goldilocks

Just to reiterate - there is loads of material online on the council website. The healthy streets weblink has been shared upthread but otherwise typing 'healthy streets Dulwich' will find it. There is detailed discussions on the proposals, as well as additional / optional wider areas. In addition people should review the 'evidence pack' for an understanding of the data that has driven the options as outlined. It would be great if people could take some time to understand really what is proposed by looking through this data - it may also help make the consultations more useful for people.

Brilliant news - that's great!

This is all true - its not the inclusion of them that is disingenuous - more some of the content! The air quality monitors chosen for the report ignore the closest monitors and cherry pick non comparable and further away data points. The travel plan is interesting - but I note that all the mitigation plans are future pipe dreams rather than actually in place. Unless I've missed the huge crocodile of kids doing park and stride options from Sainsburys..... (no - thought not!)

Probably worth flagging on here that if anyone else is approached threatened by this man, calling 999 would be appropriate rather than reporting online - it sounds as though he needs picking up quickly.

Ok- so how do we make it impossible for pupils to drive to school or have restrictions on parents dropping off?

https://twitter.com/cleanairdulwich/status/1220453205718511616?s=21 Comments were extended until the 12th Feb

This is the important point - vetoing any change for fear of effects isn't going to be a way forward. I do fully understand concerns, I also live in an area where there may be knock on effects, but i think that the way to approach it is to mitigate as much as is possible upfront and then to monitor once in. We know from other schemes that initially traffic will increase but that over a few weeks or so it should then scale back. if it doesn't then its time to look at other measures. Importantly though, that fear that things might not work isnt' a reason to scale them back to ineffective tinkering at the edges. This isn't like the Loughborogh Junction closure which was a single closure in isolation, its part of a wider scheme that neighbours other schemes. The disappointment we feel that the area from East Dulwich grove towards Lordship Lane isnt' included is a reason to push for more change, not less. Traffic is not like water - it doesn't always just find another way - some of it is sufficiently inconvenienced that it stops - people find another way - trains, walking or cycling for example. Look up the traffic evaporation section on the Liveable Streets website - there is lots of information out there. rollflick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Serena2012 > According to official traffic counts, 15 years ago > motor traffic levels on ED Grove were a third > higher than now and there were four times as many > HGVs: > https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/manualcountpoints/4 > 7606 > > Again and again people commentating on this thread > are making the assumption this is the only thing > that will happen in the area. That's perhaps > understandable given years of inaction by > Southwark and Lambeth, but both councils are > finally stepping up in response to strong public > pressure for radical change. These other schemes > will also help reduce traffic levels over the > wider area and improve the viability of > alternatives, particularly by creating continental > quality continuous cycling routes and enabling > more people to walk. Better train services are > also proposed and these schemes should help > reverse the drop in usage of bus services. > > The Ultra Low Emission Zone extension will cover > this area from next October. Even if it doesn't > reduce motor traffic levels by quite the same > extent as it has done in central London (about > 3-9%), it will still reduce NO2 levels quickly by > as much as a third: > https://www.london.gov.uk/press-releases/mayoral/u > lez-reduces-polluting-cars-by-13500-every-day > > While no one wants more traffic on their street, > giving any residents an effective veto will mean > we are stuck with congestion, pollution and > streets unsafe for a wider range of people to walk > and cycle. Yes Lordship Lane needs rebalancing > away from the car too, but some improvements are > due soon (see my earlier post). There's more > chance of getting them if this scheme goes ahead > and creates momentum for change.

This point about increasing numbers is precisely why I believe that we should oppose this expansion planning permission request by Alleyn?s at this time. The number of additional children as a result of planning expansion in Alleyns docs on the planning portal is stated as between 35-42 additional kids but once built there will be no further requirement to consult again if they want to increase numbers in those 3 extra classes and it?s more realistic to assume that the additional children attending by expansion will be 60-66 rather than 35-42!

It isn?t- there are some additional timed closures that can be supported to discourage through traffic and displacement in the wider docs

Not sure what I meant was that traffic is ?fine? at other times, more that it?s much worse when the schools are in. In terms of Calton Ave though, it?s disproportionately busy year round. It?s supposed to be a quietway but its a ? hostile? cycling environment all the time. Too many parked cars meaning that traffic close passes too often meaning even when quiet it?s not an appropriate environment for my kids to cycle on. It?s a residential road that because of geography and apps such as google maps and waze has become busier than many main roads. The other proposed changes in that area are timed closures so could be term time only.

