Roadworks in Lordship Lane at end of North Cross Road

[kford]

However attractive the final pavement looks, it'll be let down by the privately owned surface in front of the 1960s parade, which is chipped and uneven concrete.

[James Barber]

Hi P68,

How can a build out that does not protrude any further than parked cars "strangle" lordship Lane?

Hi ZT,

As I reported two weeks ago the works finish 7 September.

Hi kford,

we can't fix everything at once.

[Penguin68]

James Barber wrote (today at 11.10am):-

Hi P68,

How can a build out that does not protrude any further than parked cars "strangle" lordship Lane? [i actually wrote ...another attempt to strangle (sorry, calm) the free flow of traffic in LL - but let it pass]

But he also wrote, today at 09.21am :-They will hopefully calm traffic but primarily ...

Either the build out does have an effect on traffic or it doesn't. Up to you to make your case, but at least make it consistently.

[Penguin68]

Today I drove past the 'works', (I use that word completely wrongly) - a cursory glance suggests (I do hope I am wrong) that the Chinese granite slabs do not have beveled edges on the road side - if that is so they will, until they wear, very readily cut into tyres which scrape against them - for instance when trying to park close into the pavement. We had this problem when the pavements in Gallery Road were redone - the AA man who then helped us said that this type of problem was very common with new slabs. So do be very careful.

[kford]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi kford,

> we can't fix everything at once.

I believe the private land can't be touched by Southwark (just like the areas in front of the Moxons parade)

[Zebedee Tring]

Why so long? They started weeks ago (?late June/ early July) on what is surely not a very complicated job but is located on the busiest road in ED. This delay is presumably because Conways start one job and then move on to other jobs, leaving other jobs in limbo. In other words, just like the worst cowboy builders.

James, I think that you said somewhere something along the lines of Southwark's deal with Conways being one of the cheapest in London. As I have already commented, if you pay peanuts you get monkeys.

[bob]

Hi James.

Thank you for your reply Re traffic calming. I don't have an issue with trying to improve the look of the entrance to the market, but the traffic calming project to narrow the road's was put forward and agreed on a long time ago, since then we have seen the introduction of the 20 miles an hour speed limit across the borough, thus calming traffic every where yet to day at Peckham Rye in front of the old toilet's more road narrowing, why are we still wasting good money on some thing that is now redundant.

Bob S

[James Barber]

Hi kford,

We can with signed agreement from land owners - this is done if they agree to allow right of way. The area around Moxon's we've been trying to do this for some time. But if a single landowner doesn't wish to do it then very hardtop do without creating more ponding which is a major reasons for trying to do this.

Hi bob,

Because many people are not driving at 20mph. further measures are required.

Hi ZT,

Because they're allowed by Southwark Council to take so long. Not having a majority of councllors my lot can only do so much trying to get things completed in reasonable time scales.

[richard tudor]

Clark Barber wrote

Hi Bob

Because many people are not driving at 20mph. further measures are required.

What others measures are hiding in the wings that we don't know of.

Perhaps it would be better to accept that most people do not drive at 20 mph because it is not sensible

Ill thought out labour manifesto dogma

All roads 20 mph madness.

[Blah Blah]

I don't see anyone driving at 20mphr on clear main roads. All that money wasted on signs and road paint!

[Zebedee Tring]

So in the days when your "lot" ruled, James, were things really so much better? Please give us chapter and verse.

In any case, haven't Conways entered into a contract(s) under which they are penalised if they haven't completed works within a specific time? And what has changed since your "lot" were in power?

[James Barber]

Hi Richard tudor,

Southwark Council as part of the 20mph rollout allocated ?700k for further physical measures based on traffic count/speed to take place. This amount is meant to cover the whole borough. Being in opposition I don't yet know what or when further measures are proposed. I hope some of this is used on Barry Road, and other locations around East Dulwich with crashes. But other parts of the borough have much higher crash numbers and should be addressed first.

But of the tiny devolved budgets we have I'd like to see if we can look at one or two crash locations to make them safer.

Hi blah blah,

You are unusual. The Police report that most people think others are driving faster than they actually are.

Traffic counts have previously before 2mph speed limits shown excessive speeding on Lordship lane around Upland Road junction, Barry Road.

[richard tudor]

Cllr Barber Said

Hi blah blah,

You are unusual. The Police report that most people think others are driving faster than they actually are.

