double yellow lines in Hindmans Road

[wolis]

Does anyone know why double yellow lines have been painted on both sides of part of Hindmans Road? We woke up this morning to find them, having had just a day's notice to move our cars. Why is there no information given to residents beforehand? Or consultation?

[Amoeba]

No idea and can't for the life of me think why this is necessary on a quiet residential road. Not happy at no longer being able to park outside my home - for no apparent reason and without having been consulted in any way. Have sent the council an email hoping to find out more - suggest that others do too. Hoping this is just some ham fisted council mistake!

[intexasatthe moment]

Hindmans Rd ? Double yellow lines ? Surely a mistake ?

[bodsier]

Double yellows seem to appear and disappear ....am I right in saying they have been removed outside telcos at Loughborough Junction......on a bend.....hmmmm

[ianr]

_A_ document _has_ been posted here, according to Google. It's http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/file.php?5,file=121847‎. I've not been able to find the post to which it was attached. Nor, yet, any mention of it on the Southwark website. Perhaps we should have competitions to find things there. In principle all council public notices should surely be easily findable on the council website. Alternatively perhaps we should read, copy and index all the notices they publish each week in Southwark News.

This one can't, given the dates, be the immediately relevant or sole document, but does it provide a clue as to what might be afoot? It reads:

"LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK

ROAD TRAFFIC REGULATION ACT 1984 SECTION 14(1)

(HINDMANS ROAD) TEMPORARY WAITING AND LOADING RESTRICTIONS

TEMPORARY PROHIBITION OF TRAFFIC

1. The Council of the London Borough of Southwark hereby gives notice that because of flood alleviation works to be carried out by Thames Water / MGJV in the above named road, it intends to make an order the effect of which will be to prohibit vehicular traffic from waiting and loading at any time in part of Hindmans Road.

2. Whilst works are in progress, and whilst the authorised traffic signs are displayed, no person shall cause any vehicle to wait, including waiting for the purpose of loading and unloading at any time in Hindmans Road, on both sides, between No?s 146 to 134 and No?s 135 to 127.

3. An alternative route will not be required.

4. Exemptions will be provided in the Order to permit reasonable access to premises, so far as it is practical without interference with the execution of the said works.

5. The restrictions will not apply to any vehicle being used in connection with the said works, or for fire brigade, ambulance or police purposes or anything done with the permission or at the direction of a police constable in uniform.

6. The restrictions will come into force on the 27th January 2014 and will continue until the 7th March 2014 or until the works have been completed whichever is sooner.

7. Further information may be obtained by contacting Road Network & Parking Management on 0207 525 2014.

Dated this 16th January 2014

Nicky Costin

Road Network & Parking

Business Manager

Southwark Council Environment & Leisure, Parking & Road Network Management,

PO Box 64529 London SE1 5LX

Ref: 2198"

Google did also btw throw up another proposed Traffic Order (representations to be made by 1 May), this one about relaxing controls slightly, at lordship_lane_area_traffic_order_and_signs_review_-_public_notice_dated_10_april_2014 which is a 2.9Mb PDF file.

The contact email address for these things seems to be [email protected].

[wolis]

Thanks for that - very helpful.

[wolis]

Just re read this and realised that this was work carried out at the other end of Hindmans Road and doesn't apply to the present situation. Waiting for replies from James Barber and from Southwark Council.

[Renata Hamvas]

Hi Wolis, I've contacted Southwark officers about this.

Renata

[Selma]

Renata, I hope you have had more luck then I have.

I have been passed around different departments when calling Southwark council. Been given 3 different E-mail addresses to send my enquiry to (one did not even exist). I have yet to have any response or even been given details on who can be of help.

These must have been painted by mistake. If these are not removed soon, I will struggle as I have two small children and now can?t even stop outside my house

[Amoeba]

Hi Renata

Are you the Peckham Rye ward representative who should have been informed about this in the first place? Am keen to hear anything you get back from the Southwark Officers.

Thanks

[ianr]

I've just made an epistemological breakthrough. The London Gazette seems to be the place for public traffic orders.

I've not checked but assume that publishing them there is or helps meet a statutory requirement.

Searching there is easy too. Here is a template for finding all traffic management orders (LG Notice Code 1501) for Southwark made from the beginning of the year https://www.thegazette.co.uk/all-notices/notice?text=Southwark&start-publish-date=2014-01-01&categorycode=G411000001&location-distance-1=1&noticetypes=1501&numberOfLocationSearches=1&results-page-size=20. There are currently 44 of them, some made by the council, some by TfL. It's then very easy to filter that set in various ways. Including text "Hindmans" narrows it down to just the 10 April one that I mentioned above. The absence of the one I quoted suggests that it never became an actual order.

The yellow lines remain a mystery. Perhaps it's the yellow-liquid-in-bottles merchant found a new hobby.

-------------------

[Note: the Phorum software is stopping me from posting my full text. I'm experimentally removing one sentence at a time; so if you read just this, be aware that there's a missing sentence somewhere, that I'll try to smuggle in later, once I know which it is.

