Greenwich Council refuse to fund Falconwood pedestrian crossings

A number of local campaigns for safer streets will be before Greenwich Council this week including one which saw 456 people asking for safer crossings near Falconwood station.

Greenwich Council have refused to do anything with crossings in the near term citing lack of money though do state they will reduce speed limits from 40 mph to 30 mph next year and conduct a review. People complain that the existing speed limit is already regularly exceeded.

Lots of railings to prevent crossing rather than providing a crossing

What we see once again in responses is an attempt to shift responsibility to TfL. In response to the petition the council state funds must come from TfL’s annual Local Implementation Plan funds.

What isn’t mentioned is that boroughs can top up their annual LIP award – and it’s here where Greenwich are 31st of 32 London councils when it comes to topping up using developer and parking income over a three-year period starting last year.

Greenwich LIP

Greenwich allocated just £206k last year and zero this coming year from those sources. Here’s some other London Labour boroughs for comparison and what they will allocate this year:

  • Lewisham – £1.33 million
  • Southwark – £765,000
  • Lambeth – £1.2 million
  • Hammersmith & Fulham – £29.1 million. Not a typo as seen below:

  • Hounslow – £1.82 million
  • Ealing – £766k
  • Brent – £6 million
  • Camden – £5.26m

Even true blue Bromley are allocating £90,000 from S106/CIL and parking compared to zero in Greenwich.

So when the authority says “sorry no money from TfL for that” what they mean is they’ve chosen not to top up TfL funds using two sources of funds used extensively by almost every other London council.

Hounslow LIP allocation – £1.8m this year from S106 and CIL

They do state “available funding is subject to re-prioritisation within the 2020/2021 financial year dependant on statistics.” but if they’re not topping up TfL’s annual award there’s little to play with.

Courtesy Google. Barriers = yes. Signalled crossings = no.

I expect any argument against adding income to TfL money will now be “but what about the new cycle lane from Woolwich to Greenwich” because of course those other boroughs allocating substantially more cash do not also have Cycle Highways and Quietways.

Still, always the next report on encouraging walking and cycling to look forward to. There’s no shortage of them in Greenwich.


Running a site takes much time and cost a lot of money. Adverts are far from enough to cover it and my rent.

You can support me and the running this site in a number of ways including Paypal here

Another option is via Patreon by clicking here

You can also buy me a beer/coffee at Ko-fi here

There's also a Facebook page for the site here

Many thanks

J Smith

I've lived in south east London most of my life growing up in Greenwich borough and working in the area for many years. The site has contributors on occasion and we cover many different topics. Living and working in the area offers an insight into what is happening locally.

    9 thoughts on “Greenwich Council refuse to fund Falconwood pedestrian crossings

    • Greenwich Council willfully neglecting to upgrade roadways, pedestrian crossings, safe bicycle routes, and the removal of Street Clutter, as well as, being too lazy to request a top up of funds from Tfl is a lawsuit waiting to happen!

      All it would take is a hungry, creative Solicitor, and an injured, vindictive client!

      • It wouldn’t be TfL increasing their funding but Greenwich Council through parking income (major problems for 10+ years in that dept) and developer income (much unspent)

    • I use the station every day and was never sure what borough it falls in. I’ve seen more road accidents at that junction – 5 in 2019 and thankfully none serious. It’s utter madness there isn’t better a traffic scheme and a crossing.

      • All the area pictures are Greenwich. As you leave the station harvester and shops on left are Bexley.

    • Why is Greenwich Council Woefully irresponsible in every respect to public safety, improvements to the Realm?
      Street Clutter and neglect to replace or remove outdated, dangerous and damaged street furniture is bizarre.
      These are things this Borough should be spending S106 and funds from TFL.

    • Greenwich Council cannot afford to help to fund impriovements to a road crossing that can help safe lives and making it easier for everyone to cross the road including children. Due to lack of funds.

      Yet Greenwich Council can give over 1.2 million to TFL to increase the frequency on route 132 which Sadiq Khan the current Mayor of London and TFL should be funding as part of the Mayors and TFL promises to improve Outer London bus services when they cut made major cuts to Central London bus services.

      There is something seriouisly wrong here.

      Health and safety must be paramount at all times and with out exception.

      However, local residents are right this area does see a lot oif drivers driving over the speed limit on a regular basis. Many of then as they join or leave the motor way at the falconwood junction.

    • *** Made cuts to Central London Bus Services*** Sorry for typo said I was not a typist ot that could good on computers.

    • People are right to hold the council to account on spending.

      They Council have a responsbility to protect public funds and ensure public money is spent responsibly. Along with any money received from Developers etc.

    • Pingback: Greenwich Council's changing definition on who funds street improvements | Murky Depths

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.