Southwark School Street Closure Scheme

[johnhinton]

Both Intexasatthemoment and Singalto make an important point that is often ignored: that parents may just want to drop their children safely at the school before driving elsewhere. Two of my children have to put up with being dropped off half an hour before registration begins, but at least that is an option. What I find difficult is those parents who are happy to block my driveway as though I don't also have children and don't need access to my own house - and I don't do that to other people.

[Sally Eva]

The closure doesn't stop parents from driving their children to school. It stops them from driving their children to the school gate.

In other words it keeps traffic a certain distance from the school gate so that children can approach the school gate more safely. It also reduces pollution around the school gate at arrival and departure times.

[goldilocks]

I was interested in seeing this in action so went past on Friday. I was a little late so got there at 4:04pm. There was no sign of the road closure at all. So 4 mins after the 1 hour afternoon scheduled closure of the road directly outside the school entrance, there was no sign of it!

Am posting this as a little perspective amidst all the talk of sledgehammer to crack a nut etc. It?s a very limited closure scheme for an hour in the morning and one in the evening. The rest of the time the road is open as usual. I?m also presuming that it will also only apply in term time.

The point of these schemes are to cut down on the pollution kids are exposed to on the school run, for all the reasons noted above re idling cars, dangerous parking etc. In an ideal world it wouldn?t be necessary because everyone would be very considerate. But that isn?t the case. Also worth flagging that small children are disproportionately affected by pollution as they are closer to the source re exhaust fumes as well as their relative size to amount of pollution.

[DuncanW]

>

> This message in support of the Bessemer Grange

> scheme starts "As a Bessemer parent......". Later

> on it says that the catchment area around the

> school is small and reducing. The claim to be a

> parent might not be true I recognise but if the

> message is taken at face value the straightforward

> implication is that the writer lives near the

> school. He does cycle.

Hi Sally, not sure if I understood this post. Are you saying I might be lying about being a Bessemer parent? That's a bit perplexing to say the least, unless I have misconstrued what you are saying there.

But yes, I am a BG parent, we do not live in the immediate vicinity and yes my kids and I ride bicycles to school and then I continue on to work in London. Hope that gives my perspective the clarity and context needed.

[Sally Eva]

replied by private message

[VerryBerry]

I'm against the closure of streets to deal with what is essentially small inconvenience at limited times during the day. I drive to my child's school and then proceed on to work. I have intermittent mobility issues and even aside from that feel that if someone what's to drive they should be able to. We need to get away from the anti car rhetoric that seems fashionable. Not everyone can walk or cycle. What I want to know is wherever or not they've tried alternatives like a school carpool drop off queue. I have a colleague in Croydon who has a child who is collected from the car by voluenter / teachers each morning, this avoids cars idling and a steady stream on moving traffic. The parents volunteer and it's supported by teachers on rotation- if you need to see a teacher you know which day of the week they will be manning the queue. She reports it works really well and traffic clears quickly as they self regulate it to be a one way system, allowing others to pass. In the main, most children walk to school, but for those who don't it's ideal. My point is there are ways around these issues without such draconian measures. A small school bus would also help those not in the immediate area too. Funny i don't read about the congestion around JAGs witg thier cars and coaches on here. The anti car lobby need to get a grip as I'm sure they'd still have an issue when all area are running in electric or hydrogen;).

[rendelharris]

VerryBerry Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm against the closure of streets to deal with

> what is essentially small inconvenience at limited

> times during the day.

Approximately 10,000 children a year are injured in vehicle accidents within 500m of their school gates. It's not a small issue.

I have intermittent

> mobility issues and even aside from that feel that

> if someone what's to drive they should be able to.

Everyone should be allowed to do exactly what they want at all times? Or does civilisation depend on people having to curb some of their purely selfish demands for the benefit of society as a whole?

> We need to get away from the anti car rhetoric...

that seems fashionable.

> The anti car lobby need to get a grip as I'm sure

> they'd still have an issue when all area are

> running in electric or hydrogen;).

9,000 people in London die prematurely in London every year from polluted air. Children are growing up physically and mentally impaired due to the effects of pollution. No winky smiley from me, I'm afraid.

[Passiflora]

goldilocks Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I was interested in seeing this in action so went

> past on Friday. I was a little late so got there

> at 4:04pm. There was no sign of the road closure

> at all. So 4 mins after the 1 hour afternoon

> scheduled closure of the road directly outside the

> school entrance, there was no sign of it!

>

> Am posting this as a little perspective amidst all

> the talk of sledgehammer to crack a nut etc. It?s

> a very limited closure scheme for an hour in the

> morning and one in the evening. The rest of the

> time the road is open as usual. I?m also presuming

> that it will also only apply in term time.

>

> The point of these schemes are to cut down on the

> pollution kids are exposed to on the school run,

> for all the reasons noted above re idling cars,

> dangerous parking etc. In an ideal world it

> wouldn?t be necessary because everyone would be

> very considerate. But that isn?t the case. Also

> worth flagging that small children are

> disproportionately affected by pollution as they

> are closer to the source re exhaust fumes as well

> as their relative size to amount of pollution.

You were not just a little late at 4.04pm but very late in the scheme of things for this street closure!

But it looks like Bessemer Grange have agreed that Nairne Grove will have a permanent barrier in place soon with road signage warning car drivers not to park on the remaining part of Nairne Grove, which has been cut off for the past 5 months.

Southwark Council highways and biways really need to get their act together!

[first mate]

I do wonder why FPNs have not been issued for parking on double yellows etc, especially if there are wardens in situ?

In terms of pollution and physical dangers, won't the problem simply be displaced to streets adjacent to the blocked road outside each school? So there will be stats produced to show success and a reduction in the problem but that will only be immediately outside the schools?

Will the majority of those currently driving their children in to school just stop?

[Sally Eva]

People are not necessarily driving their children to school from very far away or going on to work.

About 15 years ago I was in a school gate conversation about how parents parked on the zig zag lines and double parked all over the place and this was dangerous and the school couldn't get them to stop and traffic wardens could only come occasionally because this was happening at schools all over the borough and there weren't enough wardens.

This Mum (ex-teacher) confessed that she drove her daughter to school although they lived 10 minutes walk away. Her daughter didn't want to walk and somehow they were always late. This Mum didn't go on to work. She drove home. Since they lived so near the school this probably wasn't even quicker with getting in and out, parking etc.

I think it is fair to say that some of those driving their children will just stop. Those who drop their children off on the way to work will be able to drop them off further away because it will be safer for the children to walk the last yards to the school gate.

[first mate]

There is a need for hard evidence on parent driver habits, proximity of home to school etc?

I don't understand the reasoning. Proposed road blocking only works if the majority of parents stop using cars, if not the problem will remain but be displaced a street away. I am not clear what evidence there is to demonstrate the majority of parents will stop? If the same driving habits occur in the displaced space surely children will be just as at risk there? So what will be the remedy then?

In regard to a paucity of wardens, other posters have suggested they are a fairly regular feature. Even so, a number of random FPNs might have served as some deterrent. Unless it has been trialled we cannot know can we? It is the seeming reluctance on S'warks part to do this that is odd.