Herne Hill news, chitter chatter and gossip

[snowy_again]

Judging by the weekend incomers shopping at Green Parrot (the bar owned by Off the Cuff), Sesame deli, and blackbird that social distancing stands no chance

 

[Rushy]

Great to hear but good luck with the 2 metre rule there!

Wonder how long the Flippin Nell queue will be!

 

[editor]

Judging by the weekend incomers shopping at Green Parrot (the bar owned by Off the Cuff), Sesame deli, and blackbird that social distancing stands no chance

It looked like a regular crowed of drinkers standing outside when I went past recently. Not good.

 

[lordnoise]

Or a safer environment might lead to more people leaving the car at home. We don't have the capacity in terms of roads and parking spaces for everyone to drive so we need to expand other forms of transport. The existing traffic calming efforts on Railton have had the opposite effect.

I'm pretty sure the inadequate calming measures in Railton Rd have had little or no effect on vehicle speed but simple ramps and a directional priority system would. As we know from the failed experiment in Loughborough Rd, closures lead to increased queues in existing pinch points which in this case would be the Herne Hill junction and the centre of Brixton. Why make these places even worse for the benefit of a few (nice people including me ) in the Poets Corner area.

 

[teuchter]

I'm pretty sure the inadequate calming measures in Railton Rd have had little or no effect on vehicle speed but simple ramps and a directional priority system would. As we know from the failed experiment in Loughborough Rd, closures lead to increased queues in existing pinch points which in this case would be the Herne Hill junction and the centre of Brixton. Why make these places even worse for the benefit of a few (nice people including me ) in the Poets Corner area.

No, the Loughborough road experiment did not prove anything, because it was not allowed to run its course.
It's totally normal that once you implement a change, there is a period where there is increased traffic elsewhere, but it's also totally normal for this to dissipate as people readjust their journey habits.
The Loughborough Rd trial was not allowed to run past the point where there were initial increases (which at the time were also affected by roadworks going on) so no one was allowed to see what would happen once things had settled down. Perhaps the people who managed to sabotage it were quite aware that this is what was likely to happen.

 

[lordnoise]

No, the Loughborough road experiment did not prove anything, because it was not allowed to run its course.
It's totally normal that once you implement a change, there is a period where there is increased traffic elsewhere, but it's also totally normal for this to dissipate as people readjust their journey habits.
The Loughborough Rd trial was not allowed to run past the point where there were initial increases (which at the time were also affected by roadworks going on) so no one was allowed to see what would happen once things had settled down. Perhaps the people who managed to sabotage it were quite aware that this is what was likely to happen.

I completely disagree - there were weeks of queues and disruption to an area that really didn't have a problem. It was the weight of local public opinion that sent it to an early grave and I hope that happens in this case ...

 

[teuchter]

I completely disagree - there were weeks of queues and disruption to an area that really didn't have a problem.

No there wasn't. And the area does have a problem. I live in Loughborough Junction. I was watching what was happening. I was out seeing if the chaos people were talking about was real. On the relevant thread I posted photos at various intervals. There was some congestion, which is waht you would expect at the beginning. The closure of Loughborough Road was not even enforced until several weeks into the "trial", and even after that was not widely complied with. There were roadworks at the time that were affecting things. Many of the congestion points visibly started to ease after only a few weeks. There was continual sabotage of the signage. There were public meetings where false information was presented. There were online petitions signed by barristers from Dulwich who didn't like that their route into central London had been disrupted. And a load of other dodgy stuff that I have some pretty firm suspicions about but amn't going to put onto a public forum. The trial was supposed to run for six months and it lasted for about two I think - but for the first part of that time, the closures weren't even being enforced.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I'm pretty sure the inadequate calming measures in Railton Rd have had little or no effect on vehicle speed but simple ramps and a directional priority system would. As we know from the failed experiment in Loughborough Rd, closures lead to increased queues in existing pinch points which in this case would be the Herne Hill junction and the centre of Brixton. Why make these places even worse for the benefit of a few (nice people including me ) in the Poets Corner area.

