Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Noticed this online consultation which is open for comments until 22 October - there are plans to restrict traffic other than cyclists turning into Champion Hill from Denmark Hill on the basis that most of it is people cutting through.


https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/championhilltrial/


May be of interest to those on Bromar, Ivanhoe and Pytchley Roads as well as those on Champion Hill (who I assume are being directly consulted).


Residents of Champion Hill and its side roads will still be able to enter and exit the area with both arms remaining two-way. However, northbound entry to the Denmark Hill arm of Champion Hill will be restricted so people living here will need to take a short detour via Grove Lane/Champion Park to access their homes via Denmark Hill.



Through traffic will need to take alternative north-bound routes and we will monitor the area to analyse any impacts on local roads. While we hope most through traffic will stay on or switch to the main roads, due to the banned right turn from Grove Hill Road into Grove Lane traffic may potentially be displaced onto the surrounding roads of Bromar Road, Ivanhoe Road, and Pytchley Road to access Dog Kennel Hill/Grove Lane. While we hope that traffic eventually adjusts to using main roads instead of residential roads, we will closely monitor the traffic, allowing for at least six months of settling-in.

Oct is normally the 6 month review of Southwark staff's annual work plan for the current year.


First starts in April then October. It is where Southwark staff have to show how they are working to gain their annual increment on the salary scale.


So one should expect more schemes like the one above whether they are needed or not.


due to the banned right turn from Grove Hill Road into Grove Lane traffic may potentially be displaced onto the surrounding roads of Bromar Road, Ivanhoe Road, and Pytchley Road to access Dog Kennel Hill/Grove Lane.



Yup. That's what I'll be doing.


What's all this about "hoping" drivers will adjust to main roads over time? As far as I can tell, most rush hour commuters are in thrall to traffic-beating apps like Waze and Google. Just what "main" route is Southwark hoping drivers and nav apps will take?

The banned right turn is not new. It is a comment on the current position.


The change is a no entry for cars someway along champion Hill ie not at the junction with Dog Kennel Hill. Traffic from the west will be unaffected. Traffic going west from Dog Kennel Hill along champion Hill will not be able to access Denmark Hill.


The consultation https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/championhilltrial/ closes Oct 22nd

So living at the bottom of Grove Park if I want to get to Casino Avenue, Sunray Avenue, Herne Hill etc due to the banned right turn from Grove Hill Road into Grove Lane traffic will be displaced onto the surrounding roads of Bromar Road, Ivanhoe Road, and Pytchley Road to access Dog Kennel Hill/Grove Lane. Then all the way down to Denmark Hill and up again towards Herne Hill.


Instead of just going over to Champion Hill and right down Champion Hill.


Why do Southwark always want to change what works and has always worked.


Same thought pattern that kept Camberwell Grove closed for so long and push traffic around residential roads.

Champion Hill has the same traffic levels as the parallel A Road Champion Park.

Champion Hill is part of quiet way and London Cycle Network route 23.

That's why the council is proposing this filtered restriction. It will make it harder/longer for residents making some car journeys. It will make it more attractive for those walking and cycling.

If we're ever to solve obesity levels, global warming. air pollution we need many more of these proposals being implemented.


Hi P68,

London's population has risen by 2 million in the last 25 years and is forecast to do the same. Doing nothing will see our residential road suffer the same levels of use/.congestion as our A roads. As indeed is already happening to Champion Hill. People, when faced with congestion, changes routes and travel modes - it evaporates. Much as when you build roads, allow new routes for motor vehicles new traffic is generated.

Does this plan also take one of the vital routes for emergency services to get from the east Dulwich area to the Kings college hospital area ?

Whilst the main route is still there, if that is blocked by additional traffic then emergency vehicles will have less options for getting anywhere quickly


Wonder if the hospital and emergency services have been consulted

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Champion Hill has the same traffic levels as the

> parallel A Road Champion Park.

> Champion Hill is part of quiet way and London

> Cycle Network route 23.

> That's why the council is proposing this filtered

> restriction. It will make it harder/longer for

> residents making some car journeys. It will make

> it more attractive for those walking and cycling.

>

> If we're ever to solve obesity levels, global

> warming. air pollution we need many more of these

> proposals being implemented.

>

> Hi P68,

> London's population has risen by 2 million in the

> last 25 years and is forecast to do the same.

> Doing nothing will see our residential road suffer

> the same levels of use/.congestion as our A roads.

> As indeed is already happening to Champion Hill.

> People, when faced with congestion, changes routes

> and travel modes - it evaporates. Much as when you

> build roads, allow new routes for motor vehicles

> new traffic is generated.


