I have been chopping and changing my route to work up in town from Sydenham to Sydenham hill - due to the shocking service!!!
I have the last two days been via Sydenham and noticed the side gate on the London bridge side of the station is open in the mornings.
Is this a permanent arrangement now as I do come from the "Upper" part of Sydenham and if I can avoid going over the train tracks to then go back over them thats a start - would have a better chance of running for and catching a train if I don't have to conquer the footbridge.
If anyone has any news if this is going to be permanent that would be great.
I can just see myself going down there one day and the gate being locked with me on the wrong side "just as the train pulls in (08-17 was 8 minutes late this morning!!!!)
Funny how they claim to have improved the service to justify stopping the 5% discount on monthly ticket renewals when the majority of London bound trains are late or made up of four coaches rather than eight!
I also notice some bright spark has finally decided to widen the late night exit from the station so that people other then dwarfs and pixes can get out without a crush.
I wonder how many management focus groups it took them to come up with that revolutionary idea?
So the opening of the side gate is a permanent thing then? Superb! (chops a precious three minutes off my journey in the morning!)
There was a period when it was open last year, but I think this was linked to it being used by people working on the line, rather than for the benefit of passengers (?). And just as we got used to it, it was closed again.
It would be helpful if they could put a dropped kerb on the pavement outside though, so the side gate more accessible.
Actually Pat we were rather hoping for 'residents parking only' even if it is only between the hours of say midday to 14.30 (as most of the residential areas in Bromley are designated). The volume of parking in Peak Hill Gardens has increased immeasurably since the gates were opened permanently. The benefit for residents in this street of the gate being open in this side are questionable now.
Please - stop being selfish and spare a thought for residents of Peak Hill Gardens who actually like to be able to park in the road in which they live occasionally. What with the London commuters and the patrons of LA Fitness parking ad nauseum, I think it is only fair that the Sydenham Society should lobby on our behalf for Residents Only Parking now. It is just getting ridiculous. By restricting it to the hours of midday to about 14.30, it doesn't stop passing trade to the local shops either. Come On Sydenham Society - let's see you fighting our corner!
I don't think Sydenham Society is being "selfish" in trying to improve access for Sydenham Station up-platform and by asking the council for a dropped kerb, together with a yellow line immediately by the dropped kerb to stop people parking across the entrance to the up-platform. This only improves the access in to the station for everyone. One day if we keep lobbying we may get the new station we are asking for and the need for this entrance may be no longer required
After last year's CPZ consultation, the Sydenham Society understood the council was intending to go back to local residents in your area who had apparently asked for some form of resident's parking scheme. If this has not yet happened then we will support you and your neighbours in furthering the discussion. Lobbying of those standing in the local council elections may well help on this matter.
You are welcome to give me a call and we can discuss this further
Oops - I keep getting misunderstood! I didn't mean Sydenham Society were selfish - I meant people in general!
Incidentally, does anyone know what happened to the proposed development of the old Regency Snooker club into flats? We went to Lewisham Library to view the plans and put comments in. Our main concern was the parking. The building is now looking tired and unloved and in need of some TLC.
The other issue is the proposed closing off of Spring Hill from the roundabout. Any news? If this happened it might just deter commuters from parking in PHG.
I agree with all off the points you have made. But I think that you need to persuade your neighbours to agree with your forward-thinking views.
Firstly, resident's parking - only 9 out of 80 households in Peak Hill Avenue, Peak Hill Gardens and Spring Hill, voted in favour of a controlled parking zones in Lewisham's recent survey. At the mayor's meeting on Thursday 13th October at Perry Hill Baptist Church a large contingent of angry people from the Peak Hill area indicated that they rejected Lewisham council's offer to investigate resident's parking in these streets.
Secondly, on the issue of shutting off the end of Spring Hill. I agree with you that this would have the effect of discouraging non-resident parking and short-term parking for LA Fitness etc. It would also allow the Greyhound end of Spring Hill to be "brightened up" and improved - at the moment it certainly needs to be. This is why the Sydenham Society put forward this proposal as a discussion point as part of the Sydenham Gateway proposals. We wanted to create an attractive public space on the south-facing side of the road. However, this tentative proposal was met by an angry deputation of your neighbours protesting against the proposal, as you will have read in the News Shopper. There would not have been the loss of a single existing parking space in the area as a result of this proposal.
It is very difficult to put forward progressive proposals for the Peak Hill area whilst many of the residents simply don't want to discuss or even listen to details of plans which would help to improve their environment. We are very keen that people like you get together and form a coherent voice on ways to improve the area. Perhaps a resident's association would be a good idea. The Sydenham Society will give you all the support you require.
