Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I went past it at about 6am, i can only have happened 15-20 mins before then. It was absolute carnage. The police, ambulances, and fire crew were there. I'm not sure if the driver had gone through the window, but the emergency services hadn't cut through the car to get them out. It didn't look like the driver was alive. Lord knows what they hit, but it must have been going a quite a rate to create that much damage. I think the car had ended up on its side in the front part of Si Mangia.

As a pedestrian, I always used to find the junction there safer before the introduction of the traffic lights. It seemed that because it was a narrow crossroads with zebra crossings, a high percentage of vehicles approached it with caution, slowing down just in case. Since the traffic lights were installed lots (maybe most) vehicles zoom through on green or even speed up to catch the green.


Just remembered, the lights were actually meant to be temporary whilst the water ring mains works were being carried out. I wonder if they will ever be removed. I do hope so, as the queues South up Peckham Rye only started when they were installed.

There is/was a consultation about the road. Am sure there was a thread. As far as I can recall it mainly suggested more crossing points for pedestrians and some flower pots on railings further up the hill...


Didn't a car also recently crash into the St Aidan's Road sign further down as well ...


Southwark's response to the crash/es will probably be a) speed cameras; or more likely b) speed humps (lots of them). I hope the driver is ok.

Can you post the photo?


kiera Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I've seen a photo taken of the aftermath - the

> body of the car's in the road, facing the wrong

> way, and the engine's on the pavement. The

> battery's somewhere else. I was told that the

> driver survived the crash and was taken to

> hospital.

There are cameras just 100m away, north of the junction. Sunbob is correct, green traffic lights give a false sense of priority and cause cars to speed. Whenever lights are broken, traffic crosses junctions with care and using eye contact, one of the pillars of the safestreets movement.
This is a serious source for concern. I used to live on Barry Road and was always shocked by the speed liberties some people take. It's worse on Forest Hill Road. As for the council, I asked them specifically about this 15 odd months ago and they said they had concluded their assessment and were planning traffic calming measures. 15 months on, nothing, apart from a slight tweaking around the Cabrini school. Where are the zebra crossings, a few bollards, something. Council, do something, or else.

Heard the accident at 05:32 but only saw the aftermath. Cars and lorries are always trundling down there at ridiculous speeds especially at night and early morning when the road is clear. I remember a similar accident a couple of years ago where a speeding car lost control and ended up smashing into the railings by the park gates, the driver got out and disappeared.


Can't agree it was safer before the traffic lights were put up, accidents used to happen there all the time on a frequent basis even on quiet sunday afternoons.

Am I the only one to think it's a bit weird to ask for photos of a horrible sounding crash to be posted, let alone post them and look at them? Takes rubber necking to a whole new level. Fortunately the driver sounds as though he was okay, but what if he wasn't? Would you post photos then?

As a warning that may also be a deterrent I think the photos should be shown.

My guess is that the damage to this car (ripping it in two) would indicate this car was doing more than 30 mph, which is just plain stupid & dangerous.

Not only to the driver but also to pedestrians, cyclists & other road users.

As mentioned, the driver of this car, walked away, no doubt helped by air--bags, pre-tensioners & a modern car design ... and good luck to him.

But what if the car or even the engine had hit a personbefore it finally stopped!!!! Doesn't bear thinking about!


Shocking photos of the effects of smoking are deemed to help scare people to their senses, why not the same with the effects of stupid driving?

I think the objection was to photos of a theoretical accident where people were hurt. I too would object to photos of a theoretical accident where people were hurt. I would also object to pictures ritual humiliation of people and eating live insects/bugs. Fortunately its on Channel 5 now which my TV is programmed to reject.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...