| Author |
Message |
r
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 28 February, 2004 - 08:36 am: | |
A few concerned locals have arranged to meet Lewisham's Head of Transport next Wednesday to try and come up with some solutions for this problem, which is getting worse with the increased congestion on the south circular. The traffic cuts through as a shortcut between Honor Oak Road and Devonshire/South Circular junction. It is debateable whether they actually get there any quicker than staying on the south circ.
There are measures taken elsewhere in the Borough which could well be applied here- better, safer and quieter environment for all as a result.
Your participation is welcome! |
Brian
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 29 February, 2004 - 04:03 pm: | |
R
Good idea. I live in Devonshire Rd and the traffic waiting to move into the SC about 5.30 is often back to Ewelme Road.
Surely the best suggestion is to make the exit from DR onto the SC should be either right turn only or closed at certain times of the day. It is not quite as bad in the morning
I personally often use Tyson Rd but as I live on DR hopefully this would be allowed. |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 29 February, 2004 - 10:07 pm: | |
Brian,
I'm sure no-one will stop you using Tyson Road!
The purpose of the meeting with the Council is to get them to start taking this issue seriously and to to start consultation with local people and putting some solutions together.Some people may know the area around Bovill Rd, Gabriel Street and Brockley Rise- these roads have no access from Brockley Rise through to Honor Oak Park exc, emergency vehicles. This was put in place 18 eyars ago, and the residents find it has changed their lives immensely.( yes I have gone round there and talked to them) . I think this is the sort of thing we need around here. Lewisham Council have been reported in the press as saying traffic calming in residential neighbourhoods is one of their priorities for the next few years. Lets all make sure we're in the frame. |
Brian
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 01 March, 2004 - 08:05 am: | |
R
I agree will all you say. When they blocked of the end of Devonshire Road for a couple of weeks about a year ago it was great. |
Jim
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 05 March, 2004 - 11:35 pm: | |
I would support any action to get the council to look at this problem-I live at the end of Devonshire too, and it has been hell in the last while. There is also a diversion notice on the south circular at the junction which seems to be there to divert traffic from the s.circular up Devonshire- it is not illuminated however, so it doesn;t actually do this- yet.
I have tried to find out more about it but no luck.it is that square thing on two posts, just near the old toilets. Anyone know anything? I hope there are not plans afoot to divert al south circ traffic down my road. Not that this is not happening already by default. |
BT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 06 March, 2004 - 08:52 am: | |
The Diversion notice is for overheight vehicles approaching the Railway bridge. If you look carefully you will see the detectors on posts just near the Davids Road junction. |
jim
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 06 March, 2004 - 06:05 pm: | |
Thanks for clarifying what Lewisham highways couldn't. However if vehicles are overheight, then there is also surely a good chance they are overweight ie hGV's- Devonshire Road is not suitable for those sorts of vehicles. If they turn off into Devonshire, where do they go then? |
r
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 16 March, 2004 - 01:18 pm: | |
The proposed meeting with Lewishams head of transport did not take place last month but has been rescheduled for late March- I and a few others are to take along written comments/evidence from local people as to the problems that they experience in these particular streets. It would be helpful to have your comments on this website, but also good to get in touch directly. I'm not happy about giving out personal details on this site, so I would therefore like to ask the webmaster whether they would act as an intermediary for direct communications in the next few weeks?
Having today had a car in Woodcombe Crescent deliberately accelerate towards me and sound its horn as I was crossing the road, I am even more inspired to get something done. Please join us. |
se23.com
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 16 March, 2004 - 03:26 pm: | |
Ok, messages sent to ratrunning@se23.com will be forwarded to R.
R, please send your email address to same. |
r
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 25 March, 2004 - 02:21 pm: | |
We are putting together our group for next Wednesday 31st March to meet the Council- if you want to join us/submit a representation, please let me know by this Saturday, as I need to advise the Council on Monday as to who is attending.
Thanks, R |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 02 April, 2004 - 01:20 pm: | |
Just to report back, that the meeting with the Councillors and Head of Transport went ahead as planned and 4 people attended, with written representations from around 6 others.
The outcome was positive. The Council will write to set out some ways forward, subject of course to the usual budgetary and practical constraints. I'll try to keep everyone posted. |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 21 October, 2004 - 06:22 pm: | |
Not a lot has been reported on this but things had moved on-until now! In the summer the Council visited the area and assessed the problem, and agreed to consider some traffic calming measures and to put a bid in for a budget for these works this autumn. Additionally the Council were requested to look at ways to reduce the source of the problem, which is traffic turning right into Devonshire from the south circ in the mornings, and also in the evenings, a bypass from Honor Oak Road to the south circ. The key to this is, taking this route does not actually get cars from A to B any faster-they would have been better to stay on the main roads. Also, cars turning right into Devonshire from the south circ effectively block a whole lane of traffic which would be in line to head up London Road- hence exacerbating the problem. To address this issue, TfL would need to be involved.
