Why is Derby Hill Crescent closed today?

I was about to turn in and had to reverse when I saw the sign.

Any councillors know why?

The residents of Derby Hill Crescent from Derby Hill to Thorpewood Avenue have permission from the council to close the street on the first Sunday of the month for “Playing Out” allowing the children to play on the street. The sign would have had details of this attached. I believe the sign was out on Saturday, but not blocking the road, just to give everyone advance notice of the closure on Sunday.

That’s an interesting idea - I’ve heard of streets closing for one-offs but not on a regular basis. I wonder if it will become more prevalent in the future elsewhere. I quite like the idea.

I don’t mean to be rude - just curious - but I know I’ll probably be shot-down.
Anyway, why would children need to play in streets when the nice green park (Baxters Field) is on their doorstep?

image640×621 227 KB

I’ll join you in the target line up: I don’t think this is the way to educate children on road safety.

Also, Lewisham has just given £30,000 of our money to Baxter’s Fields so it’s a shame if these local children don’t use it.

@Anotherjohn and @marymck I don’t think this stops anyone using Baxter Fields - it’s one day a month and people can still go there on that day if they wish.

Whilst it will never happen on my road (a busy road) I expect it is nice to have kids in the same street be able to play together, look out of the window, see kids other kids playing and go join them, for me these things are nice for getting to know your neighbours more on your street etc (I assume anyway).

I’ve seen on other dead end streets kids will be with parents practicing roller skates \ blades cycling and with children having the convenience of a toilet and some food very close by is always appealing, and means you don’t have to go out prepped with all sorts of things.

Of course I’m just assuming above, but I back onto a communal garden area and that is nice in that you can see other kids out playing and mine can go and join them.

What happens to all the parked cars? Assumedly they have to all go and park elsewhere? Otherwise there’s hardly any room on these streets. And if people have converted their gardens to driveways, then that’s even less legitimate space for children to play.

I guess just because it’s a nice thing to do and it only being one day a month doesn’t put anyone to too much trouble?

Such insightful assumptions. You explained it better than I could.

I’m sure the kids use Baxter’s field a lot of the time. The play street is complementary, not a general alternative.

On the street I live on (not DHC) many of them are just left where they are. Not ideal, but there are too many cars around to expect neighbours to move them.

I interviewed a resident of Derby Hill Crescent, and yes, great for the kids to play out in a car-free environment, and also a brilliant way to get to know your neighbours.

Information on how to set up your own Play Streets on Lewisham’s website:

I’m obviously clearly out of touch with what does it for people now - which doesn’t bode well for my month old granddaughter! (I’m already getting told off for being too rough with her)

Surely it doesn’t need the road to be shut off for neighbours in a fairly close-knit enclave like this to start talking to each other?
I’ve tried, but I still can’t get my [thick, old] head around that concept - not here, in Forest Hill.

I don’t think the road closed sign should have been put out until the road was actually closed for the event, which I understand is for a maximum of three hours. The original poster naturally assumed that “road closed” meant the road was closed, forcing her to reverse. I can’t see any notice attached that indicated that this was just an advance notice of the fact that the road would only be closed for certain hours the next day (certainly nothing visible from a motorist’s pov).

Having now read the Council’s requirements I understand that when a road does get closed for a play street event then there have to be marshalls at the barrier and cones or hazard tape and that it’s also reassuring that the Council recommends that the organizers have public liability insurance, which seems sensible as this is a big responsibility for the organizers if something goes wrong.

What was it like when you were a kid? Did children play in the street?

This is the romantic vision people have but, sorry to burst that bubble, no, at least not when I was an 11yr old kid growing up in Agnew Road (almost bang opposite where @oakr lives).

We used to knock for each other and go walk to Honor Oak rec or to Blythe Hill Fields.

Obviously, the perception (probably the reality also) is that it’s less safe for children to go off to the park in pairs or small groups but surely that would encourage neighbouring parents to take turns in taking each other’s children to the park, which is what I did with mine and their friends - even though it meant embarrassing myself rollerblading along holding their hands (to hold me up!).

I’ve got no problem with shutting roads off but the reasoning makes me feel a bit sad if I’m honest.

