Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The new pedestrian zone affecting Adys Road, Ondine Road and Amott Road is probably about to launch as signage is being installed today.


I see these are going to use "APNR" cameras, so everyone's number plate can be tracked going into the zone, and presumably fines will be issued automatically.


Anyone have experience about how good this enforcement is and what a difference it makes?


Consultation with map: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/st-johns-and-st-clements-primary-school-street/

Fs3VnO9WYAMVxa6.jpeg.60f5dd880418409333c350c5364f701b.jpeg

I think the positioning of the closure on Adys Rd is going to cause chaos, with traffic in both directions having no avenue for escape by the time the signs are visible. People turning left out of Nutbrook onto Adys will be particularly stuck.


I’m supportive of the scheme, as Adys is used as a rat run for commercial vehicles and there are often angry confrontations between motorists and pedestrians around the school, but I think the positioning of the signage could be improved.

Just to point out to residents, you will need to add an SC7 school street parking permit to your usual parking permit. This is issued for 12 months and doesn't cost anything.


Click on parking permit on Southwark website and it is on drop-down menu.

One of the problems with this is that Ady's road is the main access out of the area as you cannot exit through Ondine, Copleston or Oglander. Imagine the cars trying to turn right at the bottom of the park by the church - in both directions - as well as problems at the Amott road end. Fiasco!

Froglamder, from what I can glean from the Southwark website it tends to be an hour-ish each morning and afternoon anytime between 8-9.30 and 2.30-4.30.


It also says that it's expected to be implemented in autumn 2023, but that doesn't seem to chime with the signs being in place already.


I'd agree with Soylent & Alec. You can't argue with the safety aspect of it, but it's going to make getting from East Dulwich Road to Bellenden Road pretty convoluted and chaotic.

What time(s) is this in effect from and what roads get an exemption if you live in them? I didn’t know anything about this!

 

You have to live within the restriction (ie on Adys roughly between Ondine and Amott or a short distance down either of those roads). There are also exemptions for registered carers of people living in those houses and for parents on children with mobility needs who go to SJSC. We’re further up Adys and so now cannot drive south during the period of operation.

We received a letter about the Adys Rd closure yesterday. Hours of operation will be 8:30-9:15 and 3-3:45 during term time. Warning notices will be issued to motorists for the 17th April and Penalty Charge Notices will be issued from the 9th May. 

  • Thanks 1
On 12/04/2023 at 07:34, alex_b said:

We received a letter about the Adys Rd closure yesterday. Hours of operation will be 8:30-9:15 and 3-3:45 during term time. Warning notices will be issued to motorists for the 17th April and Penalty Charge Notices will be issued from the 9th May. 

However the signs don'make no mention of 'operating during term time' and I suspect this will be implemented throughout the summer and other holidays as well.

Cars turning left into Adys from Nutbrook- including huge lorries that use the route- once they see the sign, won't be able to escape via Gowlett Road as that section is also in the zone. Cars coming into Adys from the South and then seeing the sign will have to divert down the  very narrow  section of East Dulwich Road that runs by the church

It's going to be absolute carnage. All the traffic that comes down Crystal Palace Road to avoid the logjam on Lordship Lane is going to find itself completely screwed. No right turn on East Dulwich Road, no option to go straight jn and the section down to the roundabout is going to be even more grid locked than usual. 

Once people are inside the West Peckham CPZ area they will be trapped having to head back to Nigel Road to get out if they don't want a fine. 

They needed to change some of them there restrictions to eas pressure. 

This scheme is as gormless as all the others the council have come up with recently.

  • Like 1
4 hours ago, Huggers said:

However the signs don'make no mention of 'operating during term time' and I suspect this will be implemented throughout the summer and other holidays as well.

Cars turning left into Adys from Nutbrook- including huge lorries that use the route- once they see the sign, won't be able to escape via Gowlett Road as that section is also in the zone. Cars coming into Adys from the South and then seeing the sign will have to divert down the  very narrow  section of East Dulwich Road that runs by the church

Well the TMO states term time only as does the Southwark schools streets page. I’m generally fairly down on Southwark but I doubt they’d do something so cynically unlawful. 
 

I agree the closures are badly placed and will trap traffic. In the consultation and directly to the highways team (copying my local councillors) I suggested bringing the closure back to the corner of Nutbrook or at least advanced warning signs further up Adys and Nutbrook. Unfortunately I was ignored. 

I don’t think Amott/Gowlett will be that affected as alternate routes (the western end of Amott is closed by this). I think Fenwick is likely to bear the brunt of traffic. Southwark really should close the Bellenden rat-run to through traffic and keep commercial and HGVs on the A roads. 

