Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Latest OneDulwich update.

One Dulwich

 

Campaign Update | 22 Dec

Legal cases against London LTNs

 

On 17 December, the High Court ruled in favour of Tower Hamlets Council after a legal challenge over its decision to remove three LTNs. (The Mayor’s statement highlights concerns about traffic displacement, delays to bus services and the impact on the emergency services and those with disabilities.)

 

Meanwhile, in south London, West Dulwich Action Group in Lambeth are expecting to hear the date of their judicial review in January, as are Open Our Roads, who are challenging Croydon Council for introducing LTNs as a revenue-raising exercise. One Dulwich is in touch with both campaign groups.

 

Dulwich Village junction re-design

 

Although the redesign of the Dulwich Village junction has been completed, the concrete road block on Court Lane has still not been removed to allow emergency vehicles through. We have asked the Council to explain why.

 

We have also asked why Blue Badge parking spaces have been moved much farther away from the shops, and why the Council has still not introduced signage, road markings or a speed limit to prevent collisions between cyclists and pedestrians.

 

Separately, we have been advised in writing that the missing road sign for Court Lane will shortly be attached to the new lamppost outside 1 Court Lane.

 

We send you our best wishes for the festive period, and our thanks for all your support in 2024

ENDS...

Perhaps pro-LTN cheerleader in chief Jon Burke maybe sheds some light on why Southwark Council are so reluctant to allow emergency vehicle access at the DV junction....or is it just a case of too soon Jon....honestly....how rabidly blinkered do you have to be to post something like that?

 

Edited by Rockets
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/355683-ltn-discussion/
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Campaign Update | 12 Jan

Dulwich Village junction: still no access for emergency vehicles

Access through the junction for emergency vehicles is vital for the Dulwich area as a whole. In February 2024, the London Ambulance Service agreed to a trial closure of Calton Avenue. Five months after the bollard went in, this is still blocked. Court Lane, the other arm of the junction, is also still blocked, despite promises that it would be reopened once the building work had finished. We have emailed highways@southwark.gov.uk to ask why the delay continues – please do the same. 

Southwark report shows Dulwich LTN fines are vital income boost

Southwark’s Parking Annual Monitoring Report 2023-24 makes interesting reading. (The word ‘parking’ is confusing here as the report also covers the Moving Traffic PCNs – or Penalty Charge Notices – that include LTN fines.)

The report shows a 500% increase in Moving Traffic PCNs issued in Southwark in 2023-24 compared with 2019-20, the last year before the Dulwich LTNs were introduced. Overall, Southwark made an estimated £8 million from nearly 140,000 Moving Traffic PCNs across the borough in 2023-24. The report doesn’t break down its figures by ward or area, but we know from a recent FOI that the ANPR cameras in Dulwich Village led to 35,621 PCNs being issued in 2023, and 16,963 between January and August 2024, so Dulwich fines are making a significant contribution to the borough total.

Southwark says that any surplus after costs is reinvested in the highway network (see ‘expenditure description’ in table 7, including more than £6 million in ‘Environment reserve’). However, this reinvested extra cash means that Southwark needs to spend less from central funds. In other words, the Dulwich LTNs are an important revenue generator. Is this perhaps the reason why Southwark is so reluctant to make the signage for the LTNs less confusing?

Legal challenge against LTN in West Dulwich

The West Dulwich Action Group are taking legal action in the High Court against Lambeth’s LTN. The hearing is on 12 February. For more information, and to support them financially, go to https://gofund.me/7d97511f.

Road sign at Dulwich Village junction replaced

Finally, one small piece of good news: the Court Lane road sign on the lamppost outside 1 Court Lane has been replaced after the last one went missing during the building works. Thanks to Southwark’s Principal Lighting Engineer for making this happen.

Best wishes for 2025,

The One Dulwich Team

  On 12/01/2025 at 18:10, ab29 said:

...increase in Moving Traffic PCNs issued in Southwark in 2023-24 compared with 2019-20

Expand  

We had national lock downs in 2019-20 and 2020-21. If you look at PCNs issued across the last three years (post COVID), the picture is more mixed. Feels a little mischievous to pick that year for comparison doesn't it?: 

2021/22 242,775 ⬆️
2022/23 196,285 ⬇️
2023/24 264,259 ⬆️

Amazing how the extremely opaque 'One Dulwich' organisation has all the same talking points to one of the posters on this forum.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  • Agree 1
  On 13/01/2025 at 11:56, Bicknell said:

but compare to 2019-20  and its all much much higher. thats the point. pcns now bring in lots of cash

Expand  

Surely you can think of a reason fewer PCN's may have been issued during lockdown?

I mean I know that some people were driving to Barnard Castle, but generally the number of car journeys dropped dramatically.