If you want friendly neighbourhoods go knocking on doors with your children and say “Hello - we live just along the road so it would be great to catch up or to give you a hand with anything if you need it”. It doesn’t need a closed road to create a community - just communication!

That happened to my granddad too. It’s an occupational hazard. He used to lift me up high so as I could reach up to touch the ceiling. One of my earliest memories is my aunties (and there were five of them) fussing around what seemed like miles below and fussing at him that he’d frighten me, till the aunties frightened me and he had to give in. So don’t give in.

I played on the street once. Till my Dad put a stop to it. Cowboys and Indians and I was tied to a lamppost, on the roadway side, while the Indians whooped around in a circle. My Dad was furious probably because he was scared. I can remember the telling off and the lecture about roads being for cars and how all the others scattered. That was when we lived in Homeshaw Road. Our usual play spaces were Home Park and our gardens. That must have been more than 60 years ago, because we moved to Letchworth when I was 5 or 6. And we weren’t allowed to play in the street there either. (Mind you, if my Dad had known we’d been playing in the Arlesey Pits I’d have got more than a telling off).

I am totally in favour of you closing your road on Sunday and I hope you had a good day.

I don’t think the council has given you permission to block the road as shown in the photo on Saturday. The sign didn’t serve to give advance notice, it blocked the road and said clearly Road Ahead Closed and caused people including myself to turn around. Any details attached were not visible.

I agree with Mary, put your sign up only when the road is closed.

I have a lot of sympathy for the residents of Derby Hill Crescent and can understand why they would put up a large Road Ahead Closed sign blocking their road a day in advance of their Play Out Sunday. Thorpewood Avenue and Derby Hill are pretty solidly parked most of the time so they get the overflow parking and many people prefer that street for parking especially those with kids as having a driveway behind rather than a car gives you more space to take out your buggy or anything else.

I have a lot of sympathy as well for those who want to park on a public road and feel that a Play Out Sunday should only affect them on that day and during the hours that it takes place.

Perhaps a solution is a Play Out weekend and not just for kids but adults as well, some kind of festival involving those roads in between Dartmouth Road and Kirkdale centred round Baxters Field to celebrate it getting £30,000 from Lewisham. I am sure it could replicate the success of the Dartmouth Road opening party.

A party in the park would be good but I don’t think it’s practical to close the roads, other than the max 3 hours allowed for one street.

Roads have become much much busier in the last decades. We cannot compare it to when we were children.

Closing streets to cars completely transform the environment.

The needs of cars and parking dominate roads and streets most of the time so it seems pretty churlish to object to closing a street for one Sunday to allow children to play out safely near their homes.

Could we argue the needs of pedestrians dominate the pavements most of the time, therefore it’s acceptable to arbitrarily block pedestrians from pavements every once in a while?

I don’t think that’s a good line of reasoning

Nice staw man there. I’m not playing that game.

I responded directly to what you said and drew an analogy of my own in order to pose a question. That’s not the same thing as a straw man argument (although it would be a straw man argument if I pretended that you’d used my analogy).

I’m not trying to “play a game” - I’m merely politely engaging in debate. Hopefully you will too.

Roads and streets are designed for cars. Pavements are for pedestrians.

The idea of switching things around every once in a while is a nice novelty but it inconveniences people who rely on road access. And it’s certainly not “churlish” to say so.

This whole concept seems very one-sided and slightly unfair. If car users are expected to give up road access, what concessions/incentives are offered in return? We are all humans of equal value (even when we step into a steel box on wheels) and fairness is important.

Play street orders allow for access to the properties in the closed section (marshalls escort the vehicle) - in my experience all neighbours have chosen to work around it (ie not require access). The order is designed to prevent through traffic.

Perhaps what Hannah missed highlighting is that cars have a significant negative impact on all those around them. They are dangerous, take up public space, create pollution etc.

Walking does not generally have a similar impact. The roads around here were designed for horses and bicycles weren’t they? I’m not sure how relevant that is though.

Fair comment, although some cars create zero air and noise pollution, and have very effective automatic braking and large crumple zones to absorb impact.