Making it one way would make that road much worse, the only reason cars slow down at the moment is to let a car coming in the opposite direction past, and you want cyclists to go against this flow of traffic?. We need to encourage other forms of transport rather than cars, that’s the whole point.

 

[lordnoise]

Making it one way would make that road much worse, the only reason cars slow down at the moment is to let a car coming in the opposite direction past, and you want cyclists to go against this flow of traffic?. We need to encourage other forms of transport rather than cars, that’s the whole point.

No not a one way system but a 2 way give way system to stop cars tearing down towards Brixton. Railton is only moderately busy road at peak hours and ought to be allowed to take its share of any sort of traffic. if closed the displaced cars vans and lorries will cause extra noisy, fumey queues at other places in the local system notably near shops, pubs and restaurants at the super busy Herne Hill junction and central Brixton.

I'm not in favour of encouraging cars and vans off the road at ANY cost.

 

[lordnoise]

No there wasn't. And the area does have a problem. I live in Loughborough Junction. I was watching what was happening. I was out seeing if the chaos people were talking about was real. On the relevant thread I posted photos at various intervals. There was some congestion, which is waht you would expect at the beginning. The closure of Loughborough Road was not even enforced until several weeks into the "trial", and even after that was not widely complied with. There were roadworks at the time that were affecting things. Many of the congestion points visibly started to ease after only a few weeks. There was continual sabotage of the signage. There were public meetings where false information was presented. There were online petitions signed by barristers from Dulwich who didn't like that their route into central London had been disrupted. And a load of other dodgy stuff that I have some pretty firm suspicions about but amn't going to put onto a public forum. The trial was supposed to run for six months and it lasted for about two I think - but for the first part of that time, the closures weren't even being enforced.

You really must deal with the fact that the scheme was deeply unpopular with most local people ...

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

No not a one way system but a 2 way give way system to stop cars tearing down towards Brixton. Railton is only moderately busy road at peak hours and ought to be allowed to take its share of any sort of traffic. if closed the displaced cars vans and lorries will cause extra noisy, fumey queues at other places in the local system notably near shops, pubs and restaurants at the super busy Herne Hill junction and central Brixton.

I'm not in favour of encouraging cars and vans off the road at ANY cost.

You're right: people do need to get around; be it the elderly/vunerable, deliveries, people in the area who drive for a living etc. A good model to adopt would be the small French town one: lots of painted crossings, "painted" roadhumps, planters sticking out into the road - and draconian speed limits. You never see speeding through those places (they don't mess around over there). What I don't get is how this scheme will discourage motor vehicle ownership within Poet's Corner. Lot of parked cars in Poet's and you never see spare spaces. As for speed limits, lots of families in the area so protecting them is paramount. Here's a thought, why not go all "private gated estate" and simply make it 10mph length of Shakespeare (Coldharbour to Dulwich Road) plus all of Poet's. That would at least slow down the skip lorries. I'm a cyclist and have unfortunately seen what those things can do to someone riding a bike. Let's be postive, not divisive, about this and make ALL of our area supersafe.

 

[sleaterkinney]

No not a one way system but a 2 way give way system to stop cars tearing down towards Brixton. Railton is only moderately busy road at peak hours and ought to be allowed to take its share of any sort of traffic. if closed the displaced cars vans and lorries will cause extra noisy, fumey queues at other places in the local system notably near shops, pubs and restaurants at the super busy Herne Hill junction and central Brixton.

What's a two way give way system?. How would that make it safer?. Cars speed between the traffic calming measures as it is. Railton is a busy road.

If it's more difficult to drive and easier and safer to take other forms of transport people will do that.

I'm not in favour of encouraging cars and vans off the road at ANY cost.

Why not?. Brixton had terrible pollution before this crisis and now we're in the middle of a pandemic affecting the respiratory system.

