Peckham Rye bus & cycle gate

[rollflick]

Southwark has published plans for a trial bus & cycle gate on Peckham Rye, between Nunhead Crescent and Nunhead Lane. Only buses, cycles and authorised vehicles (refuse & emergency vehicles) would be allowed through at any time.

http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s91051/APPENDIX%201%20PECKHAM%20RYE.pdf

Bus delays have grown in Southwark, even before the surge in driving post-lock down. So bus lanes, bus gates and reducing parking on narrower sections of road are essential if we are to have better bus services. Especially now as increasing delays mean a given number of buses can make fewer runs on a route, meaning more BUS FULL signs.

The thing is, this is not a delay hotspot, not least as buses only operate southbound. Indeed most buses through Peckham operate on the *west* side of Peckham Rye, where this scheme will make congestion *worse*. Southwark even consulted on a new bus lane slightly north of there in 2016 but seems to have forgotten about installing it: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/peckham-rye-proposed-bus-lane/

Even that wouldn't be enough to mitigate the effects though.

The scheme is also supposed to help cycling, as this is the future route of Cycleway 35 to Catford. But TfL's collision data shows its the sections immediately north and south of here (plus also the western side) where cycling is unsafe and where Southwark drew up plans for cycle tracks three years back but has done zilch to implement them. Here it's very safe (one of the few collisions involved a cyclist in 2017 and no other vehicle). Plans to remove car parking would in any event enable separated cycle lanes to be installed anyway. Likewise the scheme is supposed to help walking but it's the west side that's harder to cross and where the collisions have been.

Inevitably making changes to streets to increase sustainable travel will provoke disagreement, particularly in the short term when things bed in. However I'm left wondering if this is scheme where there need not be such disagreement- as there currently appears scant objective justification for it. That would be a shame as it could damage the case for the bus gates that Southwark needs elsewhere.

[Rockets]

This has nothing to do with buses and is a trojan horse to prevent cars from turning right from Peckham Rye onto East Dulwich Road (which now will not be possible) - it makes no sense at all.

It's received a lukewarm response from the emergency services, refuse services and even TFL themselves but it has, you will be pleased to hear, received the blessings and full support of Southwark Cyclists ;-). It will inevitably send cars looking for other routes through quieter residential roads around Bellenden Road or along Barry Road to get to Dulwich from Peckham.

[Penguin68]

It is increasingly clear that 'our' councillors are anything but ours - they are the spavined poodles of the Tooley St apparat.

If we ever get the opportunity to vote again in London then we must beg independent individuals who are interested in representing Dulwich and East Dulwich residents to stand against the apparat. Otherwise our lives will become intolerable. A borough only for cyclists isn't acceptable.

[Rockets]

Even the local councillor Jasmine Ali seems less than impressed.....the quote from the report below is of someone who has been told they have to fall in line...I love the...."requested we engage with residents to promote a positive message on this scheme". She knows what's coming and how this will be received by the residents and is saying good luck trying to convince the residents they want this!!! ;-)

Rye Lane Councillor Jasmine Ali was in favour of the proposals to

promote walking and cycling, and agreed this is in line with the

Council?s policies on active travel and climate change. The councillor

requested we engage with residents to promote a positive message

on this scheme.

[sally buying]

Whether Jasmine Ali agrees or not my personal thoughts are she will do what she is told but show token interest to what is said locally.

Taking up any cause on behalf of residents my contact with her on any subject has been a complete waste of time.

I feel that she has no interest in any residents opinions.

We need a change of Cllrs who are not directed by the political Labour machine unfortunately The Lane ward where she originated has been merged into the Rye Lane ward. So no chance of change.

[Blah Blah]

This is completely bonkers and a complete waste of money at a time when other things are needed. That stretch of road is perfectly fine as it is for cyclists. I know because I cycle up it most days. It has a marked cycle lane and is rarely jammed, if ever. They would do better to spend the money sorting the mess that is the bottom of Rye Lane, that shared cycle lane on a pavement that is sinking into the gutter.

