|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
I am starting this new thread to allow us to focus on these two inter-related subjects. Please post details here if your neighbourhood suffers from speeding traffic or parking problems. If you have already made traffic related points on this website under a different topic, restate your points here. This way we will build up a fuller picture of the problems in our town. We can then meet to decide what to do next.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 12:15 pm: |
I think everywhere suffers from speeding traffic in our area.
I live Junction Ewelme Rd / Devonshire Rd.
Parking not great but never been impossible
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 12:27 pm: |
Live opposite Fairlawn school and whilst problems with the usual school run traffic problems no parking worries at all.
Speed is a big problem on this stretch of road with overtaking a common theme even on approaching the pedestrian crossing.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 12:51 pm: |
The new humps on my road, in Perry Vale North, suprised me by how much traffic they reduced. I did not think we had a problem previously but now I realise the humps have made a positive difference in speed and volume of traffic.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 01:02 pm: |
Traffic ignoring one way on Manor Mount (at last things being done!)
Speeding traffic on Honor Oak Road and Honor Oak Park
Selfish people parking on pavement or double yellows close to Fairlawn school and Catholic school near the junction - and lack of enforcement.
Congestion around Tescos garage on South Circ due to proximity to traffic lights and lack of car management on the forecourt (actually total incompetence!) and not moving dodgy people who look like they are dealing drugs on!
OK I've digressed slightly but you know where I am coming from.
Overzealous speed bumps! eg Netherby Road as opposed to some of the more useless attempts just out of our area!
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 01:27 pm: |
Don't get me started! This new thread is a good idea.
On Ewelme we have already approached the Council and Councillors re the volume of traffic on our road, particularly at peak am and pm times.
There are therefore issues with volume, speed, and the type of heavy traffic, ie lorries, large trucks, (one of which deposited its contents over the road after breaking sharply,) effects are essentially fear of being run over, cars frequently hit by passing traffic, garden walls demolished in accidents, persistent sound of screeching brakes as cars take the corner. ambulances not able to gain access in emergencies, vibrations of heavy trucks shaking the house foundations, etc. And this is only a taster. The Councils response is to make amenable noises and empty promises of imminent area based traffic calming schemes and funding which never materialises. Our road has been described as the Forest Hill bypass. Probably not the right thing to say, but a consequence of Manor Mount becoming one way. Perhaps MM should indeed become a two way stretch again as this is clearly the demand!
The car management on the Tescos forecourt was something I have brought up previously with Councillors- it really is a consquence of poor design and layout as well. No one took account of the fact that some people actually do their weekly grocery shop in there and hence take up the space a great deal longer than necessary. This should have been addressed at planning stage. Its predominantly a supermarket with petrol, not a petrol station with a few groceries.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 01:42 pm: |
The sharp corner near the top of Ewelme is an accident waiting to happen ( i expect it has on many occasions ).
To cap it all someone who obviously wants their little red car written of has parked the last or 4 days the wrong way round on the bend . Hardly visible until last minuite to drivers coming down road.
Dave has certainly got a lot of gripes. Most of which I agree with especially the Tesco situation.
This is a ridiculous place for a garage and convenience store.But I guess Tesco paid well.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 02:10 pm: |
Thanks for all your responses so far. Keep them coming!
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 02:32 pm: |
Just spotted comment on the Forest Hill Station History thread about the Horniman Museum actively encouraging their visitors to park on our local streets. Roz posted:“I'd like to bring to everyone’s attention a poster in Camden Town tube station advertising the re energised Horniman Museum, and at the bottom advising 'ample free parking in adjacent streets' ie yours and mine. How very dare they.”
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 03:05 pm: |
The Horniman monthly magazine also encourages parking in beautifull Syd Rise and other roads
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 03:16 pm: |
Sharp couple of corners at the very top of Montem Road are quite dangerous. Particularly as the road is used as a rat run for people to get onto Brockley Rise from the South Circ and people park both sides. There was some survey work done but no results yet that I've seen.
|Posted on Friday, 10 March, 2006 - 05:16 pm: |
Simon, Montem Road being a rat run between Brockley Rise (B218) and Stanstead Road (A205 South Circ). Do you know which other residential roads are included in the run – Lowther Hill, or do drivers continue northwards to turn right from Marnock Road onto the B218 by Crofton Park Station? Does the rat run operate in both directions or just south to north?
|Posted on Monday, 13 March, 2006 - 08:43 am: |
Lowther Hill and Duncombe Hill seem to have most of the traffic but I'd imagine Brockley Park (before the corners in question) has similar problems. Operates both directions.
|Posted on Friday, 17 March, 2006 - 12:40 pm: |
Thanks you for your contributions here,and under Forest Hill Station History.My take is some actions could be taken fairly quickly and on some issues we may need to buy expert advice. I suggest we concentre first on how to tackle:
1.High-speed traffic, dangerous driving, and fear of being run over on our residential roads.
