I do not understand the thinking behind this absurd idea of road closure of the middle 1/4 of The Cut. It seems to have come from the idle hands and minds of employees of TfL based at Palaestra standing at the windows overlooking The Cut twiddling their thumbs or working from home because of Covid-19 and trying to justify their future employment. To try and persuade us that this comes about because of an exercise they were conducting throughout Covid-19 and how little traffic used The Cut is unbelievable. Traffic could not use The Cut because of the interminable water main burst at the junction of Blackfriars road/The Cut.
We are not idiots even though you, TfL, treat us as such.
If both Southwark and Lambeth agreed that the pedestrians needed more room to navigate The Cut then they would remove all the tables and chairs currently placed on the footpath by local businesses along with their A boards. As the councils continue to allow these obstructions to exist there is tacit agreement that there is adequate room for pedestrians and no need to alter the current arrangements.
If TfL disagree with this position then they must surely demand that both councils abandon their money making schemes with regard to licensing tables and chairs on the public footpaths at high cost to the cafes/coffee bars/ restaurants and hand back the space to pedestrians.
Perhaps somebody from TfL can explain how closing the middle 25 metres of the street will help cyclists who have to traverse badly damaged speed cushions at each end of the proposed closure to speed safely on their journeys and how motor vehicles being removed from that same piece of road but not the other 75% of the street will help them and pedestrians.
We will have the nonsense of vehicles entering from the East ( Blackfriars Road) having to turn right onto Hatfields and continue along this narrow road with parking meters and resident bays along the whole of it to Stamford Street - there being no exits for traffic along Hatfields other than Stamford Street. The traffic from the West, Baylis Road/Waterloo Road having entered The Cut will have to turn right onto Short Street and exit I don't know where but it will have to pass through residential streets with parking meters and resident bays the same as Hatfields.
I would add that the footpaths on The Cut were widened by the removal of a traffic lane in either direction only to then be narrowed again by the sale of the gained area to commercial enterprises for their tables and chairs but still deemed adequate for pedestrian traffic by both councils.
I would argue that the narrowing of the roadway has caused more danger to cyclists rather than lessening it.
Perhaps TfL can tell us how many accidents to cyclists and pedestrians have occurred on this small stretch of road - they must have the figures immediately at hand - and how many representations have been made to them calling for their proposal by pedestrians and cyclists.
What consultations have taken place?
I have heard of none.
It would be interested to hear from anyone who thinks this is a good idea.
I have already put the argument for vehicles travelling west to east and wishing to go to Styles House.
I make another point , blue badge holders visiting the Health Centre in Lower Marsh and wishing to return home to Styles House or Benson House.
Lower Marsh is closed to cars between 11 and 3pm, so they would have to turn right into Frazier Street, reaching Bayliss Road you need to turn left but because of parked buses you cannot see to the right.
Go along Bayliss Road and then you have to turn left into Waterloo Road. Travel up to Imax roundabout and at 3rd exit go into Stamford Street.At Hatfields turn right and travel whole length of Hatfields.
Whoever though about closing The Cut , needs to think about residents as well as cyclists
I agree with much of this. I think councils looked at how traffic adjusted when the Cut was shut at Blackfriars Road and decided it could be done.
To be fair it was rather pleasant but as others have noted the planners live nowhere near here so don't understand the impact on the residential streets nearby.
You'll struggle to find any supporters living locally. They just plow ahead regardless - TfL, our useless Mayor, and of course our local councils - squandering money that could be used on better things. Residents' views mean nothing.
Over in Dulwich, a petition signed by some 2,500 residents to "Reverse Dulwich Road Closures" has been palmed off by the council. Compelled by the sheer number of signatures to respond, the official response seems to be something like: "Oh, the complainers will soon get used to it if we just plow on regardless so we're going to carry on anyway".
(There are in fact two competing Dulwich petitions here: one called "Reverse Dulwich Road Closures" and the other called "Support the Dulwich road closures". The one supporting the closures has 45 signatures and the one calling for all closures to be reversed has 2558 signatures.)
I would sincerely like to know what statistics were used to make this road closure worthwhile.
Exactly how many pedestrians and cyclists have been killed or seriously injured whilst using The Cut.
How many have been so affected whilst using the area between Hatfields and Short Street.
Neither TfL nor the councils involved have ever found the need to place a Zebra crossing between Hatfields and Short Street because it is a dangerous piece of road.
Surely forcing traffic from East and West to turn right across the paths of cyclists will be more dangerous than passing alongside each other as happens at the present time.
Forcing all through traffic to take much longer routes mainly through residential streets will only add to traffic air pollution.
The fact that emergency vehicles will be able to use it 24/7/365 surely demonstrates that it is a necessary through road as is warranted by being the B300.
ANPR cameras being installed mean only one thing. This is a purely money gathering exercise otherwise 'No through road' signs would suffice.
TfL need to be honest, transparent and upfront with their policies and need to tell us if this experiment(?) survey(?) is going to last the proposed 18 months in the hope that the problems it will cause will have been forgotten and they will then have a permanent cash generator.
In my previous posting I should have added to 'No Through Road' the much simpler 'No Entry' as an adequate sign whilst recognising that neither sign would generate the cash windfall that the ANPR cameras will.
I take it that the loading bays outside The Young Vic and the coffee bar and the Anchor and Hope will be removed as no vehicles will be allowed on that part of the street thus giving more space to pedestrians.
Drivers will learn different routes and thank you for your suggested route but I fear it is not as simple as you say as the residents of Roupell, Whittlesey and Theed Streets will soon discover when Uber minicabs and black cabs and other minicabs find their way through this conservation area.
A resident driver returning home from Baylis Road will now have to turn left into Waterloo Road then turn right at either Alaska Street or Exon Street - meanwhile blocking the only single file of traffic on Waterloo Road - then turn left into Cornwall Road then right onto Whittelsey Street then right onto Theed Street then left onto Roupell Street then right onto Hatfields.
And all this to avoid the equally convoluted route through Short Street.
And to what purpose? To avoid a 50 yard road closure whilst leaving the remaining 150yards or so as it is. What is the imagined danger between Hatfields and Short Street?
Do tell TfL.
As I understand it TfL intend to leave this plan in operation for 18 months before they review it making it an extraordinary long 'temporary move'.
The described rat run above will be even more horrendous to the members of NLRA when traffic from Stamord Street is forbidden to enter Cornwall Road meaning that the rat run will become even more condensed.
I agree with everyone on this thread. I live on Hatfields and I have to say this week has been hell - traffic has increased tenfold and it's got to the point I can't have my front windows open because the temporary traffic lights outside my house where there are roadworks is causing a delightful build up of traffic on the road, meaning pollution is coming straight into my house. TFL are not interested in the thoughts of the local residents (unless you happen to be a rich resident), all they care about are the businesses, the tourists and the passing trade in this area. Personally I'm not surprised they're in financial dire straits and I find their arrogance astounding.
I did find a petition on Lambeth's website if anyone is interested: