Tagged: transport RSS Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

• 

  hilly 3:41 pm on April 4, 2012
  Tags: future ( 18 ), olympics ( 13 ), transport   

  Olympics & Paralympics Test Events: Bus Changes in April/May 

  

  Olympic Shooting and Paralympic Archery venue

  Transport for London have published the dates and details of local bus route changes when the Olympic and Paralympic test events take place over the next month. The changes are needed because Ha Ha Road is closed from 15th April to 7th May and Repository Road from 16th April to 29th April. Bus routes 161, 178, 291, 386, 469, 486  will be affected. A temporary new bus route, the 561, will go to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital from Chiselhurst between 15th and 28th April:

  On the days that both Ha-Ha Road and Repository Road are closed, route 161 will not serve Queen Elizabeth Hospital.  Instead a new, temporary service – route 561 – will operate between Chislehurst and Queen Elizabeth Hospital (west entrance). This service has been provided in response to concerns from residents in Eltham, Mottingham and Chislehurst. All other routes will continue to serve the hospital via the west entrance.

  The two events are the ISSF World Cup Shooting from 17th-29th April, which the LondonTown web site describes as:

  The world’s top elite marksmen compete in this international rifle, pistol and shotgun competition which also serves as an Olympic qualification and Test Event ahead of London 2012. The 11-day ISSF World Cup event will be the ideal opportunity for both competitors and spectators to get a taste of the historic Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich, which will host the Olympic shooting competitions this summer.

  and the Paralympic Archery Test Event from 4th-6th May:

  International Paralympic archers trial out standing and wheelchair events for individuals and teams in this four-day Olympic test event at the Royal Artillery Barracks in Woolwich. The event is part of the London Prepares series, which runs high-profile tests and trials all all London 2012 venues and for all events ahead of this summer’s Olympic bonanza.

  There will only be between 240 and 440 people attending on any one day so it has been decided that the proposed controlled parking zone in the area will not be required. Tickets will not be on sale to the general public, though Royal Greenwich Council will have about 17% of the tickets to distribute to local residents and 6% of tickets will go to local community groups.

  Incidentally the Olympics Controlled Parking Zone seems to have changed in the Olympic Delivery Authority document from the previous map – the shapes of the borders are different. I guess the details are still under discussion, but I’m sure  “they” will let us know before 27th July.

  

  Map of Olympics Controlled Parking Zone

   
• 

  hilly 6:40 pm on March 1, 2012
  Tags: future ( 18 ), transport, woolwich ( 26 )   

  River Crossing Consultation Ends 5th March 

  

  Woolwich Free Ferry Ernest Bevin

  If you think the the Woolwich Free Ferry should continue, or you think a Gallions Reach ferry would lead to unacceptable traffic problems, or if you object to a new tunnel at Silvertown, or if you want to make any other comments about Transport for London’s  river crossing proposals then you have until midnight of the 5th March to complete the consultation questionnaire.  As I mentioned in a previous post, the Ferry could be gone by 2017 if TfL’s latest proposals on Thames crossings are implemented.

  There seems be be strong affection for the Free Ferry; in the 2003 consultation about the Thames Gateway Bridge 76% of respondents thought the ferry should be kept open. As the TfL consultation key findings brochure says:

  “ If the bridge would lead to the closure of the Woolwich Ferry, I would be strongly opposed to the bridge.”

  Over three-quarters of respondents to this question (5,086 in total) said that the Woolwich Ferry should be kept open in some form.
  3,537 people added comments to this question.
  Many respondents said that they would oppose the bridge if it simply replaced the ferry.
  The market research confirmed this finding, with 69% of respondents wanting the Ferry to be kept open.

  The consultation on the new proposals is open until midnight on Monday. It only takes 5 minutes to complete – just 17 questions including the  age, ethnicity etc. questions – and allows you to say whether you support the new Gallions Reach ferry and Silvertown Tunnel.

  

  Old Woolwich Free Ferry, or the future?

   
• 

  hilly 9:46 am on February 13, 2012
  Tags: future ( 18 ), transport, woolwich ( 26 )   

  End of the Woolwich Free Ferry? 

