Jump to content

Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale


Recommended Posts

@intexasatthemoment


At last night's Dulwich Community Council, Matt Hill, the Council officer, confirmed that the cycle lane currently painted on Townley Road with a dotted line will become a mandatory cycle lane with a solid line and a barrier separating it from the main flow of traffic once the Traffic Management Order has been signed off by the Cabinet member. The advance lights for cyclists in that lane, and the gate, will probably be added in stages after they have been trialled by TfL elsewhere. He said the delays were caused by a difference of opinion between TfL and the Department for Transport.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Irony is that the bordering private schools don't

> have proper covered cycle parking for staff or

> pupils but all wanted this junction made safer for

> cyclists and pedestrians.



Jags/Japs does have proper covered parking for bikes.

@intexasatthemoment


Matt Hill didn't say what the barrier would consist of. On the plan attached to the traffic management order, it's described as "Proposed 10.5m x 0.6m cycle lane segregation island to be installed, offset 1.5m from the adjacent proposed kerbline". I don't know if that's still the plan.

I came across this document by accident:


Sight Line

Designing Better Streets for People with Low Vision

by Ross Atkin


It's available for download as a free pdf.


It has a section on designing road junctions that are more helpful and safer for blind and partially sighted pedestrians.


It seems to me that design features that might do this have been removed from the junction in favour of yet to be completed changes that will benefit cyclists.


In all the paperwork did anyone see what appears to be the legally mandatory disability impact assessment?


I'd like to read it.


Is there an EDF member who knows about this subject?


John K

I spoke to some children today who use this junction. They think it a vast improvement for them. They're walking rather than cycling but still this is some good news from all that money being spent.
Well, let's keep proper monitoring of all road users, rather than ask a few children and conclude that ?200K+ was well spent. As with Melbourne Grove, anecdotal doesn't trump all other sorts of evidence.

I was wondering whether these were Dulwich Village children.


Or commuters from North Dulwich station.


I don't think it was ever established whether Alleyn's or James Allen's have many local pupils.

edhistory Wrote:

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


> I don't think it was ever established whether

> Alleyn's or James Allen's have many local pupils.



EDH,


We live on East Dulwich Grove and our two lads attend Alleyns, having previously attended DVI and Hamlet. How much more local do you want to get?


Tom

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

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

> Well, he said they walked, so I assume so. So were

> they driven before now because of the dangers of

> the junction?


I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the changes to the junction have not changed the travelling habits of any of the school children using it, except insofar as the removal of the barriers make it a nicer experience to cross the road here. I'd be astonished if there are people who used to drive who are now walking because of the work done.

tomdhu Wrote:

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

> edhistory Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > I don't think it was ever established whether

> > Alleyn's or James Allen's have many local

> pupils.

>

>

> EDH,

>

> We live on East Dulwich Grove and our two lads

> attend Alleyns, having previously attended DVI and

> Hamlet. How much more local do you want to get?

>

> Tom


That seems a rather snippy reply to a perfectly fair question. Without that sort of information about pupils' journeys (as well as staff), it makes it difficult for anyone to judge changes and improvements.

Going back the original Southwark consultation which stated:


"The key aim of the proposals is to significantly improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at the junction, whilst ensuring that there is no adverse delay to traffic on East Dulwich Grove."


If a couple of children have said that they think its an improvement and my own have said the same. That's good then isn't it ? And that's all it is. No one is trying to use this as justification for whole exercise. No one was ever said that less children will be driven because of changes to junction.

Jeez.

ed_pete Wrote:

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


> No one was ever said that less

> children will be driven because of changes to

> junction.


Yes, that is one of the aims of the cycling campaign and one of the reasons for the extra funding, to encourage children to move from cars/coaches to cycling. And I didn't say it wasn't good that the children asked liked it. I suggested that it was only a small part of how the changes should be judged.

Fair point and I?m aware that it?s Mayoral policy to increase cycling in London generally. Hopefully the alterations to this junction will help in that regard though I doubt the change is likely to take effect overnight.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> I spoke to some children today who use this

> junction. They think it a vast improvement for

> them. They're walking rather than cycling but

> still this is some good news from all that money

> being spent.


So what about speaking with any adults, making any independent and objective observations, speaking to the lollipop guy who knows the junction inside out etc.


Let's get some facts on the operation of the junction and stop these ineffectual interjections.

tomdhu Wrote:

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

> edhistory Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > I don't think it was ever established whether

> > Alleyn's or James Allen's have many local

> pupils.

>

>

> EDH,

>

> We live on East Dulwich Grove and our two lads

> attend Alleyns, having previously attended DVI and

> Hamlet. How much more local do you want to get?

>

> Tom



Thanks, Tom.


That's 2 children out of c985 who will not be using the new pedestrian crossing.


John K

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

    • Most of the shops in LL have too small a footprint. That's why we have so few chains. That won't change quickly. 
    • Errr could it be because of the noise pollution coming from it perhaps? You may not be able to hear it where you live but anyone on the Dulwich Village side of Lordship Lane all the way to beyond Brockwell Park is being disturbed by it - the sound wash from it is huge and that's a lot of people. As I said before we know people who live nearer to Brockwell Park to us and they say it is unbearable.   To be fair the Emirates moved to a piece of wasteland between railway tracks so it actually in a less densely populated area now and the council actually goes out of their way to try to mitigate the impact on local residents and yes, other than the concerts, you could hear a pin drop on matchdays! 😉 
    • Chains moving in is a sure sign that LL is heading for a fall. They are parasites, waiting for the independents to be successful and then, in partnership with rapacious landlords, they move in and force out those very businesses who have created the market they then seek to exploit. They replace a lively diversity with a bland and predictable offering. Then, when a downturn arrives, they move out, leaving boarded up premises and charity shops. Independent businesses who have worked hard to make a success of their efforts will try to see out hard times as they’ve invested so much. Chains look only at the bottom line and think nothing of closing branches. Chains are liable also to expand too fast, be managed badly and then collapse. Think of Brick House being forced out by Gail’s, the closure of White Stuff (although that chain was replaced by another) and JoJo Maman Bebe. . Sadly, I fear that will be the future of LL. 
    • It’s the impact the festival has on the community, the people living next door to the park who have to endure the thumping music and worse. Then there’s the park and the state it’s left in and the wildlife, especially nesting birds. All the roads going down Denmark Hill towards the park were closed off and roads off half moon lane and going up towards West Norwood closed off with wardens at each end, who were paid by Lambeth Council to stand there for the 4 days.  The festival made the news channels and interviews suggested most of the people attending weren’t fron the local area but places like Ireland and Scotland.  I live a 20 minute walk from the park and could hear the thumping music all day and night. Also the wind certainly carried the smell of drugs to my garden! For 4 days I couldn’t believe how strong it was. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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