Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As per our previous discussions, I'm attempting to pick all your collective brains regarding pavement and road repairs so that we can campaign to have residents' repair priorities addressed.


There is going to be a useful presentation on the existing Highways Devolved Budget by Highway Engineers at the next Dulwich Community Council (DCC) meeting, so this will be a good time to have an open public discussion.


The meeting is taking place this Saturday afternoon, Sept 9th, from 1-3pm at the Dulwich Library (upstairs meeting room). There hasn't been much public notice, so I'm not sure if I can attend, but I/we can follow up with emails to the Highway Officer and DCC Chair (Andy Simmons). I have a funny feeling that the engineers are also following our EDF discussions (hi, guys!).


The areas at the top of my current request list is Lordship Lane pavements (particularly the high footfall areas along the main "Destination" shopping parade) and Chesterfield Grove pavements... these will almost certainly have to be done section by section over time for budgetary reasons. I took a couple of photos of Lordship after the most recent heavy rain to show some of the "ponding issues" that actually block pedestrian access, which I'll provide.


I'm also aware that Ashbourne Grove and a section of East Dulwich Grove also has the badly laid dysfunctional paving slabs used on Chesterfield (to replace the imperial slabs some time ago... can anyone remember the date?), so I'm going to flag those as well.


I'm aware that a section of Chesterfield (I think in front of 1-60 Chesterfield?) is going to be replaced in mid-September (it's now so bad that it's even showing up on the council's "algorithm" assessment system as needing replacement!).


Am happy to have detailed forum discussions on these issues (and am looking at tree replacement as well), also let me know if there are other areas that are bad and I'll try to walk around and have a look.


The Cleaner Greener Safer fund is also being launched at this meeting, so we can maybe look at topping up the Highways Budget with CGS if a specific section allocation needs a small top-up.


Here's a link to this Saturday's DCC agenda in case anyone wants to attend:-


http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/g5847/Agenda%20frontsheet%20Saturday%2009-Sep-2017%2013.00%20Dulwich%20Community%20Council.pdf?T=0

Interesting point, Abe, I'll go down and have a look at Crawthew.


One of the things I've noticed walking around is that two long-term tarmac pavements in Village ward have recently been upgraded to pavement slabs, but only on one side of the road - Aysgarth Road and Lytcott Grove.


I'm guessing that the new Highways protocol is based around all pavements being fit out with the same unified paving slabs across the borough.


The reason why Lordship is such a mess is that the imperial paving slabs got replaced quickly with metric slabs, but they were literally just switched over without any backfilling, etc. Later on, Chesterfield/Ashbourne/EDG were also refitted with metric slabs in order to comply with new regulations, but weird slabs were used as a temporary measure. It was intended to go back and refit properly, but this never happened as highway budgets were directed to higher profile areas.


I think the protocol is that paving must be replaced every 20 years, but sooner if there is a certain amount of sunken or broken slabs. There becomes a point where patched repairs over time are uneconomical... this is what the algorithm takes into account.

Well, I made it to the DCC meeting on Saturday afterall and it was actually a really useful meeting.


For the first time, council Highway funding is being opened up for public residents' bids as part of the Cleaner Greener Safer fund.


The Devolved Highway Fund is set at ?76,190 per ward and is to cover bids for footways and carriageways resurfacing, traffic calming, dropped kerbs, trees, grass verges, and even cycle hangars.


This fund is in addition to the CGS fund (capital spending) which is set at ?89,524 per ward and ?30,000 per ward of Neighbourhood Fund (which covers revenue spending).


The bidding process is closes on October 23rd, there's more information here:-


http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/info/200256/cleaner_greener_safer

I was pleased to be informed by the Chair (hi, Andy!) that the CGS amount for all the Dulwich wards is now the same as all wards across the borough (the deprivation index calculation has been dropped).


So now all we have to do is get residents to agree which highway improvements are top priority. The more residents who stick together, the more likely the relevant bids are to be approved.


