Hi everyone, I'd like to petition Lewisham Council to create a ramp for wheelchairs and prams in the underpass between Perry Vale and Dartmouth Rd. I think it's pretty shocking that if you're disabled or have a baby in a pram you have to go all the way round on a ten minute detour along quite dangerous crossings etc. Does anyone know if this has been attempted before and/or how to go about it?
Francesca

It would be a very, very steep ramp on the Dartmouth Road end, be interesting to see what Lewisham's response will be to your request.

I don't know of anyone that's set up a petition for this but I'm sure there was a thread on here quite a while back discussing ways that a ramp might possibly work.

Can anyone remember what this thread was titled?

I agree with what you've said Francesca but I don't think a petition (regardless of how many signatures you have) will help achieve this purely because Lewisham Council are on a very tight budget & are cutting back on core services (such as libraries & youth centres, which I don't agree with) to make savings, but it's still worth a try.

If you want to set up a petition you can create one on change.org or a similar site as an online petition & for maximum local coverage ask shops to have a paper copy for customers to see. This is what myself & a local resident done when Morrisons proposed to open a branch on London Rd where M & Co is.

If you go ahead I'm happy to have a paper copy at my shop for you and I'm sure a few others will be too, best of luck with this.

There used to be a ramp onto Devonshire Rd side, but it has never been too clear to me how it was arranged.
One way to do it today is by lopping off the WHSmiths extension - there is in fact quite a long stretch from the railtracks to the road to put in a ramp at a reasonable incline.
And there is space behind Smiths to move their stock room.

Less radically, they could embed a lift into the side wall of the underpass. As long as it was hosed down every weekend it would be ok.

How about if it's put to TfL that they have an obligation, under The Equality Act 2010 and the UN CONVENTION on the RIGHTS of PERSONS with DISABILITIES, to remedy the situation in accordance with

Article 9 - Accessibility
1. To enable persons with disabilities to live independently and participate fully in all aspects of life, States Parties shall take appropriate measures to ensure to persons with disabilities access, on an equal basis with others, to the physical environment, to transportation, to information and communications, including information and communications technologies and systems, and to other facilities and services open or provided to the public, both in urban and in rural areas. These measures, which shall include the identification and elimination of obstacles and barriers to accessibility, shall apply to, inter alia:
a. Buildings, roads, transportation and other indoor and outdoor facilities, including schools, housing, medical facilities and workplaces;

How about stair lifts?

I agree with Anotherjohn - I think this would be more achievable if put to TFL rather than LC.

Happy to help you set up a petition for this.

Would anyone like to help with the wording for this?

Rather then doing "another" petition, how about writing to TfL or getting a councillor/MP on side to write a letter laying out the reasons for its need and the impact on those who cannot negotiate the stairs and the inconvenience experienced in having to go the long way round.

This sounds like a very sensible suggestion, samuelsen. It's not 'weight of numbers' that will secure the necessary funding but 'weight of argument' - and the political weight of the people making that argument.

Are there any appropriate local charities/support groups that would be on side for this?

This post was last modified: 25-04-2016 10:20 AM by Mr_Numbers.

A lot of people (Forest Hill Society, Sydenham Society, local councillors) did try to get ramps installed but the gradients and height limits required for DDA compliance would make it very difficult to deliver.

Public transport providers are specifically excluded from needing to retrofit all infrastructure to make it DDA compliant. Even if this were not the case it could be argued that roads on both sides of the railway are accessible and there is no need to make the bottom of the subway accessible.

I think a more likely solution (but it won't be soon) would be to have level access from platform 2 to Perry Vale - either by flat access to Perry Vale car park, or a lift to a new development on Waldram Place. People would then be able to cross over via the footbridge and we might be allowed to get 'platform tickets' if you have no intension of traveling, just crossing over.

In the meantime, it would be interesting to conduct a count of pushchairs and wheelchairs using the south circular route to avoid the underpass.

I think what Samuelsen & Mr Numbers have said would carry a lot more weight, but as Michael has said FH Soc, Cllr's etc tried to get ramps installed previously I don't think it will happen regardless.

I doubt that a wheelchair ramp can be installed for the steps at the Boots-end of the underpass. I haven't measures the height of the stairs, so I cannot say definitively, but in view of a maximum gradient of 1:12 as required by building regulations for a wheelchair ramp, I don't think that a straight ramp could be constructed in view of the headroom. Further, a ramp using switchbacks would take up nearly all of the width of the stairs.

I would urge you to explore whether or not a ramp can be installed at the site before asking people to petition for it.

It is about 140 feet from the track to the South Circ, and has to rise what 12 foot? That is pretty close to the 1 in 12 regulations.
Maybe we'd need a 'switchback', but if the Smiths extension is to go, then they'd be loads of room.

Or they could install that lift....

Thought this might interest readers. Apparently the underpass was originally sloped not stepped.

http://sydenhamforesthillhistory.blogspo...ation.html


The original subway, built in the early 1840s, was sloped rather than stepped. Although described as dirtier than a pigsty, it was easily accessible. From its opening in 1883 the rebuilt subway attracted criticism for its inaccessibility, principally for the "27 steps … a piece of positive cruelty". There are still 27 steps, and they are still causing difficulty for many users.

This is what I was referring to in post 4.
I can only think that there is some sort of long running stand-off between the council and rail-track on whose responsibility it is to bring it back up to Victorian standards. (minus the pigsty bit, obviously).