Questions for local council candidates from the Forest Hill Society
- Forest Hill Society
- 2 days ago
- 7 min read
While the 2026 local elections for all wards in Lewisham are ongoing, the Committee of the Forest Hill Society thought this would be a good opportunity to ask candidates from all parties standing in the wards that make up the wider "Forest Hill" area, namely Forest Hill Ward, Perry Vale Ward and Crofton Park Ward, some questions on matters of interest to our members. There are probably hundreds of topics we might ask about in all these areas, but we limited it to four to make this manageable for candidates at this busy time.
For the record, the Society wrote to the general inbox listed for all major parties represented in the local elections. We heard back from Labour, Liberal Democrat and Green candidates, but not from the Conservatives or Reform teams. A full list of all candidates standing in local wards can be found here:
Below you will find the questions, and extracts from the responses we received by Monday, 4th May. We are publishing this in the hope that this information will be of interest to our members when casting their vote on Thursday.
The Society looks forward to working closely with all winning candidates elected to represent our local residents and members, and to see how we can implement the ideas and suggestions raised below.
1. The junction and crossing outside Forest Hill station.
This is both inconvenient and dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, particularly when groups of school children have to use it when visiting the Horniman Museum. It is solely designed for the convenience of vehicle traffic flow, and does not adequately prioritise vulnerable road users. How do you propose to address this?
Labour:
We would work with TfL to explore changes on main road including the below and build a plan that delivers the changes residents want to see:
Potential signalised crossing upgrades
Public realm improvements around the station
Consideration of continuous pavements/raised tables
Improving cycling safety through junction redesign
However, any full redesign will be constrained by this being a major red route with several bus routes and limited road space at a complex junction making this difficult. This further complicated by funding constraints with significant grants from TfL needed for major redesign.
Liberal Democrats:
Current arrangements are clearly designed solely to manage the flow of traffic. We all have to work with TfL to get that improved. In terms of the time given to pedestrians it should be possible for TfL to make alterations. The Society might consider submitting written questions to the Mayor of London. We would be happy to assist in this process over the summer.
Green Party:
I agree with you that this junction is not well-designed for pedestrians and cyclists; the central island often becomes dangerously crowded, and navigating it is especially difficult for parents with prams and wheelchair users. Of course, as part of the South Circular, changes to that crossing will need to be coordinated with TfL - but we would be keen to explore a range of potential solutions in consultation with the relevant stakeholders, ranging from smaller changes to improve accessibility in the short-term, through to more comprehensive redesigns of the crossing.
2. Accessing Forest Hill station from Perry Vale.
Crossing both Perry Vale and Waldram Place in order to get to and from the rear entrance to Forest Hill station is dangerous. There are no pedestrian crossings on either road, and many cars do not stick to the 20mph limit and speed around two dangerous corners. This is particularly a problem when illegal parking is also allowed to happen along Perry Vale. How do you propose to address this?
Liberal Democrats:
We agree entirely that current arrangements are dangerous. There are no doubt a number of technical restrictions that need to be taken into account but enforcement of current rules including the speed limit and parking on pavements are critical. Lewisham Council has a poor record in tackling pavement parking where it is not permitted and this needs to change.
Green Party:
There are two elements we need to consider in tackling this problem. First, we need to explore safer and more convenient routes for pedestrians approaching via Perry Vale and Waldram Crescent. Several local residents have mentioned to us that they actually felt safer when the temporary crossing there was installed during the recent roadworks - so that may provide useful data for informing potential longer-term solutions. Improved sightlines at both ends of Waldram Place would also contribute to pedestrian safety, so we should also look at options for limiting parking on those corners (and ensure that existing restrictions are fully enforced). Secondly, we need to address the issue of persistent speeding on those roads - which could involve a combination of traffic calming measures alongside enhanced enforcement.
Labour :
We will press Council officers for a full 'zebra' or light-controlled crossing on Perry Vale outside Forest Hill Station, and if feasible a 'zebra' crossing on Waldram Place, and physical works to ensure drivers stick to the 20mph speed limit now in place.
We will also ask for a review of parking controls (and regular enforcement of them) on that stretch of Perry Vale, bearing in mind the viability of the shops and businesses there. For this to work we know it's important to keep the '2 hours free' conditions in the large Council-owned car park, as an alternative for shoppers. We successfully defended this car park in 2023 against proposals for closure and building on it.
