Jump to content

Peckham Rye Gyratory reappears for 2 week consultation: little change, more disruption


Recommended Posts

Southwark Council yesterday released the revised scheme for traffic movements around Peckham Rye/East Dulwich Road which was heavily criticised when it first appeared.  The consultation is open for less than 2 weeks, closing on 16 February so you need to be quick with your responses.  It hasn't yet appeared on the 'Southwark Platform' so the Council is obviously hoping that it will go unnoticed so that the scheme can be forced through. 

The major areas of concern, i.e., the closure of the eastern branch of Peckham Rye to the junction with East Dulwich Road and the consequential rerouting of most traffic to the western branch remain. This will cause substantial tailbacks in all directions, in particular slowing the buses. The current scheme was designed to improve the buses through the western junction so this seems a retrograde step. The scheme pays lip service to improving cycling but in practice offers little benefit - with all traffic forced to use the western arm of Peckham Rye there will be more potential conflicts. The Nigel Road bus stop  is to be moved to Rye Lane to secure the much criticised 'floating bus stop'. All of this is said to be costing £2m and will take another year to implement. Yet more contra flows, temporary traffic lights and massive disruption just when we have recovered from the delays caused by the gas works last year. And with more restrictions it will be a huge cash cow for the Council. Not that this is an objective of the scheme.... 

The link to the consultation is here: https://engage.southwark.gov.uk/en-GB/projects/peckham-rye-gyratory-bus-improvements

The Council need to be mindful of the High Court judgement in 2025 which quashed the West Dulwich low traffic zone, where the consultation outcome was described as a 'masterclass in selective reporting'.  

Edited by IainJ

Suggest properly reading the detailed documents. My take is they’ve listened very well to concerns raised in the consultation - and made sensible revisions in response. There was a lot of support from residents. 

47 minutes ago, IainJ said:

 It hasn't yet appeared on the 'Southwark Platform' so the Council is obviously hoping that it will go unnoticed so that the scheme can be forced through. 

How did you find out about it?

48 minutes ago, IainJ said:

The Council need to be mindful of the High Court judgement in 2025 which quashed the West Dulwich low traffic zone, where the consultation outcome was described as a 'masterclass in selective reporting'.  

Nope as some of us discussed for some reason the judge was swayed by a load of bolloxs from some NIMBY's with money and time on their hands.

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Nope as some of us discussed for some reason the judge was swayed by a load of bolloxs from some NIMBY's with money and time on their hands.

Are you now questioning whether judges uphold the rule of law and are actually being swayed by "NIMBYs with money and time on their hands?"

@malumbu was it not the judge that summed up by saying it was a "masterclass in selective partial reporting" or is that just spin from biased folks with an agenda.....;-)

 

  • Agree 1

This scheme seems fundamentally flawed and likely to lead to crash concentration and worse crash outcomes. 

 If Peckham Rye east is closed to motor vehicles, and the various side road closures, then a lot of extra traffic will be forced onto Peckham Rye west which will slow down the bus routes and cyclists following that route to and from East Dulwich. It is also likely to raise the pressure for motor vehicle drivers at the western Peckham Rye / East Dulwich Road junction. A young girl died at this junction in the past while temporary lights were in place. Stressed motorists are a greater danger and risk for more serious crashes. 

 Looking at Crashmap.co.uk for the area the western junction vs the eastern one, for the last five years public data is available for, shows 8 vs 7 Slight crashes and 1 vs. 0 for Serious crashes on these two junctions. Placing further traffic onto the western junction would likely exacerbate this. 

 BUT if the whole western Peckham rye from East Dulwich Road to Scylla Road junction is compared to the eastern side it becomes 2 serious and 17 slight on the west side vs. 0 serious and 11 slight crashes on the east side.

I can’t see how the scheme would make this better. But intuitively it would seem a real risk to make it much worse. 

@James Barber From my casual observation you appear to take a poltical stance, ie that everything Southwark does under Labour control is wrong.

@CPR Dave I doubt if you have posted anything positive on this forum

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

    • 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.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
    • Anyone has a storage or a display rack for Albums LPs drop me a message thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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