Serena2012

Not sure if hugely helpful, but we applied for a reception place for September 2020. By my calculation, we are around 499m from Harris ED and didn?t get in on first offers. I?ve asked Southwark for details of our place on the waiting list/ the furthest distance offered and will edit my post if I?m given a definitive answer re: distance offered in April. Historically, given the transient nature of zone 2, (and the fact that many families will apply to both state and private schools at the same time), there has been quite a lot of movement on waiting lists between now and the beginning of the school year in September (and indeed, beyond that), although chances of getting a place based on your position on the waiting list will vary hugely by school (some schools will end up making offers way down their waiting lists (which means that the distance offered can expand by 400 or 500m between April and September) whereas with others unless you?re very high on the list, you won?t stand a chance). By way of hearsay, I have heard that there were a huge number of siblings at Harris this year (over 50%) and that the catchment for the first round of offers was less than 410m as a result, but I don?t have exact numbers. I think the best advice is to go and visit all the schools that you have a shot at getting into (including schools such as Bessemer Grange that have a big catchment and good reputation), and then place them in order of preference, with at least one banker on your list (which should be a school that you?re comfortable with, and that based on previous years, you are easily within ?catchment? of). The schools should be happy to provide guidance as to the last distance offered either when you contact them to book open days, or during the open days themselves. By way of example of a school with a very tight catchment, I don?t have stats on Belham for 2020 entry but I was told at their open day that in 2019 that they made first round offers to a distance of 380m in April and that their catchment had expanded to 407m by September.

Reposting the link: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/our-healthy-streets-dulwich-phase-3/

Just a quick reminder that the deadline for submitting responses to this according to the Southwark website is still tomorrow (29 March). Conscious that this is probably the last thing on people?s minds right now, (and I agree with the sentiment that this should be suspended), but in reality, this could be your last chance to have a say on the current phase.

KR988 - I cannot agree more. Rerouting all traffic onto the A roads (some of which are quite frankly, less capable than B roads of handling increased volumes of traffic) is far too simplistic a solution and ignores some of the enormous practical and health challenges that this will bring. To do so on a permanent basis without even undertaking a trial to assess the consequences beforehand feels incredibly reckless. In contrast to vast swathes of Lordship Lane where parking is permitted on both sides of the road (as the road is sufficiently wide to accommodate parked cars and large vehicles), this is not the case on East Dulwich Grove, which has a parking prohibition on one side for the vast majority of its length. Anyone who has witnessed two sizeable vehicles attempting to pass each other when the road on the parking prohibition side is temporarily blocked (as happens multiple times a day) will be well aware that this is incredibly difficult and somewhat dangerous. Indeed, it strikes me as though the council are confusing a road no wider than most of the other residential streets in the area, and on which buses travelling in opposite directions frequently struggle to pass each other, with some sort of super highway that can handle vast swathes of traffic. This is simply not the case. Indeed, the road was not designed for the volume of traffic that it currently experiences, let alone the significantly increased volumes that the proposal will invariably result in. With that in mind, it is extremely disappointing that the proposals do not seek to address these issues. We?re all well aware of the debacle at the Court Lane/ Village Way/ Calton Avenue junction, and the fact that the council now insist that it was never designed to handle the current volume of traffic. Whilst these proposals may well resolve that issue, I would like to see some sound empirical evidence from Southwark evidencing that the A roads are capable of handling all the displaced traffic. My fear is that this, and the knock on consequences is not something that has been adequately considered, explored or understood. The proposals also threaten to jeopardise what is already a very poor East to West transport infrastructure (thereby making the use of public transport an even less attractive alternative), not least as it is difficult to see how they will fail to increase travel time for the 37 and 42 buses that currently operate along East Dulwich Grove.

