get to that part of Dulwich Common you used to be able to go via Calton and what is now Dulwich Square. Now you can't - so traffic has to go another route.

Interesting isn't it that Waze did not suggest going via Grove Tavern and a right turn there - why, because of the congestion?

You are doing a great job of highlighting what the stark realities of LTNs are.

 

[Northern Star]

@malumbu I am impacted by the traffic on Underhill, as I Iive in the area so I see the traffic every day, in particular the morning rush hour. I am not home in time to see the rush after work. 

Underhill is not classified as a main road I would have thought or A road? It is busy for a residential road, 4000 in my view is a lot for a residential road 

re speeding - cars were very much speeding down whately prior to the crossing being added in the middle of it. It has really helped kids going to Heber school - so streets for people 😀 

sorry all - I know this thread is not about Underhill but anyone who lives close I am sure is not super keen on the through traffic, whatever the cause. 
 

Many drivers who are going towards Sydenham / Forest Hill use this cut through. And yes satnavs suggest it, in particular to avoid the lights by south circular so it must have some time advantage. 
 

I agree that 2019 report is subjective but definitely highlights issues I think a lot of people in the area would agree on. 
 

Sorry all to divert the discussion from Ryedale.
 

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

23 minutes ago, Rockets said:

let me explain this to you by the journey you searched for on Waze - to get to that part of Dulwich Common you used to be able to go via Calton and what is now Dulwich Square. Now you can't - so traffic has to go another route.

Yes. It goes via East Dulwich Grove. The idea that Calton Avenue was a 'major East / West corridor is just silly. It was at best a way to cut out the lights on EDG, saving a couple of minutes max if you were travelling from the Village to Lordship Lane. 

Do you honestly believe that Waze didn't always direct cars travelling from Goose green to Forest Hill around the lights and the Plough junction during rush hour? Honestly?

The fact is that as apps such as Waze have become more popular, more and more people are being directed down back streets and around lights / major junctions.

Edited 23 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[malumbu]

@Northern Star Underhill is a reasonably long road that goes from A to B ie will be used as people have a destination to go to rather than using it as a cut through.  Including Whateley most of the roads off it are minor, ie Underhill has the priority.  To me that means it is not a minor road.  Happy to call it something other than a major road, but not sure what other definition can be used.

I've no in depth knowledge of how traffic flows have varied over the years, but in my living memory it has never been an isolated farm track and has always had a flow of traffic down to and back from LL.

 

[Northern Star]

@malumbu we’ll have to agree to disagree.  

Edited 21 hours ago by Northern Star
Making the post more neutral.

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The idea that Calton Avenue was a 'major East / West corridor is just silly.

Oh no it's not.....

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Do you honestly believe that Waze didn't always direct cars travelling from Goose green to Forest Hill around the lights and the Plough junction during rush hour? Honestly?

No I do not believe Waze would have done that pre-LTNs. The reason? Waze makes it recommendations, amongst other things, from other cars using Waze stuck in traffic. If you look back at my messages from around 2020/21 I was saying how bad the congestion at Grove Tavern had become post LTNs and how it snaked back up Lordship Lane often to the Court Lane junction. Why? Because I was often there every day at the bus stop.

[Earl Aelfheah]

16 hours ago, Rockets said:

No I do not believe Waze would have done that pre-LTNs. The reason? Waze makes it recommendations, amongst other things, from other cars using Waze stuck in traffic.

 

19 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Yeh, you're right. There was no rush hour congestion at the Grove Tavern junction of the South circular before *checks notes* a filter on Calton Avenue!?

🥱

For info - Waze has had a big impact across lots of areas, with more and more drivers directed around major junctions and traffic lights. As we have seen on underhill and rye dale.

Ironically, LTNs are one way that local authorities are trying to address the impact of apps like Waze (the Ryedale proposal being a classic example)

I thought this was quite a novel way of creating a (albeit temporary) quiet street!

Edited 5 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

52 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Ironically, LTNs are one way that local authorities are trying to address the impact of apps like Waze (the Ryedale proposal being a classic example)

Ha ha...what to deal with the displacement caused by previous LTNs....this is EXACTLY what is happening on Ryedale now: the council are chasing the LTN displacement?

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

A filter on Calton Avenue (that you can easily avoid by turning at EDG) has not caused traffic on Ryedale. Anyone who uses Waze knows exactly what's led to people using Ryedale to avoid the lights on Dunstan's Road.

You can read the research I've linked to above that describes the impact of Waze. You can see the same patterns across different areas of the country.

Edited 5 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

@Earl Aelfheah many, many people would agree to differ with you on your summation.

The facts are simple:

• LTNs cause displacement and congestion
• Post LTNs there has been an increase in congestion around the Grove Tavern junction heading to the A205
• Post LTNs traffic on Underhill and surrounding streets has increased (at least 6% on Underhill with the limited monitoring the council did) as vehicles look for a way around the congestion
• The council is chasing the displacement as residents complain that, since the LTNs, their roads have become much busier
• LTNs do not lead to traffic evaporation - it is displaced,

The Waze map below could really be used as a very visual story-telling infographic on "The reality of LTNs" and how it is not just boundary roads that absorb the displacement.

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Rockets

[Earl Aelfheah]

Your example of Waze directing people around a major junction of the South Circular during rush hour (you'll note that it doesn't do this if you plug in the same route at this time of day), just tells you how the algorithm directs people around traffic. This is not a revelation. If you're suggesting there wasn't traffic at the junction of the South Circular during rush hour before a filter was put in on Calton Avenue, well that's obviously not true. If you're suggesting that Waze didn't direct users around it prior to 2021, you are wrong. What is true, is that the number of Waze users has doubled in London since around 2019.

