Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Anyone on here know whether it's true that the works will continue till February?! School run nightmare for those that have no choice but to drive some days ... I have to because I have a few in different schools/nurseries. What is the ultimate goal of it all, does anyone know?
I do appreciate the irony of complaining about fumes while driving - but I am referring to build up of fumes with hundreds of cars just getting stuck, as we were, pumping fumes out for in excess of 30 minutes on the same road right by a primary and Infants school. Sadly this was one occasion when I did genuinely need the car.

End of Feb according to the notice put through my door. I asked James Barber if he could do anything to influence this on his thread a few weeks ago but as he's clearly been dealing with family matters recently haven't followed up with him.


I cycle through this already busy and aggressive junction every day and now rush hour has returned it's pretty frightening. It seems that more cyclists are jumping the lights or using the pavement, not in an aggressive way but presumably out of concerns for safety. It must also be unpleasant for parents taking children to the schools and for the school on the corner to have this going on beside them until the middle of next term. I fear it's only a matter of time before someone gets hurt. The inevitable chorus of car horns all the way up Court Lane isn't helping, either.

PS: I appreciate it's frustrating when your car's stuck in traffic but please do think about air quality for all the children going to school who can't get away from that all day. Also for local residents - I know people on this forum tend to assume that everyone in the village is affluent but Dekker Road and some of the bottom end of Calton Ave are owned by the Dulwich Estate and there are some residents who may not have the means or mobility to avoid the situation.

Here's a link to a PDF of the approved new junction design:-


https://turneyandburbage.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/dulwich-village-junction-changes-2017.pdf


Residents are trying to communicate with each other, as I don't think there is anything relevant on the council website, although I'll keep trying to track down formal council info.

From a pedestrian perspective, this design is awful.


There are minutes from a recent council cabinet meeting that stated that all objections and representations were considered and rejected in favour of the now-approved design.


We had a far better junction design consulted on and even funded back in 2008, but this was undermined by political machinations... otherwise the better scheme would have been built almost a decade ago for a fraction of the cost.


As part of this design process back in 2008, a double roundabout scheme was also submitted by engineers - who recommended it as the most efficient scheme for pedestrians, cyclists, and even cars - but politicians wouldn't even agree to let this design go out to a public consultation.


So, now we're stuck with this expensive mess...

Earlier I walked past and they were using angle grinder on the pavement outside the school - no screens up so huge amounts of dust on a windy day blowing into the school grounds and impossible for passers-by to avoid breathing in.
RPC, thanks for the reminder. I saw some pavement grinding on my walk to Peckham the other day. Not even the workman seemed to be wearing any protection. I'm personally much more alarmed by the thought of the possible effect of these -- if I have to pass them I usually run, at a distance, with breath held and mouth covered -- than I am by a passing smelly diesel vehicle. And I don't remember ever seeing anything to protect passers-by. So I resolved to start looking it up. The first thing I've lit on now, http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/cis54.pdf so far seems to confirm my fears: "Recent HSE-funded research has suggested that over 650 construction deaths from silica-related lung cancer occurred in Great Britain in 2004." So some heavy reading ahead, starting at http://www.hse.gov.uk/search/search-results.htm?gsc.q=stone%20cutting%20dust%20control; then on to the legal stuff.

I've attached a jpeg of the proposed Double Roundabout design for discussion.


As you can see from the engineer's notes, this was calculated to be the most efficient junction scheme to serve this oddly offset junction of roads for all users.


All the cycling groups that I consulted with at the time were in favour of it, and I believe that this layout formed the basis of the recent residents' campaign to have the council consider as an alternative (which could have easily been tweaked to take into account a multitude of parameters) to the scheme that's being implemented.


edhistory - from what I could follow, this junction scheme was signed off appropriately... I think the contractors were actually held off for a week or so in order for the cabinet to formally sign off on the paperwork.


My guess is that there are some convoluted devolved funding issues that pushed this decision through (we can discuss) and now it will conveniently be completed before the May 2018 council elections.


Just to be clear... I'm not trying to be political about this, exactly the opposite.


As I keep saying, the Dulwich/East Dulwich residents really need to start sticking together in a non-political manner in order to be able to lobby all the elected political parties in tandem to make decisions that benefit the community as a whole, rather than indulging huge sums of public funding in political point-scoring.

Sorry Robin, don't know what it would do to traffic flow but having to get right, hug a roundabout to the right with traffic entering from the left (most drivers do not appear to think "give priority to traffic from the right" applies if it's only a bicycle) then immediately join another roundabout with the same again would definitely not be a good solution for cyclists.


Personally I don't really find the junction as it stands much of a problem on a bike (though I am big, fast, confident and experienced), but that "solution" is a recipe for disaster for cyclists.


ETA Looking at that model again, it appears only to address what would be best for traffic (i.e. motorized vehicle) flow with no consideration of cycle safety.

Spot on, RH. Also the diagram doesn't appear to be to scale as the junction is less offset in reality and the main road wider.


All the junction needs to make it safer for cyclists and pedestrians is for the traffic lights to give cyclists a short head start from the Calton Ave / Turney Rd sides and for all pedestrians to cross simultaneously (until now this happened in theory but the right turn from DV into Calton Ave meant the green man came on at different times), including diagonally. Basically as for the JAGS junction - which didn't take six months to do, either.

This time around the cycle groups asked for traffic restrictions on Turney Road, and pedestrian improvements / road capacity reduction on the Court Lane / Calton Avenue side. But (for better or worse, and I realise views on this differ) they were roundly ignored.


"Roundabouts as good for cycling", let alone double roundabouts, is 1990s thinking. Works for the big-fast-and-ugly likes of Rendelharris and myself, but won't help anyone slower, less-confident and less agile.. not something I'd be comfortable using with my family, for example.

Unfortunately, the only way to get people out of cars in the Dulwich area is to improve public transportation.


Bear in mind that the double roundabout scheme was just a preliminary outline proposal which council engineers and cycle groups were already proposing alterations for. For instance, the roundabout size could be reduced so that a separate cycle lane could be created.


We had all worked very closely together on the changes to the main Village roundabout, which was done with LCN funding (London Cycle Network), a variation of the newer Quietway funding. So, the levels of cooperation were already in place.


The idea at the time was to have some kind of continuity through the Village for cars, cyclists, and pedestrians but this concept has disintegrated now. Councillors at the DCC meeting on Saturday were stressing nothing more should be done until the "holistic" review of traffic flows is completed, which I agree is what needs to happen.


Personally, I think the signalled junction scheme that was designed, consulted, and funded back in 2008 was the best way forward (better designed than the current signalled scheme), but it was worth having a detailed look at if the double roundabout scheme could work.


But it looks like the current works are going to go through, no matter what. Unfortunately, this new junction scheme is extremely pedestrian unfriendly... which could be a big problem in this high footfall area.

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...