Therefore, if anyone feels strongly about anything, let's have an open discussion, as many ward councillors are actually reading the forum, even if they don't post.

Abe_froeman Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don;t know if its cheaper and therefore easier

> to fix periodically, but less robust, but the

> newish tarmac surface on the pavement of Crawthew

> Grove is very smooth and could be a good quick

> solution for LL.


Tarmac ! I hope not.


Considering we have been waiting so long for pavement action, I'd hope we would have a proper paving upgrade.


Brockwell park entrance, and Dulwich Park entrance at Court Lane are good examples of where paving can transform an area


Considering LL is now a centre for outside eating and drinking its a big opportunity to rejuvenate the shop front to kerbside space - it may need a co ordinated approach between owners and council - I don't know


As an example of how it is causing problems, this Saturday about 11am, a little boy, fell off the side of his stabiliser bike a few yards in front of me on uneven slabs, and with his mum pushing a buggy with another baby, and therefore unable to help him quickly I, [ Hero :) ] had to pick him up quickly before he landed squarely in the puddle, but not without him getting quite wet, and this was on a sunny day.


Although a flat surface is what we need, something aesthetically pleasing would be a bonus, which will lift the area up a notch. And not tarmac please.

Lordship Lane is now what's called a Destination Area, which means it has higher footfall and therefore higher priority for council funding improvements.


But a big part of the problem is that a lot of the issues are not properly documented, so it keeps falling down the council's internal funding priority list.


I asked the Highways Manager at the meeting to explain the "algorithm" which calculates how internal highway repair funds are prioritised and it's so complicated (consisting of the age of the installation and reported potholes, sinking, etc) that I met with him in the hallway after the meeting and gave him photos of the astonishing amount of rainwater ponding that I took in some locations after the last heavy rainstorm. (I would be interested to know where the puddle in your above account was, Mick Mac.)


Normally the new pavement installation will consist of the same predetermined slabs across relevant sections of footfall (in the case of Lordship, they will use the same granite slabs that were used in the section starting a North Cross a few years ago for continuity) and then tarmac or another type of material around the trees.


What we have been trying to do for years is to get the council to experiment with a material called KBI Flexipave, which looks like tarmac (although it's made with recycled tyres), but is permeable so it won't create puddles around the complicated tree roots. Here's a link to the KBI site:-


http://www.kbiuk.co.uk/


I actually got awarded a CGS grant for ?2000 last year to try a Flexipave experiment, but it's only enough funding to cover a small treepit... I've been going around in circles with the council for months to agree a treepit in Lordship Lane that we can try this material with.


So, I'm hoping that we can get a Devolved Highways bid approved to address sections of Lordship Lane in sequence until the entire parade is resurfaced in one form or another.


I'll try to post some of my photos at some point...


p.s. BTW, St Christophers has retarmacked it's private curtilage now, so all the potholes there are gone. When we did some paving schemes in Village ward a few years ago, we used council funding to contribute to half of the costs of repaving the private curtilage outside the shops in matching material for continuity along a parade, but this could get very expensive to do in Lordship. Might try to investigate...

Thanks Mick, I think I know where you mean... will try to photograph.


FYI, my understanding of the highways repair "algorithm" is that the number of resident complaints are taken into account in the calculations, so we all need to formally whinge more frequently!

Here's a photo I took of the awful state of Lordship a couple weeks ago... this "puddle" runs between Bassano and Dudrich Mews on Lordship, where it's been impossible to walk down the pavement for years now.


You can see where the council has tarmacked a section of it, but even the new tarmac has dropped. It's tempting to blame the ponding on the trees, but there is a street light in the middle of it and even the road on the other side of the street light is flooded.


Yes, I'm sad... I'll shut up now!

Don't know how the section of Crawthew that was done got chosen. It was fine. The beginning section from the junction with LL to the corner is absolutely awful on both sides. In winter patches of ice build up all over the place because of successive poorly made utility repairs. Can this be added to the list?