I’m seeing a lot of energy going into anti-car measures. I wish that energy could be re-directed to help car owners switch to battery electric vehicles (particularly Teslas for the reasons mentioned above).

And regarding incentives (mentioned earlier), how about Play Street days fundraising for lamp-post EV chargers?

It’s going to be a long time before we don’t need to look before crossing the road.

I don’t believe play street users should offer a concession to car owners anymore than each car owner should offer a concession to those who would like their car not to drive down that road.

The Play Street movement demands concession from car owners but offers no incentive/concession in return.

It doesn’t have to be (and arguably shouldn’t be) a one-way street. Both groups of people could be winners from the Play Street concept. That way we’d avoid this “us vs. them” divisive and confrontational rhetoric between different groups of road users.

Win-win, not zero-sum.

It depends where you start from. Aren’t car owners taking concessions from others every time they drive/park (ie always) because of the reasons I mentioned?

Not all cars have the same impact. Can’t we focus on improving cars?

Let’s not forget that the cars used by carers, tradespeople, emergency services etc ultimately have a very positive impact on our lives, and if we ideologically bully cars off the roads, there might be some unintended consequences?

I thought we were talking about whether it was fine, socially, for people to close their street to through traffic (and perhaps inconvenience some neighbours - FYI objection is sought) in order for them to indulge in playing in the street. We disagreed on whether the play street users should be making (financial) concessions in order to do this. Until cars are able to sense and forecast the movements of small children in this environment I don’t think that improving cars has much to do with the debate.

Periodic play streets are a long, long way from doing this. I would love to see a future where we all had almost instant access to cheap, on-demand non-polluting, silent, driverless cars.

I do agree with a lot of your points. Just wanted to chuck some ideas around and challenge the us-vs-them rhetoric that constantly threatens to divide and entrench different groups of road users

I suggested a fundraiser to raise money for street improvements and incentivise more pedestrian-friendly vehicles, which is different in spirit from asking all participants to pay for their Play Street.

@Beige @anon5422159
This is such a London bubble discussion. Yes, I know this is a Sydenham/Forest Hill forum and therefore intended to be uninfluenced by what happens beyond our post code boundaries. But some of the reasons why the rest of the country relies on cars and motorbikes applies to some people on our patch too.

We have excellent public transport here but not everyone can access it, given our hilly landscape. And others don’t live the whole of their lives inside London and have to use cars if they venture into the rest of the country, where public transport is virtually non existent. (For example, my brother lives in a big town but to get to work for his start time of 7.30 at the region’s biggest employer, five miles away, there is no public transport.)

Closing one small street or part of a street, at the financial and time commitment of residents who are prepared to take legal responsibility for it, for 3 hours (which is all that the regs allow) on one day a month isn’t too much to ask, but a whole cluster of streets for a whole weekend is very disruptive and would need a huge commitment from the organizers, not least marshalls at every entrance, all of the time.

Wow. This thread spiralled.

meh… was hoping i could convince you with some nostalgia!

It makes me feel sad that it makes you feel sad . I did know some of my very near neighbours through knocking / saying hello in the street, but having participated in play streets I now know many more and know them better. If the existence of play streets is telling you people don’t know their neighbours ‘naturally’ anymore then can you feel happy that people are getting together to do this?

Indeed! Moving out of SE23 has given me a new perspective on how non-London communities treat car owners.

Anti-car movements and ideology seem to be a very London-centric thing.

That’s not to say Londoners’ concerns are invalid.

However, I’m alarmed by the absolutist, ideological way things are discussed in London. Please don’t take this as a criticism of other forum members - the debate here is generally constructive. However, I see ideological zero-sum, anti-car rhetoric frequently in other Lewisham forums/groups and even in the council chambers, which ought to be making policy based on hard data as opposed to ideology.

Anyway, I don’t want to divert this discussion completely from the Derby Hill Play Street, so I’ll step out of this convo for a bit.

If this is referring to me in this thread then it is a fair point, but the ideas about rights/concessions are deeply founded in the way we have lived our whole lives and I thought going back to first-principles might convince others to reconsider them (though I am less sure now). If it’s of any relevance I own and drive a car.

Was going to say similar.

Not at all. I think your posts make a lot of good points