SE23.com
The community website for Forest Hill and Honor Oak, London SE23
Events | Features | Forum | Local Books | Contact
 

Forum Archive
Dodgy road planning

Author Message
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Wednesday, 24 January, 2007 - 02:23 pm:   

Am I the only one getting fed up with the quite frankly ridiculous Road planning strategies undertaken by Transport for London and I suspect Lewisham borough!

I could list loads but will stick to the SE23 part of the borough.

I'd like to take this opportunity to have a whinge about the red routes along Stanstead Road.
Especially where they extend into the side roads leading off of it i.e Femor, Hurstbourne Road etc.

These side roads have ridiculous '20 minute' parking bays covering a substantial part of the roads and a red route line on the other side. Surely this space can be put to much better use.

(Alot of the other roads in the borough do not have them)

Considering in these areas, parking is already at a premium, I think that these are totally un-necessary. Having lived in the area for nearly 3 years, the parking spaces on these roads have been in relative abundance during daytime hours, therefore making the need for them redundant.

I'm sure these '20 min' parking spaces were put in, in regards to passing trade to the shops. But aside from the post office, all that is situated at this part of Stanstead is a few takeaways and a pub and off-licences! Hardly trades where people are going to park for hours on end one suspects.

The real problem that these bays cause is when residents come home of an evening after a hard days work and have to park sometimes streets away, due to the fact that half their road is taken up by these stupid bays that begin operating daily from 7am, with only the '20 minute' window. (The lucky ones amoungst us are still having breakfast at this time!)

I'm quite sure a few residents have been hit by penalty notices for having no option but to park in these bays overnight, and when returning to their car the following morning at 7.25am find a self written cheque to the mayor waiting for them!

Even if greedy Transport For London were to refuse to remove these bays, surely they could change the operating times of these bays to start at say 10am.

Lets face it, there is not much going on before this time!

Totally agree with Robwinton and a few of the others re: The bus lane (with money camera) at Stanstead Rd junction with Brockley Rise.

Trying to get out of the petrol station is nigh on impossible, and especially if you are going to turn left into Brockley there is only a few car lengths of road to do this.

Why cant the bus lane finish by the petrol station? It would ease the traffic stuck in the lane going straight ahead further along Stanstead.
(And yes, I've previously written filled in the self addressed cheque to the mayor for this one too, after having not been allowed out of the petrol station to do a left into Brockley, thought common sense would allow me to drive along the 3 yards of Bus lane to do it!).

Rant over!
Sherwood
Joined 30-03-2005
Posted on Wednesday, 24 January, 2007 - 02:55 pm:   

Avoid the bus lane camera by using the rat-run. Go up Wastdale Road then Malham Road and you can get through to Brockley Rise through the side roads.
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Wednesday, 24 January, 2007 - 03:03 pm:   

Thanks for the tip Sherwood, obviously a modern day Robin Hood!
Les
Joined 28-01-2004
Posted on Thursday, 25 January, 2007 - 06:35 pm:   

I think the idea of the bus lane and car lane to the lights at Brockley Rise on the A205, is to prevent two queues of traffic trying to merge, with buses, on the Catford side of the junction. This used to be a bottleneck during peak times. I agree its a pain. That bus lane camera was listed as in the top 20 earners in the capital a few months ago - something like 500,000 p.a.
Robwinton
Joined 07-06-2006
Posted on Thursday, 25 January, 2007 - 06:39 pm:   

erm, surely that would be fixed with a left turn only lane (other than buses)??
Robwinton
Joined 07-06-2006
Posted on Thursday, 25 January, 2007 - 06:44 pm:   

To pick up on a point from a separate thread but more relevant here:

".. have you noticed how the traffic on Stondon Park coming up to the Honor Oak lights has been much worse since they resurfaced it? I think they must have moved the central line to make the southbound lane narrower than before so you can't squeeze two lanes up to the lights like you used to."

I understand that parking on either side is necessary (although I have no idea how many wing mirrors are smashed each week), but we used to be able to just about squeeze two lanes here to allow traffic to go straight on if not turning at Honor Oak Road. Now the queue is single file all the way back to Crofton Park, encouraging "rat runners" to turn down the one way street just after the roundabout.
Les
Joined 28-01-2004
Posted on Thursday, 25 January, 2007 - 10:58 pm:   

Rob - I'm not sure an arrow in the road would make any difference. The bus lane is legally enforceable (and is).

I guess the point of the bus lane is to decrease the journey times for the 185, and in that respect it works because the bus normally overtakes a huge queue of traffic at that junction. Basically the layout is bus friendly at the expense of car drivers. Ken has willed it...
Michael
Joined 04-03-2005
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 09:18 am:   

I believe after the figures were released that said it was one of the main revenue earning cameras it was moved back a bit, so that it is possible to switch lanes slightly earlier than it used to be.

One of the problems here is that there is a bus stop on either side of the junction and I cannot understand why there needs to be a bus stop before the junction. There is a bus stop just before Kemble Road and another outside the Jenner. I live at the other end of Colfe Road and never use the bus stop directly opposite as it is too hard to cross the road. If you took away the bus stop here it would be possible to allow a longer filter lane.