2. The Horniman's “ ample parking available on neighbouring streets” policy
3. The issues affecting Ewelme Road, “ the town bypass”.
Can people make a short meeting on Saturday 25 March starting 12.45pm?
|Posted on Friday, 17 March, 2006 - 01:41 pm: |
I doubt if Ewelme suffers anymore than Devonshire Rd.
|Posted on Friday, 17 March, 2006 - 02:02 pm: |
The stated problem with Horniman's 'ample parking' policy sounds pretty mean-spirited to me.
The Horniman is one of the gems of Forest Hill, and brings a lot of pleasure to residents and visitors alike, not to mention trade.
Given that the museum is largely aimed at youngsters, I don't have a problem if people want to drive, rather than have a nightmare with toddlers on the trains and buses.
There's acres of space around the Horniman's area for parking compared to most areas, and the whole 'I want to park MY car, where YOU parked YOUR car' sounds pretty narrow minded to me.
Three cheers for the Horniman,
|Posted on Friday, 17 March, 2006 - 03:40 pm: |
Well spoken Les
Hornimans is a great plus for SE 23.
|Posted on Friday, 24 March, 2006 - 02:58 pm: |
Reminder of our road safety campaign. First face-to-face meeting starts Saturday at 12.45pm tomorrow. Can’t make tomorrow? There will be other opportunities to meet up or comment here. Road safety campaigns are notoriously a long hard slog. Focus will be the 3 topics listed last week. Wording of topic 2 revised in light of subsequent comments made on this forum or direct to me out and about in SE23.
1. Dangerous driving, high-speed traffic, large commercial vehicles, and fear of being run over on residential roads.
2. Congestion around Tesco Garage on the South Circular and Horniman’s “ ample parking available on neighbouring streets” policy
3. The issues affecting Ewelme Road, “ the town bypass”.
|Posted on Friday, 24 March, 2006 - 04:07 pm: |
Any clues as to the venue of the meeting? It's not the old pub in UDB is it?
|Posted on Friday, 24 March, 2006 - 06:37 pm: |
Scipio, where is the venue?
|Posted on Sunday, 26 March, 2006 - 10:41 am: |
Well, I don't know what happened re the meeting, but I sure would have liked to come, if only I knew where it was taking place!!
|Posted on Sunday, 26 March, 2006 - 06:56 pm: |
Well, looks like either you are all still at the meeting, or have lives, unlike me who clearly hasn't! Has no one else really posted in the last 48 hours?
|Posted on Monday, 27 March, 2006 - 11:08 am: |
Is there anyone else out there? Have we had an alien invasion and they've just left Roz and me?
|Posted on Monday, 27 March, 2006 - 11:50 am: |
I have noticed recently a lack of input over the weekend. I suspect all the contributers are enjoying the local attractions such as the blue painted boards outside the former McD.
|Posted on Monday, 27 March, 2006 - 12:50 pm: |
Guys - we could set-up a love-nest thread for the few of us who are still active (we had one in the past before the great purge a year ago).
After the excitement of McDonalds I have run out of inspiration, currently failing to wind anyone up.
There was a thread a couple of years ago where there was an immense amout of activity over a matter of minutes and then total silence, bar one who ended up talking to themselves. Was quite amusing at the time but can't find it! Reminds me of Roz's postings over the weekend.
Separately I suggested in the recent past that the Webmaster reorganise the site in terms of subject areas as we do often harp on about subjects that have been raised in the past (so we can see what the councillors offered others in the past, not just Roz).
Sorry all a bit boring at present.
There's some retro Adidas trainers called "Forest Hills".
Umm... http://www.bbc.co.uk/england/sevenwonders/london/p arliament_hill/02.shtml
|Posted on Monday, 27 March, 2006 - 01:52 pm: |
I did notice in your link it reads:
parking: There are no designated parking areas.
