I still think the issue is more than one of whether banning right turns into or out of Devonshire rd will make life more or less convenient for motorists. There is the congestion/pollution suffered by residents and pedestrians along Devonshire and associated roads. There is also the illegal parking on the pavement most of the way along the Honor Oak end of Devonshire rd. This pavement parking stops two people being able to walk side by side on the pavement, necessitates pushchairs and prams sometimes entering the road as the pavement is too narrow and life very difficult for people using wheelchairs. On rubbish day the pavement is impassable. Our we not supposed to be encouraging walking ? It is not so pleasant when a walk is on a blocked pavement or next to a stationary traffic jam of cars. If the road is too narrow for the amount of cars parked there and the through traffic the solution is not to take away pavement space in my opinion, but to look at the problem of where cars are going and why. Perhaps Lewisham should just dig up half the pavements and make the road wider. I suspect this would not be seen as the right thing to do. Yet this is de facto the case. I have lived in many London boroughs but I do not think I have lived in one where illegal pavement parking is allowed and indeed for the people who live on Devonshire rd who own cars perhaps necessitated by the lack of traffic management. I think it very illogical to set up a 20 mph zone, and then allow cars to park in the pedestrian space so the road can accomodate more through traffic at higher speeds. I saw an article a while ago ( cannot remember which paper ) it was about property and the east london line extension etc ( the whole line not just here ). The only thing the journalist had to say about Forest Hill was that the streets off Devonshire rd were notorius rat runs. Well that's just one persons opinion, and they probably do not even know the area that well but what a shame to pick up a paper, see an article about the area you have chosen to live in and see it the way some others do.
Perhaps those who find the pavement parking a problem should report it to the local anti social behaviour team ? ( although for anyone who lives on Devonshire rd and feels they have to do it I do have a lot of sympathy), I think the congestion there and weight of traffic is disproportionate and could be so much better managed.

Tripandfuschia raises lots of points. Traffic growth in London is a fact of life and although TfL would like to contain it at present levels, it is unlikely to reduce. The opening of the ELL may well attract more cars to HOP and FH stations as the train becomes an alternative commute route to driving or buses for many people so parking pressures may get worse. It's not clear where the rat running traffic would go if not down Devonshire Road. Any suggestions? Ideally it would not travel too fast and would not be held up at the junctions - unfortunately the clearer the junctions the more traffic is likely to be attracted to the route. Pavements should, of course, be clear for pedestrians. However, forgetting commuter parking, if the residents of Devonshire Road were all to park on the road, the road would probably be impassable to two way traffic and the amount of damage to vehicles would increase. In one of my local roads years ago, the residents all agreed to park on the road to make a point about rat running traffic. The Police threatened the parking drivers with obstruction when the inevitable gridlock occurred! The solution was to legitimise pavement parking within marked boxes and to ticket drivers who parked outside the boxes. This kept a reasonable amount of pavement clear for pedestrians and allowed traffic to continue flowing. If the residents of Devonshire Road complain to the Council about pavement parking, this is probably what will happen - assuming the pavements are wide enough.

TfL are undertaking a major study on smoothing traffic flows on major roads (including the A205) and will probably be looking at the right turn onto the A205. My contact at the Council has said they may do some turning traffic counts later in the year if funds permit.

Thanks for the figures in your earlier post andrewr. Did you also have the census figures which was done last year?
I'm going to raise a few issues here and I might sound a bit pedantic , I don't mean too but I just think it has to keep being hammered to make the point. Parking on the pavement is not just for residents of Devonshire rd to consider it affects all the people who walk down Devonshire rd, many on a daily basis in
order to reach public transport which they are choosing to use. I still find it bizarre to accept that these people have their pavement space taken away in order that residents who own cars can park their cars more safely because many people who do not leave anywhere in the area choose to drive down a road which is too narrow to take two way traffic ( and in order to get there have driven down roads such as Benson, Tyson Ewelme and Dunoon etc) because they do not wish to drive down Honor Oak Rd, the south circular or Brockley Rise, which are the through routes. Any potential traffic calming in the area may increase the traffic on these roads, unfortunate for people who live on them, but they are the through routes. Maybe any potential traffic calming may also increase the time some of these motorists spend driving through Lewisham ......... there could be many consequences which are difficult to predict, maybe some of them would not use their cars to commute or maybe carbon emissions would rise, I have no idea, but it still seems odd to me that a hypothetical commute from Catford to Peckham involves driving along Benson rd.

