Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Have these facts been taken into account, when proposing coloured Lines?


Revolutionary eye test.

Until now, people with even minor forms of the condition ? colour which affects one in 20 men and one in 200 women.

This does not include the blind and partially blind.

Many of these signs say Please Drive [more] carefully, child in car, and many do not take the sticker off when driving without said infant in the car. Point is, why drive MORE carefully than one already is?


Horsebox Wrote:

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

> PeckhamRose Wrote:

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

> -----

> > When we riding / driving behind a car that has

> a

> > sticker in it "Child In Car", does it make any

> > difference to the way we drive or ride? See my

> > point?

>

> I'm not sure I see your point, PR. The 'Child in

> Car' / 'Baby on Board' signs are intended to alert

> the emergency services of a potentially trapped

> infant, in the event of a collision.

Once people have started cycling, the desire for entire segregation often passes as they get more used to dealing with traffic.


I like cycle lanes but wouldn't want them marked off with kerbs or lots of shared use pavements since they invariably slow you down more than roads and lead to fear of going anywhere without them. Plus I think it is better for drivers and cyclists to get more used to one another.


More bike parking is definitely a good thing though and there are dome innovative designs that make it look more like street sculpture too to keep it looking attractive

As I understand, it is actually an offence to have stickers in any window

that restricts you vision.


Baby on board . Please drive carefully. I always drive carfully.


No baby on board. Drive like an 'Idiot' (Polite version)

I've always understood the 'Baby on board' stickers to be a warning to the driver following.

Baby on board = Parent who may suddenly be distracted (by vomiting/screaming/throwing of objects) and meander across the road

Hi Peterstorm1985,

Ironic that the Car Club is so successful that the permanently allocate parking space is usually empty. One of the attractions of car clubs is that the car have dedicated car parking spaces - so people can definately park them at the end of their rental hour, half day, etc. Some of the East Dulwich cars are taken out 8 times a day.


Yes, we need more cycle parking along Lordship Lane.


Any chance of group of people posting on this thread this problem could jointly propose something?

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi Peterstorm1985,

> Ironic that the Car Club is so successful that the

> permanently allocate parking space is usually

> empty.


OK, so I didn't think you'd like that suggestion but it would be a good spot. Assuming that the Car Club cars aren't being used 8 times a day to come to Lordship lane shopping (as they aren't parked there), why not move that space 50 yards down Ashbourne Grove and have the bike stands?

Totally agree with what DJKillaQueen said earlier..


DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> The most sensible route seems to be that used by

> existing cyclists, Crystal Palace Road, Bellenden,

> onto Peckham High Street.


...that's the route I take to the city every day...


DJKillaQueen Wrote:

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

> An alternate would be Barry Road, Peckham Rye, Rye

> Lane, and then either along to Camberwell, or

> taking the old canal route to Burgess Park


..and that's the way I come back.


I've been cycle commuting in London for about three years, one year of that has been cycling from ED to Hackney and I'd never consider coming down LL...or going up DKH for that matter!

I can't think of many cyclists that would be stupid enough to undertake a lorry while it's turning.


When cyclists are crushed by lorries (about 9 a year in the capital), it's usually as lorries take off from stationary but don't see they are not clear to turn left. That was the idea of the greeen boxes at the head of Junctions....so that cyclists could get in front of vehicles rather than alongside because we know that many drivers do not check their blind spots when pulling away from a junction (which is poor driving skills). They do it when they pull away from a kerb though, but not when stationary elsewhere.

And, although yes, the CS do encourage cyclists to stay on the left and filter so potentially more likely to end up in the position shown not realising the lorry is turning, part of the CS scheme is having mirrors at junctions so that lorry drivers have less blind spots and hopefully spot the numpty cyclist before moving off. Does make me shudder though - I watched someone tonight - no lights in the dark - merrily going up the side of a coach which was at the front of the queue and turning left - with absolutely no chance of reaching the front before the lights went. Luckily, he'd only made it just past the rear wheels when the lights changed and he was able to stop.

I think the one in twenty you're referring to is the most common form of colour 'blindness' - red/green - in men. I've got this and have no difficulty seeing the differently coloured cycle lanes, or traffic lights for that matter.


computedshorty Wrote:

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

> Have these facts been taken into account, when

> proposing coloured Lines?

>

> Revolutionary eye test.

> Until now, people with even minor forms of the

> condition ? colour which affects one in 20 men and

> one in 200 women.

> This does not include the blind and partially

> blind.

The easy win here is more cycle parking on LL and around ED generally. I'd happily support that in any form, whatever form of rack is deemed appropriate. There are ones that clamp onto lamp-posts, which seems efficient, even ones with flower boxes in the middle. Whatever, having more cycle parking is probably the single easiest step to encouraging it.


And on safety once someone's been tempted onto their bike, can I praise again the free training I got through Southwark? Two free lessons is your entitlement and I was lucky to get practically cycling royalty as my trainer. He was brilliant, utterly professional, an excellent teacher. I'd been riding in London at least 5 days a week for 3 years when I had the lessons and I learned a huge amount. All at your own pace, starting off in Dulwich Park for the basics of maintenance and then movement. Then minor roads, then more major/tricky ones. Forget the raging debates on segregation, helmets, blue/green colour schemes, networks that aren't really networks, contra-flows or one-ways, this is the one thing that I feel has made the biggest difference to my cycling confidence, knowledge, safety. Can't recommend it enough.

