Latest news with #WDAG
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Lambeth LTN to be removed immediately, court rules
A low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) scheme in south London must be removed with immediate effect, following an order by the High Court. Lambeth Council was told in May that the imposition of the LTN in West Dulwich was unlawful, and has been denied permission to appeal against the decision. LTNs aim to reduce motor traffic in residential areas by using either cameras, planters or lockable bollards, but opponents have criticised their effectiveness. The West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the legal challenge, described the ruling as " a wake-up call to councils everywhere". Low-traffic neighbourhood unlawful - High Court Lambeth Council must also pay £35,000 towards the legal costs incurred by WDAG. The action group said questions must now be asked about the revenue raised by penalising motorists contravening the LTN rules - and whether the more-than £1m total raised in penalty notices will have to be repaid. A WDAG spokesperson said the group had called upon Lambeth Council to clarify whether it would issue refunds. "This is not just about legality — it's about fairness and public trust. If the law was broken, the money should be paid back. "This case should never have gone to court. It could have been resolved through proper, respectful dialogue. Instead, Lambeth chose to defend litigation over listening — and the public has paid for it." In response to the decision, Lambeth Council said it "remained committed to delivering our programme to reduce road danger for those most at risk and make our streets calmer, more community-friendly places. "The High Court has ordered the removal of West Dulwich street improvements. No further fines will be issued, and we are removing the scheme as soon as it can be done safely." Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to
BBC News
2 days ago
- BBC News
West Dulwich LTN must be removed immediately, court rules
A low-traffic neighbourhood (LTN) scheme in south London must be removed with immediate effect, following an order by the High Council was told in May that the imposition of the LTN in West Dulwich was unlawful, and has been denied permission to appeal against the aim to reduce motor traffic in residential areas by using either cameras, planters or lockable bollards, but opponents have criticised their West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which brought the legal challenge, described the ruling as " a wake-up call to councils everywhere". Lambeth Council must also pay £35,000 towards the legal costs incurred by WDAG. The action group said questions must now be asked about the revenue raised by penalising motorists contravening the LTN rules - and whether the more-than £1m total raised in penalty notices will have to be repaid.A WDAG spokesperson said the group had called upon Lambeth Council to clarify whether it would issue refunds. "This is not just about legality — it's about fairness and public trust. If the law was broken, the money should be paid back."This case should never have gone to court. It could have been resolved through proper, respectful dialogue. Instead, Lambeth chose to defend litigation over listening — and the public has paid for it." In response to the decision, Lambeth Council said it "remained committed to delivering our programme to reduce road danger for those most at risk and make our streets calmer, more community-friendly places."The High Court has ordered the removal of West Dulwich street improvements. No further fines will be issued, and we are removing the scheme as soon as it can be done safely."
Yahoo
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
The London residents that fought back against LTNs
When Lambeth council announced it planned to introduce a controversial Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) in West Dulwich, south London, residents got a little more than they bargained for. They did get an LTN – a network of traffic calming measures that include road closures, planters and bollards, introduced early last year – but they also ended up embroiled in a High Court battle and a bitter neighbourhood row. Now, the West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG) has become the first local campaign group of its kind to take a council to court over an LTN and win. The ruling means that the Labour-run council could be forced to scrap the scheme entirely, potentially setting a precedent for LTNs throughout the country, although it has said it will remain in place while it 'carefully considers the implications of this judgment'. 'It feels fantastic,' says Almira Mohamed, a founding WDAG member, in the wake of the victory. 