There is a serious point here, which is that even though Southwark can argue that both Goose Green and Harris Primary schools have ?school street? closures on neighbouring streets aimed at dissuading drop offs by car, the reality is that both schools are located on roads that are likely to bear the brunt of these proposals. Whilst the concept is to be applauded, I have serious concerns that all the proposals do is to enhance air quality in Dulwich Village (which could potentially be beneficial to the Village schools, assuming the amount of idling traffic in their vicinity decreases), but could potentially worsen the air pollution around those schools on Grove Vale, Lordship Lane and East Dulwich Grove. I would love to be proven wrong on this, but I feel that it?s imperative that we as residents are given complete transparency as to the likely knock on impacts on neighbouring roads before any proposals are implemented, and that Southwark are required to take these into account and consider how best to mitigate these. Abe_froeman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes we should close East Dulwich Grove and > Lordship lane to traffic too during pick up and > drop off for the Harris schools. Dulwich College > is on the south circular so we should shut that > down too. > > Maybe we could just build a wall around southwark > and make everyone with a car pay for it?

Alice - The council is proposing to undertake modelling once they have a more concrete proposal covering areas A, B and C. However, it was conceded at yesterday?s meeting that no modelling will ever be perfect (hence my strong preference for a trial). In the context of the modelling, my concern, as a resident of one of the A roads which could bear the brunt of some of the ?redistributed traffic? is that there is proper stress testing of the assumption that the A roads involved (many stretches of which are narrower, more densely populated and have properties closer to the road than other B roads in the area) can safely handle any increased volume of traffic, and the knock on impact on air quality on these roads (particularly given that these A roads house a large number of schools and young families). It is imperative that this data is shared by the council in a comprehensive format, so that residents are fully informed on the potential repercussions and any unintended consequences before the statutory consultation takes place, and that the modelling isn?t simply part of a box ticking exercise/ one designed to only share ?positive?/ ?helpful? outcomes whilst failing to address the negatives. Alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Are there not computer programs that can model the > effects of different road closures?

Excellent post Mockingbird. I agree wholeheartedly with your comments. The lack of a trial is particularly concerning, because although there was some acknowledgment from the council that they could look to make tweaks once any zone was in place, there is a real risk that it will be very difficult to make wholesale changes once the horse has bolted, even in circumstances where the unintended consequences are grave.

If someone who has had success on this front could post a link to the exact section of the Southwark website they used, then that would be much appreciated. Our blue bin is typically overflowing after a week. I?ve asked Southwark for an additional blue bin twice over the past 6 months or so to no avail.

Lillypilly Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > From what I can see, during the restricted turn > hours, there will still be vehicle flow along > Townley from LL to the Townley/EDG junction, where > the traffic will mostly turn left towards Village > Way, rather than right to the LL end of East > Dulwich Grove (only permit holders can turn > right). Vehicles coming out of Calton Ave (which > will be closed at the super busy Court Lane end) > are currently the main contributors to this > right-turning traffic into East Dulwich Grove, > along with traffic that has turned off LL onto > Townley already. So there might actually be > benefits for the LL end of East Dulwich Grove, as > it won?t be receiving this traffic from Calton and > Townley. There?s also the question of who the > permit holders for full access to and from Townley > Road will be - the recent explanatory documents > mention access for residents and permit holders > (i.e. these are not one and the same thing). I > wouldn?t be surprised if the school coaches are > granted permits so, again, some concerns for the > LL end of EDG might not eventuate as the coaches > may use Townley Road still. As others have noted, > it is not as straightforward as a problem in one > area being pushed into another. > > What is clear, however, is that the current > situation on Townley Road is dangerous and is > getting worse. I walk it with my children at > school time every day. The traffic is > bumper-to-bumper in the rush hours, the air > quality is poor (you can smell the fumes), and > there are frequent near-miss accidents between > school children and vehicles. It?s not just > Alleyn?s and JAGS kids that are affected, it?s > children from all the surrounding schools who use > this very popular walking route to school - incl > DVIS, Dulwich Hamlet, Charter, Herne Hill. There > are far too many children being dropped off to > school at Alleyn?s and JAGS by car, and far too > many rat-runners. The whole Dulwich/ED area is > changed for the better in non-term-time. Re. > schools stopping students from driving to school, > I know from an Alleyn?s parent that the school has > tried to do this, but it made no real difference. Thanks for your insight re: impact on the Northern segment of East Dulwich Grove. Based on my interpretation, the restriction seeks to stop vehicles turning from East Dulwich Grove onto Townley Road, as opposed to any restriction on the direction from which vehicles that have made it onto Townley Road can turn. Moreover, Townley will be closed at the Lordship Lane end. I shall engage in the consultation and watch out for any transport modelling with bated breath...

