Gas works gridlock this summer

[IainJ]

As if the traffic chaos caused by the Council's road works in Grove Vale and Dulwich Village was not enough, be prepared for a summer of disruption due to the renewal of gas pipes affecting Lordship Lane, East Dulwich Road, Peckham Rye and associated streets.  Nothing from the Council by way of mitigation, as usual no doubt extremely relaxed about the traffic congestion likely to ensue. We meanwhile will have to ensure endless delays as the buses are snarled up with temporary traffic lights taking ages to change on single phase sequences. All the more maddening when there is often no sense of urgency about completing the works. 

This comes courtesy of the Friends of Peckham Rye but needs to be circulated widely.

 

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sharon Dorrington <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025, 18:23
Subject: Gas pipe replacement project in Peckham Rye
To: Sharon Dorrington <[email protected]>

 

I am contacting you regarding our project to upgrade the gas network in the roads around Peckham Rye. We need to replace the old pipe with new plastic pipe to ensure a continued safe and reliable gas supply. Our contractor, Forefront Utilities, will start this essential work on 6 May for approximately 16 weeks.

 

Who are we?

SGN own and operate the gas network in your area and provide your gas supply 24 hours a day, 365 day a year.

 What roads will be affected and when?

Phase one

Our engineers will start work on 6 May for approximately six weeks in Rye Lane between the junction with Peckham Rye to property number 206 Rye Lane. Temporary two-way traffic lights will be in place to ensure that road users are able to pass the work site safely.

 At the same time, we will also be working in Nigel Road the road will be closed at the junction with Peckham Rye. A signed diversion will be in place and access will be maintained for residents and businesses.

 Work will also start work in Peckham Rye for approximately 12 weeks. Our engineers will be working between the junctions of Rye Lane and East Dulwich Road. Temporary multi-way traffic lights will be in place to keep everyone safe.

 Phase two

Our engineers will start work on 16 June for approximately ten weeks in East Dulwich Road between the junctions of Worlingham Road and Peckham Rye. We will need to install temporary multi-way lights for the duration of the work.

 Phase three

From 28 July for approximately four weeks, we will be working in Lordship Lane, Spurling Road and Worlingham Road at their junctions with East Dulwich Road.

 

Our work in Lordship Lane will take place from the junction with East Dulwich Road to the junction with Zenoria Street. Temporary multi-way lights will be installed for the duration of the work. 

 

The junction of Spurling Road and East Dulwich Road will be closed with a signed diversion in place.

 

The junction of Worlingham Road and East Dulwich Road will also be closed with a signed diversion in place.

 

How will this affect you?

•            If your property is within the road closure, access will be maintained. Please speak to our engineers about any special requirements you may have.

•            Please ensure that delivery drivers and visitors know about the road closure and traffic lights to allow them to factor in additional delivery time.

•            Please allow additional time for your journeys.

•            Please check with your local bus company to be aware of any delayed buses or suspended bus stops.

 

At SGN we appreciate that work of this nature is disruptive and ensure that we will complete this work as quickly and safely as possible to minimise this disruption.

 

We will update you on our progress at each phase of the work programme.

 

Ongoing information on our project will be available on our website

 

Sharon Dorrington (She/Her)

Stakeholder and Community Engagement Manager

Vice Chair @ SGN Race Equality Network

M:+44 (0)7970123506
E: [email protected]

SGN, St Lawrence House, Station Approach, Horley, Surrey, RH6  9HJ

 

[Kathleen Olander]

So glad they added their pronouns 🤪

[KalamityKel]

So essential work being undertaken to important services is a problem? 

 

[Rockets]

That's a lot of temporary lights going in. More traffic chaos around Dulwich....will it ever end?

Edited Sunday at 19:21 by Rockets

[malumbu]

21 hours ago, Kathleen Olander said:

So glad they added their pronouns 🤪

What's your problem?

14 hours ago, KalamityKel said:

So essential work being undertaken to important services is a problem? 