Why should Southwark bother to close Bellenden Road. They seem to dig it up every other week which does the job.

but if  you are silly enough to pay around 1 milllion for a 2 up 2 down you need some consideration 

 

 

 

Edited by richard tudor
To Broad a comment
1 hour ago, alex_b said:

I don’t think Amott/Gowlett will be that affected as alternate routes (the western end of Amott is closed by this). I think Fenwick is likely to bear the brunt of traffic. Southwark really should close the Bellenden rat-run to through traffic and keep commercial and HGVs on the A roads. 

yes lets really finish off the shops and businesses

 

12 minutes ago, Huggers said:

yes lets really finish off the shops and businesses

That wasn’t what I said. I said close the rat run especially for commercial traffic, HGVs and coaches. You could still retain access without having residential roads with three schools on them being subject to dangerous traffic. The fact the bollard at the corner of Nutbrook and Adys gets knocked over on a weekly basis shows that vehicles are using these streets that cannot safely navigate them without driving across pavements. 

  • Like 1

but how would they differentiate between users? We have always thought there should be a sign at top of Lyndurst Way discouraging HGV's and coaches with a weight limit. We regularly have articulated lorries trying to negotiate the Maxted Road/Nutbrook Street corner. 

As for the bollard on our corner- it is too low for a lot of vehicles to see until it is too late. 

  • 1 month later...
On 17/04/2023 at 13:29, Huggers said:

but how would they differentiate between users? We have always thought there should be a sign at top of Lyndurst Way discouraging HGV's and coaches with a weight limit. We regularly have articulated lorries trying to negotiate the Maxted Road/Nutbrook Street corner. 

As for the bollard on our corner- it is too low for a lot of vehicles to see until it is too late. 

Too late for what? To late to avoid driving on the pavement?

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • 1 month later...

Road seems a bit quieter, not too much craziness in the morning that I’ve noticed. Some people doing awkward turns or long reverses at the signs. A fair number of people driving straight through.
 

Unfortunately the Adys/Nutbrook bollard still gets taken out within days of being repaired. 

  • Thanks 1

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

    • Thanks for all of the thoughts. I have a letter from searches which outlines the scope of work but doesn't mention any work guarantee as far as I can see. I agree that next step is to check directly with the major works team. Tim .
    • I thoroughly recommend Jay from JK Electrical Contractors who is an NICEIC registered. NICEIC is the UK's leading certification body for the electrical contracting industry and conducts regular audits and assessments on all its members. It is the specialist trade body which certifies professional electricians.  Jay completed the installation of a 19 way consumer unit for us and works to the highest standards and our entire electrical installation is now fully compliant with 18th Edition of the electrical wiring regulations. Before installing the new CU he traced and corrected faults that had developed over the last 25 years -some of which were my DIY bodges that were non-compliant.  We now have an installation that is 100% safe and  reliable . His contact details are :- 0208 150 6450 [email protected] Here is what he installed for us.
    • I fully support this petition, however it will need to be shared far & wide to be effective. Also there is always a huge amount of interest / objection during the festival, but not so much when they start consulting for the next one, usually around January. It's crucial that everyone that has been impacted makes their voice heard then.  A couple of points which may be good to include in the wording (if it is still possible to amend?) - The total tickets sold are way more than 3000. The licence allows a capacity of up to 9,999, but this may include staff & performers etc. The published attendance for 2024 was:  Friday – 8,999 / Saturday – 9,512 / Sunday – 9,422 So that's c.28,000 people trampling & littering our park over three days - people who have no need or desire to take any care or consideration of our park.  - Gala claim for 2024 that "62% of all ticket holders were from Southeast London and 18% of these were from hyper-local postcode areas SE15 and SE22." So a bit of maths shows that means that around 89% of attendees were not what most people would term 'local'... - Gala have ambitions / plans to extend the number of event days to 6, over two weekends. They applied for a licence for this in 2024, but then withdrew it. Instead they added a "free" event, billed as a community day, to the existing 3 day festival, thereby increasing the event days to 4.  This would appear to be an attempt to set a precedent for increasing the number of event days, and it's inevitable that they will attempt to secure the 6 days they desire for 2026, to increase their profits further. Two weekends in a row of noise, disturbance & disruption would be unacceptable, plus an extra c.18,000 trampling & littering the park... - The site size has been increased. The claim is that it is to compensate for lost storage space due to recent flood alleviation works, but the area has increased by more than the area lost, and appears to have been used for attendee activity rather than site storage. Gala have often stated that the festival can only be located in the park because the footprint has been designed specifically for that area, and yet this year the footprint had been amended & extended without any apparent issues. Surely this proves that it could be relocated?  Apologies, I just can't help going into rant mode on this issue, but hopefully some of the above may be helpful in increasing the argument presented by the petition?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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