29,000 lorries??? WE need to get involved. Please Read.

[BluesDave]

For everyone who cycles through Fulham or over Wandsworth or Putney Bridge or Hammersmith or through any of the surrounding areas we must add our voices to this protest. If the traffic through these areas are going to be increased by 29,000 lorries which equates to 11,880 lorries a year which is 990 lorries a month or 33 extra lorries per day then clearly it is far too much of an increase in HGV traffic. I believe many cyclists will be injured or killed as a direct result of this. I added my name to the campaign to keep this out of Barnes. I think the time has come for the weight of London based members on this forum and the LCC, CTC & BCC to add their weight to this campaign.
If we are silent on this issue we won't be able to cycle safely through Fulham, Wandsworth or Chelsea for 7 years at any time of the day or night. A lot of lives and livelihoods will be destroyed by this. Granted the sewer relief project is needed but there are alternative brownfield sites which would be much safer for all concerned that are neither densely populated or major conurbations.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24018267-rats-fight-super-sewer-ventilation-shaft-plans.do

So please for the sake of every cyclist in South West London and Surrey add your name and your voice and that of your club if you have one to this campaign.

 

[screenman]

I must be reading a different article to you, it says 29,000 lorries but not per year that works out at 11 per day. Is that Chinese whispers or have I missed something.

Give me the facts and I will certainly reconsider my support, in the mean time it sounds like nimbyism to me.

 

[BluesDave]

If that sounds like nimbyism to you then why don't you invite Thames Water to build a 15 meter stench pipe in your back garden and have 33 extra lorries a day carrying rubble, clay, stones, dirt, ballast and plant equipment thundering through your neighbourhood every day posing a serious clear and present danger to pedestrians, children, animals, cyclists, bikers, drivers and drivers alike for seven whole years 24 hours a day which is exactly what they wanted to do in Barnes.

http://www.stoptheshaft.org/
http://www.fulhamrats.moonfruit.com/
http://www.fulhamrats.moonfruit.com/#/super-sewer-lorries/4557007531
http://www.facebook.com/pages/StoptheShaft-PutneyBarnes/130900093629791
http://www.facebook.com/FulhamRATS#!/FulhamRATS?sk=wall

I could go on but I think theres enough here for you to be going on with.

 

[screenman]

It was the lorry numbers I am disputing, you expect people to give support and then give false figures. I was in Barnes last weekend, I know it to be a nice area, expensive but nice.

Give me facts, that is all I ask.

 

[BluesDave]

It was the lorry numbers I am disputing, you expect people to give support and then give false figures. I was in Barnes last weekend, I know it to be a nice area, expensive but nice.

Give me facts, that is all I ask.

I note what you said about the figures regarding the lorries and have ammended them accordingly. I can only apologise for that very simple mistake however that number is a conservative estimate.
I can't see how anyone can disagree that the ammount of lorries involved is too many in any event given the ammount of cyclists who use that route.

I hope the above links contain enough facts as you work your way through their sub-links. Also there are numerous newspaper reports and council bulletins pertaining to this across London, Hammersmith & Fulham, Wandsworth & Richmond & Barnes far too many in fact for me to post here as I would saturate the post. People can go looking for them online if they wish.

I like to think that we are mostly all friends on here and can have reasoned debate, there are a lot of cyclists on here that use that route and I daresay none of us wishes to undertake the risk of ending up under one of a massive increase in lorries.

I don't live in the Fulham area but I cycle through there every time I work anywhere from Fulham Broadway onwards, also I visit Putney & Barnes on a regular basis as well.

No-body has anything to lose by adding their name to a pettion or their support to a worthwhile campaign which could save lives. Or is that just my opinion.

 

[screenman]

So is the only problem the 10 extra lorries per day? If this is moved to the other site would there not be the same vehicle problem for others.

I am not trying to be antagonistic, I would never vote for anything without getting as much information as possible, as it might be this is the better option.

 

[screenman]

Petition signed, for the reasons that all playing fields need protecting.