 

In deed, this is something that has to happen to maintain and improve our infrastructure 

[Penguin68]

I don't think the issue is about whether the work is necessary or beneficial (in the - very - long run) but rather any expectation that it will either be scheduled, or indeed delivered to the benefit of those living locally and using local roads; my experience has been that these sort of works are scheduled and delivered to the benefit solely of those undertaking the works, without any consideration of the disruption to those of us who live here. These are our roads, which we have paid for, and their use is being taken away from us by a private company set only for its own profitability, without regard to our loss of utility value. Had I any belief that the scheduling was planned around minimum disruption to road users I would be more relaxed, and indeed if I see significant work going on every day on site I will be slightly re-assured - but I'm not holding my breath. And I don't expect the council we have elected to give a damn!

[exdulwicher]

45 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

These are our roads, which we have paid for, 

Taxation pays for many many things in life, that doesn't entitle anyone to unlimited free access to them.

49 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

their use is being taken away from us by a private company set only for its own profitability, without regard to our loss of utility value. 

I suspect the loss of gas (or worse, the existing main leaking and going BANG!) would be a considerably greater loss of utility...

[Penguin68]

7 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

Taxation pays for many many things in life, that doesn't entitle anyone to unlimited free access to them.

Ah, that's the excuse then for the NHS being intermittently crap, but I had always assumed that unlimited free access was actually its USP. 

8 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

I suspect the loss of gas (or worse, the existing main leaking and going BANG!) would be a considerably greater loss of utility..

So if the gas company was to close completely your own road for a year to undertake remedial work, and actually only worked on one day of that year, you'd be OK with that then? A reductio ad absurdum of course, but the point I was making was that it should be done promptly and efficiently with our needs in mind and not those of shareholders. 

[exdulwicher]

6 minutes ago, Penguin68 said:

the point I was making was that it should be done promptly and efficiently with our needs in mind and not those of shareholders. 

Surprising though this info may be to you, utility companies have to pay to access the road and to undertake repairs - it's called a Lane Rental Scheme - and they can be fined for exceeding the allowed duration. No-one is going out to deliberately cause as much disruption as possible or to make the work last as long as possible.

The fact that they've publicised this work and explained what is going to happen and when is an indication that, wildly unfair though this may be to your personal liberty, you might wish to look at your own options for minimising disruption. You now know it's going to happen so you could sit in traffic and scream about how Southwark Council / the utilities companies set out every day with the sole aim of causing as much outrage to Penguin68 as possible or you could maybe think "I might not drive down this road today cos I know it'll be slower due to the roadworks, I might drive that way around instead".

[Insuflo]

What the hell has any of this to do with the council? The council has no power to prevent the gas company working on the pipes which they own, even if the pipes are under the council owned road. The gas company, SGN, is a Statutory Undertaker, that is, they have a legal right to undertake works which involve digging up the road to access their property (the pipes). The council can negotiate or coordinate with SGN to try and minimise the disruption but with a project this big, how could serious disruption be avoided?
You may as well blame the council for the cancellation of my M&S order. Bloody council! 

[first mate]

How many parts of ED are currently negatively affected by major roadworks?

[exdulwicher]

2 minutes ago, first mate said:

How many parts of ED are currently negatively affected by major roadworks?

Your handy guide to all roadworks and road closures:

https://one.network/

[first mate]

Thanks ED.

I looked at a different source and it shows fat red lines on most major routes into ED. We all understand the need to deal with vital utilities upgrades, but, for instance, could the non-urgent pavement widening work around Melbourne Grove etc.. have been postponed until other works, including work on crossings right the other end of Lordship Lane, South Circular, have waited? Perhaps I am missing something but to have all going this on simultaneously seems poor management, and the Council does have a coordination role.

[Rockets]

Very poor management. I thought it was incredibly short-sighted/incompetent for Southwark to let the A205, Dulwich Village/Red Post Hill and Melbourne Grove non-essential works to all take place at the same time.

It's almost as if they like the disruption, congestion and increased pollution that comes with it. Perhaps they are happy that those on the Peckham Rye side of Dulwich now get their fair share of works-induced traffic hell......

Who is responsible for this within the council?

[Penguin68]

3 hours ago, Insuflo said:

The council can negotiate or coordinate with SGN to try and minimise the disruption but with a project this big, how could serious disruption be avoided?

