1. When the proposals for traffic calming Falmouth Road were discussed as part of the whole works, people complained that traffic would actually AVOID this road, thus making it harder for the shopping parade. It is partly because of this that the scheme was revised.
2. If the original full scale plans had been implemented, displaced traffic from trinity street would NOT have been able to get to swan or Cole streets, and Falmouth road. It would be on the Main Roads (GT DOVER ST ) where it belongs.
As I mentioned, this scheme is under review. The number of cars on falmouth road etc is NOTHING like the volume (and high speeds) experienced previously on trinity street. If you thing falmouth road is bad now, imagine what it has been like for the residents of trinity street.... - which is much more residential in nature.
Hopefully, with a little tweaking, we'll get the through commuter traffic out of ALL this Ward' residential roads, making them safer and more pleasant - which was the original intention.
Also, I agree, congestion charging should help too!
of course the traffic has only been displaced - until something like congestion charging comes in, which has the power to change peoples use of the car, traffic can only be displaced from one road to another. The point is, the through commuter traffic should be on the main roads, not cutting through redidential developments.
And what do you think congestion charging will do... if not displace traffic elsewhere, and make the traffic much much worse in the new place. Yes, it will stop a few people from driving into the congestion area, when that is their destination.
BUT, for those of us just outside the boundaries, it will route traffic past our front door.
Imagine, for a moment that you are driving from Richmond ( South West) to Islington (North) - both outside the congestion zone. You have to cross the Thames at some point.
In the old days, you had a large choice of bridges (doubtless a cabbie would be able to tell you which was best), and therefore a large choice of routes through/on the edge of the city. Now, you will have to go over Tower Bridge, as that is the only practical option to avoid the charge.
So, all the traffic now has to go over Tower Bridge, and Tower Bridge Road, which is bad at the best of times becomes absolutely gridlocked.
Therefore, you decide that it's worth paying that fiver to cross London more quickly. Which is all very well, until you hit the inner ringroad near Tower which is fuller than ever of traffic.
agree that sounds like a hard time on tower bridge road.. Let me see.... Richmond to Islington.....
How about hop on the train to central London and then hop on the tube to Islington.
Easy. I've done it loads of times (used to live in Richmond)
No congestion charge to pay.
The only information I saw on the traffic calming schemes in the local area was a map of the proposals from Southwark Council a few months back. As far as I recall, no explicit mention was made of closing Trinity Street (it did show that traffic calming measures of some variety were going to be introduced in the general area, but nothing specific). To be honest, I would probably have supported the closure, all other things equal, it's just the side effects I don't like.
If this situation is currently under review, as John indicates, what is the best way of influencing this review (eg who should I write to?), and when will the review be concluded? I also want to see commuter traffic on Great Dover Street where it belongs.
I'm with John Criddle - as you'd expect from my usual tirades about cars using residential streets as rat-runs.
Why shouldn't people benefit from a change? Or should we all suffer if we can't all benefit? As to travelling at 1mph - well, hopefully the penny may soon drop... Why is it a problem that cars should be restricted to main roads for the major part of a journey?
Anyway, someone asked who to complain to. Hopefully all residents will have received a letter from Southwark Council in the last couple of days informing us that the scheme is being monitored and that we'll receive a consultation document asking for views and suggested modifications. The results will be displayed locally in October - details to follow.
In the meantime you can contact The Transport Group at Chiltern House - on 020 7525 5465 and ask for Trevor Wilding or Alan Harris. The switchboard is 020 7527 5000.
Oh you smug singletons, who can use the tube easily. I'm a smug singleton who can also use the tube easily as well. And therefore I don't have a car in London - who would?
But, I would defend to the last the right to drive if one wishes to. And if one so wishes, then it shouldn't be made more difficult. Imagine a mother with 4 small children who wants to undertake my imaginary journey. On the tube? You lot would be swearing at her for having the temerity to bring 4 small children on the tube, getting in the way of proper people.
What about the builder/plumber/interior decorator/computer specialist who has to take his van of tools on this journey?
What about the person who's hired a van to move some furniture. Or the person who takes a cab to get his shopping home, and then runs up against a thick wall of traffic on the inner ringroad (where it has all migrated to).
JE's point is valid BUT.... if people who COULD easily use public transport did so, then the roads wouldn't be so snarled up in the first place. Then those who DID need to use the road (like those you have just described) would not have nightmare journeys.
(And no, I don't drive. I use public transport and walk everywhere, but when I get the bus or have to get a taxi, I can see how much easier life would be if London wasn't full of people making unnecessary journeys by car.) Getting the bus into town is so much quicker at the weekend.
...if those people who could easily use public transport did so...
Absolutely right, Jo Jo, but therein lies the problem. Those people who could, but don't, are still going to drive, whatever. Those people who have to drive (as described) can't because those who 'could but don't' do.
No amount of legislation will stop 'those who could but don't', as they're probably rubbing their hands in glee at the prospect of paying a fiver a day for a quicker journey into work in the city, in their air conditioned comfort.