  

  The Woolwich Free Ferry John Burns

  The Woolwich Free Ferry could be gone by 2017 if Transport for London’s latest proposals on Thames crossings are implemented. They have just launched a public consultation on proposals which include a new Silvertown Tunnel and a new ferry at Gallions Reach which would replace the Woolwich Free Ferry.

  

  Woolwich Celebrates the opening of the Woolwich Free Ferry

  The earliest that a ferry is recorded as running across the Thames at Woolwich is in 1308 when it was sold for £10. There was also a privately run ferry in the early 1800s, established by an act of Parliament in 1811.  Later in the 19th Century, after pressure for a ferry from Woolwich residents,  the Free Ferry was instigated by the Victorian engineer Sir Jospeph Bazalgette, better known as the builder of London’s sewage system. It has been part of Woolwich life for over 120 years. It was opened on Saturday 23rd March 1889 by Lord Roseberry – an occasion for a major celebration in Woolwich, illustrated in the picture on the right posted by Mary Mills on twitter. In 1996/7 the ferry carried over 1 million vehicles and approximately two and a half million passengers, around 2000 vehicles a day southbound and 1500 northbound.

  Personally I think it would be a great shame if we lost the ferry; I use it occasionally, and usually find it quite an efficient and relaxing way to get over to the north circular and Essex – when there’s no problems and two ferries running of course. However I’ve experienced quite long delays there as well, and can sympathise with commuters who have to cross the river regularly when the service is impaired.

  Sentiment aside I have a couple of concerns about the proposed new ferry at Gallions Reach. Firstly, where will the traffic for the ferry come from? Some, I assume, will come from the direction of the Woolwich Ferry – heading down the South Circular then turning right along Woolwich High Street to Thamesmead and the new ferry. How much will be tempted to take an earlier right turn and cut across through Shooters Hill or Plumstead I wonder? And what about the traffic that comes in to London on the A2 – again how much will cut across through East Wickham and Plumstead to get to the new ferry. It seems very likely that there will be an increase in traffic along streets that aren’t designed for heavy use.

  The increase in traffic will lead to demands for improved roads and before we know it Oxleas Wood and Woodlands farm are under threat again – a subject of previous posts on this blog. It appears to be a re-run of the very old plans for Ringway 2. The Google Earth snippet below is taken from an overlay provided by the cbrd.co.uk web site’s excellent UK roads database. It shows Ringway2 running down through Oxleas Wood and Woodlands Farm, ploughing across Plumstead to Western Way and thence to the Thames. Underneath is an extract from the TfL consultation documents showing the proposed new road to connect to the Gallions Reach ferry. Spot the difference!

  

  CBRD (Chris's British Road Directory) Google Earth overlay for Ringway 2

  

  TfL map extract showing route to new Gallions Reach ferry

  My concern is aggravated by suggestions in a 2009 presentation by a TfL Planning Manager that the Gallions Reach ferry could be replaced by a fixed link (i.e. a bridge) “depending on local development and demand, and impact of congestion relief at Blackwall and Dartford.” Sounds like that could lead to Ringway2 by stealth.

  I’m also concerned about the effect of the proposed development on people living in Thamesmead. I went for a walk up Gallions Hill yesterday to take a look at the route of  the proposed new road. I was immediately struck by the loud and frequent  aircraft noise. The area is directly under the flight path for London City Airport and aircraft are quite low here on their landing approach. I was also struck by the landscaping and rows of new, young trees that had recently been completed on the land to the North-west where the new road would run; it has been converted into a park, soon to open to the public. So residents would have a major road and ferry port to add to the aircraft noise, and potentially lose a new park!

  

  Panoramic view from Gallions Hill looking North-west

  The consultation on the new proposals is open now. It only takes 5 minutes to complete – just 17 questions including the now standard ones on age, ethnicity etc.  – and allows us to say whether we support the new Gallions Reach ferry and Silvertown Tunnel. It runs to midnight on 5 March 2012.