Traffic counts have previously before 2mph speed limits shown excessive speeding on Lordship lane around Upland Road junction, Barry Road.

Why are all roads being targeted instead of the above?

If people think most people are driving faster than they actually are but in fact are going a lot slower there cannot be a problem.

[Penguin68]

.

[bob]

James,

I'm not to certain i understand this the council bring in a road narrowing project let's call this plan A to bring about road calming because of excessive speeding in some location's, this fail's to work, so they need a plan B because plan A is not working, they implement plan B a blanket speed limit of 20 mph across the borough to rectify the situation, this fail's to stop the excessive speeding, so we revert back to plan A the road narrowing which failed in the first place. Do the road planing dept have any clue what they are trying to achieve or how to go about it or even the misery and hardship they are putting local people at. ( This is pop at the council whoever they be not you)

Bob s

[edhistory]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi kford,

> We can with signed agreement from land owners -

> this is done if they agree to allow right of way.

If they do grant a right the land becomes "highway" and Southwark Council can charge a very expensive street furniture license for use of their own land.

An A-board license alone costs ?380 per year.

Why does Mr Barber support this?

John K

[85volga]

Getting back to the main issue which is when will Conways return and finish the bloody works ?????????? this is turning into a procrastinated bloated load od hog wash.

I care not for stage two "the flower baskets" bla bla bla just finish the works and return the road traffic and bus stops to normal.

[first mate]

What is truly extraordinary is that Conway are getting away with it. They are so hand in glove with S'wark that they have an office at HQ, so where us the accountability?

[Penguin68]

To be fair to Conway (god this sticks in the craw) it is not unusual (or indeed bad practice) for customers and suppliers to work as 'partners' - particularly where there is a service or call-off contract situation. However the obvious lack of either timeliness penalty clauses or (it often appears) quality assurance penalty clauses shows the initial procurement and contracting staff in Southwark to be well below par when it comes to setting or policing effective contracts - had they been in a commercial firm they would have been fired.

It is also unfortunate that building and construction services have had a long history of corruption - particularly linked to local authority supply - I am not suggesting that this is the case here, but just because of the history very effective policing of contracts and perhaps some show of 'arms-length' relationships might have been a better call to reassure the paymasters (that's us, eventually, as local and national tax payers, in case you've forgotten).

However, Conway is presumably not the driver of the mad Southwark alone Chinese granite policy which has done much to add to the time failures here (both in terms of delivery and of ease of fitting) so I am sure the blame can be spread quite wide (not that, of course, any blame or censure will actually be applied anywhere).

[spider69]

Is the current re-organisation taking place in Southwark Council making matters worse?

Senior staff going and others fearing for their jobs does not concentrate the mind.

[Zebedee Tring]

There's no excuse for their utter incompetence, spider69. In fact screwing up a sensitive scheme would surely make it more likely that you would get the chop - bosses don't like their underlings giving them problems.

[Zebedee Tring]

James, you haven't replied to my post below:

"

So in the days when your "lot" ruled, James, were things really so much better? Please give us chapter and verse.

In any case, haven't Conways entered into a contract(s) under which they are penalised if they haven't completed works within a specific time? And what has changed since your "lot" were in power?"

If you don't reply to this, I will assume that this is because you can't make a satisfactory response and that Southwark's relationship with Conways is no different from when your "lot" were in power. Please in future try to help us to get a better service from Southwark and Conways rather than using these threads to take political swipes at Southwark Labour.

[mockingbird]

ZT posted:

Please in future try to help us get a better service, not political swipes...

Good post. Cllrs interested in self aggrandisement and political swiping serve only themselves.

[rch]

To be honest, this latest design doesn't bear much resemblance to the original Living Streets recommendations... it's more of a bog-standard highway junction build-out with a raised crossing.

As it develops, it's looking like there won't be much space for anything other than a few cycle racks, so I guess we'll have to just wait and see what it looks like when it's finally done.

On a positive note, the raised crossing will make life a lot easier for prams and disabled pedestrians...

[Penguin68]

I suppose I'm an old cynic, but I do begin to feel that the hugely extended works both there and in Townley are extended so that, once they are finished, we will think things have improved, when they have only actually improved compared with the mess the road works have created - we won't be able to remember back to the time before the changes to realise that things may not be any better, or conceivable may actually be worse. Well, you can fool some of the people...