I sincerely hope the station car park is not closed. Its actually not ideal especially as long as the main ticket office is on that side, lift or no lift. Its also needed for cabs, effectively another way of reducing private car use. Also people still need however to be dropped off and collected from the station - we collect elderly relatives and family coming to stay all the time and its difficult to do that especially since that clearly underused oversized cycle rack was foisted upon us with minimal consultation. Those spaces should be reinstated as car park spaces for that purpose.

In response to tripandfuschia - the figures I have give a breakdown of traffic speed and volume by hour of day and day of week during the measurement period. Is this the 'census' you are referring to - or was there some other count done?

I think you have to recognise that our roads were mostly laid out in the days when there were very few cars and lots of people walking (and pushing big prams). I don't think we will be going back to those days until the oil runs out - and probably not even then. So, in my view, there is a strong argument for giving a bit more space to cars and a bit less to pedestrians than was appropriate in 1900, so long as - and I mean this sincerely, the remaining pavement is wide enough for double buggies, and for pedestrians to walk safely.

I agree that a commute from Catford to Peckham shouldn't use Benson Road - or Devonshire Road, but I really don't see how people can be stopped from doing it if it is quicker than the main road routes. Making it impossible can only be done by blocking roads or making them one way which is hugely inconvenient to local residents slowing their journeys and increasing their mileage. I believe many of the motorists caught going the wrong way down Manor Mount are locals!

To Roz - we have a large and under-used car park in Perry Vale. What is needed is level access from that car park to the station. It would be a much more suitable place to pick up and drop off, and for cabs to wait, than the extremely congested and awkwardly located space in front of the station. Bike racks seem to be increasingly used - apparently there was an increase of something like 23% in cycling in Lewisham last year. It's good to see some transport facility provided which has scope for growth for once!

Andrewr You are correct that there are more and more car journeys but every study I have seen shows that increasing road capacity increases traffic so I cannot agree that space should be taken from pedestrians and given to car drivers. The easier it is to drive along Devoshire/Benson rd compared to driving along the south circular/ Honor Oak rd the more drivers will do it. The quicker it is to commute by car the more many people will do it. The cheaper it is to commute by car compared to public transport the more many people will do it. Stopping rat runs may increase journey times for some car commuters and may persuade some to look at alternatives. The same traffic calming may also make some local residents use alternatives to driving for short journeys and I think this may be a good thing as the figures show the vast majority of journeys under 2 miles are by car in the UK unlike in almost any other European country where walking and cycling may be promoted ( for example by not using pavements as car parks to increase road capacity). It is to be regretted that some local residents who may for various reasons have to use their cars may have longer/less convenient journeys caused by the trafic calming. Also I would hazard a guess that the majority of residents of Devonshire Rd and all the associated roads in the area, Benson Ewelme, Tyson, Dunoon etc etc which we are discussing are not regular car drivers, ( ie do not use their car if they have one for a daily commute), so again I will say that incoveniencing drivers or not is not the only issue. Lastly I will also hazard a guess that the majority of drivers driving along Devonshire rd are not beginning or ending their journeys in Devonshire rd or the associated roads, ie they do not live in the local area. These are all suppositions based on observation only so without the figures I cannot be sure. The census I am referring to is when the police were stopping people on Devonshire rd. There was a big sign saying census and there were non police uniform officials there. I assumed they were asking people about their journeys but as I was not driving when I saw it I was not stopped and asked questions. It was approx 9 months ago around or just before the time the 20mph questionnaire came out.

I forgot to say, re Manor mount one way law breaking motorists, again i have not stopped them to ask if they are local so this is based on observation but everone I have seen doing this appears to be heading from Honor Oak rd to the South Circular, and given how many were stopped by the police when they did their exercise they are not local in that they do not live on Manor Mount. They may be local in that they live in Lewisham, SE London, however you define local, but they appear to be non local in that they do not live on manor Mount. They cut through this residential road to avoid traffic lights on the south Circular. A camera and enforced fines were quickly change their minds i suspect.

Well, we're plainly not representative residents, then. We generally do and sometimes two different vehicles as well.

I'd also mention that, following the planning inspectorate decision, it's likely that there will be a large increase in local residents in the next few years. I believe that the properties are squarely aimed at non-car owning occupants, but I'm sure there will be some to add to the numbers.