Yes, Abe... maybe you can now understand the frustration of having my CGS bid to repair sections of Lordship pavements refused in favour of cycle hangars. I even have more photos of other locations of sunken pavements... it's usually only the rocking paving stones that get "repaired".


Hi worldwiser... I keep meaning to go down and look at Crawthew, so yes, will add it to the list to flag, if nothing else.


From memory (someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), repairs to utility service bodges are the responsibility of the utility service, but it gets so patchy and time consuming for our highway engineers to re-re-re-enforce this in sections where there are multiple services that it tends to drop off the list. Conversely, it costs a lot of money for the council to go in and address the multiple utility service bodges in one section. So, let's see if the Devolved Highway Budget can be used in this way so that internal funds don't have to be used for something that the utility companies should be responsible for.

And worldwiser... I made it down to Crawthew, as well.


I've attached a photo of the south section starting from Lordship... you can definitely see how the multiple patches have sunk. They're only about a quarter to half an inch deep, which isn't technically a trip hazard (thereby not qualifying for replacement just yet), but you can see how the multiple patches retain the water and would freeze.


The good thing is that it's tarmac, which won't be too expensive to replace a whole section of.


I definitely think a bid should be put in for the whole section to be redone with the Devolved Highways Funding, but I suspect that it would be more likely to be approved if local Crawthew residents applied instead of me (I apply for so much stuff that my bids tend to get fobbed off).


Do you want to have a go at applying? Go to the link below and follow the instructions to bid... give the location and stress that the multiple patches freeze up, which aren't getting addressed. You might want to ask if it's better to replace the tarmac or even upgrade to paving slabs so that engineers could investigate and make an assessment.


What do you think? Do you want to give it a go applying yourself?? The deadline is Oct 23rd. Here's the link:-


http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/info/200256/cleaner_greener_safer


Let me know... I can try to help talk you through it if necessary. It would be really good if you could also get three or four other residents to back you up.


Power to the People!

Hi again Mick Mac...


Okay, ignore everything I said above, as I walked by Jade/Oddono's again this morning and saw exactly what you were talking about!


I've attached a new photo.


I have now written to [email protected] myself with the photo, asking if this can be escalated as an urgent repair, as the ponding is actually blocking the whole pavement and this small section should be easy to address... I think it would help if you emailed them too, noting that you actually witnessed a child almost falling into the water. The more, the merrier.


I'm curious to see what will happen and how long it will take to get a repair done...


In the meantime, I'll keep putting together a Lordship list for a Devolved Highway Funding bid, but will try to escalate the more serious issues in the interim. If nothing else, our complaints should increase our algorithm calculations.

  • 1 month later...

Hi worldwiser, sorry about the delay in replying, life got insane again.


The best thing to do is stress that the tarmac pavement has been disintegrating for some time and is causing trips hazards and needs to be renewed from scratch.


It might have to be done in sections starting from the corner of Lordship, depending on budget availability. I seem to remember when the section in the middle of the road in front of the flats was done ages ago... I think it was decided to do that section first because of the number of residents in the flats (i.e. higher footfall) of which some were disabled.


Also, FYI, I talked to a Crawthew resident on the bus home from Sainsbury's one day and she said they would still like trees along there... I remember being told that the pavement was too narrow for trees, but I'm working on finding a smaller species for narrower pavement widths.


Have you put the bid in yet? I'm starting to work on my bids over the next week before the Oct 23rd deadline hits, so I'll be checking in more frequently...

  • 1 month later...

rch Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Hi again Mick Mac...

>

> Okay, ignore everything I said above, as I walked

> by Jade/Oddono's again this morning and saw

> exactly what you were talking about!

>

> I've attached a new photo.

>

>


IT SEEMS WE ARE FINALLY GETTING NEW PAVEMENTS ON LL ! WOOHOO - THANKS TO THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE

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

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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