'You often feel like you're talking to a brick wall, and the council makes you feel like you're being irresponsible, that you hate the planet and love pollution, and that you don't want to do any good for the community. All we wanted was for them to listen to our genuine concerns about how the LTN is actually going to cause more damage – and they didn't listen.' The ruling, delivered by Judge Tim Smith on Friday, ruled in favour of WDAG on its claim that Lambeth Council's consultation on the traffic measures was inadequate. Throughout the consultation process, WDAG had made 'numerous' attempts to engage with the council, which they say went ignored. This culminated in an intimidating 53-page dossier of evidence, concerns and questions submitted to the council by the group, which Judge Smith ruled Lambeth should have considered, saying there had been a 'serious failing' by authorities. The WDAG campaigned to ask the High Court to declare the LTN unlawful, ploughing thousands of pounds out of their own pockets into the battle. Around 680 supporters who opposed the LTN raised £50,000 to help cover the cost of the legal fees, which came to £60,000 in total. Judge Smith allowed one of three claims brought by the campaign group but dismissed the other two, which also related to how the council had carried out the consultation on the scheme. 'I did not harbour any significant concerns about the conduct of the consultation and engagement as a whole,' he said. Still, those involved say their success sets a national precedent. 'This ruling sends a clear signal to all councils nationwide: communities will no longer tolerate top-down, poorly conceived schemes that ignore local input, which prioritise revenue over real solutions to issues like pollution,' a WDAG spokesperson said following the High Court ruling. The council, for its part, argues LTNs such as the one in West Dulwich 'make it safer and easier to walk, wheel, scoot and cycle by stopping cars, vans and other vehicles from using quiet streets as shortcuts'. 'Over time, LTNs can encourage people to switch from driving to more sustainable ways of travelling, like walking, public transport and cycling,' it says, adding such schemes help 'tackle the climate emergency'. It was 2pm on a Wednesday when I travelled to West Dulwich to interview the group in person, but at the top of Rosendale Road, on the border of the LTN, it might as well have been rush hour – traffic sat bumper to bumper. It is 'the words the council uses' that Mohamed finds most frustrating, she says. 'Like 'traffic evaporation'. The traffic evaporates here,' – she motions in the direction of the leafy streets surrounding Rosendale Road, now closed to traffic – 'but if you look behind you, it's over there.' This forms the basis of their argument against the measures – that while the leafy interior streets of Dulwich are quieter, all the traffic has been pushed to the boundary roads at the edges of the LTN, most of which were already highly polluted and home to some of the borough's poorest residents. 'Councils are putting in LTNs all over the country that are very, very unpopular. [But] I don't think they thought we would actually do it, actually go to court,' Mohamed says. 'One of the biggest reasons I'm involved is that it's an injustice. All of the boundary road traffic [on the edges of the LTN] goes towards… the poorer communities and the vulnerable groups.' This is hardly a David and Goliath battle; it has been fought by West Dulwich's well-heeled residents, a local lawyer, GP and data analyst among them. But more broadly, the LTN was opposed by the majority – 67.5 per cent – of those who live in the area, according to a council survey. The point they won on, in the end, is that the council hadn't taken residents' concerns into consideration in the consultation period. One meeting in particular has become notorious. In April 2023, a drop-in at West Norwood library was so disastrous it has been branded a 'six hour fiasco'. The High Court was told that the council employees present were met with such hostility from residents that they were granted a day's wellbeing leave to recover. One was reduced to tears. Mohamed points out that although the WDAG has been blamed for this outcome, the meeting took place a year before the group was formed, and cites the incident as an example of Lambeth's inadequate communication on the subject. She claims no one in a position of authority attended the meeting and, moreover, that throughout the consultation process, residents have been 'treated with contempt'. 'They staffed the drop-in with three engineers – one lady was in charge of designing the parking, and of course everyone was asking her questions: Why are these plans being put in place? She wasn't able to answer that,' Mohamed says. 'When people were saying these ideas are preposterous, and they don't make sense, she became overwhelmed. The meeting was under-resourced, not enough of the right people were there, and they left the engineers to explain it to the community, who were upset.' A barrister acting for Lambeth council told the High Court that the WDAG was 'extensively involved' in the consultation process. He said the local authority had exchanged 54 emails with the group between April 2023 and August last year. According to its members, however, this was a one-sided conversation, and the majority of those emails were WDAG members chasing for a follow-up. The group hotly contests that LTNs work in the first place. They are fast being adopted borough-wide: there are five permanent Low Traffic Neighbourhoods already in place in the borough of Lambeth, two