Exactly this - its purely factual that Alleyns kids on the whole come from a much wider area than those at distance criteria state schools. The short video posted above from 'Clean Air for Dulwich' clearly shows the difference between term time and holidays in terms of impact on local roads. Years of discussion and consultation with the school has done nothing to improve the situation for the local community and the concentration of independent schools with Alleyns and JAGs being located virtually opposite exacerbates the issue. The Dulwich Healthy Streets proposals may help reduce the number of parents who chose to drive / have their kids driven to Alleyns, but until this is in place and the current situation improves I don't think that further expansion should be granted. macutd Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the traffic is greater at Alleyns because they are > not local children attending their local school > but children driven from a much wider area

also don't let him get too disillusioned if they say no - unless they have a designated scheme it might be logistically difficult for them to take him -at my work we have very strict rules on when we have u16s doing work experience - in terms of what they can do, who they can go to meetings with etc from a child protection perspective.

Motor bird- just a follow up to the clarification you provided above. You state that the school is expanding their intake at reception and reducing it from year 3 and that this change from 1-2 form to 2 form throughout will not result in more children going into the secondary school. Whilst this is correct in terms of no change to the numbers who can go straight through to the senior school, it WILL result in more children attending the ?junior school? and as you note, these additional children at this age will not be allowed to use the coaches. Therefore if they do not walk there will be more cars coming to the site. I?m not sure anyone is confused about the plans.

Website for Rock Steady Rum Lounge seems to indicate recruiting for both sites. How do you know its closing?

TigerSharks run one at Alleyns - its on Tues and Thurs (I think) and Sundays. you can swim once a week or more. PM me if you need more details.

The recent documents submitted by Alleyns are intended to address the concerns raised in the objections to the initial plans. The date for responding to these additional documents is very short - it closes on the 29th of January which really doesn't give any reasonable time for responding to them.

I see from the attachment that the lock was cut- this is concerning for those of us who do use the bike racks by M&S. would be good if you could let us know what kind of lock was cut within minutes of going into M&S if you don?t mind?

I've also had a brief look through this and there really isn't anything that would change the concerns to the previous application - least of all the air quality report uses the results of monitors up to well over 1km away, yet ignores the readings of those on Calton Avenue. One thing I noticed in the information submitted is that there will be two 'walking busses' starting in January 2020. One from Sainsburys on Dog Kennel Hill, via Greendale and one from Dulwich park. Has anyone see these? I haven't noticed any walking busses on Greendale, so assuming they haven't started it yet?

I don't have comments on either school as no personal experience, but my main comment would be that in taking either place as they only go up to year 2, make sure you're happy to commit to the private system for the whole of your son's education (and any other children you may have). With the exception of a couple of kids who may go to Dulwich Hamlet from HH school, the vast majority go onto other independents. Its doubtful you'd be in DHJS catchment from near the Villa, and probably unlikely you'd move to a state primary mid way through!

Other thoughts for the initial poster are to keep an eye out on Gumtree and facebook marketplace to see if it is for sale. Also if the frame was registered, report it stolen so if recovered it can be reunited with you.

its relevant to know whether it was an opportunistic thief grabbing a bike that was left for a couple of mins, vs understanding if someone is waiting outside with bolt cutters to steal bikes locked to the cycle storage. Basically it helps others manage risk. Know it can sound a little victim shame-y but it really isn't generally meant in that way. In the same way its useful to understand where locked bikes have been taken, what type of lock they were locked with - not so that it can be pointed out that something else might have been better, but that so that people can try to make sure that they don't use locks that are being cut locally.

Perhaps this is feedback you should give the school? Not sure what anyone on here is going to be able to say on it?

Thing is though - its not a 'kids cake' is it? - just because its for your child it doesn't' make it take any less time to make and decorate. What you're asking for is a handmade cake decorated and unless you want something really simple it takes time and these costs and expertise are what the ?100 cake is quoted for. if you want a cheaper cake, then supermarkets are able to mass produce more cheaply. Or you could make one. I think that obviously there is a range - I suspect that you could find something a little cheaper, but in terms of a designed cake which will take hours to make, then the price you pay will be higher. Small kids really don't care that much about cakes btw - they're happy with supermarket ones or home made. My daughter was the most delighted with a chocolate brownie that I dusted with icing sugar and stuck her own frozen characters in!

How many miles would you get on that type of car from a full charge?