I wonder what you might be basing those musings on? Please share. JAGS, JAPS and Alleyns all face out onto EDG, Alleyns has a playground that is directly adjacent to it, so they would be feeling any disbenefit in equal (as can be roughly measured) proportion. Proportionately and absolutely, far more children from the local state schools live within realistic 'active travel' distance, so I would think more are enjoying the benefits to a greater extent. There are all sorts arguments both for and against the LTNs in Dulwich, but this particular narrative just seems like grift to me. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just musing on the idea that the active travel > benefits may have disproportionately benefited > children at the independent and more affluent > schools (and the air pollution from displaced > traffic disproportionately affected some of the > less affluent ones). Perhaps one of the many > things that should have gone into the analysis of > compliance with the council?s new socioeconomic > duty (something that seems to have been given very > little consideration in the report accompanying > the decision notice). > > I see on Twitter that the LDs have requested the > decision to be called in before Overview and > Scrutiny (stating concerns about adequacy of > consultation). Let?s see if the council approve > that request. A chance for both sides to air their > concerns about process flaws. If it happens I > wonder if the meeting is a public one.