I?m struggling to see how the proposal could do anything other than to significantly increase traffic on East Dulwich Grove, but it?s an interesting theory! exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Serena2012 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > In particular, I would be very interested to see > the > > modelling of likely impact on traffic flow and > > volume, as well as understanding whether any > > improvements to the hazardous junction between > > East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane are > > considered. > > I'd love to see that one - the junction is very > small, comes almost right onto the roundabout at > Goose Green and takes buses. Maybe - just maybe - > the hoped-for reduction in traffic along ED Grove > means that the LL / EDG junction doesn't actually > need any mitigation as it'll be quieter anyway?

ExDulwicher and Goldilocks - I?m cognisant that one of the principal aims of this initiative is to cause people to think twice about motor vehicle usage, and that as such, not all journeys that currently take place by car will be replaced like for like. Nevertheless, my understanding is that where similar schemes have been implemented, the impact was that an amount of traffic was displaced, thereby increasing the volume of traffic on the A roads. With that in mind, it is very disappointing to note that the most northern portion of East Dulwich Grove appears to have been omitted from the consultation in circumstances where it will be directly impacted. Whilst I agree that the residents of certain roads should not have the power of veto, in the same way that those residents of the roads that stand to directly benefit should not be the only voices heard, I am of the view that those living on roads directly impacted should have the right to have our views taken into account and have the ability to influence the proposal particularly where it risks adversely impacting our daily lives. With that in mind, I feel that we should demand that the Council assesses and then considers ways of mitigating the risk that the proposal presents to the roads that will bear the brunt of any increased traffic flow, as well as considering their suitability for this. Rollflick - You make a good point that the proposal is only one of a number of initiatives designed to improve air quality in the area, and that there is merit in getting the momentum going in this regard. That having been said, as a resident of one of the roads likely to be negatively impacted, I intend to engage fully with the consultation going forward, to ensure that prior to implementation, the likely impact on East Dulwich Grove is fully and properly understood. In particular, I would be very interested to see the modelling of likely impact on traffic flow and volume, as well as understanding whether any improvements to the hazardous junction between East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane are considered.

Johnie and Alice - Thank you. My overwhelming concern is that the current proposal assumes that the A roads are well placed to take on any displaced traffic. This may well have been the case where similar schemes have been implemented in areas such as Walthamstow. However, this is simply not the case in the context of East Dulwich Grove. I am not sufficiently familiar with all stretches of Lordship Lane or Dulwich Common to be able to comment specifically on these. East Dulwich Grove is not a particularly wide road; it has a significant number of residential properties in close proximity to the road (particularly in its northern half), and already has a very hazardous junction with Lordship Lane at its most northern point (which if memory serves me correctly, Southwark have historically tried and failed to propose a solution for). I therefore implore Southwark and other interested stakeholders to take these factors into account, and ensure that the ultimate design does not simply remove the burden from one part of the neighbourhood and move it to another.

As a young family with two preschoolers living at the north of East Dulwich Grove, we find these proposals incredibly concerning. Whilst the concept is laudable, and we agree that measures that ought to improve air quality in the area should be supported, the proposals will invariably result in a significant increase in the volume of traffic (and indeed the volume of queuing traffic) on East Dulwich Grove. In circumstances where the levels of NO2 emissions on East Dulwich Grove are already at a level that breaches the WHO limits and is dangerous, we struggle to see how this proposal takes into account the health and well-being of those families living on East Dulwich Grove, a largely residential street, which also houses three large schools, with pupil volumes far in excess of those attending the Village schools. As anyone familiar with East Dulwich Grove will be aware, the pavements in the Northern section are narrow, and most of the properties either have fairly small front gardens or none at all, thereby offering limited protection from the road. Indeed, the road was not designed for the volume of traffic that it currently experiences, let alone the significantly increased volumes that the proposal will invariably result in. With that in mind, it is extremely disappointing that the proposals do not seek to address these issues. In particular, there is a real risk that the proposals will create a green and leafy oasis in the streets of North Dulwich, with significantly increased air quality for its residents, without addressing some of the fundamental infrastructure issues that cause people to jump in their cars to drive (i.e. getting from East to West is incredibly difficult), which will simply cause the A roads in the area to become dangerously over-congested and even more harmful to human health than they are already. We also have significant concerns about the impact of the proposal on the junction between East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane, which is incredibly dangerous to pedestrians and had been the location of numerous accidents in recent years. Significantly increasing the volume of traffic using this junction cannot be prudent, and is a fatal accident waiting to happen. We also struggle to see how these proposals will improve air quality for pedestrians seeking to cross the road between JAGS and Alleyn?s or at the East Dulwich Grove/ Village Way/Red Post Hill Junctions as presumably these proposals will only increase the size of tailbacks and idling traffic on East Dulwich Grove. Whilst we are conscious that the rationale of a scheme of this nature is to make driving along the roads that remain open so nightmarish that people stop doing it, we suggest that before implementing a scheme that will invariably cause significant daily tailbacks and large volumes of idling traffic on the road (and accordingly, have a hugely negative impact on air quality), that Southwark carries out a health impact assessment on East Dulwich Grove and ensures that all avenues of mitigating these impacts for residents (including free green screens etc) are carefully considered. We would also encourage interested stakeholders (including Clean Air Dulwich, assuming of course they are motivated by improving the air quality for all, and not just the privileged few who live on those streets that stand to benefit directly from these proposals) to give thought as to how best to mitigate the impacts of these proposals on those that live, study and work on the roads that will invariably become busier as a result. In particular, given that all residential properties on Townley Road are significantly set back from the road, as are the more actively used parts of the Alleyn?s playing fields, arguably, the impact on health of keeping Townley Road fully open would be significantly less than for all the non-resident/ school bus traffic that currently uses Townley to have to be rerouted onto East Dulwich Grove. Indeed, it is suggested that rerouting all traffic onto the A roads is far too simplistic a solution and ignores some of the enormous practical and health challenges that this will bring.

If you live on East Dulwich Grove/one of the other roads likely to be adversely impacted, and are concerned by these proposals, please PM me.

Utterly horrendous. Junction of East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane (and a portion of Lordship Lane) is still closed.

Due number 2 in May, assuming all goes to plan. DS will be 3.5. Will PM you.

I'm wondering whether there is an issue with revised timetable 32 on Southern's website... It's entitled: "Beckenham Junction and Crystal Palace to London Bridge", but when you actually click on the link, it takes you to a timetable entitled "London Victoria to West Norwood, Crystal Palace, Norwood Junction and West Croydon". Surely, there must be some Beckenham Junction trains that stop here on the way to London Bridge...

We don't have cats, but have used the Neighbourhood Vet on the corner of Barry Road (opposite Peckham Rye Park) for our dog over the past year and have been very impressed.

Thank you Sanda and Gillian for taking the time to write reviews. They are extremely helpful. Our little boy is due to start in September. If anyone else has feedback, I would love to see it.

I'm currently contemplating sending my son to Le Nid, and wondered if there were any additional feedback or thoughts, particularly from anyone who has sent their baby there. Many thanks.

Hi all. After a somewhat arduous journey to get here, I'm due my first (a boy) on 15 December. It would be fab to get to know some local mums/ mums to be. I'm definitely keen for a meet up sometime soon, although sadly I can make either 6 or 12 September. Feel free to meet up without me though - I'll try and make it to the next meet-up. S x x

Where are the Lanes moving too?(I'm conscious that they're already hugely over-subscribed) What about Oakwood, are they staying at the Forest Hill Road Surgery?

Go MissMack's family! What a fabulous, heartwarming, community spirited story. Truly well done!

A little bit further afield, but I really like Fabrics Galore on Lavender Hill in Clapham. I used them last year to source some upholstery fabric and the choice was great. I also have a friend who's into quilting and she uses them all the time.