  On 12/01/2025 at 18:10, ab29 said:

In other words, the Dulwich LTNs are an important revenue generator

Expand  

How is the Dulwich LTN a revenue generator exactly? The arguments that parking fines are being used to fund LTNs and that LTNs are a revenue generator, are not logically consistent.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah

Is there a reason we have yet another LTN thread? Also, any chance anyone knows who runs ‘one Dulwich’, or why their missives are constantly being reposted on this forum, despite people being able to sign up to receive them if they're interested?

  On 13/01/2025 at 13:20, Bicknell said:

see page 4 of report   Southwark says moving traffic pcns increased mostly as  result of the scool street programme. 

Parking Annual Monitoring Report 2023-24

there must be alot of school streets

Expand  

Thanks. I suspect most people are in favour of school streets.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah

think your right that people in favour of scool streets. but 26k pcns from school streets in 2019/20 to 139.5K pcns 2023/24 - thats alot of school streets - didnt know so many were put in

£2 million spent on LTN Costs (Table 7). Was that from surplus from parking or from scool strrets?

Parking Annual Monitoring Report 2023-24

 

  On 13/01/2025 at 13:30, Earl Aelfheah said:

Is there a reason we have yet another LTN thread?

Expand  

Because someone managed to get the old one locked!

 

  On 13/01/2025 at 10:37, Earl Aelfheah said:

We had national lock downs in 2019-20 and 2020-21. If you look at PCNs issued across the last three years (post COVID), the picture is more mixed. Feels a little mischievous to pick that year for comparison doesn't it?: 

Expand  

If you look at the figure pre-Covid the picture looks even worse for the council......

Here is the data:

PCN2017.png.53ac89c6e5ab8549b4e3aba300dae010.png

  On 13/01/2025 at 14:04, Bicknell said:

think your right that people in favour of scool streets. but 26k pcns from school streets in 2019/20 to 139.5K pcns 2023/24 - thats alot of school streets - didnt know so many were put in

£2 million spent on LTN Costs (Table 7). Was that from surplus from parking or from scool strrets?

Parking Annual Monitoring Report 2023-24

 

Expand  

I read that as a 39% increase from the school streets programme - roughly 39K? I think there are around 24 school streets in Southwark, so that's around 1,625 fines per street over the course of a year - so a couple a week on average per school street? Have I done the maths right there? Does seem like quite a lot. 

  On 13/01/2025 at 14:22, Rockets said:

Because someone managed to get the old one locked!

If you look at the figure pre-Covid the picture looks even worse for the council......

Here is the data:

PCN2017.png.53ac89c6e5ab8549b4e3aba300dae010.png

Expand  

OK, that's a fairer comparison. Does this 'look worse' though? If you read the Council's own narrative, it appears that the increases are down to better enforcement (more cameras installed to stop people driving in bus lanes), more enforcement officers employed to ticket those who have parked illegally and the introduction (and subsequent enforcement of) School Streets. If you're not going to enforce bus lanes or parking restrictions, then what's the point of having them? And if you do want to argue against them, make that case (rather than supporting them in principle, but not in practice).

There are 430 million miles travelled on Southwark roads each year. If there are only 264,259 PCNs being issued, that suggests that the vast majority of drivers manage without getting caught in bus lanes, driving through a school street, or parking illegally.

  On 13/01/2025 at 14:04, Bicknell said:

£2 million spent on LTN Costs (Table 7). Was that from surplus from parking or from scool strrets?

Expand  

Don't think it's hypothecated in this way. Any surplus from PCNs generally goes into a fund that can be allocated for (amongst other things) improvements to roads and the public realm. I suspect that some of that budget was used to landscape the square / improve the layout.

  On 13/01/2025 at 13:30, Earl Aelfheah said:

...why their [OneDulwich] missives are constantly being reposted on this forum, despite people being able to sign up to receive them if they're interested?

Expand  

Any answer to this? Are there other organisations who's subscription email updates we want to start regularly posting on the forum? 

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  On 13/01/2025 at 14:29, Earl Aelfheah said:

I read that as a 39% increase from the school streets programme - roughly 39K? I think there are around 24 school streets in Southwark, so that's around 1,625 fines per street over the course of a year - so a couple a week on average per school street? Have I done the maths right there? Does seem like quite a lot. 

Expand  

Just read this back and I have definitely not done the maths right 🤣

Assuming that there were around 39K PCNs related to school streets (this isn't totally clear - the report says the increase is 'mostly' down to SS), there are actually 29 school streets in Southwark. So it's around 1,345 issued per SS.

So that's around 3.7 a day on average. Does seem high!

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  On 13/01/2025 at 15:44, CPR Dave said:

I'm in favour of school streets. 

I wished they worked though.

26,000 driving through the school streets and receiving penalty notices suggests that something has gone terribly wrong. 

 

Expand  

Yeh, I agree. This does seem ridiculously high. Perhaps the increased enforcement will help (probably not)?!