trials (including West Dulwich) and two schemes at the start of 'engagement'. Lambeth, which declared a 'climate emergency' in 2019, published data at the end of last year which demonstrated these schemes have been successful. It said the LTN in Brixton, south London, has had a 'transformative effect' on air quality, pollution, and rates of cycling: traffic within the LTN decreased by 58 per cent, overall traffic reduced by 4 per cent, and cycling increased by 27 per cent across the area. Another LTN trial, however, this time in Streatham, was delayed after lengthy bus delays over a period of months. Buses were taking up to two hours to travel less than three miles. And LTNs are often unpopular among residents: in 2023, it was revealed that Lambeth had spent more than £310,000 over a three-year period repairing vandalised LTN infrastructure. In West Dulwich, it has proved particularly divisive. 'I've always wondered, why are they doing this?' says Robbie Owen, another WDAG member. 'If you look at the effect of the LTN, it's making the nice parts of West Dulwich nicer, and the not so nice parts less nice. It also seems to be completely fanciful that this will play any meaningful part in [the Council's] self-declared climate agenda.' He describes the traffic-calming measures as 'tokenistic policies' that have no real impact. The group also alleges that the scheme is based on 'thin, oversimplified' research, and that it has already had a devastating impact on local businesses. 'The dry-cleaners were saying their takings have gone down, because a lot of the shops rely on passing trade,' says Owen. 'That just isn't factored into the council's thinking… it seems extraordinary that they are making a very nice middle-class area even nicer, and producing damaging effects [elsewhere].' A third member, Jonathan, puts this in even stronger terms: 'LTNs actually makes things worse… if you dig into it, we firmly believe it actually increases pollution, because it forces the majority of traffic to drive longer distances and for a longer time. It's nonsense.' On Feb 12, the WDAG finally had their day in court. It has been a tense wait to hear if they had been successful, but now, in a victory for community campaigners – the more cynical might call them NIMBYs – everywhere, they have taken the council to task. In a statement, Lambeth Council said it had implemented the West Dulwich Street Improvements to 'reduce road danger and create a neighbourhood where residents can live safer, happier and healthier lives'. 'This was part of our overall ambition to reduce road danger, encourage more active and sustainable travel, and improve air quality for communities across our borough,' it continued. 'The court has allowed the claim against the West Dulwich Street Improvements on one of the three grounds of challenge, and dismissed the other two. We acknowledge the court's decision and are carefully considering the implications of this judgement; we will provide further updates in due course.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Telegraph
12-05-2025
- Politics
- Telegraph
The London residents who fought back against LTNs
When Lambeth council announced it planned to introduce a controversial Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) in West Dulwich, south London, residents got a little more than they bargained for. They did get an LTN – a network of traffic calming measures that include road closures, planters and bollards, introduced early last year – but they also ended up embroiled in a High Court battle and a bitter neighbourhood row. Now, the West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG) has become the first local campaign group of its kind to take a council to court over an LTN and win. The ruling means that the Labour-run council could be forced to scrap the scheme entirely, potentially setting a precedent for LTNs throughout the country, although it has said it will remain in place while it 'carefully considers the implications of this judgment'. 'It feels fantastic,' says Almira Mohamed, a founding WDAG member, in the wake of the victory. 'You often feel like you're talking to a brick wall, and the council makes you feel like you're being irresponsible, that you hate the planet and love pollution, and that you don't want to do any good for the community. All we wanted was for them to listen to our genuine concerns about how the LTN is actually going to cause more damage – and they didn't listen.' The ruling, delivered by Judge Tim Smith on Friday, ruled in favour of WDAG on its claim that Lambeth Council's consultation on the traffic measures was inadequate. Throughout the consultation process, WDAG had made 'numerous' attempts to engage with the council, which they say went ignored. This culminated in an intimidating 53-page dossier of evidence, concerns and questions submitted to the council by the group, which Judge Smith ruled Lambeth should have considered, saying there had been a 'serious failing' by authorities. The WDAG campaigned to ask the High Court to declare the LTN unlawful, ploughing thousands of pounds out of their own pockets into the battle. Around 680 supporters who opposed the LTN raised £50,000 to help cover the cost of the legal fees, which came to £60,000 in total. Judge Smith allowed one of three claims brought by the campaign group but dismissed the other two, which also related to how the council had carried out the consultation on the scheme. 