Communications have been sent to the Council asking for an update but none has yet been received. I have proposed to them a deadline in late November for a response. If a response is not received I would conclude that this is clearly not being taken seriously and all our discussions have been a waste of time.
It is then surely time for residents to take this one step further.One suggestion would be to lobby the Highways sub committee and/or to set up a peaceful protest outside the Town Hall, with local press coverage. Your comments /suggestions are welcome. |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 22 October, 2004 - 02:22 pm: | |
An update on the previous entry- the Council have today written to say that a traffic calm plan was submitted for budgetary approval but this was not succesful. It is proposed that this be put forward next year. I think that it is now the time for local residents to make their views known. Leaflets will be distributed in the next few weeks to those 20 plus residents who have expressed an interest in becoming more involved - with a view to setting up a proper campaign group- before one of us, to put it bluntly, is killed on these roads. |
Hils
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 23 October, 2004 - 06:41 pm: | |
R let us know where we can pick up these leaflets as I would be interested in becoming more involved. |
SB
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 25 October, 2004 - 12:43 pm: | |
I am against any further traffic calming in the area around Devonshire Road. I live on one of the side roads off it. We have been infested with too many humps already. I would object strongly to any road closures similar to the schemes in Bovill Road. In order to solve the problems, we need to make roads run more freely, to stop people getting stressed by having to wait in jams - then there will be no need for them to look for rat runs. What is needed on Devonshire Road is a re-think of the parking which makes it nearly impossible for cars to pass each other - either that or make Devonshire Road one way - which could solve rat-running?
Also a mini-roundabout at the top of the hill where Honor Oak Road meets Forest Hill Road would be helpful in making traffic flow easier. |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 25 October, 2004 - 11:32 pm: | |
I believe the point made previously about enabling the south circular to run more freely would solve some of these problems of rat running in the smaller side roads. Those of us who live in consequently affected roads need to be able to cross those roads in safety, without being hooted at by drivers who speed up just as you are crossing. I am not interested in making the street in which I live a better environment for ignorant aggressive drivers. |
BT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 26 October, 2004 - 08:46 am: | |
Mini Roundabouts !!
As someone who uses the junction with Stondon Park and Brockley Grove on a daily basis I can assure you that Mini roundabouts are not the answer. Drivers coming down Stondon Park from the Brockley end totally ignore the Mini Roundabout and don't even slow down. As the view from Brockley grove is very restricted at this point it makes it extreemly difficult and dangerous to negotiate this Mini Roundabout. A mini roundabout at busy junctions is not the answer. |
Richard
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 26 October, 2004 - 09:23 am: | |
I totally agree. There are 2 on Perry Vale and neither seem to achieve the objective. I think the majority of drivers don't understand how to indicate on a small island and that it's give way to your right - not left!! |
Bosco
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 26 October, 2004 - 09:34 am: | |
I agree with you there Richard. I still fail to see why the min-roundabout was constructed at the Perry Vale/Mayow Road junction - it's completely pointless and we always approach it with a certain degree of trepidation! I don't remember that junction having been a particular problem before so rather than alleviating a problem they have caused one where one didn't exist! |
SB
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 02 November, 2004 - 12:52 pm: | |
Re. the mini roundabout - I think this is a better case than the one at Perry Vale (which I agree is pointless) - it's on a steep hill with a blind bend. Trying to turn right uphill whilst peering round the corner is killing my clutch!! (And have you ever tried in on a motorbike in the wet, where you don't have the luxury of a handbrake and have to hold the weight of the bike up?) |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 04 November, 2004 - 04:43 pm: | |
Do you good people fancy setting up your own mini roundabout or Perry Vale threads? We don't have much call for one in Ewelme. |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 10 November, 2004 - 11:40 pm: | |
Dear Hils- sorry just noticed your message about leaflets- if there is some way we can communicate off the website then I am happy to give you further info. Perhaps the webmaster would oblige in passing on private mobile phone numbers, etc?
Things have moved on again and a positive letter has been received from Pat Hayes, Head of Regeneration at Lewisham however further action clearly required to progress matters.
Cheers |
jason
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 17 November, 2004 - 04:31 pm: | |
I'd like to get more involved as I live on the Forest Hill end of Devonshire and have been concerned at the volume and speed of traffic recently - its been amazing- nonstop. It wasn't like this a few years ago.
