Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The closure of Goodrich Road, at the corner of Dunstans Road, has reappeared in 'Batch 2' of the council's 'Post-Lockdown Highway Schemes'. Unlike the other 'School Streets' schemes in Dulwich, this is a permanent closure, on account of the school 'not having the resources' to be able to manage a timed-closure. Which does beggar belief given that it's one of the largest Primary schools in the borough....


Since it was first proposed back in May, there has been no attempt by the Council to inform, let alone consult the local residents who live on these streets, during the many days and weeks outside of school hours. The main gates of the primary school are on Dunstans Rd & Upland Rd, so it also makes little sense to enforce this closure, and drive more cars up & down the very roads on which the Council are trying to encourage more walking, cycling, and distancing.


I've been told repeatedly by the Council that they were intending to make residents aware, but this has never happened. It all seems to be such a strange and heavy-handed decision, I can't help but wonder if there is some kind of other agenda at play.....?

Has the school approved this version of the plan as I thought they had told the council they didn't think their plans were going to help with the problem they were trying to address and actually make matters worse?


I had also heard the majority of the school's teachers drive and park locally and we're worried about the impact.

They're 'descoping' it to the extent that it's now a permanent closure at one end of the road, rather than both. But it's still going ahead as a permanent closure:


http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s90208/APPENDIX%2012%20GOODRICH%20ROAD.pdf


I don't know whether the teachers have been consulted, but local residents haven't even been informed, let alone asked. It all seems very odd given that the main entrances to the primary school aren't actually on this road. So it can only end up driving more traffic up and down the roads on which they're trying to encourage active travel and distance.


And funnily enough those were the Dulwich Hill Ward councillor's own comments on the original proposal, but they've been totally ignored. All quite strange !

And funnily enough those were the Dulwich Hill Ward councillor's own comments on the original proposal, but they've been totally ignored. All quite strange !


Well, they'll be up for punishment beatings and re-education then from the Tooley St. apparat. The Goose Green squad have been keeping their noses well clean. They know the score.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
    • Niko 07818 607 583 has been doing jobs for us for several years, he is reliable, always there for us, highly recommended! 
    • I am keeping my fingers crossed the next few days are not so loud. I honestly think it is the private, back garden displays that are most problematic as, in general, there is no way of knowing when and where they might happen. For those letting off a few bangers in the garden I get it is tempting to think what's the harm in a few minutes of 'fun', but it is the absolute randomness of sudden bangs that can do irreparable damage to people and animals. With organised events that are well advertised there is some forewarning at least, and the hope is that organisers of such events can be persuaded to adopt and make a virtue of using only low noise displays in future.
    • There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda and far more across their briefs than any minister I've seen in years. The consensus was that Labour are so unpopular and untrusted by the electorate already, as are the Conservatives, that breaking the manifesto pledge on income tax wouldn't drive their approval ratings any lower, so they should, and I quote, 'Roll The Dice', hope for the best and see where we are in a couple of years time. As a strategy, i don't know whether I find that quite worrying or just an honest appraisal of what most governments actually do in practice.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...