Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I've just seen this petition online about road closures around Peckham Rye (described further below). If this is something that concerns you, please take a minute to sign the petition.


https://www.change.org/p/to-stop-the-road-closure-taking-place-peckham-rye-covid-19-experimental-travel-measures-to-stop-the-road-closures-happening-in-peckham-rye-covid-19-experimental-travel-measures


Southwark council are trying to now set up a road closure on Peckham rye which will stop all traffic from driving down Peckham Rye (East) and turning right onto East Dulwich Road. Peckham Rye (west) already has a no right turn onto East Dulwich Road.

Thanks, I wont be signing the petition but useful to know that on my occasional drive to go a different way. I tended to avoid the Peckham/OKR route into town due to the traffic light sequencing on the other side of the Elephant. But have stooped driving that way due to the ULEZ, and will be giving up the car once the extension comes into place (but may do car club so again useful to know). I'll also try and suss out the best way by bus and need to check out if there is any priority. One thing that really used to wind me up was the selfish drivers on Rye Lane parking on the double yellows which tended to slow down the buses considerably. I'd have zero tolerance and send them to the car crushers.

Not from the Westernmost strand of Peckham Rye, no, correct.

But this change is talking about the Easternmost strand of Peckham Rye.

So there will be NO way to turn right to ED when heading South on Peckham Rye to ED Road



brambles Wrote:

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

> Do you mean turn left into east dulwich road

> You can?t turn right into east dulwich road for

> years

brambles Wrote:

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

> Do you mean turn left into east dulwich road

> You can?t turn right into east dulwich road for

> years


You follow the 37 bus at the junction of Nunhead Road, East Dulwich Road and Peckham Rye East. - I do it on every visit to Sainsburys

For clarity.

Peckham Rye EAST side, is SE15, and the Common is SE15.

Peckham Rye WEST side, is SE22, as is the Park, SE22

One side has odd numbers (SE15 I think!)

The other has even numbers.


Meanwhile, SOUTH is towards the TOP of the hill.

North is towards Peckham and the river.

You're welcome.


To block a road to all but cycles (and the four busses that use it?) so that no-one can turn right, ie west, towards East Dulwich Road/Roundabout, from either Peckham Rye East OR West, shows utter stupidity, thoughtlessness, and all round f*&%wittery of those who run our Council. It WILL affect cycles because the extra traffic build up on PEckham Rye West will make it more dangerous for them. All council meetings I have ever attended I have tried to remind them that not all people can ride cycles for reasons of health age dis/ability or other. This idea is planned for after Covid has been dealt with I think. We must sign the petition and either all turn up and stop the work from going ahead, or just raise our eyebrows in despair.

PeckhamRose Wrote:

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


> To block a road to all but cycles (and the four

> busses that use it?) so that no-one can turn

> right, ie west, towards East Dulwich

> Road/Roundabout, from either Peckham Rye East OR

> West, shows utter stupidity, thoughtlessness, and

> all round f*&%wittery of those who run our

> Council.


Praise indeed!

Well said Peckhamrose. I would also add that forcing cars to go out of their way, burns more fuel, causes more pollution and nothing is more polluting than cars idling in traffic clogged up as increasing numbers are forced onto fewer roads. The southbound cycle lane works perfectly well. It is not an accident hotspot. Cycling Northbound has never been an issue either. Southwark might do better to address some of the disintegrating road surfaces instead, which are becoming a bigger hazard for cyclists and motorcyclists alike. Having run out of roads to put speed humps on, closing roads to general traffic seems to be their next fad.

I couldn?t understand where this related to - two roads with the same name was too confusing for me and I needed a map. When I found the map I realised it wasn?t going to affect me contrary to that I first thought, but if it helps here?s the link to the actual details of what the Council is planning to do.


There are details and maps (8 of them) in the traffic management order on the Southwark Council website.


Follow the link for LSP Peckham Rye trial from this page https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/traffic-orders-licensing-strategies-and-regulation/traffic-management-orders?chapter=5&article


This is an experimental order for 18 months so there is no need for the Council to consult before it comes into effect.


There are a number of ?Covid related? experimental orders going in across the borough. It appears the best way to object until a formal consultation is carried out (likely to be after 9 - 12 months of operation) is to send as many individual comments / letters / emails to your Councillor. If you've signed the petition that will count as 1 view as far as the Council is concerned from what they've said in response to other consultations so even if its just an email to your Councillor saying "I've signed " you might want to do that too if you want your view to be known.

I missed this first time round. Responses must be sent within 6 months of the date of the experimental traffic order. At 5 on the TMO it says


?The council will in due course be considering whether the provisions of the experimental order/s should be continued in force indefinitely, by means of a permanent order made under section 6 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984. Anyone wishing to object to the making of the permanent orders or make any other representation regarding the scheme would have 6 months to do so, from the date the experimental order comes into force (or, if the order is varied by a subsequent order or modified pursuant to section 10(2) of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, from the date that variation order or modification comes into force), and may send a statement to

[email protected] or to: Traffic Order consultations, Highways, Southwark Council, Environment and Leisure, P.O. Box 64529, London SE1P 5LX; or use the form labelled 'Parking - Road traffic and highway schemes - responding to statutory consultation notices' at www.southwark.gov.uk/statutoryconsultationnotices quoting the reference ?TMO2021-EXP14_LSP Peckham Rye?. Please note that if you wish to object to the scheme you must state the grounds on which your objection is made?

Has someone created an E-petiton against this on Southwarks own website? That is the petition that the council pay attention to. They will be discussing a petition against road closures in Dulwich and East Dulwich tomorrow. Get one of those going as well as the Chnge petition to get them to listen.


Link to do it is here - http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionListDisplay.aspx?bcr=1

FairTgirl Wrote:

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

> Has someone created an E-petiton against this on

> Southwarks own website? That is the petition that

> the council pay attention to. They will be

> discussing a petition against road closures in

> Dulwich and East Dulwich tomorrow. Get one of

> those going as well as the Chnge petition to get

> them to listen.

>

> Link to do it is here -

> http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionListD

> isplay.aspx?bcr=1


I set up the change.org petition. Have set up an e-petition as well. Am waiting for Southwark to get back to me:


A member of our team will review your request soon and either approve it or contact you to discuss it. You will be kept informed of progress by email.


Once it is live I will post on here for people to sign and share.

Huggers Wrote:

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

> so everyone will take the right hand rye fork and

> then wiggle through our peckham residential

> streets coming onto east dulwich road via Fenwick

> street? oh great.


In all likelihood yes, or go up to and along Barry Road and track back down residential roads to EDG or Lordship Lane. Similar to get to Nunhead.


I don't think anyone disagrees with the fact that air pollution in Southwark is a public health crisis but the council needs to be held to account for the haphazard and inexplicable manner in which they appear to be going about closing roads. While at one end of East Dulwich Grove they are closing roads to prevent 'rat-runs' meanwhile creating new 'rat-runs' at the other.


Bucky -

Once it is live I will post on here for people to sign and share.


Good luck!

Hand in glove with the Council; tunnel vision as to the consequences https://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/streets-for-distancing-2/


People need to start actively commenting on these https://eastdulwichstreetspace.commonplace.is/comments


There is one for every experimental area.

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

    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
    • You can get a card at the till, though, to get the discount. You don't have to carry it with you (or load it onto your phone), you can just get a different card each time. Not sure what happens if they notice 🤣
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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