Unlike: plenty of parking in neighboring streets.
|Posted on Monday, 27 March, 2006 - 02:11 pm: |
Do you think Scipio is still in his meeting?
|Posted on Wednesday, 29 March, 2006 - 11:44 pm: |
Roz - Sorry you could not find us last Saturday, we were not far from Ewelme Road. A small group but lively! I shall post a summary here of main points covered. Can’t do this until I’m back in Forest Hill with access to 25 March’s scribbled notes. Do you want to suggest a time and place for next meet-up?
|Posted on Thursday, 30 March, 2006 - 07:40 pm: |
Fairlawn School has petitioned parents over selfish parking and other habits close by. It's taken a long time but is a welcome move. Obviously only aimed at parents/carers and not the 40 - 50 mph drivers along Honor Oak Road or the fast turners into Canonbie. Don't know how joined up all this is.
Like the idea of a protest group, reminds me of my hippy days after punk rock died with the New Age Travellers, then anti poll tax riots, Critical Mass, Gulf War I protests and stop the Crystal Palace development (well right on!). A reclaim the streets campaign would be great, if we have enough crusties amongst us.
What do we want?
Nice shopping presincts with galleries and designer shops
When do we want them?
or something like that I recall
|Posted on Thursday, 30 March, 2006 - 08:18 pm: |
Scipio, I couldn't find you as there was no venue given for the meeting hence I had no idea where to look.
|Posted on Friday, 31 March, 2006 - 11:58 pm: |
Fair point, Roz! I have an urgent piece of work to finish this weekend but shall then post details of last Saturday’s meeting.
|Posted on Friday, 07 April, 2006 - 11:57 am: |
Here are the notes on the first meeting of our Road Safety Campaign held Saturday 25 March:
We met near the P4 bus stop at the Tesco Garage end of Honor Oak Road. A local lady waiting at the bus stop decided to catch a later bus in order to give us her own robust views on the many problems in Forest Hill caused by the constant through traffic and the low priority given to pedestrians. She was pleased we were trying to get things changed.
Having done the “Who is Scipio?” gags, we introduced ourselves - a group of mixed ages and backgrounds - and got done to business. We agreed that our “meet on the street” had been useful and will continue to get “out and about”. We will publicise our activities on the SE23 website but will not respond to negative comments about our campaign such as the 17 March forum posting.
Our Road Safety Campaign will include the following actions:
1. Approach our own contacts to recruit supporters from all age groups
2. Be serious about what we want to achieve but plan some fun events as publicity
3. Publicise our existence on the Community Notice Board in Sainsbury’s
4. Establish the skills/knowledge/contacts our expanding group has to draw on
5. Stay focused on our objectives
6. Identify and make contact with outside experts who can give us advice
7. Keep formalities to a minimum but take the steps needed to insist on recognition
8. Identify the individuals in Transport for London and Lewisham Council who make the decisions that affect life on our roads
Our first set of priorities will be to:
1. Identify the boundaries of our defined area of residential roads
2. Press for action on the dangerous driving, high-speed traffic, large commercial vehicles, and fear of being run over experienced on these residential roads
3. Put forward solutions to the South Circular congestion around the Tesco Garage
4. Stop the Horniman advertising “ ample parking available on neighbouring streets”
5. Find out about the issues affecting Ewelme Road, “ the town bypass”
|Posted on Friday, 07 April, 2006 - 10:14 pm: |
All very worthy Scipio, and I am sure that we would all hope that your lobby will make some difference to the quality of life on the local streets.....but lay off Les and Brian. I see nothing negative in their speaking up in support of the Horniman. If the only problem the museum brings to our community is occasional parking inconvenience, then heaven knows we are happy blessed. This is not, by the way, intended as a negative comment about your campaign, which I support in the main.
|Posted on Friday, 07 April, 2006 - 10:29 pm: |
All sounds inspiring but am just a bit confused how people knew the ' venue' of the meeting - albeit a bus stop -when it wasn't advertised anywhere and certainly not on this website. So what mandate does this group have to do these things if we don't even know who they are? I'd really like to know who is claiming to represent my interests.
I have to say Scipio that all this doesn't really add up.....
|Posted on Wednesday, 12 April, 2006 - 04:55 pm: |
I apologise for delay in responding to the above points of view.
