Rockets

But folks remember, it's not the constituent dissenting voices who are the problem here. It is the people who are running the consultations who are trying to skew things to their advantage. All of these dissenting voice groups are only in existence because the councils tried to railroad their plans through undemocratically. The West Dulwich group had to raise £50,000 to challenge the council after the council refused to entertain any of their concerns - that is shameful and shows the lengths constituents have to go to to be heard and the lengths councils will go to to silence them. There is a similar pattern of behaviour between all of the councils locally.

It might be irritating for you Mal but it is a victory. It is a victory for all of those who said the council/s have been manipulating the process of forcing these measures on local residents. As I said a long, long time ago the way councils were going about is ultimately doing long-term harm to the climate change debate as they fixated on idealogical rather than pragmatic measures - and measures that actually did nothing to help the very cause they were trying to influence - in some cases making it worse. I sense your irritation is because that one decision vindicates much of what some of us have been saying for a long time and I suspect you also realise this will have a knock-on effect in other areas as the template and legal precedent has been set for more challenges on the basis of councils installing them unlawfully. Actually Earl, the problem is that they are skewed towards councils being able to manipulate the process to install things, in the case of West Dulwich unlawfully - this is the crux of this but I wholeheartedly agree that there needs to be wholesale change to what is clearly not a democratic consultation process and one that is being manipulated. This is why I think this is a watershed moment because if you look back on how Southwark council behaved in relation to LTN and CPZ consultations in our area it was a woefully poor and biased process. Just think back to consultations where you could not say a simple "no" but were forced to agree to some sort of measure - it's utterly shameful how local politicians have manipulated to the process - with the help of many of the aforementioned groups. I do hope that those politicians will one day be held accountable for their role in all of this. Lambeth clearly have a big issue based solely on the number of fines issued unlawfully (is it supposed to be £1,000,000 worth?) - that sounds like the mother of all legal battles and now you may see the ambulance chasers going after Lambeth on behalf of the thousands of people who have been incorrectly issued tickets - more tax-payers money being wasted in defending them. It's going to get really messy and they only have themselves to blame - I suspect a lot of other councils are having cold sweats right now.

Perhaps Richard was there to glean info on how to prove the ones this side of Dulwich are unlawful as well....;-)

I am heartened because many of the laughter emoji trolls laughed at the prospect of a High Court Challenge to the West Dulwich LTN. What's the saying: he who laughs last laughs longest....;-) Ha ha! 🙂

Bravo to everyone involved. Delusional seems so apt to describe how some councillors and their active travel lobbyist friends have become. For every laughing emoji they leave on forums like this or for every attempt to smear anyone who dares question them by accusing them of being a facist you know deep down they know that we are right - that many councils have been acting unlawfully and undemocratically when it comes to LTNs. I do hope you all have a celebratory street party within the LTN! The worm is starting to turn and lets hope those responsible take full accountability for their actions.

I very much suspect that the Southwark legal team will be calling urgent meetings with councillors to determine if, or perhaps more likely how much, the council is exposed in terms of the lawfulness of their LTNs and given the issues Southwark had with the consultations I suspect there will be some nervous folks at Southwark HQ. The house of cards may be about to come tumbling down but at least Southwark can now look for favourable support from central government - unless of course Labour HQ is happy to hang some of their harder-left administrations out to dry - Southwark Labour has always been a thorn in the side of more moderate Labour leadership. Grab your popcorn this is going to get interesting.

Perhaps Ian should, instead of trying to weave a narrative that the residents funded this with money from dodgy right-wing facist/Reform/People's Party of the Right to pollute sources (where have we seen that tactic before), worry that a local council used tax payers money to roll out an LTN that was deemed to be unlawful on the basis that they did not properly take into account all of the material considerations (either they cut corners or didn't do the job they are entrusted to do) and then used tax payers money to defend themselves in court. And lost. Because it is unlawful. Of course it stays, for now, as the council will be exploring every avenue open to then to try and extracate themselves from the mess - which was entirely of their own making. The next moves will be fascinating but this is incredibly embarrassing for Lambeth and a real filip to anyone who sees similarities with their own local LTNs - the template has now been set for any other legal challenges.

March46, I know you're disappointed and this must come as a real blow but it is a watershed moment because Lambeth have been caught doing exactly what Southwark have been doing. In that the "council had not taken into account all material considerations, and had therefore been unlawful". And look at the items within the dossier that were the undoing of the council: Displacement of Traffic onto Boundary Roads Increasing Rather Than Decreasing Pollution Increased Road Hazards and Collisions: ● Overwhelming Public Opposition Ignored: ● Damage To Crucial Local Businesses: ● Absence of an Impact Assessment: ● Flawed Monitoring and Evaluation of Pollution and Traffic: Trust me, Southwark will be looking very closely at how this ruling might impact their implementation of LTNS. It is also going to be very interesting to see how Lambeth try to extricate themselves from this self-made mess and to see who takes accountability. Councils have been cheating the system and their constituents and Lambeth have been caught and remember residents had to raise the money to bring this landmark case. Why? Because the council refused to engage with them and tried to push them to one side - no doubt referring to them as a noisy minority.

Where have we seen this before....I do wonder if this has sent shivers through other councils who may worry they also have unlawful LTNs.....could this be a watershed moment and councils will finally start being forced to listen to constituents....#lookingatyousouthwark The WDAG spokesperson added: "This ruling sends a clear signal to all councils nationwide: communities will no longer tolerate top-down, poorly conceived schemes that ignore local input, which prioritise revenue over real solutions to issues like pollution. A WDAG spokesperson said: "We are delighted with today's ruling, which clearly demonstrates that Lambeth Council failed to fully consider the impacts and effects of the LTN on local residents and businesses. "Lambeth Council chose to spend public funds fighting the very community it exists to serve, rather than sitting down with us to find a workable, locally supported solution. "Meanwhile, over 700 residents and businesses had no choice but to raise more than £50,000 just to have their voices heard."