Living near a local primary I do see some appalling behaviour in the mornings by drivers - a real lack of care for children's safety sometimes. 

...no idea why we're having this discussion in the (latest) LTN section.

Edited by Earl Aelfheah

Ah yes, you're right. Sorry, quick maths on my phone, not working out for me. I think it's more than 26,000 though and there are 29 school streets, not 24 (that was my mistake originally, apologies). Either way, it's a lot!

[edited to add]

A quick google picked up this from Direct Line https://www.directlinegroup.co.uk/en/news/brand-news/2023/03022023.html

Suggests a very different figure for school street fines issued by Southwark. According to an FOI, there were only 275 PCNs issued in Southwark in relation to School Streets for 2022. Something doesn't add up!

Edited by Earl Aelfheah
  On 13/01/2025 at 21:24, CPR Dave said:

Even if the numbers are correct, there is a huge problem with the schemes if three or four people are driving past the signs every school day in what is, effectively, a 90 minute restriction. 

Expand  

Yeah, I agree. If I were to take a guess, I would assume the numbers in the Southwark report are probably the right ones (as opposed to the FOI response). If so it's a lot of people getting fined every school day, like you say.

  On 13/01/2025 at 17:39, Earl Aelfheah said:

Possibly. Or the response to foi was incorrect (or reported incorrectly) 🤷‍♂️

All a bit weird.

Expand  

Just got a (very quick) response after I emailed Southwark on this.

In response to the question: “Please could you let me know how many PCNs were issued in relation to Southwark School Streets in the last year?”, they confirmed there were 28,619.

 

Edited by Earl Aelfheah

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Does anyone know when the next SNT meeting is? I am fed up with my son being mugged on East Dulwich Grove! 
    • The issue must be everywhere at the moment. I was visiting a friend last week in Bermondsey, think we were walking  down Linton Rd & we dodged 7 dog poos. It was disgusting. 
    • Thanks for your message — I actually took the time to look into what CityHive does before posting my original comment, and I’d encourage anyone with questions to do the same. Yes, the Companies House filings are overdue — but from what I’ve gathered, this seems likely to be an accountant or admin issue, not some sign of ill intent. A lot of small, community-based organisations face challenges keeping up with formalities, especially when they’re focused on immediate needs like food distribution. Let’s not forget CityHive is a not-for-profit, volunteer-powered CIC — not a corporate machine. As for the directors, people stepping down or being replaced is often about capacity or commitment — which is completely normal in the voluntary and community sector. New directors are sometimes appointed when others can no longer give the time. It doesn’t automatically mean bad governance — it just means people’s circumstances change. CityHive’s actual work speaks volumes. They buy most of the food they distribute — fresh produce, essential groceries, and shelf-stable items — and then deliver it to food banks, soup kitchens, and community projects across London. The food doesn’t stay with CityHive — it goes out to local food hubs, and from there, directly to people who need it most. And while yes, there may be a few paid staff handling logistics or admin, there’s a huge volunteer effort behind the scenes that often goes unseen. Regular people giving their time to drive vans, sort donations, load pallets, pack food parcels — that’s what keeps things running. And when people don’t volunteer? Those same tasks still need to be done — which means they have to be paid for. Otherwise, the whole thing grinds to a halt. As the need grows, organisations like CityHive will inevitably need more support — both in people and funding. But the bigger issue here isn’t one small CIC trying to make ends meet. The real issue is the society we live in — and a government that isn’t playing its part in eradicating poverty. If it were, organisations like CityHive, The Felix Project, City Harvest, FareShare, and the Trussell Trust wouldn’t need to exist, let alone be thriving. They thrive because the need is growing. That’s not a reflection on them — it’s a reflection on a broken system that allows people to go hungry in one of the richest cities in the world. If you're in doubt about what they’re doing, go check their Instagram: @cityhivemedia. You’ll see the real organisations and people receiving food, sharing thanks, and showing how far the impact reaches. Even Southwark Foodbank has received food from CityHive — that alone should speak volumes. So again — how does any of this harm you personally? Why spend time trying to discredit a group trying to support those who are falling through the cracks? We need more people lifting others up — not adding weight to those already carrying the load.
    • Well, this is very disappointing. Malabar Feast  has changed its menu again. The delicious fish curry with sea bass no longer exists. There is now a fish dish with raw mango, which doesn't appeal. I had dal and spinach instead, which was bland (which I suppose I could/should have predicted). One of my visitors had a "vegetable Biriani" which contained hardly any vegetables. Along with it came two extremely tiny pieces of poppadom in a large paper bag.   This was embarrassing, as I had been singing Malabar's praises and recommending we ordered from there. The other mains and the parathas were OK, but I doubt we will be ordering from there again. My granddaughters wisely opted for Yard Sale pizzas, which were fine. Has anybody else had a similar recent poor (or indeed good!)  experience at Malabar Feast?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...