'I did not harbour any significant concerns about the conduct of the consultation and engagement as a whole,' he said. Still, those involved say their success sets a national precedent. 'This ruling sends a clear signal to all councils nationwide: communities will no longer tolerate top-down, poorly conceived schemes that ignore local input, which prioritise revenue over real solutions to issues like pollution,' a WDAG spokesperson said following the High Court ruling. The council, for its part, argues LTNs such as the one in West Dulwich 'make it safer and easier to walk, wheel, scoot and cycle by stopping cars, vans and other vehicles from using quiet streets as shortcuts'. 'Over time, LTNs can encourage people to switch from driving to more sustainable ways of travelling, like walking, public transport and cycling,' it says, adding such schemes help 'tackle the climate emergency'. 'It's an injustice' It was 2pm on a Wednesday when I travelled to West Dulwich to interview the group in person, but at the top of Rosendale Road, on the border of the LTN, it might as well have been rush hour – traffic sat bumper to bumper. It is 'the words the council uses' that Mohamed finds most frustrating, she says. 'Like 'traffic evaporation'. The traffic evaporates here,' – she motions in the direction of the leafy streets surrounding Rosendale Road, now closed to traffic – 'but if you look behind you, it's over there.' This forms the basis of their argument against the measures – that while the leafy interior streets of Dulwich are quieter, all the traffic has been pushed to the boundary roads at the edges of the LTN, most of which were already highly polluted and home to some of the borough's poorest residents. 'Councils are putting in LTNs all over the country that are very, very unpopular. [But] I don't think they thought we would actually do it, actually go to court,' Mohamed says. 'One of the biggest reasons I'm involved is that it's an injustice. All of the boundary road traffic [on the edges of the LTN] goes towards… the poorer communities and the vulnerable groups.' This is hardly a David and Goliath battle; it has been fought by West Dulwich's well-heeled residents, a local lawyer, GP and data analyst among them. But more broadly, the LTN was opposed by the majority – 67.5 per cent – of those who live in the area, according to a council survey. The point they won on, in the end, is that the council hadn't taken residents' concerns into consideration in the consultation period. One meeting in particular has become notorious. In April 2023, a drop-in at West Norwood library was so disastrous it has been branded a 'six hour fiasco'. The High Court was told that the council employees present were met with such hostility from residents that they were granted a day's wellbeing leave to recover. One was reduced to tears. Mohamed points out that although the WDAG has been blamed for this outcome, the meeting took place a year before the group was formed, and cites the incident as an example of Lambeth's inadequate communication on the subject. She claims no one in a position of authority attended the meeting and, moreover, that throughout the consultation process, residents have been 'treated with contempt'. 'They staffed the drop-in with three engineers – one lady was in charge of designing the parking, and of course everyone was asking her questions: Why are these plans being put in place? She wasn't able to answer that,' Mohamed says. 'When people were saying these ideas are preposterous, and they don't make sense, she became overwhelmed. The meeting was under-resourced, not enough of the right people were there, and they left the engineers to explain it to the community, who were upset.' A barrister acting for Lambeth council told the High Court that the WDAG was 'extensively involved' in the consultation process. He said the local authority had exchanged 54 emails with the group between April 2023 and August last year. According to its members, however, this was a one-sided conversation, and the majority of those emails were WDAG members chasing for a follow-up. The group hotly contests that LTNs work in the first place. They are fast being adopted borough-wide: there are five permanent Low Traffic Neighbourhoods already in place in the borough of Lambeth, two trials (including West Dulwich) and two schemes at the start of 'engagement'. Lambeth, which declared a 'climate emergency' in 2019, published data at the end of last year which demonstrated these schemes have been successful. It said the LTN in Brixton, south London, has had a 'transformative effect' on air quality, pollution, and rates of cycling: traffic within the LTN decreased by 58 per cent, overall traffic reduced by 4 per cent, and cycling increased by 27 per cent across the area. Another LTN trial, however, this time in Streatham, was delayed after lengthy bus delays over a period of months. Buses were taking up to two hours to travel less than three miles. And LTNs are often unpopular among residents: in 2023, it was revealed that Lambeth had spent more than £310,000 over a three-year period repairing vandalised LTN infrastructure. 