Of your other stated 'facts', they're not born out by any evidence - rather data show the exact opposite; The notable exception being the fact that Underhill road has seen increasing traffic since at least 2021 (probably before that).

So it just takes us back to the question - what's the likely cause of that increase - and the increase of traffic on Ryedale? Is it a traffic filter (that does very little to interrupt cars driving between the Village and Lordship Lane, and nothing to stop cars travelling through the Village to the South Circular) having an impact on an unrelated route over other side of East Dulwich? There is no logical argument, or evidence for this.

Or is it that Waze (the use of which has massively increased in the last 5 or 6 years), directs people around traffic lights and major junctions, diverting more people onto side roads - something that has been studied and the impacts described in the academic research? 

Edited 4 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Moondoox]

Quite looking forward to the trial, as someone who cycles and lives on Ryedale. Frankly I think Underhill needs a bus gate or something radical. People on this forum rage at the idea of having to get out of their cars, but what's the alternative? Rat running down residential streets forever?

[alice]

Why the dehumanisation?   It’s a route,it’s a road,  like Underhill is a residential road.

Edited 4 hours ago by alice

[Ladharrbeinn]

15 minutes ago, Moondoox said:

Quite looking forward to the trial, as someone who cycles and lives on Ryedale. Frankly I think Underhill needs a bus gate or something radical. People on this forum rage at the idea of having to get out of their cars, but what's the alternative? Rat running down residential streets forever?

Agree we need radical approaches to reducing traffic - but what we don't need are these piecemeal road closures which massively ameliorate one street and the direct expense of another. It is simply unfair. All these roads are residential, so the idea that some are "rat runs" others the correct route, is totally illogical. The cost to the residents of the roads suffering from the displaced traffic is noise, pollution - but also literally cost, in terms of the value of their houses. For example, the (already very wealthy) residents of Court Lane have been handed a massive bonus by the closure of "Dulwich Square", entirely at the expense of those on East Dulwich Grove, whose houses are much closer to the carriageway and including the children at East Dulwich Charter School.  

[Rockets]

@Ladharrbeinn absolutely spot on but the problem is some people just don't want to hear it - they are permanently blinkered by the active travel obsession. Interestingly, the testimony given by TFL during the congestion London Assembly meeting was do telling - they are utterly obsessed by active travel and think that any negativity associated with their plans can be forgiven because it is part of the active travel doctrine.

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

There is no logical argument, or evidence for this.

But there is @Earl Aelfheah it just happens to be one that doesn't tally with your own ideology.

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Or is it that Waze (the use of which has massively increased in the last 5 or 6 years), directs people around traffic lights and major junctions, diverting more people onto side roads - something that has been studied and the impacts described in the academic research? 

Waze directs drivers around congestion. It's how the algorithm works.

1 hour ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Your example of Waze directing people around a major junction of the South Circular during rush hour (you'll note that it doesn't do this if you plug in the same route at this time of day), just tells you how the algorithm directs people around traffic. This is not a revelation.

As I said it is how the algorithm works. And I ran it at lunchtime and it was still directly vehicles along Underhill saving 3 minutes.  It is now sending traffic via Peckham Rye. Interesting though is that it never sends vehicles on the most direct route which is an LTN boundary road (as Rachel Aldred et al would categorise it).     

48 minutes ago, Moondoox said:

Quite looking forward to the trial, as someone who cycles and lives on Ryedale. Frankly I think Underhill needs a bus gate or something radical. People on this forum rage at the idea of having to get out of their cars, but what's the alternative? Rat running down residential streets forever?

Welcome to the forum!

But clearly, despite all of the interventions to date, people are not getting out of their cars are they? Do you realise that many of these interventions are causing more rat-running?

One presumes you supported the council's measures - what would you say to those who live on St Dunstan's who may be impacted by the closure?

[Earl Aelfheah]

43 minutes ago, Ladharrbeinn said:

All these roads are residential, so the idea that some are "rat runs" others the correct route, is totally illogical.

I don't entirely disagree with this. Certainly we need strategies to reduce traffic across the entire network. It is true however that there are A roads and B roads; with A-roads generally designed and equipped to handle higher traffic volumes and faster speeds compared to B-roads. What we've seen in recent years is there has been a big shift in traffic from A roads to B roads as a result of dynamic routing apps. 

Edited 3 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

18 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

What we've seen in recent years is there has been a big shift in traffic from A roads to B roads as a result of dynamic routing apps. 

To be fair @Earl Aelfheah there has also been a big shift from B roads to A roads due to LTNs. That is, after all, one of the stated aims of LTNs to push traffic more onto main roads - what did Cllr Leeming say about this.......? And on the basis of that dynamic routing apps have been pushing drivers from A roads to other B roads to find a quicker route around the congestion.

[alice]

The roads that have been mentioned above are neither a Roads nor B Roads

[Earl Aelfheah]

2 minutes ago, alice said:

The roads that have been mentioned above are neither a Roads nor B Roads

I was responding to Ladharrbeinn who was commenting on East Dulwich Grove (the A2214).

[Ladharrbeinn]

32 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

I don't entirely disagree with this. Certainly we need strategies to reduce traffic across the entire network. It is true however that there are A roads and B roads; with A-roads generally designed and equipped to handle higher traffic volumes and faster speeds compared to B-roads. What we've seen in recent years is there has been a big shift in traffic from A roads to B roads as a result of dynamic routing apps. 

I'm confused - of Underhill and Ryedale, which is the A road and which is the B road?