Sydenham improvement works

[chrisj1948]

They 'did' the stretch outside our front gate last night. The machines were very impressive and I was astonished at the speed with which they made progress. Still noisy at 00:30 but neither my wife nor I had any difficulty getting to sleep. When you are used to cars with 8kw bass boosters rattling the house with rap whilst they wait at the Newlands Park lights, mere heavy plant is a bagatelle.

Regards
Chris

[parker]

Loving the pretty new lighting at Station Approach... Hope there's more pleasant surprises like this in store.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[alywin]

And I see the 194 and 75 buses are on diversion for a couple of days (thought it was nights, not sure now). Don't remember seeing anything at the bus stops on Saturday, just came back to Penge East last night and was surprised to see Diversion signs up and hoods on the bus stops.

[stuart]

Popped into Rineys today on another matter and mentioned I found the parking bay outside The Railway Pavillion inconvenient to pedestrians and dangerous to road users.

I was surprised and pleased that it is to be just a loading area and other parking will be prohibited. Of course delivery lorries will still be an occasional nuisance but at least a necessary nuisance. The success of this may lie in persuading Lewisham and the Met to actually police our street.

Stuart

[leenewham]

The parking bay outside of the Railway is parking for part of the day and loading early in them morning according to the shops. It's not well conceived. It's too narrow, but Sainsbury's will want to have somewhere to load their goods.

The trophy shop has a large awning which is in danger of being damaged as it overhangs the parking bay. They should really have thought about this! The owner did complain (if you are reading this, I will get around to your shop, apologies it's taken so long we have been busy).

Overall the scheme is good but there are some bits that lack common sense.

[Rachael]

Personally I would lobby to have those bays removed. There wasn't parking for loading before, was there? Is there is no loading provision for the retail units and the possibly-maybe-never pub in the Greyhound development?

Apart from being a danger to pedestrians and cyclists (and to a lesser extent drivers, in my experience) it is very visually off-putting as you crest the railway bridge. All you can see is those parked cars, when what you should be seeing is our regenerated high street.

[leenewham]

Agree Rachael. The thing with design is that what works on paper doesn't always work in reality. Having the humility to admit mistakes and adapt to make things better is always the best position to be in.

Same goes for politicians.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[stuart]

Personally I would lobby to have those bays removed. There wasn't parking for loading before, was there? Is there is no loading provision for the retail units and the possibly-maybe-never pub in the Greyhound development?

Whilst it would be better for pedestrians if the bay wasn't there - a lorry parked entirely on the road would be a greater obstruction and possibly more dangerous.

Of course in a perfect world Purelake would have provided off street rear access to the pub & shops as part of their development. But they didn't so this may be the least worst solution.

The key is to police it so the issue is restricted to a few necessary vehicles per day, hopefully in an off peak period. But as we know all too well those too lazy to cross the road will park thoughtlessly unless they can be sure of a ticket under the wiper.

Stuart

[Rachael]

I know the loading needs to be somewhere, Stuart, but does it need to be THERE? (I don't have suggestions for an alternative, before anyone asks. Just wondering.)

[hairybuddha]

How about designating a spot somewhere in Forest Hill (maybe the Post Office car park?) to stop the vans, load the gear onto cargo bikes and then onwards to Sydenham?

[[For the avoidance of doubt, this isn't a serious suggestion.]]

I agree that the parking and loading around there creates a bit of an eyesore and, combined with the Greyhound site, doesn't exactly give a good impression of the High St. Although I find the vans parking on the pavement opposite more offensive.

Looking at the plans, it's interesting how easily this kind of thing can be missed. The bay doesn't look like it would be obtrusive at all. Some of the dimensions on the plans look a little unrealistic actually. Would it be too cynical to suggest that Lewisham probably knew what it would look like but disregarded the practical and aesthetic issues in the interests of "smoothing traffic flow" and anticipating complaints from local businesses?

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/project ... 11351.aspx

[stuart]

I know the loading needs to be somewhere, Stuart, but does it need to be THERE? (I don't have suggestions for an alternative, before anyone asks. Just wondering.)

I think the positioning is a consequence of removing the zebra crossing on the bridge and putting in the light controlled crossing lower down.

