Jump to content

Southwark Council's Cycling Strategy 2015 plan for the Adys Road - East Dulwich Road junction


Recommended Posts

I remember filling in a consultation on the Southwark Cycle Scheme.


And if you read the plan there are no changes proposed to Adys, CP Rd and Landells beyond some traffic calming measures, which given all have speed humps already, would be pretty minimal I'd think.


The real stuff happens further north.

I commented on this and expressed dismay at the idea of using Adys Rd as part of a main cycle route. Seems completely mad to me ,it's a nightmare at the moment with cars squeezing past .


But then I also commented on the potential for collisions between pedestrians and cyclists on the shared cycle lane in Peckham Rye .

See also the Quietway Events and Consultation pages available via https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/. There was a presentation at the Community Council yesterday. (In fact there's already a thread on it: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1451849,page=3)
  • 4 weeks later...

The black traffic measuring cables often appear just before roadworks start. I have been told that they help determine the timings for temporary traffic lights.


Of course, it might also be collecting data to justify any other proposals.

The EDF focus has been on the Townley Road junction and and Dulwich Village junction changes.


This is about the yet to be announced changes to the Adys Road / East Dulwich Road / Crystal Palace Road junction.

Please not a cycling route down Adys Rd . Unless parking restrictions and a one way system is introduced .


I would NEVER cycle up or down Adys Rd ,it's difficult enough to drive along it .


Am I the only person who thinks this ?

Eh, I cycle up Adys road pretty much every day. I would say of all the roads in the area it's one of the least difficult (not discounting the slight climb). It has traffic calming and I've not seen any cars speeding etc.



intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Please not a cycling route down Adys Rd . Unless

> parking restrictions and a one way system is

> introduced .

>

> I would NEVER cycle up or down Adys Rd ,it's

> difficult enough to drive along it .

>

> Am I the only person who thinks this ?

I couldn't find anything in the documents about the proposed Traffic calming measures for Crystal Palace Road. Perhaps I missed it.


Nothing either about a F.M.Conway Aecom Ltd modification of the North Cross Road - Crystal Palace Road - Upland Road junction.


Nor the southern exit onto Lordship Lane.


John K

Adys Road is perfectly OK for cycling if you know what you're doing. Narrow, yes, but speeds are very low, there are no buses and hardly any HGVs. Nobody expects to go fast, which means you can ride in the middle of the road - you just have to be sensible enough to negotiate with oncoming traffic (OK, there's the occasional thug that thinks(???) negotiating = "try to run the other guy off the road", but those are a fact of life). Biggest hazard is at school drop-off - cars pulling in and out and people opening doors without looking, but "ride wide" and that's not such an issue.


Given the minor changes there and on Crystal Palace Road, it's not like there's going to be some massive surge in numbers cycling along there anyway. Simply designating something a cycle route is not going to turn it in to a Superhighway peloton overnight. Likely similar numbers as you get on Green Dale.. more than background noise, but not so many you'd necessarily notice it was a designated route. Further north, it's a different story.

Having skimmed the Southwark document two things really leapt out, the clear aim to calm or 'design out' traffic on residential streets as well as remove parking on busier roads. The second was that allegedly extensive public consultation has been carried out. This is the first I've heard about these much more ambitious plans. According to the document we are just at the beginning of these 'exciting' changes and this is a 5 year plan. I am beginning to think they really intend to make car ownership impossible.

Several people have pointed out to me that the southern terminus junction with Lordship Lane would be very dangerous left "un-treated".


Junction roadworks to in introduce saftey features will be required.


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

    • Eh? That wasn't "my quote"! If you look at your post above,it is clearly a quote by Rockets! None of us have any  idea what a Corbyn led government during Covid would have been like. But do you seriously think it would have been worse than Johnson's self-serving performance? What you say about the swing of seats away from Labour in 2019 is true. But you have missed my point completely. The fact that Labour under Corbyn got more than ten million votes does not mean that Corbyn was "unelectable", does it? The present electoral system is bonkers, which is why a change is apparently on the cards. Anyway, it is pointless discussing this, because we are going round in circles. As for McCluskey, whatever the truth of that report, I can't see what it has to do with Corbyn?
    • Exactly what I said, that Corbyn's group of univeristy politics far-left back benchers would have been a disaster during Covid if they had won the election. Here you go:  BBC News - Ex-union boss McCluskey took private jet flights arranged by building firm, report finds https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cp3kgg55410o The 2019 result was considered one of the worst in living memory for Labour, not only for big swing of seats away from them but because they lost a large number of the Red-wall seats- generational Labour seats. Why? Because as Alan Johnson put it so succinctly: "Corbyn couldn't lead the working class out of a paper bag"! https://youtu.be/JikhuJjM1VM?si=oHhP6rTq4hqvYyBC
    • Agreed and in the meantime its "joe public" who has to pay through higher prices. We're talking all over the shop from food to insurance and everything in between.  And to add insult to injury they "hurt " their own voters/supporters through the actions they have taken. Sadly it gets to a stage where you start thinking about leaving London and even exiting the UK for good, but where to go????? Sad times now and ahead for at least the next 4yrs, hence why Govt and Local Authorities need to cut spending on all but essential services.  An immediate saving, all managerial and executive salaries cannot exceed and frozen at £50K Do away with the Mayor of London, the GLA and all the hanging on organisations, plus do away with borough mayors and the teams that serve them. All added beauracracy that can be dispensed with and will save £££££'s  
    • The minimum wage hikes on top of the NICs increases have also caused vast swathes of unemployment.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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