These (like the work on the A205 junction with Lordship Lane) are planned and voluntary, in the sense that they are not a response to an emergency (for which rules are necessarily different). Of course the scale of work will necessarily be disruptive, the issue is how long that disruption continues.

For voluntary works the council has, and should have, considerable influence on timings, and sequencing (with other planned works). And of course, even with planned works there will be some serious disruption - the issue is how much and more importantly how long. By choosing to work at their pace the contractors can avoid such things as overtime working or indeed at times any serious sequencing - so maybe you will find that here are down times when no work is being progressed because that suits the contractors to optimise the use of their workforce to minimise their costs - at the expense of disruption to us.

The paltry charges imposed on them by the council may well be far less than the cost of employing more people to do the job. It won't matter to them. I have seen the speed at which works like this are completed in other countries, and it far surpasses that achieved by UK engineering forces.

[exdulwicher]

3 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Very poor management. I thought it was incredibly short-sighted/incompetent for Southwark to let the A205, Dulwich Village/Red Post Hill and Melbourne Grove non-essential works to all take place at the same time.

Well A205 is TfL and that's been on the cards to do for years, there have been safety concerns around that junction for a long time.

"non-essential" - excellent, I'm glad that you can determine how essential these are. Can you share the Rocket's Scale of Essentiality? I assume it's based on all manner of calculations such as government funding, road safety, traffic management, contractor availability, weather, school holidays, neighbouring work times, complementary utility works and the council pipeline of schemes?

8 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Who is responsible for this within the council?

Radical thought but you could have a look on their website or you could contact your councillor. And what would you do with that info? Demand that they come along personally and stop all disruption immediately?

Like it or not, there will always be disruption of one sort or another - assuming of course that you want functional roads and utilities, they need maintaining. 

You've been given the necessary info around when and where it'll be, there is an element of personal responsibility now for you to minimise that disruption to yourself. Maybe think about re-routing your journey or re-timing it or perhaps going by a different mode of transport?

I was given some info that central London might be really quite busy today so rather than try and get the bus into town or go for a bike ride along The Mall, I made other plans. Somehow managing not to post my outrage about this undemocratic infringement on my personal liberty on here.

[first mate]

Ex Dulwicher said "non-essential" - excellent, I'm glad that you can determine how essential these are. Can you share the Rocket's Scale of Essentiality? I assume it's based on all manner of calculations such as government funding, road safety, traffic management, contractor availability, weather, school holidays, neighbouring work times, complementary utility works and the council pipeline of schemes?

Given all those variables is it not odd that all the works are going on simultaneously?

[Rockets]

No just trying to determine who is accountable for this mess....the person who is signing them all off to happen at the same time....I know how much our council loves accountability it's like councillor kryptonite...;-)

I love the fact you cited the usual "go to" of "find another route/way" and I love you cited a trip to central London. Of course we all have multiple options to get in and out of central London and those pesky PTAL scores are brilliant in central London so we can pick and chose. I doubt there are many people driving from Dulwich to central London (unless they are doing so as part of their job).

The challenge I think many of us Dulwich residents feel is that, for example, during the A205 or Dulwich Village works, there is clearly no easy alternative mode/route because each day the congestion was a bad as the previous day. Whilst those on the pro-active travel lobby, like your good self, will always say, as you just did, there is always another way sometimes reality dictates there is not - the further you get out of London the more reliant people become on cars and I would suggest those using the A205 are traversing east to west and vice versa rather than north to south and vice versa. The council has admitted that east west routes are limited. Throw in the plethora of LTNs around the surrounds of the A205 and you can see why problems occur.

I think the council do actively turn a blind eye to congestion as they have convinced themselves it is a weapon from the nudge toolkit. One suspects if they were properly monitoring pollution levels they would be encouraging the works to be done more quickly or at times of least disruption because they would be held accountable for any increases.

The fact you have leant so heavily on the "find another way" narrative leads me to believe I am on to something. If this is the thinking of other active travel planners and lobbyists then you can see why many could be led to believe that such works are welcomed to try and make journeys intolerable for vehicle users. 