I've said before, the way to prevent rat-running is to make the existing trunk routes run more smoothly, not block to back routes, to the detriment of the residents there.

Many of the residents would not find it detrimental though shzl. However muxh you speed up trunk routes if it is quicker to rat run people will do it.

Many people in those roads do use their car daily for work/school run/shopping etc but I would hazard a guess that they would put up with a minor inconvenience in order to reduce the rat run factor in their own street. If I lived in Devonshire however I would probably be too scared to take the car out as I would never be able to park it again...

As I said, I'm apparently plainly not representative, as you already seem to have decided you know all about what the residents of this area do and would like.

I don't find the rat-running (if that's what it is) a particular issue for me. In fact, I had to conceal a mighty grin as I was driving the opposite direction to the huge queue of waiting traffic the day before yesterday (and there was no problem with two lines of traffic and parked cars either side). Rat running only works if it speeds up a journey - people would give it up if they knew they regularly get stuck in a queue. Therefore, is that not some clue that the people in that queue are perhaps not rat-running, but using the most direct route for them?

Oh, and I would object to a minor inconvenience. We are already humped to death.

Anyway, there's likley to be very little funding for this sort of thing in the next few years, given the swingeing cuts we are likely to see in local authority budgets - I'd rather see the potholes mended and roads resurfaced than valuable resources devoted to resolving what really is a quite insignificant issue in the big scheme of things.

I would have thought there are far more people using the pavements today than when these roads were first laid out, given the far greater density of people in the area now. Only a minority are car owners.

Plus it would not have crossed the designer's minds that the whole of the road space would be out of bounds to pedestrians. 2 abreast pavement width is fine if those in a hurry, those with dogs, groups of children etc could walk for long stretches in the road.

The pram theory does not make sense either as I doubt they were much wider than a double buggy - they still had to be manoeuvred through doorways.

There is a good case for widening the pavements and perhaps installing a cycle lane, which might be possible if the road were made one-way.

It is offensive to suggest narrow pavement space should be reduced to make more space for rat runners, but this is happening by default especially on the railway side pavement.
They should be towed away.

Shzl, i have all along, if you examine my posts, distinguished that there are different interests among the many groups of people who live in the area and I have mentioned on many occassions that traffic calming may inconvenience car drivers, some of whom would accept the inconvenience for a better environment and some of whom would be unhappy. I merely make the point that many residents do not own a car at all and many who do do not use it on a daily basis. In your post you state that traffic calming would be detrimental to the residents of the road, you do not say detrimental to some residents of the road so the implicit assumption is that everyone owns a car, or would be against traffic calming. I merely state traffic calming would not be detrimental to all residents, as I believe many residents do not own a car or use one as often as you seem to. It is not the case that I think I know more about the area than you. I would be very very happy if a fiull scale consulatation of all the residents of all the roads was carried out to find the best solution for everyone.

Shzl with regard to your other points that rat running occurs only when the journey is quicker, ....well I suspect the journey is quicker rat running through Devonshire rd evenfor the people sitting in the queue as they are missing out on all the traffic lights in Forest Hill centre. If it was not quicker I suspect they would not do it. You earlier stated that that main route needed to be speeded up so I suspect it is actually quicker for the drivers to sit in a queue in Devonshire Rd rather than stick to the South Circular through route. I wonder if you have some suggestions to speed up the south circular abd deal with the congestion? I am glad for you that things seemed ok when you sped along in your car with the width of the road and the parked cars etc but the issue is about more than the convenience of car drivers .....it involves pollution, both air and noise....quality of journey for pedestrians......quality of journey for cyclists etc and quality of life for all those living on the dside roads feeding into Devonshire Rd.

I do? Where? Surely you didn't get all that from "we are already humped to death"? I'm not making a legal argument here, it's just my opinion to show that other opinions are available. You've chosen your's, so let me have mine.

Actually, the less the cars sit in jams and move freely, the less pollution caused.

I don't pretend to be a traffic engineer and to have all the answers. What my work for our area may push the congestion elsewhere. I'm sure it's very complicated.

That's what I was referring to when I mentoned funding. It's likely it would cost more to do the consultation than to implement the proposed solution.

Just out of interest, tripandfuschia, do you drive? And do you live on or around Devonshire Road?

