march46

I can only guess, but it seems very likely it’s because the decision was still subject to call-in, and was not yet effective. Why don’t you email them if you’re still not sure? Not sure what you are hoping to achieve though.

The decision is only effective on 24th June, this is visible on the website. The attempts by some here to find smoking guns or ‘gotcha’ moments is quite impressive - if not a bit tiresome.

How is the wording I directed you to different? See above, the decision only became effective on 24th June. Hope that clears it up for you.

There is no ‘different document’. If you read the report carefully you will find what you’re looking for under ‘timeframes’. The decision was made on the 16th June, but will have been subject to a standard 1 week call-in period so only became effective on 24th June (see ‘effective from’ date).

What’s causing your confusion?

It was the same report (just hadn’t been approved at that stage). This document mentions those things if you read carefully. Page 5 of Appendix A shows the consultation responses, there is a clear majority on those three roads.

A different take - the roads where a majority of residents wanted a CPZ are getting one. The roads where a majority of residents didn’t want a CPZ aren’t getting one.

The report has been available online since 16th June. https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?Id=8364&LLL=0 There’s no evidence of any attempt to hide the report, the information is in the public domain and has been for some time.

I personally don’t feel unsafe in Dulwich Square, whether I’m walking or cycling. The only times I’ve felt concerned have been when drivers ignore the signage and act as though it’s not a pedestrianised area. That said, I’m hearing from parents at local schools that more children are now walking to school independently - which suggests the space has become more welcoming and safer for young pedestrians too.

Just curious - do you also raise concerns when drivers ignore road signage and enter pedestrianised areas, or about pedestrians who don’t wait for the green man? Or is your frustration only reserved for people travelling by bike?

This thread has gone wildly off topic Isn’t there a separate thread on the Dulwich Park bridge?

No, drivers shouldn’t park there. It’s a bookable loading bay like the ones mentioned in this article. During peak footfall times the bay isn’t bookable / available - providing more space for pedestrians. Enforcement will be key.

Hmm do you have any evidence of longer bus journeys times? I don’t have any evidence, but my impression is East Dulwich Grove is much better during the times I travel along it by bus than it used to be.

Which road would that be?

Same here. East Dulwich Grove is much improved from what I can see. I also remember long queues back to Melbourne Grove being the norm pre-covid, whereas now they are the exception. I note the traffic seems to be worse at the weekend than during the week now, possibly related to lack of timed restrictions and no parking restrictions at the weekend.

This thread, like many others seems to have gone off topic.

You have no evidence that the report has disappeared, the only problem is that you can’t find it. It’s quite an insight into how conspiracy theories start.

This piece makes some interesting points about the potential impacts of driverless vehicles on pedestrians. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/12/driverless-cars-pedestrians-second-class-citizens

Do we have any evidence that they’ve ‘disappeared’, or just that @firstmate can’t find them but once could? Before you start off on another conspiracy theory it’s worth clarifying.

It’s not a pedestrian island, nor a safe place to cross. It’s an island to protect people cycling whilst they wait to turn right. Not where you would want children crossing the road.

Local businesses and Highways officers have agreed a solution to provide space for loading via double yellow lines. Maybe a CPZ isn’t needed but it sounded as though you were complaining at the loss of a few parking spaces - this suggests parking pressure is already high, if so a CPZ could be a solution for that.

Sounds as though a CPZ is already needed if the current parking pressure can’t cope with just a few spaces at one end of a road being removed.

The new zebra crossing makes it easier, and much safer for pedestrians to cross the road. It’s really great to see the council prioritising pedestrians as they should in the hierarchy of road users.

Here is the decision document. I’m sure we will all agree that it’s great Southwark is listening to businesses. “This request came from the businesses on Lordship Lane, informing Highways that they have large vehicles coming to collect and deliver goods from the business which causing an obstruction as vehicles are parked both sides of the entrance and opposite resulting into the vehicle having to block the whole road and cause obstruction.” “Officers attended site and met with the local business to discuss what would be the best solution to allowing the large vehicles to drop off and collect without obstructing and blocking the road off. As a result, it was agreed that double yellow lines will allow space for loading/unloading without obstructing the road.” a Officers attended site and met with the local business to discuss That isn’t true, so long as the driver is actually loading (ie not shopping nearby).

How do you know the businesses haven’t asked for this, so they have somewhere for their loading?