| Author |
Message |
Djnever
Joined 09-04-2006
| | Posted on Monday, 22 May, 2006 - 05:23 pm: | |
Is it me, or is the traffic system in Forest Hill absolutely ludicrous?? On the very few occasions I use the car to go further afield/ visit friends/ journey back up North, I am stuck for a minumum of half an hour at the hundreds of traffic lights that seem to litter the main streets. I mean is there any need for so many? Has the council ever heard of roundabouts? My particular gripe is the area near the Esso/ Tesco garage - coming down Honor Oak Road to turn right onto London Road. And then once on London Road, up the hill, there are 3 more sets of lights! There seems to be very little use of Sydenham Rise which goes left off London Road, why is that just not closed permanently to allow flow on the South Circular? Traffic coming the other way is also heavily delayed most of the day, as the lights change to red when one single car comes down Sydenham Rise. So thats a 2-3 minute delay every time a car decides to travel down a 400 yard road. There are plenty of other routes to take!
Surely a planners objective is to make traffic flow. Please consider roundabouts/ making Sydenham Rise access for residents only!!? (a long shot, but any chance someone could raise this at the meeting tomorrow?)
Before anyone suggests it, I have tried all the back routes and the suspension on my car is taking a battering with the thousands of speed bumps! |
Johnp
Joined 08-05-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, 24 May, 2006 - 10:04 am: | |
It's complicated by the fact that the GLA / TransportForLondon 'owns' the South Circular (because it's a trunk road), but Lewisham Council 'owns' the minor roads (until, of course, you cross the border into Southwark). I'm glad to hear that the council's measures to deter 'rat-running' on residential roads are indeed having a deterrent effect on your suspension ;-> (Drive at 20mph or less along the *whole* of those roads, and even the most wimpy suspension should be unscathed - But that defeats the objective of rat-running, doesn't it???)
I haven't quite worked out what now equates to a Highways Committee in Lewisham; I suspect it's the Deputy Mayor (which should be Cllr Heidi Alexander from today).
I can't think of simple ways to make a public road "residents only" - suggestions welcome! |
Theotherbrian
Joined 28-03-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, 25 May, 2006 - 08:07 pm: | |
You really know your place as a pedestrian in FH. It takes over two minute to cross the few metres of road outside W.H.Smiths. It really does feel that you are an afterthought and a downright nuisance if you aren't in a car. Rather like the country as a whole really! |
Andrewr
Joined 24-05-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, 25 May, 2006 - 09:18 pm: | |
Agreed that the lights in the area of the Tesco Garage are ridiculous. The phasing from Honor Oak Road seems to have changed recently to only allow about 2-3 cars out on green causing long backlogs - and increased rat running and light jumping. These lights were a favourite gripe of our former councillor Peter Dawson. Whilst he was griping the phasing improved although TfL denied anything had changed. The increased delays must be very apparent to the users and operators of the P4.
As for closing Sydenham Rise - how is it proposed that one gets from Honor Oak Road to Sydenham Hill - or from Sydenham Hill onto the South Circular eastbound? These routes get quite a bit of use with turns banned at the next junction to the west on the SC. |
Djnever
Joined 09-04-2006
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 03:53 pm: | |
No-one wants to use the car less than I do, I cycle in to work and really only ever use my car when absolutely necessary. All I was pointing out is the 'management' of the area. My proposal, if the we were to close Sydenham Rise, would be to simply use Sydenham Hill as the connecting road to the South Circular and use a roundabout where this connects. The flow of the traffic would be so much greater, I guarantee it. Otherwise Forest Hill will be a permanent bottle-neck, night and day! |
Sherwood
Joined 30-03-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 03:56 pm: | |
Someone once spoke to a traffic engineer and complained that a new traffic scheme had caused a bottleneck and slowed the traffic down and was given the impression that that was the purpose of the traffic scheme. |
Blushingsnail
Joined 21-12-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 04:08 pm: | |
Does anyone know if 20mph speed limits are actually enforceable? I picked up a Council leaflet yesterday in which it said they use physical means to slow traffic (eg speed humps) because they can't enforce 20mph limits. Later in the leaflet they refer to how the police enforce 30mph limits, but no mention of 20mph. Does this mean that 20mph is a recommended speed limit and not a legal obligation?
I don't drive by the way, so please excuse my ignorance. |
Abi
Joined 09-09-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 04:27 pm: | |
Yes they are enforcable but, I suspect, it's unlikely that this will happen in practice.
Resources for speed traps, cameras and similar are much liklier to be directed at roads which have notorious accident black spots or the roads / traffic conditions lend themselves to revenue raising.
If the sign says 20 MPH then drivers are legally obliged not to exceed this limit. It is not a recommendation. |
Sherwood
Joined 30-03-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 04:35 pm: | |
I saw a Lewisham Council website that said that the police refuse to enforce 20 mph speed limits. That is why we have humps in the roads! |
Philip
Joined 19-03-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 10:15 pm: | |
My understanding is the police or council can't issue fixed-penalty notices (speeding tickets) for breaking the speed limit, so although enforcement is technically possible, it would have to be done by taking every single offender to court instead. |
Philip
Joined 19-03-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 10:16 pm: | |
... the 20mph speed limit, so ...
- I should have said. |
Loneranger
Joined 29-10-2005
| | Posted on Wednesday, 31 May, 2006 - 11:29 pm: | |
The Lewisham Council websites confirms what Philip has written. There is no fixed penalty for breaking a 20mph speed limit.
Half way down the following link has more information.
http://www.lewisham.gov.uk/TransportAndStreets/Mot orVehiclesAndTraffic/TrafficCalming/RoadMarkingsAn dSignageSpeedHumps.htm |
Loneranger
Joined 29-10-2005
| | Posted on Thursday, 01 June, 2006 - 08:23 pm: | |
The latest edition of Lewisham Life has an item on the South Circular and traffic calming.
http://www2.lewisham.gov.uk/lbl/documents/News/Lew ishamLife/Jun06/lewisham-listens.pdf |
Djnever
Joined 09-04-2006
| | Posted on Friday, 02 June, 2006 - 01:19 pm: | |
Predictably they are concentrating on suburbs closer to Lewisham eg. Catford and roads closer to Lewisham Centre. Really doubt if they will look at the South Circular area past Forest Hill if its on the Southwark borders. I believe its jointly managed by the two councils AND Transport for London. Sounds like too many cooks to me, so really a recipe for disaster! |
Ooperlooper
Joined 28-06-2006
| | Posted on Thursday, 29 June, 2006 - 11:30 pm: | |
If you replaced the Tesco garage t-junction with a roundabout, it would be impossible for pedestrians to cross Honor Oak Road. |