Please also do not overlook the impact of this on public transport. As I said previously exam weeks start next week and a lot of schools in the area are massively concerned by disruption to pupils travelling on public transport that these works (especially the A205) are creating. But clearly the council aren't too concerned.

[first mate]

57 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

You've been given the necessary info around when and where it'll be, there is an element of personal responsibility now for you to minimise that disruption to yourself. Maybe think about re-routing your journey or re-timing it or perhaps going by a different mode of transport?

But it is not just one journey is it? This is weeks, if not months, of potential disruption on roads all around Dulwich. Others will have to state the degree to which other modes of transport, like buses, are impacted. 

[Rockets]

1 hour ago, exdulwicher said:

Can you share the Rocket's Scale of Essentiality?

Stop being faceatious. Clearly a burst water main (of which there have already been many, some of which led to the closure of the A205) is more essential than the removal of a pedestrian refuge to facilitate an advanced cycle lane box...or do you think they are equally important?

Edited Monday at 15:58 by Rockets

[teddyboy23]

The temporary traffic lights in grove vale were not there this morning

[LurkyMcLurker]

Is it really that messy, though? I don't think it is.

It's inconvenient. It's unpleasant. It's not a disaster, though.

I go through Red Post Hill and Grove Vale 5 days a week and I've never seen the traffic backed up to such an extent where these works interfere with one another. If they did? Of course it'd be a disaster. Of course that'd be worth demanding someone to answer for what's gone on, but that hasn't happened.

It seems to me this is more likely an incovenience across a broad area where you can possibly interact with multiple areas undergoing work. That's annoying. However, it's not like these works were unplanned or left in a state where traffic lights didn't exist or didn't work. It's not like work has started then sat completely unresolved for ages and ages without any work occurring.
 

[ianr]

20 hours ago, exdulwicher said:

Your handy guide to all roadworks and road closures:

https://one.network/

That seems to be a multi-pronged multi-product company specialising in selling services to councils, etc.  See eg https://uk.one.network/customer-stories.  Their dynamic relay of real-time congestion reports may be useful, but I've no idea how complete or authoritative it is.  And are there any other public utilities available on that site?

I've found https://public.londonworks.gov.uk/roadworks/home useful for full access to the London Roadworks Register.  Enter, say, just Southwark and you can get a list or map of all current and planned roadworks.

There's also https://streetcare.tfl.gov.uk/ for reporting and viewing reports of street problems, from major to very minor.  I've used it to report a vandalised bus stop display panel, very minor; but I see that something to do with traffic lights (for which TfL have, I believe, statutory responsibility) can be dealt with quickly: eg https://streetcare.tfl.gov.uk/report/7456860.

I'm far from sure that they're directly responsible for dealing with contractors' faulty mobile traffic lights, though their remit does extend to anything that might indirectly affect the red routes.  Otherwise it would I believe be a problem owned by the borough and the contractor.  See https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs-and-communities/information-by-borough?intcmp=17175#on-this-page-2 about suitable contacts.

A few days after writing the following I did see that the faulty mobile lights in Grove Vale did have an 0800 phone number for Conway on it.  Any one of us could have phoned them at any time, and presumably achieved something useful to all.  Or even given streetcare a try.  Perhaps, presumably, none of us did.  In which case, nostra culpa.

"I spent half an hour, shortly after the first warning on the forum, observing and making a  voice recording logging all the changes [and flows], but never got round to collating them.  There were some very definite faults like [mobile light stuck at red], probably intermittent in nature.  And some of the basic timing seemed to have some excessive intervals, possibly for the safety of pedestrians, though I'd be very wary of saying they should be shorter without good analysis.  And overall, the traffic seemed very tolerant of the waits, and not jammed to the extent of creating longer and longer queues.  I'm not sure what a traffic flow analyst would make of it."

[sunbob]

Does anyone know if these works have started yet?  They hadn't at 7am this morning. 

[Earl Aelfheah]

Massively inconvenient, but what exactly do you want the council to do about it? They're not council works and if they're essential, then they're essential. I for one don't want to put minimising short term inconvenience over a long term safe and reliable gas supply in the area. 

Edited yesterday at 15:33 by Earl Aelfheah