SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors Adult Learning Lewisham


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
Those new traffic lights at the bottom of Forest Hill Road...grrr!
Author Message
Grangerover


Posts: 35
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #1
13-12-2007 01:07 PM

(The new lights at the 'crossraods' with Colyton and Dunstan Roads at the top of Peckha[/i]m Rye Park...)

I'm sure anyone who drives or cycles down Forest Hill Road must also be cursing these lights! I only drive at weekends when the traffic is light but the installation fo these lights never ceases to bring all the main traffic to a grinding halt. Heaven help anyone who has to drive on weekdays. A friend of mine who cycles down this road to work says it's made his journey time longer as the traffic now backs up all the way up the hill which invitably slows him down too.

Whose insane idea was it to install these lights? The flow of traffic worked perfectly well before they were installed. I can't see who benfits from it. Certainly not pedestrians who had a handy zebra crossing there beforehand, but now have to wait a couple of minutes for the 'green man.'

Can one appeal to have these things removed? And who decides, TfL or the council?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Applespider


Posts: 283
Joined: Feb 2006
Post: #2
13-12-2007 03:56 PM

Oooh agreed.

I used to jump on the 363 to Peckham Rye some mornings but have now given up since you can get stuck at those lights so long that you miss both the train you intended going for and the next one.

Find all posts by this user Reply
councillorsusanwise


Posts: 76
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #3
14-12-2007 01:29 PM

I am so glad that you have started this thread, as this is a set of traffic lights that does not need to be there, and I cannot understand why they were installed. The tailbacks are ridiculous in length, and the emissions in that area must now be very high because of the almost stationary traffic.

Find all posts by this user Reply
blushingsnail


Posts: 364
Joined: Dec 2005
Post: #4
14-12-2007 03:10 PM

I think this set of traffic lights has been discussed a few times (always negatively!) at FH Soc Transport Committee meetings. Someone did discover the reason for them and apparently they aren't meant to be permanent(!). I'll prompt a member of the committee to post here.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Ian


Posts: 75
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #5
14-12-2007 05:40 PM

councillorsusanwise Wrote:
I am so glad that you have started this thread, as this is a set of traffic lights that does not need to be there, and I cannot understand why they were installed. The tailbacks are ridiculous in length, and the emissions in that area must now be very high because of the almost stationary traffic.


These new traffic lights are in SE22, which is Southwark council. Nothing to do with LBL or SE23.
Check it out on Rob's map.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8...0d1ba9d055
I am gobsmacked that you appear not to know where our boundary's are ! Unless you work for Southwark as well ?

You should worry more about the ones at Honor Oak Road and London Road which cause a long traffic que along HOR which also affects traffic build up in Devonshire Road, Woodcombe Crescent, Ewelme Road etc and has caused high emissions since they were put in. These are on our manor, not someone else's.


One loud voice can make a difference !
Find all posts by this user Reply
PVP


Posts: 271
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #6
15-12-2007 07:26 PM

I think this does affect all the cyclists of SE23. I must admit to being a fair-weather cyclist so have not had the pleasure of these lights.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Grangerover


Posts: 35
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #7
15-12-2007 08:57 PM

Ian Wrote:
These new traffic lights are in SE22, which is Southwark council. Nothing to do with LBL or SE23.
Check it out on Rob's map.
http://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ie=UTF8...0d1ba9d055
I am gobsmacked that you appear not to know where our boundary's are ! Unless you work for Southwark as well ?


Hmmm...Ian, I'm not sure if you're deliberately having a pop at Susan but you'll notice I posted this thread in the 'beyond SE23' section so we're all well aware it's outside our "boundary." But these damned lights are only about 500m from the SE23 boundary so it IS an issue that affects a great many of us from Forest Hill - we do occassionally venture out you know!

Anyway, back on topic - can anything be done about this? I'd lay good money on the fact that the local residents are just as ****** off about them as we are!

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #8
15-12-2007 11:06 PM

Ian Wrote:
I am gobsmacked that you appear not to know where our boundary's are ! Unless you work for Southwark as well ?


there's no need to be rude. This is a forum for debate, not insults.

Find all posts by this user Reply
baggydave


Posts: 384
Joined: May 2004
Post: #9
16-12-2007 11:07 PM

Not sure whether Southwark Highways Department or TfL follow this web site, nor whether this is a legitimate method of raising this with them. Has anyone complained?

BD, working with the system not against it

Find all posts by this user Reply
blushingsnail


Posts: 364
Joined: Dec 2005
Post: #10
17-12-2007 11:04 AM

My source says he found out from TfL that the lights were installed because of some work due to be done by Thames Water, but which doesn't seem to have started yet. I don't understand the connection between the two but then I don't know that area. Does anyone feel strongly enough to contact TfL for further info?

Find all posts by this user Reply
shzl400


Posts: 729
Joined: Oct 2007
Post: #11
17-12-2007 11:09 AM

While we're looking in that direction, what's happening to the derelict school and why are there still speed cameras along there, when there are no longer children crossing?

As for the traffic lights, they caused very bad jams when they were first installed, but this seems to have eased to the tolerable now - are people taking different routes to avoid them?