OK it was the template URL that Phorum didn't like. That's a difficult one. It might take some time. In the meantime, the LG home page is www.thegazette.co.uk/, and the Notice Code, Borough and Start Date you'll have to select yourself.]

[update: the search template URL is now re-included in an acceptable form. I've had to leave out just the string specifying the borough. I've also corrected the LG Notice Code above, from 501 to 1501.

And included "Southwark" in the URL as a required text string, which I think will exclude most TfL orders.]

[wolis]

Thanks Renata. I've spoken to various people at Southwark and they're supposed to be ringing back - nothing so far so I hope you can find something out.

[Amoeba]

Thanks ianr - much appreciated.

[James Barber]

Hi ianr,

The Lordship Lane changes Iw as assured last month when I checked is about tidying up a number of traffic orders into one traffic order and changes virtually nothing.

Hi wolis,

Shocked at all that double yellow lines. Constitutionally this will have been agreed by local councillors at the Peckham & Nunhead Community council. Simply agog.

What was everyone thinking when they proposed, agreed and actioned this?

[Convex]

Watching with interest.

Bonkers!

[spider69]

James Barber Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi ianr,

> The Lordship Lane changes Iw as assured last month

> when I checked is about tidying up a number of

> traffic orders into one traffic order and changes

> virtually nothing.

>

> Hi wolis,

> Shocked at all that double yellow lines.

> Constitutionally this will have been agreed by

> local councillors at the Peckham & Nunhead

> Community council. Simply agog.

> What was everyone thinking when they proposed,

> agreed and actioned this?

Surely the Local Cllr would have been at the meeting and been aware of the road layout. Or did no one turn up and a pet project was pushed thru with no opposition or awareness from the local community.

How many other new rules are passed thru with no knowledge from the community.

It only takes one proposal and no objections to go thru.

Any comment

[DulwichFox]

.......When they put Yellow Lines on one road, I did not live on that road, so I did not Protest.

...and When they put Yellow Lines on another road, I did not live on that road, so I did not Protest.

...and When they put Yellow Lines on yet another road, I did not live on that road, so I did not Protest.

...But When they put Yellow Lines on my road. It was too late to Protest.

DulwichFox

[EDmummy]

DulwichFox Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> .......When they put Yellow Lines on one road, I

> did not live on that road, so I did not Protest.

>

> ...and When they put Yellow Lines on another

> road, I did not live on that road, so I did not

> Protest.

>

> ...and When they put Yellow Lines on yet another

> road, I did not live on that road, so I did not

> Protest.

>

> ...But When they put Yellow Lines on my road. It

> was too late to Protest.

>

> DulwichFox

Like it Dulwich Fox but do you actually know Hindmans Rd? Absolutely no sane reason to put these lines here. The only reason I can think of is that they are there temporarily to store mechanical diggers etc to continue the work we had done at the other end of the street for the last 3-4 months.

[MissSophie]

I too live in Hindmans and am flummoxed by this. Is this because of the new development that is being discussed behind 16-20 and the need to get emergency service access? It would explain why both sides have been painted (for fire engines to turn if need be)However, this can't take place before the developments are actually built, can it? It seems insane, and highly impractical. Tyrell Road and Oakhurst Grove is also going to be affected. Please help James and Renata!

[wolis]

Dulwich Fox: It's hard to understand what point you're making. Apart from the tasteless misquoting of the famous Niemoller reference to the Nazis and Jews, it's irrelevant. I don't remember another incident of yellow lines appearing overnight in a residential street with no reason and no warning, that we were supposed to protest about.

[willwaters]

Agree with MissSophie's speculation here. The lines do not cover the length of the road so re-surfacing unlikely. It would be just the righ position for the proposed development. Ironically we actually objected on the basis of compromised parking during the development. We didn't get a reply and looks like our concerns were well founded.

Whatever is going on I find it retry poor that the council do not feel obliged to inform anyone.

[ianr]

I'm interestedly flummoxed too. It may be quite different but I'm reminded of a previous occasion when some road markings went up, at our expense, later to be carefully removed. http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,549542 I don't think anyone at the time bothered to check the reason, whether it might have been a case of someone jumping the gun as far as formal authority went.

On the question of authority I'm even more flummoxed by one aspect of the discussion, perhaps because of my lack of familarity with the nuts and bolts of local government as now is. I do understand that community councils can be allocated control of smallish funds, which they can allocate in prescribed areas, and that of course they can express opinions on anything of relevance. But what actual power and function do they have in matters of traffic management decisions and actions? A priori, perhaps naïvely, I'd have assumed none, other than as a stater of opinion.

[Selma]

Has anyone had any sort of response from the council? None of my E-mails I sent over 24h ago has been responded to (sent to [email protected] and [email protected])and no one I speak to have any idea who to even speak to.

[Goonerjules]

This is totally crazy - we returned home yesterday and struggled to park near our house (we have 2 babies) due to the knock on effect further up the road. It seems a bit weird that this could happen with no obvious reason without anyone being warned. Surely it is a mistake.

[Amoeba]

Not a word from the council yet. Renata is this something you can do anything about - or do you know who can?