Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I was happily doing my usual school run route when I hit some congestion on Hillsboro Road. This is not unusual but on most occasions it sorts itself easily. However, the other day when I saw the congestion, I past what I thought were parked cars dropping children of at Alleyn's and I pulled into a gap, I was soon approached by an angry man that accused me of being stupid and couldn't I see that they were waiting. NO I couldn't, I thought you were parked! Anyway, it wasn't long before a woman joined in to say, very nicely, that the parents of Alleyn's have a rule that Hillsboro Road is a one way street that comes down from the opposite direction I was going in. I was getting fed up at this point so smiled, said it wasn't usually a problem and swiftly turned round to change my route.

As the day went on I kept thinking how cheeky it was that parents of Alleyn's have decided to change driving restrictions on a PUBLIC road. I do appreciate it's difficult to find parking near any school for morning drop off and it's also a problem at my child's school but why don't you try parking a little further away, I DO! Many of us residents of nearby streets are perfectly entitled to use Hillsboro Road anyway we want, THANKS!

I've seen this kind of mutually agreed one way system work extremely well in a similar situation in North London. However the school there worked very hard to have strong links with the local community. Sadly Alleyns doesn't, & the parents have set up this system whilst neglecting to tell 80% of the local residents of their plans. Note I say 'tell' not, 'negotiate' or 'suggest this course of action to'. They did post notes to those on Hillsborough rd, but not to anyone on the Dutch Estate, or Thornecombe, Glengarry, Tarbert or Trossachs Rds - all of whom use Hillsborough to get to & from their homes (when we can). It could work well with a little good will and effort, I'm sure many in the local community would be willing to give it a go, but it needs to be mutually agreed & adequately policed (by this I mean two or three parent volunteers out each drop off, pick up time for a week or so informing people of what they're doing, plus some basic signage reminders of which way the traffic should be flowing pinned on Alleyns fence - nothing fancy)in the set up period in order to work sufficiently well enough to ease the congestion.


It does seem to me to be another typical Alleys "we're doing this & *!%* the lot of you" scheme. they've been very cackhanded in their approach & management of this. Poor show from them again. Shame really.

I think the appropriate reply in this situation would be along the lines of:


"You can make whatever agreement amongst yourselves you like but I adhere to the law of the land and your cosy little agreements are b****er all to do with me so **** off!"


Alternatively, you could tell them that you and a group of ED residents had decided amongst yourselves that the road in question was to become a toll-road and that you were there as designated collector to take ?10 of all the other users, so hand over the dosh! See how they react to that.

Domitianus Wrote:

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

> I think the appropriate reply in this situation

> would be along the lines of:

>

> "You can make whatever agreement amongst

> yourselves you like but I adhere to the law of the

> land and your cosy little agreements are b****er

> all to do with me so **** off!"

>

> Alternatively, you could tell them that you and a

> group of ED residents had decided amongst

> yourselves that the road in question was to become

> a toll-road and that you were there as designated

> collector to take ?10 of all the other users, so

> hand over the dosh! See how they react to that.



^


totally that!! ha ha ha ha that cracked me up

I viewed the situation described in the original post slightly differently ie that Alleyns parents, having realised the problems that drop off traffic cause on that road, have decided that they will operate a one-way system for Alleyn parents only thus reducing the impact of the school run. In this case there was confusion between the original poster and the parents dropping off as to who the rule was applied to. Perhaps they thought she was a parent trying to pick up her child.

Domitianus Wrote:

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

>

> Alternatively, you could tell them that you and a

> group of ED residents had decided amongst

> yourselves that the road in question was to become

> a toll-road and that you were there as designated

> collector to take ?10 of all the other users, so

> hand over the dosh! See how they react to that.


LOL! I'm so gonna try that one! Perhaps TheAllSeeingEye could join me?

Domitianus Wrote:

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

> Does it matter? Fact is. whether one is an

> Alleyn's parent or not - they can still choose to

> obey the real law rather than the made-up law of

> the Alleyn's "We own the roads" posse.