Shzl, in your post at 9.55am yesterday ( sorry I don't know how to copy the quote as you do ) you state that blocking roads is .....to the detriment of residents there.........I am merely trying to make the point, although not really succeeding it seems, that not all residents would find it detrimental, partly as many do not own cars and partly as some who do, myself included, would be happy to trade more inconvenience when we choose to use them for less through traffic.

I have previously suggested the traffic calming found between Brockley Rise and Honor Oak rd could give some ideas of how the area could be. Cars cannot turn off Brockley Rise and cut through Parbury Rd/Grierson Rd in order to miss out the traffic lights an Brockley Rise/ Honor Oak Rd junction.
I am sure this inconveniences a lot of drivers who live on Grierson Rd and have to sit in a queue for a few minutes when driving past one tree hill and having to go all the way through the lights at the junction then back again ( and probably make more pollution ). However the trade off is they have a quiet rd as do the residents of the roads that lead to Grierson rd. All the train commuters have a pavement to walk on which is not de facto a car park and they have a nice quiet tree lined street to walk along at 8am in the morning with no queues of cars beside them.

I appreciate you are not a traffic engineer, nor am I but I merely ask if you have ideas to speed up the traffic on London Rd to make the point that there is probably little to be done to speed up that traffic. We are living in a very congested city. Journeys by car are increasing as Andrewr points out in earlier posts. What we can all do as citizens is decide how we would like our city to be. I am seeing the increased congestion being pushed on to roads like Devonshire. My choice is for that not to happen and I am raising the issue here not because I think I know best or I'm trying to tell you off as a two car family, but because I do not think the issue is really raised in this city much. Increasing congestion is not inevitable and many people would like to do something about it. You, Shzl seem happy with things as they are, well thats's fine but please do not think your view is shared by every other person who lives in this area. I know my view is not.

Yes, I do live in the local area, on one of the roads feeding into Devonshire, which also has its share of through traffic, sometimes I drive my car and sometimes I walk to the station or the bus stop or to the shops at Honor Oak along Devonshireor the town centre of Forest Hill along Devonshire. I walk along Devonshire in a daily basis at peak times and yes I do think I have a stake in local traffic management.

Hey shzl. I have reread your comment and perhaps I am reading too much into it when you said that blocking the road is to the detriment of the residents. Perhaps you do not mean all the rsidents when you say that .You say you are not making legal arguments....perhaps we can agree that some residents would like the road one way and some would like it another

Knowing my neighbours as I do and have done over the last decade, I think many of them would be keen to discuss proposals to reduce traffic problems in this area and would be happy to at least consider some inconveniences if it resulted in a better living environment. There have been quite a few incidences over the years about cars running into garden walls, and lorries losing their loads on the hills, and an ongoing concern of too much traffic in a residential area which is also a major ' walk to school' route.

The best way forward surely is to set up a meeting with local traffic engineers to try and get some solutions on the table, using their expertise as to what is possible. With that done, funding solutions can be looked into.

Well, further to my comments on here about my fiancee's accident at this junction (14 January 2010), we are getting a little frustrated with the overwhelming lack of any ownership or assistance with dealing with the concerns she has.

She initially wrote a letter to Jim Dowd (16 January 2010), suggesting a ban on right hand turns out of Devonshire Road and got a response from Malcolm Smith, Executive Director for Regeneration (2 March 2010) saying that it was TFL's responsibility, so the letter had been forwarded to them.

She got no response form TFL and wrote again to Mr Smith (20 April 2010), pointing out that her concerns were related to Devonshire Road rather than the A205, suggesting that this was the council's responsibility. She also suggested that, at the very least, a sign could be erected warning of cyclists approaching.

We now have another reply (4 May 2010), this time from Darien Goodwin, Head of Transport, which sets out how the council isn't going to even approach TFL about the right turn issue, as they have had complaints about the queue length to the signals in Honor Oak Road. It is also made clear that there are no available warning signs in existence and that there has only been one recorded personal injury accident in 3 years in the vicinity of this junction (presumably this is my fiancee's?).

Overall, she is very frustrated and I'm less than impressed. Perhaps if we have a few more deaths or injuries, someone will be bothered to even investigate the issue?

In the meantime, I thank all at the council for helping me with my voting decisions tomorrow in my new borough. The blue touch paper has been lit.