 

[sleaterkinney]

You're right: people do need to get around; be it the elderly/vunerable, deliveries, people in the area who drive for a living etc. A good model to adopt would be the small French town one: lots of painted crossings, "painted" roadhumps, planters sticking out into the road - and draconian speed limits. You never see speeding through those places (they don't mess around over there). What I don't get is how this scheme will discourage motor vehicle ownership within Poet's Corner. Lot of parked cars in Poet's and you never see spare spaces. As for speed limits, lots of families in the area so protecting them is paramount. Here's a thought, why not go all "private gated estate" and simply make it 10mph length of Shakespeare (Coldharbour to Dulwich Road) plus all of Poet's. That would at least slow down the skip lorries. I'm a cyclist and have unfortunately seen what those things can do to someone riding a bike. Let's be postive, not divisive, about this and make ALL of our area supersafe.

There's loads of parking in poets corner. People don't stick to the existing 20mph speed limit ffs. If you're a cyclist you know motorists don't give a shit about stuff like that.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

What's a two way give way system?. How would that make it safer?. Cars speed between the traffic calming measures as it is. Railton is a busy road.

If it's more difficult to drive and easier and safer to take other forms of transport people will do that.

Why not?. Brixton had terrible pollution before this crisis and now we're in the middle of a pandemic affecting the respiratory system.

You're absolutely right: we should not be adding to the dreadful pollution on Coldharbour with this scheme. Well said.

 

[sleaterkinney]

You're absolutely right: we should not be adding to the dreadful pollution on Coldharbour with this scheme. Well said.

As I also said - And the whole point of this:

If it's more difficult to drive and easier and safer to take other forms of transport people will do that.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

As I also said - And the whole point of this:

Indeed. If we can slow down the skip lorries then great. Unfortunately they won't be going away for the foreseeable future.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Indeed. If we can slow down the skip lorries then great. Unfortunately they won't be going away for the foreseeable future.

As someone who cycled along Railton road every day, it's not the skip lorries.

 

[lordnoise]

Lets send the skip lorries down Shakespeare Rd to Loughborough Junction (mostly muggy people in social housing down that way innit)

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

As someone who cycled along Railton road every day, it's not the skip lorries.

It is for Shakespeare Road (north)

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

It is for Shakespeare Road (north)

I think another of phrasing that Lord Noise would be "we should be wanting to help all of our community and that includes the more deprived areas of Lambeth"

 

[sleaterkinney]

Lets send the skip lorries down Shakespeare Rd to Loughborough Junction (mostly muggy people in social housing down that way innit)

Do skip lorries really use that junction of Shakespeare Rd onto Railton?. I'm really doubting that.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

Do skip lorries really use that junction of Shakespeare Rd onto Railton?. I'm really doubting that.

Have you counted them? Not just skip lorries but Network Rail HGVs will all have to come down Shakespeare (north). Why can't all of the area be included in the scheme? It's not fair one part will suffer for the benefit of another. We live here too.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Have you counted them? Not just skip lorries but Network Rail HGVs will all have to come down Shakespeare (north). Why can't all of the area be included in the scheme? It's not fair one part will suffer for the benefit of another. We live here too.

I would like to think the local council would have some idea of where they go?. I'm just questioning the assertion that HGVs turn off onto Shakespeare from Railton, or do they go down Shakespeare (south) from Dulwich road?.

Maybe they should just do Railton - but that would make Shakespeare even more of a rat-run.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

I would like to think the local council would have some idea of where they go?. I'm just questioning the assertion that HGVs turn off onto Shakespeare from Railton, or do they go down Shakespeare (south) from Dulwich road?.

Maybe they should just do Railton - but that would make Shakespeare even more of a rat-run.

Well, the depot is, I believe, due to move from the present site. When, I've no idea but I do know there is a local resident campaign to block them moving into the new site which is near Knight's Hill, West Norwood. Apparantly there are a lot of houses very near the proposed site. For the short term I'd like to see them slowed to 10mph. Also once they've gone the site will have to be cleared for the 200+ housing development. That will be a lot of vehicles on N. Shakespeare for 2-3 years. One of my fellow North Shakespeare campaigners lives opposite the site and she's offered to do a count so we can get an idea of skip increase N. Shakespeare if this scheme goes ahead. When I've cycled up the road they turn left into Railton, then a quick right into Regent and Dulwich Road for right turn onto Norwood Road (opposite The Chutney). I think they go that way for access to South Circular at West Norwood. I've never ever seen them further down at Rymer (probably too tight for them).