Having lived on and around Champion Hill as a child since 1958 I have to admit I have not seen any major increase in traffic over the years apart from the brief burst when the rush hour is on. Not that you would really notice. Apart from that brief spurt it is pleasant for pedestrians, cyclists and car users with very little traffic and is safe to use.


Appears that this looks like the Camberwell Grove mindset to ban vehicles.


I thought I read you live on Champion Hill does that have an influence on you thinking.


Thought Sally Buyings comments summed things up well.

spider69 Wrote:

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


> Having lived on and around Champion Hill as a

> child since 1958 I have to admit I have not seen

> any major increase in traffic over the years apart

> from the brief burst when the rush hour is on. Not

> that you would really notice. Apart from that

> brief spurt it is pleasant for pedestrians,

> cyclists and car users with very little traffic

> and is safe to use.


I lived on Champion Hill for ten years 2006-2016 on the ground floor of Ruskin Park House, at the end nearest the junction. From 6.30AM to 9AM the road was blocked as far back as the student halls, with traffic frequently hooting at those in front to pull out onto Denmark Hill. The pollution was filthy, we had to keep our windows closed at all times in the hottest weather. For some reason evening rush hour wasn't too bad. During the day there was a continual stream of traffic, most of it driving in excess of the speed limit, with many drivers going the wrong side of the traffic islands to avoid having to slow down. The only way it's safe to use as a cyclist is to hold a position in the middle of the road (and then get abused by car drivers for slowing them down) - if you move at all to the left someone will try to squeeze by at a pinch point and you risk being slammed into parked cars.


Too many comments on here symptomatic of the "I should be allowed to drive whenever and wherever I want" mindset. People are dying in their thousands because of London's traffic every year, and many thousands more, especially children, are suffering serious health problems. It's not good enough to say "Oh the council should leave everything as it is and not interfere."


In answer to Artful's (sensible) question, the road won't be completely barriered, there will just be an island on the right-hand side (as you come up from Denmark Hill) and a no-entry sign, which I assume emergency vehicles are permitted to ignore - the road will still be two-way either side of the semi-closure.

spider69 Wrote:

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

> Must be a different road.


Well, it's the one I worked from home by the side of for a decade, with a desk looking out directly over the junction of Denmark Hill and Champion Hill.

I drive this road every morning as part of my commute and am usually heading down champion hill during rush hour between 8 -8.15am. There is never any traffic or congestion. The only time I've encountered backed up traffic was during the winter snow this year for obvious reasons (and someone had crashed into the bollard at the bottom)

wimble Wrote:

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

> I drive this road every morning as part of my

> commute and am usually heading down champion hill

> during rush hour between 8 -8.15am. There is never

> any traffic or congestion. The only time I've

> encountered backed up traffic was during the

> winter snow this year for obvious reasons (and

> someone had crashed into the bollard at the

> bottom)


I can only offer my empirical experience of living right next to this road for ten years. Of course those who use it for their daily commute would have no motive for claiming that everything's fine with it, would they? This is a well-known rat run, leading on to one of the busiest roads in the area, and you've never been held up there? I wonder why when my wife and I wanted to leave there at morning rush hour in the car we'd frequently be held up for a number of minutes? Just unlucky, I guess...

  • 2 weeks later...

While understanding the points of view of Champion Hill residents, I?m really concerned about the knock-on effects of this trial. This won?t stop people who need to use vehicles using them - it will just displace the cars and vans onto other roads.



I think this trial will have a serious impact on congestion from the junction between Dog Kennel Hill and Champion Hill round past Denmark Hill station. Previous roadworks etc have demonstrated that it takes very little to slow buses going up Dog Kennel Hill considerably, with tailbacks going all the way down Dog Kennel Hill and sometimes back to Goose Green.


The buses up Dog Kennel Hill are a central part of the commute for a very large number of people living in East Dulwich, Forest Hill etc. I think consultation with TFL is essential before pursuing this trial.


I would also expect the trial to have a serious knock-on effect on the junctions between Townley Rd and East Dulwich Grove, and between East Dulwich Grove and Red Post Hill. This is the obvious alternative route between Lordship Lane and Red Post Hill/Ruskin Park. These junctions are already very busy in the morning, especially with coaches and other traffic going to Alleyn?s and James Allen?s Girls School. An increase in congestion at these junctions would lead to even longer tailbacks (and pollution outside schools due to cars idling in queues) and delay the 37 bus route, which is another essential route for many people?s morning commute.


If the impact on buses is as bad as I fear then a lot of people are going to be adversely affected by this trial, which is planned to last for 6-12 months.

I have sighn the consulation. Very much against this and so are many people in the surround area.


Not only do we have a horrible proposal for large scheme of apartments on the corner the Champion Hill/DKH that will ruin the area, this road scheme will the ultimate spat on the face from southwark, to us, again.....


