Jump to content

Consultation on Bellenden Road - Holly Grove - Lyndhurst Way Cycling and Walking Improvements


ed_pete

Recommended Posts

Catma, as a daily cyclist I find there are few things as stressful as hoping that a car approaching a side road junction (often at speed) is actually going to stop. The Choumert/Bellenden junction you mention is one where my experience is that cars often stick their nose out a foot so it's not ever really clear if they *are* stopping, and meanwhile I'll have an impatient car driver too close behind me hoping to complete a mad overtake before the traffic island outside the bike shop. I'm sure I've scowled on occasion.


Incidentally, going the other way cars are even less tolerant, often resorting to a last gasp dash out of the Choumert junction, apparently ignoring the possibility that cyclists turning left off Bellenden may need to use the right lane to turn N (right) onto Lyndhurst Way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ed_pete Wrote:

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

>

> For what it's worth, I use this route as a cyclist

> most working days and although I can see that the

> proposed changes would make it better for cyclists

> I really don't think it's that bad at present and

> I think the changes unnecessary.


A year on, I think the OP 'won' this thread.


The main loser on the current layout is the motorist, stuck on Bellenden Road when vehicles are attempting to pass each other and the parked cars and vans. The changes don't improve the motorist's lot.


Pedestrians are adequately catered for. You can't rely on right of way at some of the zebra crossings (especially at Warwick Gardens), but unfortunately that's the norm everywhere. I don't see my walk to/from the station improving in the changes.


Cyclists have to be on the ball when changing lanes, and assertive in their road positioning, and thick-skinned when it comes to impatient motorists. I don't understand the drawing well enough to know how much the cycle lanes will improve life: cycle lanes inside parked cars sound to me like a recipe for passenger door collisions, and cycle lanes with parked cars on them are not really helpful. As rendelharris points out, the cycle lane takes a less safe line than an assertive cyclist. Some posters have said they are not confident on the existing route: I strongly the suspect that some proper training would be far more use to address this than the the physical changes proposed.


Overall, I'd have been happier for the consulatation and highway budget to have been spent on something more beneficial. For example, a crackdown on careless driving in this area. All the main problems I see around Bellenden Road are from impatient and inconsiderate road users: overtaking and parking on the zig-zag lines; forcing progress past the parked cars; failing to stop at zebra crossings; driving too fast; cycling the wrong way in one-way sections. Just fine the buggers, and forget about fiddling around with paint on the road! Oh, and give cyclists some decent training :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • There is no equivalence between One Dulwich purporting to be a local organisation speaking for local people, and actually properly constituted organisations such as The Dulwich Society. A 3 -second google search reveals the openly published names of the trustees of Dulwich Society, so I can make my own mind up as to whether these individuals are coming at local issues with a particular slant. I can read minutes of their meetings online, and whilst I might not agree with their every position, I can have confidence that they are an open and fundamentally democratic institution. There is absolutely nothing similar in terms of publicly accountable information to be found about One Dulwich - no idea of who is behind it, who pays for it ( it is clearly expensive), and on what basis they make their decisions.  Given the Police involvement in the intimidation of people with a public pro-LTN view ( for which there is no equivalence in terms of severity of any incident for those with an anti-LTN point of view), I can fully understand why, for Dulwich Society's traffic sub- committee only, they want a bit of online anonymity. I also find it slightly disturbing that when The Dulwich Society current leadership asked the 'grouping' pushing for changes within it for a meeting to discuss their concerns, they refused it. Given the recent experiences of organisations such as The National Trust, the question can be asked - is something similar going on here?   
    • I’ll post it to the DVLA if i don’t find the owner by midweek. 
    • The most recent one did, despite the council making it very difficult for anyone to object (which interestingly they were forced to change for the CPZ consultation and look how that went for them). I will dig out the responses for you when I have more time so you can enlighten yourself.   Ha ha...the language used by councils when they see the results of a consultation and need an out to ignore the views of locals...;-) Did you not notice how this only became a thing once the consultation had been run....one wonders why!? Earl you can bluster all you like but you cannot ignore the fact the council closed the junction to emergency services and put lives at risk and resisted all calls (from the emergency services) to open it for them. Surely you can't defend that  or are you willingly turning a blind eye to that too? Ha ha, which kind of begs the question then why so many of you get so vexed by One Dulwich? Surely you could compartmentalise their work if the above was true? I suspect it has a lot to do with the accountability that they are forcing and the fact some don't like it.
    • I believe around 57% of the 5,538 people who were part of the self selecting sample making up the original consultation, opposed the LTN. So just over 3,000 people. This was around 3 years ago now. I think there’s something like 40,000+ living across se22 and SE21 🤷‍♂️  The LTN is a minority interest at best. Whilst it’s an obsession for a small number on the transport thread who strongly oppose it, I suspect most locals quietly approve of the improvements made to that junction. …and we still haven’t heard who has supposedly been pressurising the emergency services and how (are we seriously going with the far left / the commies)? Is anyone willing to stand up and support the 'One' claim that people are partially covering their plates and driving through the filters due to inadequate signage? Again, it all sounds a little ridiculous / desperate. Feels like it may be time for them to start coming to terms with the changes.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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