Satellite view of the bus stop and junction:
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=colfe+ro ad,+se23&sll=53.098145,-2.443696&sspn=10.461226,21 .665039&ie=UTF8&om=0&safe=active&z=19&ll=51.442284 ,-0.043449&spn=0.000662,0.002202&t=h&iwloc=addr
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 12:22 pm:   

My next rant concerns Lewisham council's obsession with the Speed hump!

Don't get me wrong, they can be a useful tool when used properly, but I'm convinced that LB's policy is to build them anywhere and everywhere!

(Anything to do with using up their budget so they can get the same again from the government perhaps?!)

Their latest brain wave is to place them around the Blythe Vale area, as I found out this morning!

Why? Anyone who drives through this area, knows that you cannot drive any faster than 10 mph or so at most points. This is because the roads are so narrow, that cars are forever pulling over and trying to squeeze past one another.

Its happening evertwhere! And its seriously getting on my wick!

I think LB should get their priorities right when it comes to road safety. Fisrt and foremost starting with the state of the road surfaces!

They are an absolute disgrace! I remember reading an article sometime ago from someone who commented that you could always tell when you drove into Lewisham borough, due to the fact that your fillings were shaken loose the moment you entered into it!

There are pot holes everywhere, and worn and uneven surfaces! These in my opinion are an accident waiting to happen! These factors vastly increase the risk of vehicles loosing control in esp adverse weather conditions.

In fairness, LB have began to relay some road surfaces on major roads, but not nearly enough.

Also, I think the standard is of poor quality as within six months, they are in a terrible state again.

Is there anybody from the council who checks the workmanship?

Utility companies are perhaps the worst for this. They dig up the road and then half heartedly repair it afterwards, with shoddy workmanship.

I confess I know nothing about the art of road surfacing, but I'm sure I could do a better job of filling in the mess with a jar of marmalade!
Laura
Joined 19-07-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 12:50 pm:   

Clearly something must be done. It's ridiculous that the state of the roads can inspire up to 12 exclamation marks in any one post :-)
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 01:08 pm:   

Blimey, Laura.

Someone with even less work than me to do!!!!!

:0)
Laura
Joined 19-07-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 01:17 pm:   

Work...? It's Friday. :-)
Robwinton
Joined 07-06-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 01:35 pm:   

POETS day?
Laura
Joined 19-07-2006
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 01:41 pm:   

Darn tootin'. Do excuse me, must nip off now for an urgent appointment with a nifty pinot noir.
Domc
Joined 17-03-2005
Posted on Friday, 26 January, 2007 - 01:44 pm:   

they are also going to be doing Honor Oak Road - at long last I may add.
Although I hate speed bumps this road is incredibly danagerous due to 2 schools and it being very wide. Several kids have already been knocked down.
Les
Joined 28-01-2004
Posted on Saturday, 27 January, 2007 - 12:05 pm:   

Agree with Micheal's post above - the bus stops can be no more than 50m apart.
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 09:27 am:   

I know I had a few at The Honor Oak last night, but I could hardly believe what I was seeing this morning.

Newly laid speed bumps on Blythe Vale lane (the road that runs up beside the Blythe Tavern).

I'm absolutley gobsmacked by it. If I walked up that road i'd be struggling to fit my big bum through the gaps in that road what with it being so narrow.
It is practically impossible to travel up that road any faster than 5mph!

So in the name of all that is holy, why is there now speed bumps there???????????

This is another crass, crackpot decision by the council, further demonstrating its own stupidity and wastefulness (with our money).

As I've mentioned before, I do believe that speed bumps are neccesary, but only in SENSIBLE well thought out places where there is an obvious need. There is absolutley no need for them in this location.

Besides, the road itself has 'natural' speed bumps as it is so badly uneven! Like most of Lewisham's roads!

I may sound particulary blunt about this, but I am fed up with the council (and TFL?) wasting our hard earned money (council tax, fines etc) on ridiculous, ill thought out stupidity!

And I would like to invite anyone from the council who is reading this, to perhaps write in and try to explain some of these decisions. I fancy a laugh, coz there isnt much to smile about at the moment.
Dotcom
Joined 21-04-2005
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 10:43 am:   

Went up Blythe Vale Lane last night and thought the new bumps actually improved the road surface!
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 10:58 am:   

Hmmm, you may have a point. :0)
Fhssecretary
Joined 12-10-2006
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 11:18 am:   

Perhaps they are repairs? Or perhaps the widespread potholing is part of a traffic calming policy?
Simod_the_bod
Joined 28-11-2006
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 11:26 am:   

Good thinking Fhssecretary, I think you may have hit the nail on the head! Perhaps the answer is both.
Dotcom
Joined 21-04-2005
Posted on Friday, 02 February, 2007 - 11:29 am:   

My sentiments exactly. The bumps have definitely made the road faster than it was.


Local forums in nearby areas: SE13.com | SE14.com | SE20.com | SE22.com | SE24.com | SE25.com | SE27.com