Thistleblower - I must emphasise this is not just my own personal crusade but as Baggie Dave succinctly put it, a “reclaim the streets” campaign by local residents. I am glad you are broadly supportive of our objectives. My first posting on 10 March clearly struck a chord, not simply on the website forum, but also around the town. The issues have cropped up in a number of conversations when out shopping, having a haircut, on the allotment and simply buying the paper. (I have not yet revealed that I was the author.) Clearly more people read the local website than post a message on the forum. I drew up the list of priorities from the items posted but I did not personally initiate any of them. When someone believes something is a problem, it needs to be investigated and resolved. For this reason, the Horniman practice of advertising “ ample parking on neighbouring streets” stays on our hit list for the time being.
|Posted on Wednesday, 12 April, 2006 - 07:05 pm: |
I'm well blown away by the quality of debate here (and I am being serious) and even a generous comment! So I've taken time off ranting against ugly extensions. Sorry I haven't anything positive to add but I'll go away and compose a poem!
|Posted on Wednesday, 12 April, 2006 - 08:11 pm: |
Thank you Baggie Dave and I am looking forward to reading your poem!
Roz, I will get back to you. My immediate priorities this evening are reading a bedtime story to our little houseguest, and then eating my supper, hopefully served with a glass or two of wine. Currently next on the agenda will be to try to allay your misgivings. There may be some slippage, depending on how well our houseguest settles down tonight. Please bear with me.
|Posted on Thursday, 25 May, 2006 - 03:14 am: |
To pick up where I left off, I never drank my wine. Instead I took a phone message that my elderly relative was seriously ill. Over the past six weeks, I have been fitting in 110-mile round trips to visit, and to arrange what to do next. I apologise for managing to lose the four vital words “in Honor Oak Road” when posting my reminder of our group’s first meeting. I have had a fair bit of stick from the family over this. Full details were given on the ad for Sainsbury’s community board.
A group of local people met on Saturday 25 March. These were: a man who goes to the same Art Class as Aemilia at the Kirkdale Institute, a lady who saw our ad in Sainsbury’s, a customer from the barber’s, and me. Subsequently we have had encouragement and offers of help from other SE23 people. Roz, you did not respond to my invitation to suggest the time and place for our next meeting. I am aware of the preliminary steps towards a Forest Hill Society but this does not supersede the road safety campaign we have already started for the full SE23 area i.e. Forest Hill and Honor Oak. We are happy to share information with the new Civic Trust when it is created.
|Posted on Thursday, 25 May, 2006 - 09:29 pm: |
The Tewkesbury Lodge estate Residents' Association(which serves the area adjoining Honor Oak Road) has had a long standing campaign to get improvements to traffic management in HOR. We have had some successes - the crossing outside Fairlawn and the new pavement at the London Road end in particular. We'd love to see a crossing or at least an island between Westwood Park and Manor Mount to assist crossing the road at this hazardous point en route to/from the station - but we are usually told the road is too narrow. However, back in March, we were advised that the Council was undertaking a local safety study looking in depth at HOR and Honor Oak Park between Devonshire Road and HOR. Haven't heard the outcome yet.
|Posted on Friday, 16 June, 2006 - 01:35 pm: |
The council currently have a consultation underway on a traffic calming plan for the Crofton Park area, some of which falls inside SE23. The leaflet containing the questionnaire can be found at:
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4E85FFC6-8 BA9-4C11-8B96-82BA68FFD641/0/Crofton_Park_calming. pdf
If you live in the area and are as fed up with the rat-running that goes on as I am, now's your chance!
|Posted on Friday, 27 October, 2006 - 01:55 pm: |
Baggydave was cycling on Honor Oak Road the other morning and noticed that there were no irresponsible parents illegally parking either close to Frances Cabrini or Fairlawns school. This appeared to be due to a concerted effort by the school/s, parents and the police, although he believes the only action taken by the Rozers was to book a white van man on a mobile phone driving past one of the schools (whistling in the wind I'm afraid).
BD commends this initiative but wonders how many parents returned to their normal selfish ways in the following weeks. He would also like to hear from selfish parents who would like to defend their antisocial and lazy actions (not that he has any preconceptions on this subject).
|Posted on Friday, 27 October, 2006 - 02:31 pm: |
Well, I walk past St Dunstans on the way to the station every day and the 4X4 drivers can't drop little Torquil by the side of the road, they have to drive into the school. These people seem to think that they have right of way on the pavement. Makes my blood boil, mild mannered though I am.