 

[BluesDave]

So is the only problem the 10 extra lorries per day? If this is moved to the other site would there not be the same vehicle problem for others.

33 extra HGV lorries a day my friend fully loaded with tons of rubble over a major London Cycle route being Wandsworth Bridge & New KIngs/ Kings Road. Thanks for signing by the way for Barnes & Fulham.

 

[screenman]

29,000 divided by 2345 = 11.37 What percentage increase would that be, not that any is good.

 

[BluesDave]

Lorries 29,000/ 7/ 12 / 25 = 13.809. Based on 25 working days per month.

These lorries will be going to & from the site though which means passing through the area twice so 13.809 x 2= 27.619 lorries passing through per day in real terms. There will also be heavy plant travelling to & from site over the period on a regular basis over this time and I have allowed for six items per day in the final figure.
There is no way to work out what the percentage of increase through here is without physically counting single every car, bus, lorrry, etc that passes through the surrounding areas every day.

Mathematical equation debates aside, (I'm a decorator not a physicist), my point is that this is a very dangerous thing on so many levels for so many reasons and that is why the campaigns should be supported to stop this both in Fulham & Barnes.

 

[Dan_h]

Petition signed, I would not want an increase in HGV traffic on the roads I use every day either.

 

[dellzeqq]

may I suggest that this is a really good time for all of us to try and achieve what (the excellent) Tom Bogdanovich of the LCC and I tried to do with the Olympics five years ago and failed - which is to insist that the muck-away be reduced, that the proportion being transported by road be reduced, that the routes be risk-assessed after comments by the LCC, that the drivers are trained in a manner approved by the LCC, and that a monitoring organisation (which could be the LCC) check whether the wheels are washed and so on and so forth

 

[albion]

Misinformation does not help a cause.

 

[screenman]

And that was my point, pedantic as it seemed.

 

[subaqua]

may I suggest that this is a really good time for all of us to try and achieve what (the excellent) Tom Bogdanovich of the LCC and I tried to do with the Olympics five years ago and failed - which is to insist that the muck-away be reduced, that the proportion being transported by road be reduced, that the routes be risk-assessed after comments by the LCC, that the drivers are trained in a manner approved by the LCC, and that a monitoring organisation (which could be the LCC) check whether the wheels are washed and so on and so forth

muck away was significantly reduced compared to other projects of similar size ( Ok you have to do some adding up of projects as the olympic park is so big) the on site soil hospitals ( quaint name isn't it) meant a huge reduction in what would have been taken away to be cleaned. demolition waste was cleaned on site and reused as much as possible, the north Plaza which joins onto the A12 at Hackney wick/Leainterchange was the preffered route onto the park , the athletes village entrance was on temple mills lane which was closed to pedestrians and cyclists ( although some foolhardy ones did still use the route ) and had wash stations at the exits.
the use of the canals and waterways on/around the park to full potential would have been an further improvement I suppose.
wheel washes were used on the park venues and were mandatory, CLM actively stopped work on venues if wheelwashes and any residues were allowed onto the main park highways as the Environment agency were actively monitoring, there was/is a fleet of sweepers keeping the roadways clear on the park to reduce external contamination of roadways. all noted in the weekly inspections i have had to do as part of the environmental monitoring to ensure compliane with COPA1974 ( a good year for acts of parliament)

bringing in of aggregates was done largely via the rail network , the same one that used to run the nuclear trains !!
the system was far from perfect but not a failure.

as for the OP , who will be complaining most when in a few years the sewers already close to capacity , and spewing filth into the Thames fairly often in heavy downpours, reaches and breaches any spare that Bazalgette designed in . yes thats right those NIMBYs in the west.

yes its terrible that you will get some more lorries for a few years but do we really want to not have a super sewer and risk going back 150 Years ??

oh and yes living in the east you get a nasty pong fairly often as Beckton north of the river and Crossness ( sarf) discharge on the tide. 3 days after Christmas is always a particularly pongy time.