New Zebra Crossing on Lordship Lane.

[Huguenot]

Charliecharlie, where's your evidence that planned parking damages retailers?

It's quite frustrating that so many people trot out this glib cliche with no evidence but present it as fact.

Since all shoppers on LL are ultimately pedestrians (or how would they get to the checkout?), then facilities that improve their access and movement will ultimately increase trade, not decrease it.

If you are claiming that these pedestrians can't get to LL without driving, then how about traders running a survey asking all shoppers at the point of purchase what their postcode is? At the end of the survey period we can finally find out the cash value of motorist non-SE22 customers to LL traders without all the bullshit.

Or will this be prevented because it may reveal an alternative agenda on behalf of traders - their own convenience at the expense of others?

[Pierre]

At the risk of a "change? change?!" reaction, I'd like to know what the criteria are for spending money on that area and whether a crossing will actually _improve_ anything.

It's a dangerous section of road for those crossing, granted. It's a bit dicey to drive down.

If the traffic speed is too high, why not reduce the speed limit to 20mph?

If pedestrians not using the crossings is a problem, why not put up railings to ensure crossing anywhere else is more difficult? (yuck)

If the road is full of speeding through traffic, why not make it buses and pedestrians only (except trade vehicles within certain hours by parking permit)?

I'm not saying any of these are the best idea, but I don't think that yet another crossing, on a curve in the road, is actually going to make much difference - people will happily wander into the road 20 yards either side of the existing crossings.

: P

[KalamityKel]

Pierre I'm sure if it was an issue of speeding through traffic no one would be complaining - no one would be able to cross (saving the need for any sort of crossing) and the traffic movement would mean no congestion (again no need for a crossing) ;-)

[*Bob*]

I'm confused.. where is this fabulous section of South London Autobahn where the cars race at high speed and pedestrians risk their lives in a deadly game of virtual 'Frogger' whilst trying to cross the great divide?

[????]

Turn it off Hugenot, you don't even live here, can you remember what Rye Lane was like a few years ago...you think the parking nazi's round there helped it? I think that rather than conduct a huge statitstical study for firm evidence (quite how that would work is beyond me?)...you could. given the lack of any other evidence, anectdotally look at the views of people who actually live and work in SE22, which on this forum are pretty resoundingly a NO.....go back to Raffles for your tiffin.....

...how about we give local independents evey chance in tough times.

[charliecharlie]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Charliecharlie, where's your evidence that planned

> parking damages retailers?

Talk to Mel ref Blue Mountain and Forset Hill branch (which closed as turnover plummeted after they brought in parking restrictions)

Talk to Chris and Karen from Pretty Tradtitional about thier views on the interrelationship between CPZ's and turnover

Talk to Rob and Monica at Health Matters about how the bus lane/changes of parking regs effected them

I understand that about 20% of trade come from those who live outside the area (about the % that makes a business viable, lose that lose the business)

Yes, I know that you can use the buses, but....

[Asset]

The curve isn't that bad, it is possible to see the road well enough. I think there should be a crossing there as it's where I always want to cross. Oh dear the poor car drivers may be held up a little. Tough.

[SimonM]

>>I'm confused.. where is this fabulous section of South London Autobahn where the cars race at high speed and pedestrians risk their lives in a deadly game of virtual 'Frogger' whilst trying to cross the great divide?<<

That'd be at the other end of LL, by the Grove Tavern (I refuse to refer to this centuries-old tavern as the "Harvester"!) which really does need some pedestrian phasing/pelican crossings/whatever to help us negotiate the Monaco Grand Prix-stle traffic...

Oh and the Forest Hill branch of Blue Mountain was hopelesly positioned from the word "go" - down the road from the station, no room for even outside tables never mind parking...

[*Bob*]

Not sure about that, Simon.

Entering a Harvester should always entail a certain degree of mortal peril.

[SimonM]

>>Entering a Harvester should always entail a certain degree of mortal peril.<<

Well there's the salad bar for that.....but for those of wanting to cross to get to the park or along to the college or picture gallery (and/pr back again) :))it'd be nice to cross in some safety...

[*Bob*]

Surely what 'slows down motorists' on LL is - and I'm just thinking outside the box on this one - the amount of traffic?

You could put 12 pedestrian crossings in between Somerfield and Goose Green and you'd still be stuck in the same queue on Denmark Hill just a few minutes later anyway.

[fractionater]

edit

[Huguenot]

Awww, Quids, you know I only post because I love you xx

It's a bit wierd though, because I've not recommended a parking permit, I've only recommended that someone check the data before casting judgment.

Your strategy seems to be to shout at me for being reasonable, to berate me for asking for information, and then to tell me to get the hell off the forum because I no longer live locally.