Incidentally, in January 05 Lewisham council approved a proposal for the change of use of 1 Spring Hill (the former club) to offices together with the construction of an additional storey at 2nd floor level and conversion of the upper floors to provide 4 x 1 bedroom flats plus 4 x 2 bedroom flats and 4 parking spaces to the side. We now await the builders....
Thanks for your response. I would be interested to know if, as you say 9 people out of 80 voted in favour of resident permit parking, did the other 71 dismiss it out of hand? There seems to me an awful lot of local apathy regarding the state of this area and before people get all indignant, I don't mean the Sydenham Society or any of its members, as we know well the good work they do for this community.
I mean it is very difficult to get immediate neighbours interested in community issues - its very much a case of 'yeah I know what your saying but I can't be bothered to do anything about it and it doesn't affect me anyway....
It's a shame those very angry residents did not actually think about the beneifts of closing off Spring Hill, rather than - 'oh I will have to go the longer way round to get into my road, etc'. Plus now the world and it's wife are parking down Peak Hill Gardens, as it is so convenient just to nip through the gate and get onto the up line platform to London. With the roundabout end of Spring Hill being closed it would have been a lost less convenient. Seems we are stuck with it now and I am at a loss as to what will make it any better quite frankly. With resident parking only, that sort of thing would have been stopped at a stroke and our street would have been a lot less busy than it is now.
I take your point about a resident's association and I agree it is needed. Just not sure there are people out there that have the energy to explain to groups of angry residents that they are a bit misguided.
I am one of the residents who is undecided about the advantages of resident permit parking. I am certainly not apathetic about community issues but having previously lived in Walworth in an area where residents paid for parking permits and had a small allocation of vouchers for visiting friends, I wouldn't say it was a perfect solution. I was discussing the issue with my neighbour, who is in favour of resident parking, but we both wondered whether some of the Greyhound public house parking area couldn't be leased by the station and gym for commuters and members. It is such a large area and doesn't seem to be used that much. Maybe this has been raised before?
The majority of the Greyhound car park was sold to developers several years ago.
There have been two attempts to get planning permission on this site for a block of 12 flats (with associated parking ) but both have been unsuccessful. A properly sited and well-designed block of flats will be put forward one day and permission will be granted. Of course, this will put additional parking pressure on the area when visitors turn up.
As Nasaroc states planning permission for 8 flats for 1, Spring Hill has been granted along with four parking spaces. Pressure for parking spaces in this area can only grow.
Pat is correct in emphasising that the area around Peak Hill and The Greyhound is already the most difficult areas in Sydenham for parking and that developments such as the former club, The Greyhound car park and the opening of the gate on the up platform of the station can only make matters worse. You cannot stop these developments but it is vital that residents of this area decide that they want to get involved in a rational discussion about how they can improve their area in the future.
GillyJP shouldn't be despondent about setting up a residents association in the area and having a rational discussion about these issues. There are many very successful residents groups in all of the roads leading off Sydenham Road. (the Thorpes, Girton Road, Canal Walk etc). Local councillors and officials like dealing with them because they represent a "ready-packaged" view of local views so the councillors don't have to face a confused mass of individuals. The residents associations also feed into the new police "Safer Neighbourhood" strategy and can have representatives on the police Ward Panels.
I'm a member of one of these residents associations (as well as the Sydenham Society). Our association is making sure that we are fully involved in all of the discussions about the Sydenham Gateway so we can make sure we benefit from it. Peak Hill area residents should do the same. If you don't want the money to shut off the end of Peak Hill, many people in our neck of the woods would be very glad to use it to shut off the end of Queensthorpe Road instead!
I am thinking about the Resident's Association for Peak Hill Gardens and surrounding area very carefully.
To be perfectly honest, when I was approached by the group opposing the closing off of the roundabout entrance to Spring Hill, I felt unable to voice my preference for it being closed off. I just kept my head down. That probably says more about me than anything and plus I don't want to turn these things into a battle of neighbours which, maybe unfairly, I feel it may escalate into.
We have already had 2 cars badly damaged by someone spraying them with paint stripper and I not saying this was anyone from the immediate area and there was a seven year time lapse between the vandalism, but it makes you very cautious.
But to further endorse my point about the car parking for example today, Good Friday, no commuters, hardly anyone in the gym, and guess what? There a total of 15 cars parked in Peak Hill Gardens, and actually spaces between them. Nothing down the end by the railway station gate at all. I rest my case for resident's only parking in this area.