[JohnL]

sally buying Wrote:

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

> Whether Jasmine Ali agrees or not my personal

> thoughts are she will do what she is told but show

> token interest to what is said locally.

>

> Taking up any cause on behalf of residents my

> contact with her on any subject has been a

> complete waste of time.

>

> I feel that she has no interest in any residents

> opinions.

>

> We need a change of Cllrs who are not directed by

> the political Labour machine unfortunately The

> Lane ward where she originated has been merged

> into the Rye Lane ward. So no chance of change.

The Lane is Rye Lane isn't it ?

OK there maybe some tiny differences but to my eye the Lane ward pre 2018 is the same as Rye Lane ward post 2018

[rupert james]

The Lane Ward used to be a separate ward but with boundary changes it was included with Rye Lane.

[JohnL]

rupert james Wrote:

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

> The Lane Ward used to be a separate ward but with

> boundary changes it was included with Rye Lane.

Sorry edited it now as I googled - but it still looks the same to me

[JohnL]

Rockets Wrote:

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

> This has nothing to do with buses and is a trojan

> horse to prevent cars from turning right from

> Peckham Rye onto East Dulwich Road (which now will

> not be possible) - it makes no sense at all.

>

> It's received a lukewarm response from the

> emergency services, refuse services and even TFL

> themselves but it has, you will be pleased to

> hear, received the blessings and full support of

> Southwark Cyclists ;-). It will inevitably send

> cars looking for other routes through quieter

> residential roads around Bellenden Road or along

> Barry Road to get to Dulwich from Peckham.

Trying to work this out.

So will traffic that currently tuns right at Peckham Rye east southbound into East Dulwich Road westbound be diverted to Peckham Rye West southbound and be allowed to turn right there or will there be an alternative route through the lanes further east

[JohnL]

The guys who come to install my smartmeters refused last week as "nowhere to park near Peckham Rye and too difficult to get there"

(actually they said they need two men to deliver to Peckham Rye - obviously one acts as lookout)

I don't care about smartmeters but nobody seems to be able to navigate the roads around here and delivery people need to walk it seems (or park illegally as my sofa delivery man blatantly did and didn't give a hoot ) :)

[jimbo1964]

Rye Lane has always been a bit of a nightmare for cyclists as pedestrians tend not to look where they're going at the best of times. It's just a free for all now of people meandering all over the road. I think best avoided completely as a cycle route.

[Rockets]

JohnL Wrote:

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

> Rockets Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > This has nothing to do with buses and is a

> trojan

> > horse to prevent cars from turning right from

> > Peckham Rye onto East Dulwich Road (which now

> will

> > not be possible) - it makes no sense at all.

> >

> > It's received a lukewarm response from the

> > emergency services, refuse services and even

> TFL

> > themselves but it has, you will be pleased to

> > hear, received the blessings and full support

> of

> > Southwark Cyclists ;-). It will inevitably send

> > cars looking for other routes through quieter

> > residential roads around Bellenden Road or

> along

> > Barry Road to get to Dulwich from Peckham.

>

> Trying to work this out.

>

> So will traffic that currently tuns right at

> Peckham Rye east southbound into East Dulwich Road

> westbound be diverted to Peckham Rye West

> southbound and be allowed to turn right there or

> will there be an alternative route through the

> lanes further east

It certainly isn't called out in the pdf that they will now be allowing right turns from the west fork of Peckham Rye.

One of two things seems to be happening here:

1) this is part of the strategic plans to make east/west travel difficult across the area

2) they are trying to cut traffic to reduce the impact of the closures on East Dulwich Road, East Dulwich Grove etc.

But I think we can all start playing the new game Dulwich residents are getting used to playing: Which roads become the displacement roads...any bets anyone?

[JohnL]

Well I'll go down Consort Road onto East Dulwich Road.

Problem is so will everyone else :)

(it took me three goes to read that map)

[Rockets]

JohnL Wrote:

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

> Well I'll go down Consort Road onto East Dulwich

> Road.