It's good news is it not that peer pressure rather than laws can improve the traffic congestion outside a school. KC should not have been asked to turn around but aside from that its great that parents can come up with a partial solution to this problem

It might be good news if it hadn't taken them 11 years after the suggestion was first mooted to instigate it. I've grown people in the time it's taken them to realise that this approach could work (well, it might if they handled it properly). Rubbish response time from Alleyns really.

Domitianus Wrote:

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

> I agree that parents agreeing a practical solution

> amongst themselves is positive. I am not so

> comfortable with the fact that some appear to be

> trying to 'enforce' this rather than seeing it as

> a type of voluntary code.


I agree entirely.

> Domitianus Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> I agree that parents agreeing a practical

> solution amongst themselves is positive. I am not

> so comfortable with the fact that some appear to

> be trying to 'enforce' this rather than seeing it

> as a type of voluntary code.


It's not a matter of comfort, nor of community relations, nor of positivity. Obstructing the highway is a matter for the police.


If they want to campaign to have the status of the road revised, there are legal and democratic means to do so, and they are free to approach the proper authorities. As it stands, their actions amount to mob rule and should be condemned outright.


paragraph removed following complaints The Administrator

Very rarely does this forum make me cross. I find it most useful on many an occasion. BUT how dare you Burbage use such language talking about other people and their children. 'nauseating spawn' - what makes you say such appalling things about young children??? What is it that enrages you so much?

Sorry, totally forgot to say what I was going to say in the first place.


No, Hillsborough is not a one way street and that is obviously for good reason. But what is wrong with parents trying to make it work for all involved by going in one way and going out another for half an hour a day? Anybody who has ever been in the unfortunate situation of having to go through this road at school time may think it is a good idea. Random parking, dropping off etc on both sides of the road are really dangerous and the traffic jam causes road rage with no extra help needed.


Obviously...doing the vigilante thing is overstepping the mark on many levels...and I think you should be cross Knackered Cow, I would be. But most of these people take their children to school and go off to work, they don't like driving through this road any more than anybody else would.

Perhaps a solution would be for said parents to collect their children on one of the other roads nearby rather than having to congregate on this street? If my information is correct Alleyns pupils are above ten years of age and can presumably be expected to stroll a hundred yards or so without walking in front of a car/falling down a mine shaft/taking sweets from strage men etc etc?


Or would that be an 'elf an' safety issue?

They shouldn't be using so many cars to take their precious babies to school. They should carpool or how about this - make their children walk/use public transport!


Do you have any evidence that (some at least) of 'them' don't do these things? Alleyn's is a very large school, if all parents were just bringing one of their 'precious babes' (I'm glad that you, if you have children of your own, obviously and rightly disdain and despise them, it's just so middle class to value and love your own children) there would be horrendous jams (much more than now) all around the school.


As I said in an earlier message (expunged as the message it was replying to was also expunged) it is clear that Gordon Brown's belief that he can win the next election on a class war basis clearly still has some mileage in SE22.


I should add that I too believe that the action of these parents in trying to enforce a unilateral chnage of road use is out of order

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> They shouldn't be using so many cars to take their

> precious babies to school. They should carpool or

> how about this - make their children walk/use

> public transport!

>

> Do you have any evidence that (some at least) of

> 'them' don't do these things? Alleyn's is a very

> large school, if all parents were just bringing

> one of their 'precious babes' (I'm glad that you,

> if you have children of your own, obviously and

> rightly disdain and despise them, it's just so

> middle class to value and love your own children)

> there would be horrendous jams (much more than

> now) all around the school.

>

> As I said in an earlier message (expunged as the

> message it was replying to was also expunged) it

> is clear that Gordon Brown's belief that he can

> win the next election on a class war basis clearly

> still has some mileage in SE22.

>

> I should add that I too believe that the action of

> these parents in trying to enforce a unilateral

> chnage of road use is out of order



It's not entirely surprising that such a response to my generally light-hearted post should appear! What on earth are you going on about though re "disdaining/despising"? Are you inferring that middle class people "value and love" their children more than other people? If not, forgive me but I found your post confused and ever so slightly bizarre.

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

    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
    • Anyone has a storage or a display rack for Albums LPs drop me a message thanks
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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