With the space required either side of the crossing there is no where else to position a loading bay that side of the road. You might reflect that Lewisham's consultation came up with the unequivocal view that zebras were preferred to light control. So they did the opposite.

As I said it would not be a major problem if it was restricted to occasional deliveries lorries to the pub and to the two shops. It just that unless its effectively policed a lot of people will think Mr Pickles wants them to use it to save the high street. Plus they would probably block legitimate loading/unloading.

BTW on the very day all the media have been warning drivers about stopping in the ASL - I just went down the road to see two cars had completely filled Sydenham Road box whilst two cars and a van came out of Newlands and completely blocked the yellow box.

You really want to scream at these people. Not that they would notice. Or even care.

Stuart

[Rachael]

Since those two parking bays came into operation I have never seen them empty - always with cars, not delivery vehicles. So presumably they are no use to loading vehicles either. If they change the use to loading only at a later date, they will have a struggle enforcing it as they have been adopted as regular parking spaces by users already.

[stuart]

All they have to do Rachael is to slap tickets on twice a day every day. The message would get through and Lewisham would get a few extra bob they could spend for community benefit.

Sudden inspirational thought: Sequester parking income for Sydenham Assembly funds. Why not have us sworn in as 'deputies' to collect the money at no expense to the council. If only Mr Pickles would think that a good idea.

Sorry, day dreaming again.

Stuart

[JRobinson]

How about designating a spot somewhere in Forest Hill (maybe the Post Office car park?) to stop the vans, load the gear onto cargo bikes and then onwards to Sydenham?

[[For the avoidance of doubt, this isn't a serious suggestion.]]

...

What?! why isn't that a serious suggestion?! I think it's a great idea - get a local company to run a cargo bike courier service to and from the High St to the post office car park, and completely stop any kind of loading/unloading, or HGV, or vans completely from the high street. Fantastic idea.

Maybe we'd need a nearer car park - Girton Road, or Savacentre perhaps, and maybe a nominal fee for the cargo bike useage (or get the lorry drivers to cycle the goods up the road)
fewer goods vehicles on our high street, more parking for disabled people, and local car drivers (and not so local as well) and healthier lorry drivers.

[hairybuddha]

or get the lorry drivers to cycle the goods up the road

Would love to see the look on the lorry drivers face as he's told to get out of his cab and get on his bike

Slightly OT, but since this thread has been given a bump. New data from TFL shows that 1/3 of car journeys in London are under 2km in distance. That's 1.5 million journeys every day, of less than 2km and 650,000 less than 1km. You bunch of selfish bastards: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/ ... london.pdf

EDIT: and 60% of journeys are less than 2.5km!

[mosy]

I think they should tear up all the newly laid tarmac, lay cobbles and deliver things by horse and cart...that comforting sound of clip clop clip clop. Mind you, it'd be fun watching the parking meter wardens who scoot about on bikes now trying to pin a ticket on a horse (only kidding as the fine probably comes in the post from a camera shot).

About half-on half-off pavement parking and a few of the roads/pavements now finished, the differential level is so low that it's almost an invitation to drive onto the pavement, even if only intending to finish up in a legitimate parking space. Kerbs used to be a deterrent to motorists (wreck yer tyres/wheels), so what happened to kerbs?

[Steveofsyd]

Is there any news on what is happening with the awful toilets at Station Approach? Please tell me they are still going.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[roundasapound]

It looks like Queensthorpe Road will be a no-through road once the improvements are complete.

There is already a "T" sign at the end of the road, the way the paving is, looks like it will be another blocked road, like Venner Road.

Although this only increases the traffic through Earlsthorpe Road and Silverdale instead.

[marymck]

It looks like Queensthorpe Road will be a no-through road once the improvements are complete.

There is already a "T" sign at the end of the road, the way the paving is, looks like it will be another blocked road, like Venner Road.

Although this only increases the traffic through Earlsthorpe Road and Silverdale instead.

Yes, there's going to be a "pocket park" across the former entrance to Queensthoroe.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Steveofsyd]

What about the toilets ...does anyone know? They are truly awful and a waste of space as the only bit that works is the auto single cubicle in the centre. Apparently frequented by drug addicts I've been told.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]