   
• 

  hilly 6:24 pm on January 20, 2012
  Tags: future ( 18 ), olympics ( 13 ), transport   

  Olympics Parking in Shooters Hill 

  

  Shooters Hill 2012 Olympic Parking Restrictions

  I just caught the LOCOG/Greenwich Council/TfL stand in General Gordon Square about traffic management during the games before the wind and rain blew them in to Woolwich Library. They will be there again tomorrow (weather permitting I guess), and they have published some, but not all, of the displays on the London 2012 web site.

  The proposed road closures weren’t surprising. Roads around the Olympics venues  – Ha-Ha Road, Circular Way and perhaps less expectedly Repository Road – will be closed. There will be a checkpoint for traffic coming along Charlton Road, with all non-games traffic diverted down Stadium Road. Buses will be diverted around the closures.

  The main impact proposed for us Shooters Hill residents will be a large extension of the residents parking zone across the hill, as shown in the extract from the map, above. The additional area is North of Shooters Hill Road, bordered on the East by the Golf Club and Shrewsbury Park, Wrekin Road and Ennis Road down to the Common then down to join the current restricted parking zone round Plumstead Station. Details of how we can get parking permits, including permits for visitors, will be communicated “early in 2012”. The web site does say that we are entitled to visitor permits, but not how many.

  Providing they get all the details right this sounds like a good way to deter Olympic games spectators from filling all the roads around the venues with parked cars, with not-too-much impact on residents. Parking fines are likely to be increased to £200 for the duration of the Games.

  If you want to comment on the proposals, and can’t get along to the drop-in session, the London 2012 web site gives the following methods:

  Have your say

  Email: greenwichparking@london2012.com
  Post: Freepost Traffic and Parking enquiry
  Phone: 08000 111 300

   
• 

  hilly 1:08 am on April 23, 2011
  Tags: brinklow crescent, transport   

  On the Brink 

  …of madness!

  The Newsshopper’s Nina Massey recently published a report on the local opposition to the pavement widening at Brinklow Crescent (which according to the paper is in Eltham, oops, wonder how that mistake happened!). Brinklow is a `true’ crescent, and its semi-circular shape curves round the hillside elegantly to meet Plum Lane at each tip. Both junctions have been modified, although it’s the changes on the west side that seem to be causing the most controversy.

  It’s a curious tale because the work, which was carried out in the name of pedestrian safety, and includes tactile paving, a raised crossing at pavement level, and a wider pavement, has also created a narrower road, which has led to difficulties with cars passing each other…

  Apparently someone from the council is going to meet the residents to talk this through.

  Here’s the report:

  GREENWICH Council has apologised to residents for failing to consult with them over residential roadworks.

  No consultation was carried out before roadworks started on April 4 to narrow the entrances to Brinklow Crescent in Eltham.

  Mother of two, Inderjit Gill, said: “We just don’t know why they’ve done it and what is even worse is that we weren’t consulted.

  “Two cars used to be able to pass at the same time, but now that’s not possible.”

  The 50-year-old added: “I don’t accept the council’s apology. It’s too late now and the damage has been done.”

  Greenwich council has said the works were carried out to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians.

  Paul Revel, a web editor who has lived on the road for almost 10 years said: “In all the time I’ve been living here, I have not witnessed any issues with pedestrian or cyclist safety.

  “I would have liked to be told what was happening, especially as we ultimately pay for the road works.”

  A spokesman for the council said: “Local residents should have been consulted on these proposals and we apologise that this usual process was not followed on this occasion. “

  “Council officers are investigating how this error occurred so that we can ensure it does not happen again.”

  Here’s some photos of what it used to look like, (taken from streetview pictures which were I believe last done in 2009).

  

  This is the western tip of the Crescent, as can be seen it is quite wide for pedestrians, although apparently it’s historically safe, and there’s no official record of any accidents there going back as far as 1995.

  

  Here’s what it looks like now.

  

  This is the eastern tip of the Crescent, it certainly has a commanding view of casino wharf. Again, according to records, pedestrians here also appear to have been historically good at car avoidance.

  

  Here’s what it looks like now.

  So, altogether this raises two questions: (a) why did these road safety works happen when they did – are they part of a wider plan for the area? (b) why haven’t members of the community been involved – if they had been, would it have been done differently, or at all?