Croydon’s pro-car Mayor, Jason Perry, has been forced to run a consultation for the past month to introduce motoring restrictions on six new school streets.
Zoned out: Healthy School Streets make roads safer for children, according to the pro-car Mayor
“It’s so important that we do what we can to make journeys to school as safe as possible for our younger Croydonians,” according to a bloke who rips out cycle schemes, opposes low-traffic neighbourhoods and spent more than a year acting as a cheerleader for ULEZ vandals and climate change deniers.
The Healthy School Streets, according to Croydon Council, “improve road safety around schools and encourage pupils to walk, cycle and scoot more often”. They also generate a considerable income for the cash-strapped council through motorist fines – provided, that is, council staff remember to switch on the correct camera equipment…
The council has been introducing experimental Healthy School Streets since 2017 – often against a barrage of dubious opposition from part-time Perry and his pals.
The schemes limit motor traffic on surrounding roads to schools during school drop-off and pick-up times.
“The council has been working with schools across the borough where there is an interest in introducing a scheme to improve the environment and road safety around them,” the council said earlier this month – omitting to mention that it blocked a seemingly well-considered scheme to benefit three schools on Melville Avenue in South Croydon, on the grounds that it might cause some traffic on neighbouring residential streets.
The schools being considered under the latest round of proposals are:
- Applegarth Academy, Addington CR0 9DL
- Beulah Road Infant and Nursery, Thornton Heath CR7 8NJ
- Harris Primary Academy Purley Way, South Croydon CR0 4FE
- John Wood Primary School, Croydon CR0 6JA
- Riddlesdown Collegiate, Kenley CR8 1EX
- Rowdown Primary School, New Addington CR0 0EG
The Purley Way primary, sited so close to the major road that the school had to be fitted with special air pollution protection, could prove an interesting set of proposals.
“The schools were selected based on requests from ward councillors and residents, and discussions with the school,” the council said.
“Feedback will be used to develop recommendations that will be reported to cabinet; it will then decide on the future of the schemes. If approved, further consultation will be held on the Healthy School Streets during the summer.”
Piss-poor Perry is supposed to have said: “We know that Healthy School Streets make streets safer for children and families and it’s great that these six schools have asked us to look into introducing them.”
Just a shame about the children at three schools on Melville Avenue, eh, Jase?
The surveys are a pretty banal box-ticking exercises: they ask for your name and address, and whether you agree or not, and that’s just about it. They close today, and can be viewed on the council’s consultation page by clicking here.
Read more: School street scheme scrapped on road next to Mayor’s home
Read more: Council boss admits road fine ANPR cameras not switched on
Read more: Fining car drivers is not fine with pro-pollution Mayor Perry
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
- Inside Croydon works together with the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, as well as BBC London News and ITV London
ROTTEN BOROUGH AWARDS: In January 2024, Croydon was named among the country’s rottenest boroughs for a SEVENTH successive year in the annual round-up of civic cock-ups in Private Eye magazine
If anyone objects to these schemes there is one sure fire method to get it rejected. Undertake a random study without disclosing your methodology or providing any independent verification and pass it to Mayor Perry. Just make sure Mayor Perry resides in the adjoining street which is effected by the diverted traffic flow.
https://insidecroydon.com/2022/12/12/school-street-scheme-scrapped-on-road-next-to-mayors-home/
The drawback to these schemes is householders affected do not have any system of dispensation for tradesmen and deliveries to their homes.
They do.
They make arrangements for deliveries outside the restricted hours.
It is really very simple.
Personally I have no objection to school street restrictions other than their main function which is to generate income , reduction of traffic is a bonus effect. People do not purposely drive through school streets at restricted times, mainly strangers probably using a sat nav and a few forgetful but all lured into the trap with inadequate signage which they miss in the plethora of other signs. After spending many thousands on the CCTV you would think that a few bob could be spared to fit a strobe warning light fitted to the signs but that would rather reduce the income generation wouldn’t it .So once again sod the motorists we need your donations.
Just not true.
So which part is not true or fair comment?
All of it.
Is it just me, or does anyone else think these so called “healthy school streets” measures are dangerous in some areas of Croydon?
We have one near us. All it has done is displace parents driving their kids to school in the immediate vicinity of the road(s) where the school entrance is located to other roads and forced them to park – badly – on adjacent roads where safe parking is inadequate and/or unsafe.
It is obvious that a significant number of parents dropping their children off at school forget about the highway code and parking safely
They are a danger to themselves and other road users.
I have seen parents blocking entrances and exits to roads nearby so they can get out of their cars and take their kids to school. This makes seeing oncoming traffic nigh on impossible in the mornings during term time.
I have never seen such bad/dangerous parking in my life! It is just a matter of time before there is a serious road traffic accident.
Also the restrictions mean that it is impossible during the restricted hours to get a taxi to drive into some roads to pick someone up. That is not acceptable, especially when someone needs a taxi to take them to hospital for an appointment.
What an utterly chaotic, poorly thought through mess!
There are bad drivers all over the place, many to be found, often in a rush, doing the school run.
School streets are in place to remove such bad driving from the immediate vicinity of schools, and schoolchildren.
So you make an excellent case for their introduction, as such bad driving is clearly a threat to the well-being of pedestrians of all ages.
Nobody is forcing these selfish law-breaking entitled menaces on four wheels to park “badly” in ways that are illegal and create danger for other road users, including those on foot.
What should happen is that the Council sends round teams of traffic wardens to ticket these irresponsible louts until they get the message.
Of course, our part-time night Mayor won’t do that, as he’s too busy sucking up to dangerous, racist climate-destroying motorists to care for anyone else
It is interesting that Susan Hall and her fellow-travellers, including piss-poor Perry, the motorists’ friend, having lost an election fought almost entirely on opposition to ULEZ, are now pushing back at other schemes intended to reduce car use, make our streets a safer place and improve air quality.
First it was the Purley cycle lane, which Perry was prejudiced against from Day 1.
Now, it seems that the “enemy” of the motorists are to be primary-aged school children, some as young as four, who the car lobby want to place in peril and to ruin their lungs at an early age.
“I have no objection to school street restrictions,” according to one avid motoring rights commenter, before going on to put forward the outright lie: “other than their main function which is to generate income”.
That is simply untrue.
If motorists obeyed the signs, there would not be a penny income to the local authority. That so much money is levied in fines is a clear demonstration of just how many bad drivers and repeat offenders there must be out there.
Any driver failing to follow the rules of the road and the law of the land is a mere fool, “lured into the trap with inadequate signage”. It is a common trait that these motorists never take responsibility for their own shortcomings. Perhaps they are really not fit to be allowed out on the King’s highways?
Did I mention? Susan Hall lost the election.