|Posted on Friday, 27 October, 2006 - 04:29 pm: |
Andy, surely you should appreciate that 4x4 are essential for the school run, they are particualarly good down Wood Vale (a 20mph zone) where they can easily get to 60mph. I think the subject should be further discussed at one of your locals
|Posted on Friday, 27 October, 2006 - 04:43 pm: |
I did not know your beloved Wood Vale was a 20 mph zone. You live at learn .That will teach you to cycle down HOR. Surely dropping of the young people is paramount.They cannot be expected to walk from the pavement .
|Posted on Friday, 27 October, 2006 - 08:11 pm: |
What is worse Brian is that I cycled down Honor Oak Park the other evening, the most cycle unfriendly experience I've had for yonks. Cars parked on the pavement (mainly people driving to the station) narrowed the roads and a nightmare for us on two wheels. Naturally one should walk to the station, which would be made even better for us in the posh estate should the authorities belatedly decide to reinstall the Crystal Palace.
High Level Line
Anyway, speculation aside, I believe if you check the good news thread we should be chewing over the cud sometime over a pint of Banks' (that you owe me).
|Posted on Wednesday, 01 November, 2006 - 07:25 am: |
The speed humps on the long, straight stretch of Westbourne Drive are at best counter-productive, at worst potentially lethal. Drivers familiar with the road swerve left and right to avoid having to slow down. The result is you look to your right, see nothing, step onto the road and looks to your left...only to be slammed into by a car driving at around 70mph on the wrong side of the road. They all seem to travel that fast, concentrating on where to steer rather than where there may be pedestrians. It has become a hugely dangerous crossing (at the junction with South Road, where the former church stands). I know, I know, I ought to sympathise with the council for having to do something with its year-end budget surplus, but somehow...
|Posted on Wednesday, 01 November, 2006 - 08:51 am: |
This may seem daft but...with sat nav etc why can't vehicles be fitted with electronic speed limiters.
Each road would have a transmitter that would beam a signal to vehicles and set the speed limiter to the maximum speed for that road.
|Posted on Wednesday, 01 November, 2006 - 08:51 am: |
Dear Givenuphope, The Council doesn't have to do anything with its year end surpluses if it doesn't want to. Local authorities have the power to carry forward from one year to another rather than spending up. This doesn't apply to central government, so if a local authority has received a specific grant for a specific purpose (as opposed to the normal general grant), then there will still be a need to spend up at year end. Some other bodies may take a similar view. However, for most expenditure, the need for year-end spend up is a persistent urban myth.
It is kind of you to acknowledge that Lewisham is in a much stronger financial position than it was some years ago, and runs within budget. This is the result of decisive action at the start of the last council by the Mayor (with a little help from me), and recognition by central government that Lewisham had been gravely underfunded for years - a situation which was to some degree put right three years ago.
So far as Westbourne Drive is concerned, I suggest you raise this matter with your local councillors.
|Posted on Wednesday, 01 November, 2006 - 08:42 pm: |
A friend of mine was surprised to receive a traffic offence fine in the post from Southwark. He had accidentally gone down a one way street and did not notice and was rightly fined £50. He was caught on camera and a dated and timed photo of the car arrived attached to the fine.
Is there any reason why cameras like these cannot be positioned to catch speed and other traffic offenders in Forest Hill, such as Manor Mount, and Davids Road where people perpetually, daily, deliberately go the wrong way up these one way streets. They appear to be self funding.
I was nearly hit (again) by a car turning into Davids Road from the south circ, as a shortcut to Sainsburys. I was not looking in that direction due to it being a one way street. Potentially this is very dangerous.
How much do these cameras plus supporting systems actually cost to buy and operate, and if its cost effective in Southwark, why not in the centre of Forest Hill.?
|Posted on Thursday, 02 November, 2006 - 12:01 am: |
A Home Office report in 1997 showed the average cost of installing a speed camera as £12,500, with £8,500 average annual recurring costs. Each camera produced annual 316 speed related proscecutions at a cost of £27 per case.
Traffic light cameras are cheaper but there were fewer proscecutions averaging £46 each.
I would think the equipment is cheaper now, but the running costs may be dearer.
There are two types of speed camera schemes a national one were the cameras have to be highly visible ie bright yellow, and those put up by local councils which do not have to be visible.
In both cases any profit from fines after costs apparently go to the Treasury.
This is a link to the ancient Home Office report.
|Posted on Friday, 03 November, 2006 - 02:20 pm: |
A sign on the lamppost opposite the entrance to Wickes in Catford claims "Traffic Enforcement Cameras".
However, since most people driving out of Wickes ignore the no-right-turn sign, I find it difficult to believe that there are cameras.