Find all posts by this user Reply
councillorsusanwise


Posts: 76
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #12
17-12-2007 01:00 PM

This is for Ian.
I try not to post on this web too often, as it does give some people the opportunity to take an anonymous pop at me as noted by Grangerover.
I wrote my thread as a traveller on that road, and intend to complain to Southwark about those lights.
I am well aware, as I hope all LBL councillors are, as to where the boundaries of Lewisham begin/end. As to the issues of road traffic in the roads you mention, they were amongst the roads that I monitored as a FH ward councillor for 8years until 2006. As you again appear to have issues with them, I suggest you contact your local ward councillors for more help asap.

Find all posts by this user Reply
baggydave


Posts: 384
Joined: May 2004
Post: #13
18-12-2007 11:12 PM

Peckham Rye needs speed controls as otherwise people hammer down there at 50mph, causing old vegan sandal wearing beardo cyclists like me to miss a heart beat. It doesn't need the traffic lights though, which if anything have now encouraged traffic coming from East Dulwich to use the route.

Councillor Wise - you owe me a reply to the e-mail I sent you in 1999 about the dreadful Crystal Palace development. No worries, we won in any case. And this isn't a pop, it is a gentle jibe!

BD - putting the kick into campaign.

Find all posts by this user Reply
MartinH


Posts: 6
Joined: Dec 2007
Post: #14
19-12-2007 09:47 PM

I was informed today by a resident in Dunstans Rd that the traffic lights have been installed because of the amount of heavy plant and machinery expected in the next few months. By all accounts 50-100 earth moving lorries per day will turn into London Rd as work commences on a new water feed pipe running from the reservoir in Honor Oak to, I believe, Water lane in Brixton. The pipe is to be 10 metres in diameter and a tunnel boring machine will be deployed. At the moment we are not sure where the spoil is going to be unloaded but I'm sure that you can come up with some suggestions. I thought that would cheer you up !

Find all posts by this user Reply
councillorsusanwise


Posts: 76
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #15
20-12-2007 12:39 PM

Baggy Dave
Are you sure I never replied? If so, please accept my apologies as that is very atypical of me.
Please resend me the email you sent me in 1999, which has since been deleted by our computer controllers along with many from that period, and I shall try and reply in the context of the time.
Regards S

Find all posts by this user Reply
Grangerover


Posts: 35
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #16
20-12-2007 02:20 PM

MartinH Wrote:
I was informed today by a resident in Dunstans Rd that the traffic lights have been installed because of the amount of heavy plant and machinery expected in the next few months. By all accounts 50-100 earth moving lorries per day will turn into London Rd as work commences on a new water feed pipe running from the reservoir in Honor Oak to, I believe, Water lane in Brixton. The pipe is to be 10 metres in diameter and a tunnel boring machine will be deployed. At the moment we are not sure where the spoil is going to be unloaded but I'm sure that you can come up with some suggestions. I thought that would cheer you up !


If correct, this seems a very strange reason to install the lights. Firstly, the lights were installed quite a few months ago which is unusually far-sighted! Secondly, if this a temporary project, why have they installed permanent lights rather than temporary lights? And thirdly, I can't understand how this relates to the lorries anyway! The route your resident friend described doesn't pass through Forest Hill Road...all very odd.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Toffeejim


Posts: 84
Joined: Nov 2004
Post: #17
20-12-2007 02:29 PM

councillorsusanwise Wrote:
that is very atypical of me.


Please forgive my pedantry but do you mean by this that not replying is not typical of your behaviour or that your behaviour is atypical amongst councillors in that you tend not to reply to correspondence.

The reason I make this point is that earlier this year I also sent an e-mail to you, as one of my ward councillors, about I problem I was then experiencing. Unfortunately the mail elicited neither acknowledgement nor reply. Perhaps there is a technical fault with the Lewisham Council server.

You'll no doubt be relieved to hear that I have subsequently managed to resolve the matter.

Find all posts by this user Reply
councillorsusanwise


Posts: 76
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #18
20-12-2007 03:15 PM

Dear Toffee Jim
This is atypical of me as both a person and a councillor.
As to you sending me a an email also; I cannot tell who you are from your pseudonym, as with Baggydave, so I cannot tell what your issue was.
There has been faults earlier this year with the server, but did you email your issue to all three ward councillors, and did any of us pick it up? Please let me know, because although I am very pleased to hear that the matter has been resolved, I am concerned that there may be others that may be sitting in the internet ether.
regards
Susan

Find all posts by this user Reply
steveb


Posts: 113
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #19
21-12-2007 12:39 PM

Grangerover Wrote:
if this a temporary project, why have they installed permanent lights rather than temporary lights?


I understand (from another discussion board) that these lights will be "temporary" until 2009, when the pipe works are due to end. Their use will then be reviewed so there is the possibility of becoming permanent.

Find all posts by this user Reply
michael


Posts: 3,198
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #20
22-12-2007 11:57 AM

MartinH Wrote:
I was informed today by a resident in Dunstans Rd that the traffic lights have been installed because of the amount of heavy plant and machinery expected in the next few months. By all accounts 50-100 earth moving lorries per day will turn into London Rd as work commences on a new water feed pipe running from the reservoir in Honor Oak to, I believe, Water lane in Brixton. The pipe is to be 10 metres in diameter and a tunnel boring machine will be deployed. At the moment we are not sure where the spoil is going to be unloaded but I'm sure that you can come up with some suggestions. I thought that would cheer you up !


The water pipe will only be 2.5 metre diameter but the access shafts will be 10 metres - see http://www.tunnels.mottmac.com/projects/...&mode=type
Couldn't they build a new underground line while they are about it?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields