Hi Emma, yes I apologise I got that wrong. Eliot Bank is a two form entry school and I am happy to be corrected.
I will try and respond to this thread later with other matters people have raised.
3 Likes
It is not a benevolent dictatorship when we have elections every four years.
Our manifesto clearly stated: Work with parents and schools to protect our children from toxic air. All Lewisham children will be encouraged to walk, cycle and scoot to school away from main roads. We will provide interventions to protect our most polluted playgrounds and build on our anti-idling schools programme to reduce emissions in the vicinity of our schools.
The executive has embraced School Street as an intervention, after some lobbying from me. Under new laws, we are able to put these interventions in place to support active travel for 18 months. These 18 months, or less, will act as a trial and consultation period, which seems absolutely reasonable to me.
In my memory, I had probably two complaints regarding parking/congestion issues near Holy Trinity, and these involved cars parking on the pavement on Dartmouth Rd. Eliot Bank, on the other hand, I received countless as the school is larger and congestion is greater. It is understandable (to me) why the intervention was focused here.
Today, I emailed our road safety and sustainable transport manager expressing anxieties about the proposed placement of the ANPR cameras and offering a potential remedy if the same level of congestion remains but below Radlett Avenue. My suggestion was that we could move the lower ANPR camera to the junction of Thorpewood Avenue & Dartmouth Road, while a rail-gate be placed at the junction of Derby Hill & Derby Hill Crescent. This isn’t without its issues, as one of the schools would need to agree to operate the gate and I am unsure how easy it is to move the cameras around.
Finally, noting some of the comments here… I don’t seem to understand the attitude that if a street gets nice things (model filter/CPZ/school street/public realm improvements) = “they get it but we don’t, therefore you’ve set street against street”. I have no idea where this attitude has been fostered and I sincerely hope it is not representative.
2 Likes
I just don’t get why you can’t see this is divisive. You are creating more problems for nearby schools and streets to favour one small area and one small school.
5 Likes
Indeed. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a more divisive policy by the council. It’s given rise to all kinds of nastiness, both between residents of streets that “win” and “lose”, and more generally amongst those who have ideologically pursued LTNs vs those affected by them.
Resident-on-resident warfare is really sad to witness. And all avoidable, if the council were to choose positive policy making as opposed to zero-sum.
Being objective I would raise the following points:
Polluted Playgrounds
Eliot Bank is in set in the middle of a tree lined avenue with the classrooms setback from the road. There are 2 playgrounds a front one which could not be described as the most polluted under any measure. There is a very large playground at the back which is about 50 metres from the road and could probably be described as one of the largest and least polluted playgrounds in Forest Hill if not Lewisham. It is absolutely brilliant that we have this resource for our kids.
I am not sure if many people such as the mayor would say
Holy Trinity is on a cramped corner with a B road and the classrooms are not setback from the road, the playground is small and could be described as polluted.
Parking/Congestion
It would be good if somebody could do an FOI regarding congestion on this but over the last ten years or longer the issue at Eliot Bank has been the parents parking over residents driveways and subjecting residents to abuse when challenged. A small but significant number of residents have been affected very badly. The council and the school have been unable to resolve this. Those residents are the ones who will benefit from gating that section of the road with two cameras.
Lewisham Transport surveys and the last CPZ consultation found that most parking pressure in this area was not the top of Thorpewood Avenue but the lower section with some very high levels of short term parking more normally seen in car parks. This is probably not just an issue for Thorpewood but also Derby Hill Crescent and Featherstone. These residents are the ones who will not benefit from these cameras and probably see it as having a major negative effect.
The worst congestion is the bottleneck section of Thorpewood Avenue between Derby Hill Cresecent and Dartmouth Road. This section takes most traffic in and out of Thorpewood Avenue. This struggles as it is single file when the driveways are parked over and often leads to gridlock both on TA/DHC .and smaller but significant queuing on Dartmouth Road when two cars try to pass at the same time. It is worrying that the original school street plan would have made this significantly worse as it would be a single point of entry and exit to TA at the busiest times. Any School Street that does not take this junction into account could easily lead to a lot more pollution with more engine idling outside Holy Trinity and the surrounding residences.
Leo, I welcome the fact that you are taking into account the concerns of the majority of residents and the children who will be affected. It would be good if you could recirculate the letter with any potential changes so that it becomes a commitment rather than an online chat.
I don’t think anybody feels that the residents outside Eliot Bank shouldn’t get two cameras to protect their driveways and protect them from parental abuse. I am totally in favour but I think this plan can be done in such a way that most residents and children in this area benefit from this change and thank you again for your proposed changes.
2 Likes
Chris how is this tweet relevant - it’s about a cafe in Ealing by an obsessive anti LTN campaigner. We’re talking about local issues to do with School Streets. We can all find thousands of pro and con LTN tweets on Twitter if you want to go read them there but I would encourage people to go read them there and keep it on topic here. We’re lucky enough to have an engaged councillor in the thread and calling policies divisive does not add to the discussion or argument.
2 Likes
I was replying specifically about a point the councillor raised in which he said he didn’t understand how modal filters could be divisive. I provided an example where they had been very divisive.
1 Like
Personally, I think this response is revealing. Instead of looking at the wider goal of School Streets - ie disincentivising parents from driving to school which will benefit the wider community as much as Eliot Bank’s neighbours - it is viewed as a narrow gain for lucky few. If the trial of the School Street is successful, the problems caused nearby are likely to be minuscule and transient as parents once driving to school begin to change their behaviour as they are no longer conveniently able to.
On a side note, I see similar responses to house building. The focus is always on the narrow, immediate ‘losers’ of a scheme. The magnitude of social and environmental ills caused by homelessness or extortionate rents and prices caused by an inadequate supply of housing in the South East, are overlooked.
It is very rare that the bigger picture is viewed.
2 Likes
I live in Radlet Avenue, so am potentially affected. My instinct is to wait and see, and to make sure that any problems arising are promptly reported (to Leo?). I suggest others do the same.
4 Likes
Emma, if it were possible to move Holy Trinity to a tree lined avenue, I would. If were feasible to close off Dartmouth Road to traffic to protect Holy Trinity, I would push for it.
When I’ve used congestion in these posts, I was talking about a number of things - including: pollution, dangerous manoeuvring of vehicles near a school entrance, and the problem of parents illegally blocking residents’ access to the public highway (by parking over their vehicle crossovers). From my casework, the last two issues are much greater outside Eliot Bank and unfortunately, on the first point, while we can try to disincentivise parents from driving to Eliot Bank (often past Holy Trinity), we can’t block off Dartmouth Rd.
I am aware that parking pressure is greater at the lower section of Thorpewood Avenue but that pressure is caused by commuters and gym/pools users, rather than school drop offs. I’ve been pushing for a CPZ to cover TA/RA/DHC/DH but under our current policies (which I’d like amended) for a CPZ to be placed a consultation and local referendum needs to take place. Atm, it is essentially up to residents to self-organise if they would like CPZ in this area.
As I said, I understand your concerns and have offered a suggested remedy. I would be grateful if you might email your concerns to me at cllr_leo.gibbons@lewisham.gov.uk and I will ensure that the response I receive from our Road Safety team is shared with you.
2 Likes
As a resident of the lower part of TA I’m not seeing this as much of an additional problem. Our parking issues, in normal times, are much more to do with commuter parking, visitors to the library, swimming pools and shops plus dumped vehicles (Leo, there are currently 2, a Transit van that hasn’t moved in over a year and a Ford Sierra on the corner of Featherstone). If EB parents do try to use lower TA as a drop off point the greater concern, in my opinion, is that there will be nowhere for them to legally stop and they may block the road for a short time to residents and emergency vehicles. However, that would be easily remedied if LBC stationed a traffic warden there to hand out tickets for a while as a deterrent.
2 Likes
Yes Leo you and I disagree over the Mais House development. That is not relevant to this debate and people will not understand your distraction techniques or that you are having a dig at me personally or why. I am entitled to my opinion on what is happening at Lammas Green/Mais House just as I am on School Streets and Road Closures and on the flaws with the Local Democracy Review. Setting up a Council Local Democracy Review that reported that reported to the Labour Group did not inspire confidence.
Obviously I get under your skin. Rise above it. You’re the Politician. I’m just a citizen and voter.
I suggest that the Moderators remove the whole of Leo’s post to which I am responding and this one, so that this discussion is kept on track.
2 Likes
@LeoGibbons & @marymck while there are some great views and perspectives here, please lets keep to the discussion at hand and avoid any personal digs and arguments. It would be a shame to have to move anything to #moderator-actions, especially as there are a range of views here, all equally valid and informing.
6 Likes
John, the traffic warden option has failed to work at EB which is why the residents up there are getting 2 cameras to protect their driveways and gate that section. I think we should applaud their success.
Leo, I have not said that I want Holy Trinity moved or that anything should be done to Dartmouth Road.
I pointed out that the most polluting and busiest section of Thorpewood Avenue is beside that school and that a School Street for Thorpewood Avenue should deal with that junction as a primary concern and not add more pollution to Holy Trinity…
I did reference their playground as you have stated that this intervention is to protect our most polluted playgrounds while I think Eliot Bank has probably one of the largest and least polluted playgrounds in Forest Hill if not Lewisham.
As you say the parking pressure is greatest below the proposed cameras and this is likely to make that worse. I think there is a very high level of apathy and disengagement with the council in TA(lower)/DHC/DH so I would say you will probably not receive a single concern/complaint.
Emma, perhaps they should employ a more nimble and zealous traffic warden. I’m sure (s)he could dish out enough tickets to deter the inconsiderate and earn LBC a few quid.
Re your response to Leo it’s not apathy on lower TA, although it could be considered disengagement, but when you’ve been banging your head against a wall for years it’s really nice when you stop.
1 Like
Actually the assembly meeting agreed that the group would look at traffic flow throughout Forest Hill, but behind the scenes it was changed into a Tewkesbury and Thorpewood group.
Ah that explains it! Thank you. Also I remembered that at the same time I was told there was a Thorpewood working group that there was somewhere else mentioned. Tewkesbury does ring a bell. Did @SophieDavis run that one and anyone know what the outcome was?
I wonder how he selected which doors to knock on?
There is no viable voting system, as the two main parties collude to ensure First Past the Post stops voters truly expressing themselves. A lifetime of having to vote for the least worst option. Stinks!
I did a little comparison of catchment areas for the two schools.
Eliot Bank is the small circle.
Holy Trinity is the large circle.
Although Holy Trinity has half the number of pupils, they come from a far more disperse area. The maximum walk to Eliot Bank from within the catchment area is about 12 minutes - and that’s only because there isn’t a pathway between Taymount Rise and Derby Hill Crescent.
Source: https://www.locrating.com/school_catchment_areas.aspx?schoolid=urn100723&schooltype=0
For Holy Trinity (and Kelvin Grove with three form entry) some pupils have to travel much further. I would suggest that this is a good reason to implement a school street for Eliot Bank first. Whether the exact details of the scheme are right, I don’t know, but I think it is right to test out a school street for a school which has the smallest catchment area rather than the biggest - it is more reasonable to expect Eliot Bank pupils (and parents) to walk the short distance to school - and making this change during a pandemic also makes sense as more parents are working from home.
This is about changing behaviour, and the council is encouraging Eliot Bank school children/parents to be less reliant on their cars. The impact for residents on Thorpewood will be positive, although I do worry about the impact on Derby Hill Crescent and Kirkdale. The council will need to look carefully at the impact, but it is an interesting experiment which can only encourage Eliot Bank parents to be less reliant on motor vehicles.
On the issue of Lower Thorpewood, I have no idea how to solve the issue. A small CPZ for residents on the south side without driveways might help, and a footbridge from the Perry Vale car park to the swimming pool would make a huge difference.
Full disclosure: My daughter goes to Eliot Bank and, because she is in year 6, no longer requires anybody to take her to school (prior to that she may have had a lift to school on around five occasions in the last six years).
6 Likes