'Tokenistic policies' In West Dulwich, it has proved particularly divisive. 'I've always wondered, why are they doing this?' says Robbie Owen, another WDAG member. 'If you look at the effect of the LTN, it's making the nice parts of West Dulwich nicer, and the not so nice parts less nice. It also seems to be completely fanciful that this will play any meaningful part in [the Council's] self-declared climate agenda.' He describes the traffic-calming measures as 'tokenistic policies' that have no real impact. The group also alleges that the scheme is based on 'thin, oversimplified' research, and that it has already had a devastating impact on local businesses. 'The dry-cleaners were saying their takings have gone down, because a lot of the shops rely on passing trade,' says Owen. 'That just isn't factored into the council's thinking… it seems extraordinary that they are making a very nice middle-class area even nicer, and producing damaging effects [elsewhere].' A third member, Jonathan, puts this in even stronger terms: 'LTNs actually makes things worse… if you dig into it, we firmly believe it actually increases pollution, because it forces the majority of traffic to drive longer distances and for a longer time. It's nonsense.' On Feb 12, the WDAG finally had their day in court. It has been a tense wait to hear if they had been successful, but now, in a victory for community campaigners – the more cynical might call them NIMBYs – everywhere, they have taken the council to task. In a statement, Lambeth Council said it had implemented the West Dulwich Street Improvements to 'reduce road danger and create a neighbourhood where residents can live safer, happier and healthier lives'. 'This was part of our overall ambition to reduce road danger, encourage more active and sustainable travel, and improve air quality for communities across our borough,' it continued. 'The court has allowed the claim against the West Dulwich Street Improvements on one of the three grounds of challenge, and dismissed the other two. We acknowledge the court's decision and are carefully considering the implications of this judgement; we will provide further updates in due course.'
Telegraph
10-05-2025
- Telegraph
Unlawful LTN takes £1m from motorists
An unlawful low traffic neighbourhood (LTN) banked a Labour council more than £1 million in fines from motorists in just six months. Lambeth council made £1,080,580 from penalty charge notices (PCNs) after closing roads last October as part of the controversial West Dulwich LTN. On Friday, a judge ruled that the council had acted unlawfully by creating the LTN and then unfairly ignoring residents' legitimate concerns that it would cause more pollution and traffic congestion. Now, campaigners are demanding that the council pays back money it has banked from the south London scheme following the High Court ruling. A freedom of information request showed that the LTN was raising more than £180,000 a month from fines issued to motorists who had entered roads suddenly closed to them. The West Dulwich Action Group (WDAG), which comprises residents and businesses, opposed to the scheme, saying: 'As the LTN has been declared unlawful, there can be no possible justification for Lambeth to keep the fines collected since September last year, and so they should be refunded.' Tim Smith, the deputy judge, said Lambeth was guilty of a 'serious failing' after it ignored an 'impressive' report produced by campaigners that warned the LTN street could lead to increased congestion and pollution. He also found the local authority had given a 'masterclass in selective partial reporting' after a council document failed to record public consultation on the scheme. WDAG became the first residents' organisation to win a legal battle over an LTN. The ruling, which has proven embarrassing for Lambeth council, could now mean the LTN will be scrapped. LTNs involve closing residential roads to some traffic and fining motorists who stray into the zone. A PCN has just risen from £130 to £160 in the borough, but a lower charge can be paid if the fine is settled in a couple of weeks. Critics claim the schemes simply force congestion onto invariably busier boundary roads, causing gridlock and more pollution. The council has 'acknowledged' the court's decision and said it was 'carefully considering the implications of the judgement'. It has raised millions in fines from LTNs it has introduced in an apparent attempt to tackle climate change as well as promote 'active travel' such as walking and cycling. A Lambeth council spokesman said: 'Lambeth Council has introduced a trial neighbourhood scheme in West Dulwich to make streets safer, create new community spaces and support people to walk and cycle around the area. 'We have thoroughly engaged with – and listened to - the local community throughout the development of these proposals, and provided opportunities for residents and businesses to feed back. We ask that all road users follow the law so they do not get a fine.'