You misrepresented the results of the survey on another thread, which showed that residents close to LL are vastly in favour of parking restrictions. You continue a tired argument that involves using LL as your shopping destination, and other people's roads as your car park.

Your reaction to their chagrin is to bully them.

In your own terms, 0 out of 100.

And I still love you.

[whishter]

I can't see where anyone has mentioned that in the option where the least parking spaces are lost the bus lane is interrupted. As a daily bus user but also a resident of Chesterfield Grove I am struggling with which option would be better. I do believe they is a need for a pedestrian crossing but struggle with my options of delayed buses as they have to pull into the main traffic lane particularly during rush hour - anyone who gets the bus in the morning will know the delays involved in Grove Vale where the bus lane ends - or struggling to park on my own street particularly on a Saturday. Anyone got any thoughts?

[SimonM]

Well the bus lane continues unbroken at, e.g., the pelican crossing at the junction of LL and Overhill Road.

[Mark]

I like the idea of a wide pavement to walk on outside Somerfield but I don't like the thought of the disruption caused by the interruption of the bus lane. Nor am I keen on the loss of parking spaces as it may mean loss of business to local traders, or will it?. Is anyone a trader or has anyone spoken to a trader to get their opinion on this?

[charliecharlie]

how wide does a pavement need to be to do its job(?)(?)

don't remember seeing any human corpses or mangled buggies outside Somerfield

seems kind of OK the width it is; room for double buggy, Big Issue guy, cash point folks and general ED flaneurs.

Stroll on EDers:)

what's happening? are we planning a big party outside Somerfield?

NB End of year budget... Conways - the cousin of 'Southwark Big Daddy', and another big ol' expensive f**k up springs to mind

[charliecharlie]

future scenario....

http://www.blog.treutech.com/photos/crowd_of_people.jpg

people enjoying the new wider pavement outside Somerfield

(wow, I never knew it was such a popular shop... perhaps it's the closing down sale bargains that are attracting such a crowd...)

edited because of horrendous typing and trying to do 12 things at once

[Louisa]

I think the question of cars has only become an issue in ED because we do not have a public car park. I think it is a great shame that we cannot invest in a patch of local land which not used so that we have a place for visitors to the area to park.

Louisa.

[Horsebox]

Louisa Wrote:

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

> I think the question of cars has only become an

> issue in ED because we do not have a public car

> park. I think it is a great shame that we cannot

> invest in a patch of local land which not used so

> that we have a place for visitors to the area to

> park.

>

> Louisa.

What about concreting over the LL end of Goose Green? It's plenty big enough and might ease the "It's Saturday and I can't park within 5 metres of my front door" syndrome. It may also discourage those arriving from the north from driving up LL.

[Louisa]

I dont think I could stomach the thought of GG being sacrificed for a car park, as much as it would be nice to have somewhere that close to LL. I was thinking more along the lines of perhaps reopening up the somerfield car park and maybe extending it a little, perhaps putting some underground parking in too?

Louisa.

[AllforNun]

oh that's great news, maybe after the 2 traffic accident deaths in Nunhead the council executive have finally acted.......mmm hang on did you say Lordship lane or Nunhead lane ?

[SimonM]

Surely it has been demonstrated time and time again that if you supply/build a car park that holds X cars then come Saturday morning 4X will be queueing impatiently to get into it?

[first mate]

Will losing some parking on LL increase parking issues in the side streets making it easier to introduce controlled parking and permits in future? If it's only a couple of spaces then probably no issue, just musing.

Just seen this already discussed earlier. Sorry folks.

[karter]

Mark Wrote:

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

> I like the idea of a wide pavement to walk on

> outside Somerfield but I don't like the thought of

> the disruption caused by the interruption of the

> bus lane. Nor am I keen on the loss of parking

> spaces as it may mean loss of business to local

> traders, or will it?. Is anyone a trader or has

> anyone spoken to a trader to get their opinion on

> this?

I have spoken to a number of retailers now , on my journeys on that strip of LL and lower down, they all have said pretty much the same thing, shoppers will not be able to park temporarily at that spot to do their shopping so it may affect trade. Parking would be retained behind the zig zags though and the pavement would be built out disrupting the buslane. As Moos said ( which i admit was funny reading my first post back) that does it take fatalities to warrant a safety measure? I think it does unfortunately that's why they put safety measures such as speed cameras on black spots and that's how councils work bizarly enough. I can't recall reading about any fatalities on that strip of LL though. And like charlies said, are they doing this cos they need to spend allocated monies or it would just be wasted if they don't use it. Who knows. I think a third crossing at the roundabout would definitely be a good idea though. It can be tricky crossing from Goose green to the Mind Shop. Another crossing on LL would make life easier too however. And one more thing before you all fall asleep, i recall the workers building up the side roads at the lower end of LL some years back, to reduce speed, only to have them take it all away again. I mean WTF, what a waste of money.