>

> Problem is so will everyone else :)

>

> (it took me three goes to read that map)

It's another example of the council forcing traffic from lightly populated streets onto more densely populated ones....they really are completely out of control and with each closure are making the problems worse and worse and increasing congestion and pollution throughout Dulwich. But Southwark Cyclists are happy so it's all worth it! ;-)

[Seall]

Thanks very much! What about all the cyclists who use the pavements and pose a risk to those of us are elderly or pushing buggies.

[johnie]

So now anyone wishing to drive north from the Ivydale area will need to divert down Colyton road past Harriss Girls School and onto Forest Hill Road? That's going to work really well, given Colyton is a major A road with hardly any kids cycling to school, dog walkers, and school coaches.

[Huggers]

wouldnt cyclists just cycle along the Rye?

johnie Wrote:

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

> So now anyone wishing to drive north from the

> Ivydale area will need to divert down Colyton road

> past Harriss Girls School and onto Forest Hill

> Road? That's going to work really well, given

> Colyton is a major A road with hardly any kids

> cycling to school, dog walkers, and school

> coaches.

[jenf]

Literally no one asked for this change. Likewise, literally no one has been asked about this change. Unbelievable.

[Sally Eva]

johnie Wrote:

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

> So now anyone wishing to drive north from the

> Ivydale area will need to divert down Colyton road

> past Harriss Girls School and onto Forest Hill

> Road? That's going to work really well, given

> Colyton is a major A road with hardly any kids

> cycling to school, dog walkers, and school

> coaches.

Why wouldn't they just go north via Linden Grove, Consort Road etc?

[malumbu]

Rather than reach for the keyboard and go straight to this site does anyone actually reach for the keyboard and e-mail their councillor? It's democracy, they have a manifesto, you vote them in, they attempt to deliver their manifesto. All this whinging is simply undermining a long established way of devolving government. And of course if you are that unhappy report back afterwards and ultimately stand for election yourself.

In addition national government is committed to zero carbon by 2050 and part of the decarbonisation of road transport is to reduce private car use so its going to happen whatever, hooray. Quoting from the attached report Mick Jones of the Clash, Big Audio Dynamite and Carbon Silicon's cousin stated "Public transport and active travel will be the natural first choice for our daily activities. "e will use our cars less and be able to rely on a convenient, cost-effective and coherent public transport network." [shame you and the previous Labour government failed to put up fuel duty since 2004 then] https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/878642/decarbonising-transport-setting-the-challenge.pdf

PS the most useless bit of traffic control are the lights on Knatchbull Road in Loughborough Junction, the only lights I am happy to run on red.

[peckhamside]

They will need to sort out the junction of Nunhead Lane and Consort. I was already planning to write to the Council re parking there which blocks the junction and makes it pretty impassable. Two lanes of cars cannot cross so junction is very slowed down.

I support road closures generally. I guess this will reduce traffic up the whole of PR East side and re route it to West side. This will make it easier for cyclists going South who currently have cars restlessly revving behind them as they slow down up the hill.

[JohnL]

malumbu Wrote:

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

> Rather than reach for the keyboard and go straight

> to this site does anyone actually reach for the

> keyboard and e-mail their councillor? It's

> democracy, they have a manifesto, you vote them

> in, they attempt to deliver their manifesto. All

> this whinging is simply undermining a long

> established way of devolving government. And of

> course if you are that unhappy report back

> afterwards and ultimately stand for election

> yourself.

We had this argument in my block about planning permission - and the consensus is it's already decided before we are "consulted".

[JohnL]

peckhamside Wrote:

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

> I support road closures generally. I guess this

> will reduce traffic up the whole of PR East side

> and re route it to West side. This will make it

> easier for cyclists going South who currently have

> cars restlessly revving behind them as they slow

> down up the hill.

We're not allowed to turn right on peckham rye westside going south - so it means an alternative route (and as stated above I'd use consort road.

[Abe_froeman]

Yes it's bad news for Nunhead Green and ally he little shops there. Traffic was already bad but it will now also have to absorb all traffic coming from Peckham to East Dulwich Road.

I suspect this will also back up traffic on Consort Road making the 37 bus even more unusable than it currently is.