BBC News - West Dulwich low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) unlawful, High Court rules - BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckg4178plvdo

By default anyone who leaves a Glastonbury (parking) sticker in their vehicle window should have it removed and crushed! There are some cars around our way that have a plethora of them in their window - clearly keen to let everyone know how frequently they go!

So Ex- by your reckoning the sweet spot for works is June and July then? One wonders then why so much of the non-essential works always seems to happen at the same time in March.... When did the Dulwich Square works commence......they finished in November/December didn't they? Ahem.....

I think the issue is that Dulwich Square has probably had more council money spent on it than any other equivalent sized-area in the borough - the £ per square foot of tax-payer's money buried within it must be astronomical so people do have a keen interested in what happens there. There clearly will be disruption caused by the building of the new house in the garden so let's see and hope that it is kept to a minimum - the council has a lot of ROI to generate from that space.... 😉

Maybe it is but if it gets approved let's see if anyone has any issues with the disruption it could well cause.....watch this space....

Malumbu......err sorry - it was a legitimate question. You use the Square don't you - surely there will be disruption - the entrance to the building works will be beyond the threshold of the road narrowing and very close to the cycle parking? Not sure how you have managed to take that and link it to Reform - I can't imagine even they would run on a ticket based on the outrage caused by the building of an additional house in the garden of a house adjacent to Dulwich Square 😉 Apparently the application was rejected once and some of the neighbours are not at all happy about it.

Do you not think it is going to cause some challenges given the building works are taking place in the garden of the property and I presume access for the works will be through the back gate that is adjacent to the Calton Ave entrance to Dulwich Square which will probably lead to builders vans and unloading vehicles being parked nearby?

Ex- come on, you know what essential works are - if a water main bursts or the gas/electricity supply is cut - you need to get in there and fix it immediately to reconnect supply/repair the damage. Three lots of changes to the pavement layout are not "essential" and should never have been scheduled to happen at the same time cutting 3 of 4 arterial routes into and out of Dulwich. Surely you be pragmatic enough to agree with that? The timing of having all 3 at once was a disaster and responsibility for that lies with the council and I still believe two of them happened as the council needed to spend surplus as the end of the year.

Ex- I am challenging you as you are suggesting it is a myth that the council ramps works at the end of the financial year to spend any surplus and you claim it is actually because of the weather....but I am still trying to determine why so many non-essential works (like the DV, Melbourne Grove and A205 works) all seem to have started around the same time in March - hardly the most predictable time in terms of weather. I was not putting words into your mouth but posing a question...

Are any of the Dulwich Square supporters concerned that the plans for a two-bedroom dwelling (in I presume the garden of) at 1B Court Lane might lead to significant disruption during the building works?

But they need to do all of them at the same time around the close of the financial year cos MArch and April are always such dry months 😉 - what's the catalyst for that then? So are you confirming then that if there is a surplus is can be spent any time after the close of the financial year for the council?

But surely some council bright spark could have worked out that putting temporary lights and contra flow on three of the four arterial routes in and out of an area probably wasn't the smartest decision and would create significant congestion. Ex- how much of that was likely driven by the need to spend the council road budget surplus around fiscal year end? Is there a date where end of year budget works have to commence?

Stop being faceatious. Clearly a burst water main (of which there have already been many, some of which led to the closure of the A205) is more essential than the removal of a pedestrian refuge to facilitate an advanced cycle lane box...or do you think they are equally important?

No just trying to determine who is accountable for this mess....the person who is signing them all off to happen at the same time....I know how much our council loves accountability it's like councillor kryptonite...;-) I love the fact you cited the usual "go to" of "find another route/way" and I love you cited a trip to central London. Of course we all have multiple options to get in and out of central London and those pesky PTAL scores are brilliant in central London so we can pick and chose. I doubt there are many people driving from Dulwich to central London (unless they are doing so as part of their job). The challenge I think many of us Dulwich residents feel is that, for example, during the A205 or Dulwich Village works, there is clearly no easy alternative mode/route because each day the congestion was a bad as the previous day. Whilst those on the pro-active travel lobby, like your good self, will always say, as you just did, there is always another way sometimes reality dictates there is not - the further you get out of London the more reliant people become on cars and I would suggest those using the A205 are traversing east to west and vice versa rather than north to south and vice versa. The council has admitted that east west routes are limited. Throw in the plethora of LTNs around the surrounds of the A205 and you can see why problems occur. I think the council do actively turn a blind eye to congestion as they have convinced themselves it is a weapon from the nudge toolkit. One suspects if they were properly monitoring pollution levels they would be encouraging the works to be done more quickly or at times of least disruption because they would be held accountable for any increases. The fact you have leant so heavily on the "find another way" narrative leads me to believe I am on to something. If this is the thinking of other active travel planners and lobbyists then you can see why many could be led to believe that such works are welcomed to try and make journeys intolerable for vehicle users. Please also do not overlook the impact of this on public transport. As I said previously exam weeks start next week and a lot of schools in the area are massively concerned by disruption to pupils travelling on public transport that these works (especially the A205) are creating. But clearly the council aren't too concerned.

Very poor management. I thought it was incredibly short-sighted/incompetent for Southwark to let the A205, Dulwich Village/Red Post Hill and Melbourne Grove non-essential works to all take place at the same time. It's almost as if they like the disruption, congestion and increased pollution that comes with it. Perhaps they are happy that those on the Peckham Rye side of Dulwich now get their fair share of works-induced traffic hell...... Who is responsible for this within the council?

That's a lot of temporary lights going in. More traffic chaos around Dulwich....will it ever end?