This is one of the road safety hotspots in Perry Vale that has had some improvements, over many years, but none that (in our view) have had a decisive impact on how safe people are, and how safe they feel, trying to access the Perry Vale side of our station. Now that the 20mph speed limit applies to all roads in Forest Hill, Crofton Park and Perry Vale, we believe it's time to revisit this road safety issue.
3. Devonshire Road traffic levels.
Residents on all roads connecting Devonshire Road to Honor Oak Road and Honor Oak Park have to suffer unhealthy levels of traffic and noise on these exclusively residential roads. How can this rat-running be addressed, to reduce traffic, and improve cyclist and pedestrian safety and overall air quality through the Devonshire Road neighbourhood?
Green Party:
A number of residents on Devonshire Road and Honor Oak Road have raised concerns with us about traffic levels, and the resultant noise and pollution. Additionally, many have expressed concerns that the older houses on those roads are at risk of subsidence, given the vibrations caused by the heavy goods vehicles that regularly use them. As in the case of the roads on the other side of the station, we would need to explore a wide range of traffic calming and enforcement measures to identify a long-term solution that serves the needs of all stakeholders; bearing in mind these concerns about subsidence, it may make sense to prioritise traffic calming measures, such as raised tables, that are not going to result in additional vibrations.[...]
We also need to consider the impact on adjoining roads; there are several through roads that get used as cut-throughs between Devonshire and Honor Oak Road. There are already traffic calming bumps on some of these roads, but the main issue here is the volume of traffic - so it would be important to involve residents of those streets as well to explore potential ways to reduce that volume, such as introducing additional one-way systems. That said, these needs will all need to be balanced carefully, as traffic easing on those cut-throughs could have a negative impact on traffic and pollution on the main roads. [...]
Labour:
Having spoken to residents on these roads, we are all too aware of the issues of rat-running and subsequent traffic and noise pollution as a result.
We have had officers to consider making changes to Devonshire Road, but previously these were considered unfeasible. We would commit to doing this again and push for action to be taken to deal with the rat-running and traffic build-up at the Forest Hil end of Devonshire Road.
We would also build on the consultation in Forest Hill last year on the Sustainable Streets programme and consider what measures would be most suitable and be supported by residents, including:
Modal filters (planters/camera restrictions preventing through traffic).
Traffic restrictions using ANPR cameras.
Changes to prioritise walking and cycling.
If a Low Traffic Neighbourhood is considered, the impact of parking and traffic on boundary roads, as well as local access must be considered.
Liberal Democrats:
There is undoubtedly a problem in this area. We are very cautious about addressing a problem in one area that could make matters worse for surrounding roads but we are certainly open to solutions proposed by residents.
4. Parking on Thorpewood Avenue and Dartmouth Road.
The rebuilt swimming pool was supposed to be a ‘public transport only’ pool, hence no parking was provided. This has not worked, witnessed by the traffic and parking problems in the nearby streets which is detrimental to locals, library users, and school children. How do you propose to address this?
Labour:
[...]We understand that some people want to visit the pools by car, displacing traffic to nearby streets such as Thorpewood Avenue. This is also a busy road with two schools on and is used as a cut through between Kirkdale and Dartmouth Road.
We would also build on the consultation in Forest Hill last year on the Sustainable Streets programme and consider what measures would be most suitable and be supported by residents, including whether a Controlled Parking Zone is needed on Thorpewood Avenue and surrounding streets. The best way to look at these would be through parking stress surveys to assess the demand for and displacement of parking.
In the Sustainable Streets programme, parking is no longer treated in isolation and is tied to road safety and active travel.
Liberal Democrats:
The same principles noted (in question 3) apply here too. We do not have a blanket solution for all parking problems whatever the circumstances; instead we feel strongly that residents should be involved in creating a solution and their consent obtained. However as a start point pavement parking (which is a traffic offence unless a road has been given an exemption) must be tackled.
Green Party:
As with the other cases you mention, we would be keen to launch a process of consultation with local residents to identify a solution to the parking issues on these roads. Hopefully, the proposed expansion of Lewisham's cycling infrastructure included in our manifesto - more protected cycle lanes, better cycle parking options, and an expansion of cargo bike infrastructure - will go some way towards encouraging more local residents to make the journey to the pools without using their cars.
But even with those investments, we cannot reasonably expect that no-one will be driving to the pools - so we will need to identify additional ways of alleviating the pressure placed on parking spaces on those roads. Some local residents on Thorpewood Avenue, for example, have suggested the installation of paid parking bays along some of the roads on the opposite side of the pools, such as Clyde Vale; we could also look at the area around the business park next to Albion Millennium Green as a potential space for additional parking.
Comments