 

[teuchter]

we should not be adding to the dreadful pollution on Coldharbour with this scheme.

Why can't all of the area be included in the scheme? It's not fair one part will suffer for the benefit of another. We live here too.

So, you think the scheme is a bad thing, but you want it be increased in scope to include your area?

Sometimes it feels like you can't win with traffic reduction schemes.

People don't want it in an adjacent area, because they worry their area will be adversely affected by displaced traffic.

Or, they don't want it in their area because they think it'll make access more awkward.

They mostly want less traffic on the road, but they don't want their freedom to drive around to be restricted.

The schemes shouldn't be piloted in affluent areas because that's favouring the middle classes by giving them traffic havens and sending the lorries elsewhere. But the schemes shouldn't be piloted in working class areas, because gentrification, and it's only so the middle class cycling nazis can pass through.

 

[teuchter]

On speed limits:

Yeah, I'd be very pleased with 10mph speed limits in residential streets too.

But actually we now have a 20mph speed limit pretty much throughout London. And a huge proportion of drivers ignore it. That's UK driving culture. Either it has to be strictly enforced - it's barely enforced at all - or we have to change the culture of driving in this country. Unfortunately it doesn't look like either of those things are going to happen soon. And as I understand it, at a local level, at a council level, the power to make either of those things happen is limited. Enforcement depends on national policy and leglislation and it depends on funding. So, if you want to do stuff at a local level, you have to look at other measures, and they are mostly things like traffic calming and partial closures like what's suggested in this scheme.

If a day were to come where 20mph was absolutely enforced (ideally with speed limiters in vehicles) and 10mph were to be absolutely enforced on purely residential streets, then quite possibly some of these restriction schemes would become redundant. It would be a much better situation if we didn't have to put physical defences up against motor vehicles, but at the moment we do.

For those who are saying we should deal with everything via speed limits instead - fine - write to your councillors and MPs and bang on about it until those who speak against such things are outnumbered. But at the moment "we should just do speed limits instead" is not a legitimate argument against the implementation of these kinds of schemes. It's not an immediately viable option. Help make the speed limits happen, and then some of these infrastructural restrictions can quite possibly be revisited.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

So, you think the scheme is a bad thing, but you want it be increased in scope to include your area?

Sometimes it feels like you can't win with traffic reduction schemes.

People don't want it in an adjacent area, because they worry their area will be adversely affected by displaced traffic.

Or, they don't want it in their area because they think it'll make access more awkward.

They mostly want less traffic on the road, but they don't want their freedom to drive around to be restricted.

The schemes shouldn't be piloted in affluent areas because that's favouring the middle classes by giving them traffic havens and sending the lorries elsewhere. But the schemes shouldn't be piloted in working class areas, because gentrification, and it's only so the middle class cycling nazis can pass through.

Scheme is an excellent idea - but it needs to "embrace" (bit of council jargon there) all of the community.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

There's loads of parking in poets corner. People don't stick to the existing 20mph speed limit ffs. If you're a cyclist you know motorists don't give a shit about stuff like that.

Actually not all of Poet's: a lot of Mayall Road residents park on north Shakespeare as the bays are usually full on Mayall, and of course it's all the same CPZ (code PR) so they don't get ticketed (I've friends on Mayall who do it all the time). Anyway, parking isn't the issue here so I'll shut up!

 

[teuchter]

Scheme is an excellent idea - but it needs to "embrace" (bit of council jargon there) all of the community.

So you've changed your mind from what you were saying yesterday, where your problem with it was that it was going to push more traffic and pollution onto coldharbour lane and other areas.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

So you've changed your mind from what you were saying yesterday, where your problem with it was that it was going to push more traffic and pollution onto coldharbour lane and other areas.

Er, no. Parking conversation was off on a tangent (parking chat not important).