DO NOT DO IT! Simple, leave it as it is, sometimes doing nothing is the best thing to do. Also the cost to the tax payers to do a badly thought trial would be a good insensitive to not to waste money! It would not be cheap. It's not a welcome scheme, badly thought one at that!


~Adding more time to get to destinations this is.


This road is critical to get about the local area, and serves to re-leave congestion on the other busy roads into London, for traders, delivery company's, and getting to relatives, getting to work. It would only add burden to the other areas, let this road share the strain like all the other roads do. More traffic standing more pollution on roads near the station of Denmark hill, and increase accidents there too.


Southwark and its staff need to be put in their place, this borough is getting worse with rubbish schemes like these, please sign against this to stop this! Poor people who live in this road are nearly completely cut off, and emergency vehicles, did they even think about that?

betternowthanthen Wrote:

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

Southwark and its staff need to be put in their

> place, this borough is getting worse with rubbish

> schemes like these, please sign against this to

> stop this! Poor people who live in this road are

> nearly completely cut off, and emergency vehicles,

> did they even think about that?


Having had a closer look at this scheme I tend to agree it's probably a bad one for the displacement effect it will cause - however it's a bit dramatic to say that. If you live on Champion Hill you won't be cut off, if you live above the corner you'll have to go round via Denmark Hill (three minutes maximum, probably), if you live below nothing's changed. Emergency vehicles (which generally would prefer a wider main road anyway, when I lived on CH we heard them a lot on Denmark Hill but only saw them on CH if they were coming to an address on that road) will be allowed to travel through the no-entry, as they are generally.

Grove Lane Residents? Association has just submitted an objection. The unintended consequences of this misconceived and appallingly timed scheme are quite serious. Closing Champion Hill to through-traffic westbound (from Grove Hill Road and Dog Kennel Hill) will cause serious northbound congestion in the morning rush hour on Dog Kennel Hill, the southern section of Grove Lane and Champion Park, where it will back up at the already overloaded junction with Denmark Hill.

This will have two unacceptable consequences:

1) it will increase journey times, including bus journey times and ambulance journey times

2) it will increase air pollution on Dog Kennel Hill, Grove Lane and Champion Park, roads with a high density of residents, which carry thousands of pedestrians to Denmark Hill and East Dulwich stations at the top and bottom of the hill, Kings College Hospital and local schools.

The main roads, onto which the trial aims to displace traffic, constitute a Primary Route for ambulances serving Kings College Hospital. Kings is a major teaching hospital, whose busy A&E department and new Critical Care Centre accept patients from across the South East. Its workers and patients (and those of the Maudsley) are heavily dependent on the northbound bus service in the morning, especially in the absence of a tube station.

The inevitable impacts of the proposed closure of Champion Hill to westbound through traffic on traffic flow, emergency service response times, bus journey times and air quality (in what is already an Air Quality Management Area) will be exacerbated if the trial is undertaken at the same time as major roadworks scheduled for the next 12 months and beyond by both Southwark (already begun on Denmark Hill) and TfL (Camberwell town centre). Electronic billboards are already warning motorists to avoid using Grove Lane/Champion Park for th? next year and to use alternative routes! Please make representations to LB Southwark to postpone the Champion Hill trial until after Southwark and TfL?s improvements at Denmark Hill and Camberwell Green have all been completed and more detailed study of the potential impacts has been made through wider and more in depth consultations.

https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/championhilltrial/consultation/intro/

Cross borough cooperation is needed on this between Lambeth and Southwark. LB Southwark needs to be reminded that all residents living in the area have a voice, that decisions to introduce traffic measures that will impact across wider communities and on NHS providers and on emergency services need taking with great care and after appropriate consultations. Lambeth had to pull the plug on a similarly misconceived road closure in Loughborough Junction after the Fire Brigade lodged a formal complaint about increased response times. The LAS had noted similar delays. Kings had said patients and workers were suffering unacceptable delays getting to the hospital, and had commented on a perceived increase in pollution, resulting from the congestion.

In response to the opening post - the residents of surrounding, affected roads onto which traffic would be displaced (Bromar, Pytchley, Grove Lane and others) were not consulted about this trial. It is also worth noting that TfL rejected the closure of Champion Hill a few years ago on grounds of unacceptable delays to bus journey times. And that the trial is strongly opposed by most residents of Champion Hill itself (many of whom will be unable to access their homes except via Denmark Hill). I gather there are also concerns about how coaches transporting students (of whom there are 750+ on Champion Hill) to and from Kings Halls of Residence will safely negotiate the proposed one way system on the Denmark Hill leg of Champion Hill.

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...