Hardly NIMBYISM. The roads mentioned would see an INCREASE in rat running (as happens whenever South Street is closed). The congestion would only be eased in an area which is non residential. Basically local tax payers would suffer so that non tax payers could benefit.

I wrote to councillors and to the council to object and was ultimately refered to a man called Brian Hanson whose title is ‘L B Greenwich Commission Director’ and whose employer is Hyder Consulting – the people who will, most likely, be invoved in building the gyratory system. At best – this is the tail wagging the dog, at worst, well, you fill in the blanks. Mr Hanson patronisingly told me that I had probably only seen the old plans (let me tell you – it isn’t that straight forward finding the relevent place to comment online) and that most of my complaints had been covered by recent updates – though he fails to answer any of my complaints specifically.

Most of the parents at my daughter’s school had not heard of these plans as of the 12th of July 2010 and at tleast 90% live right in the middle of the scheme. Funny that. Those that support the scheme support the lovely-ness of small respite of pedestrian area – the beneficiaries of which seem to be tourists, residents of that small area and patrons of Rhodes Bakery… While the regular folks like me who take their kids to school, ride their cycles to work or take buses have been completely left out of the equation. I guess that makes me a Nimby… go figure…

There are loads of residents who ‘suffer’ from rat-running – around Trafalgar Road, Humber Road, Westcomebe Park Road to name but three. And there are families and young children everywhere! – jeez – NIMBYISM at its worst.

Why should your precious road be protected so that everyone else has to sit in traffic jams? I support the plans – if they prove to ease congestion. If speed restrictions are ignored (which they pretty much are everywhere – 20mph zone??) then maybe something should be done about that instead.

It would be more appropriate to make Circus Street one way from Brand Street to Greenwich South Street thereby cutting off the ‘rat run’ in the evenings. Further it amazes me that Gloucester Circus continues to be a ‘free for all’ traffic island. Surely ‘keep to the left ‘ would be safer.

Request for information RFI/01950

I refer to your email dated 22nd February 2010 in which you asked:
~
Following on from my email dated 17 Feb 2010, can you please provide a response with regards to the Pedestrianisation of Greenwich Town Centre. As a concerned resident of Greenwich I am keen to find out what the initial findings of the Councils consultations are as the report was due to be published on 16 Feb 2010. Can you please provide the recommendations that were made following this consultation, along with an update on the future plans for this project I would be grateful.
~

The initial consultation process has confirmed that almost 90% of those who replied support the principle of improving the town centre environment.

Further, nearly 80 % agree that pedestrianisation of College Approach, King William Walk (part) and Greenwich Church Street (part) is an appropriate way forward.

Of those who support pedestrianisation around 70% prefer the gyratory concept to the idea of a T junction at Nelson Road/Greenwich Church Street.

Following these returns officers are developing more detailed plans about how best to design a gyratory scheme incorporating the views and opinions expressed, it is anticipated that a further consultation will take place on this more detailed proposal in the summer of this year.

Yours sincerely,

Sinéad Cuffy-Dillon.
Freedom of Information
London Borough of Greenwich

I have since sent another request to find out what is happening and received a receipt informing me that the point of contact’s mailbox is full.

Have you any further information on these proposals?