There is a new block of flats gone up a few doors down with no parking provided, so this is going to make things worse. |
Vertical Hold
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 28 November, 2004 - 11:46 pm: | |
This is a subject close to my heart. Every spare piece of ground, whether it be a filling station, off licence, TA barracks or whatever seems to be turning into flats. Not semi detached houses you notice, which would be in keeping with the nature of the area. How is it that property developers, who make huge profits from these developments, seem to have no problem geting permission for these developments? An ever increasing population density leads inevitably to the problems described above. Personally, I don't like it. ncidentally, there's a nice piece about road safety here:- http://www.ishn.com/CDA/Article_Information/BehavioralSafetyItem/0,3563,3436,00.html |
Les
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 29 November, 2004 - 02:16 pm: | |
The local authority is promoting high-density affordable housing. Sounds reasonable to me, provided the transport system keeps pace (which it hasn't). |
CT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 29 November, 2004 - 02:53 pm: | |
Not that I'm an apologist for the mayor but the buses have got lots better and (hopefully) we'll be hooked up to the tube soon too!
Agree with VH that a lot of devt in area is pretty poor but I'd definately not define FH as an area of semi-detached houses! Perhaps in places but I would have said the predominant housing type is large houses converted to flats and modern flat blocks.
Nothing wrong with high density either - it means there are the people there to support the local shops and facilities that makes FH so great! More important that they get the design right. |
Vertical Hold
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 29 November, 2004 - 06:45 pm: | |
Hmmm,
you almost convinced me! |
CT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 30 November, 2004 - 05:20 pm: | |
You'll see! |
CC
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 03 December, 2004 - 10:07 am: | |
i dont think the Council has a lot of choice in the matter... high density is encouraged at every level (government, GLA and Borough) in order to make more effiecent use of land and meet the housing demand in the south east. every borough has an annual (or 5 year) housing target it needs to meet, which therefore leads to more intesive use of land. additionally the london plan requires that across london 50% of new housing should be affordable and within this 70% should be social housing and 30% key worker housing.
so i think your just gonna have to get used to it! |
CT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 03 December, 2004 - 03:06 pm: | |
Blimey!
Highly techical answer there CC - do we have a Lewisham Boro employee in our midst?
Hmmmmm |
Vertical Hold
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Saturday, 04 December, 2004 - 11:38 pm: | |
Well, the problem I have with this is illustrated by the following example. Air traffic grows at x% per annum. The existing facitilies will be exhausted in y years. Where will we put the new runways? I say, we are asking the wrong question. What about 'do we want additional air traffic?' Why not let air traffic self-limit based on the existing facilities? Same is true for road traffic, housing etc etc. Why not just put up the 'full' signs? I certainly don't remember voting for any 5 year housing target, affordable or otherwise... |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Sunday, 05 December, 2004 - 05:50 pm: | |
darlings, as mentioned before, love your enthusias but please set up your own thread- this is the rat running thread for Ewelme/Benson/Devonshire.Ta. |
CT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 06 December, 2004 - 12:44 pm: | |
Yeah that's right VH, close the airports, shut the docks, sterilise everyone....
Think we need to be realistic here. London needs people need houses. We also need houses that are close enough together and to shops etc so that we don't need to drive everywhere.
And I'm not your darling R! |
BaggyDave
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Monday, 06 December, 2004 - 01:39 pm: | |
CT, VH and perhaps R, come and check out the other threads which seem to have died a death (muggings, comedy, moor park tavern, places to eat.) Perhaps you could inject some life and humour into them........... |
R
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Tuesday, 07 December, 2004 - 11:47 pm: | |
Your as likely as not no-ones' darling, CT- I was only talking metaphorically. |
CT
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Wednesday, 08 December, 2004 - 03:39 pm: | |
I don't think you were R!
And I am! |
Jack
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Thursday, 09 December, 2004 - 09:12 am: | |
Good for you. Now what was the subject of this thread again?? |
se23.com
Joined N/A
| | Posted on Friday, 10 December, 2004 - 05:38 pm: | |
Yes, everyone will benefit if we could just stay on topic within the threads. For those who don't know, you can start a new thread anytime by scrolling to the bottom of the list of existing ones. Thanks. |
Roz
Joined 17-03-2005
| | Posted on Sunday, 09 April, 2006 - 06:55 am: | |
Another thread that has slipped down the agenda a bit- I am now rectifying this.!
I'd like to know what prospective local councillors and Mayoral candidates intend to do about this prevailing issue. Little has changed since it was raised first some years ago. Some readers may recall my comments about a local councillor who recently made false promises just to keep some of us quiet.
Having voted along party lines for years, unfortunately now unlikely to continue in the local elections as see this as actually have little bearing on Council performance on local issues of concern such as this.
The party that will actually look as if it will do something will get my vote this time.
I have been previously advised to get a petition arranged but as everyone knows this takes time, something I do not have ,and I do not see why if local councillors, Head of Transport, and prospective candidates already see there is a problem. |
Londondrz
Joined 09-04-2006
| | Posted on Monday, 10 April, 2006 - 09:02 am: | |
Roz, I have contacted the council on the envirocall line and asked for the roads dept. Lady whom I spoke with was very happy to tell me what was going on and some idea of timeframe. My interest was parking problems and the rat run that is Waldenshaw Road and Manor Mount. |