Cyclist needs to be more a ware of Pedestrians, they have a habbit of cutting you up on the roads when crossing and on the pavements drives me nutts they feel they have the right of way but I let them know in colourful Languages they DON'T(6)

Agreed that the Southwark training is brilliant. Hadn't realised it was two lessons. I could do with one on bike maintenance!


Ridgeley - that's back to earlier points on inconsiderate cyclists, drivers and pedestrians who although a minority, ruin it for the rest of us. The only "off" I've had in my bike was when a drunk pedestrian stumbled into my path on a segregated cycle path. Thankfully since I had been wary of him, I was going v slowly so only have a monster bruise to show for it. And the only real emergency stops I've had to make have all been after pedestrians stepped out into my path without looking despite me being on the road where I should be. If I'd been a bus, they'd be dead.

Ridgley, I also agree cyclists have no right to spear through crowds of pedestrians, cut them up etc.


But I have to also agree with Applespider - my most serious near misses, one incident apart, have all involved pedestrians. The chief problem is they just do not look when stepping into the road. It's a pretty basic error on their part, but most of the miscreants are plugged into their MP3 players and are passively listening for a noisy car, rather than a quieter bike.


Hopefully electric cars and/or cycling will really take off and then they'll have to start looking too!

James, can't make the 19th but wanted to point you in the direction of cyclehoop, an alternative cycle parking option that utilises existing street lights, signposts etc, so no digging up of pavements needed.


www.cyclehoop.com

Cyclehoop looks like a brilliant idea. I want there to be far more cycle stands but I also don't want to add any more clutter to the pavements than absolutely necessary. This looks like a great way of providing more cycle parking at minimal cost or disruption.

As I understand, the cyclehoops are already in use across Southwark, particularly up towards Borough and London Bridge.


They've got some other interesting bike-parking solutions on their site:


http://www.cyclehoop.com/news-press/


And it's a British company so double win!

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

    • Trossachs definitely have one! 
    • A A day-school for girls and a boarding school for boys (even with, by the late '90s, a tiny cadre of girls) are very different places.  Though there are some similarities. I think all schools, for instance, have similar "rules", much as they all nail up notices about "potential" and "achievement" and keeping to the left on the stairs. The private schools go a little further, banging on about "serving the public", as they have since they were set up (either to supply the colonies with District Commissioners, Brigadiers and Missionaries, or the provinces with railway engineers), so they've got the language and rituals down nicely. Which, i suppose, is what visitors and day-pupils expect, and are expected, to see. A boarding school, outside the cloistered hours of lesson-times, once the day-pupils and teaching staff have been sent packing, the gates and chapel safely locked and the brochures put away, becomes a much less ambassadorial place. That's largely because they're filled with several hundred bored, tired, self-supervised adolescents condemned to spend the night together in the flickering, dripping bowels of its ancient buildings, most of which were designed only to impress from the outside, the comfort of their occupants being secondary to the glory of whatever piratical benefactor had, in a last-ditch attempt to sway the judgement of their god, chucked a little of their ill-gotten at the alleged improvement of the better class of urchin. Those adolescents may, to the curious eyes of the outer world, seem privileged but, in that moment, they cannot access any outer world (at least pre-1996 or thereabouts). Their whole existence, for months at a time, takes place in uniformity behind those gates where money, should they have any to hand, cannot purchase better food or warmer clothing. In that peculiar world, there is no difference between the seventh son of a murderous sheikh, the darling child of a ball-bearing magnate, the umpteenth Viscount Smethwick, or the offspring of some hapless Foreign Office drone who's got themselves posted to Minsk. They are egalitarian, in that sense, but that's as far as it goes. In any place where rank and priviilege mean nothing, other measures will evolve, which is why even the best-intentioned of committees will, from time to time, spawn its cliques and launch heated disputes over archaic matters that, in any other context, would have long been forgotten. The same is true of the boarding school which, over the dismal centuries, has developed a certain culture all its own, with a language indended to pass all understanding and attitiudes and practices to match. This is unsurprising as every new intake will, being young and disoriented, eagerly mimic their seniors, and so also learn those words and attitudes and practices which, miserably or otherwise, will more accurately reflect the weight of history than the Guardian's style-guide and, to contemporary eyes and ears, seem outlandish, beastly and deplorably wicked. Which, of course, it all is. But however much we might regret it, and urge headteachers to get up on Sundays and preach about how we should all be tolerant, not kill anyone unnecessarily, and take pity on the oiks, it won't make the blindest bit of difference. William Golding may, according to psychologists, have overstated his case but I doubt that many 20th Century boarders would agree with them. Instead, they might look to Shakespeare, who cheerfully exploits differences of sex and race and belief and ability to arm his bullies, murderers, fraudsters and tyrants and remains celebrated to this day,  Admittedly, this is mostly opinion, borne only of my own regrettable experience and, because I had that experience and heard those words (though, being naive and small-townish, i didn't understand them till much later) and saw and suffered a heap of brutishness*, that might make my opinion both unfair and biased.  If so, then I can only say it's the least that those institutions deserve. Sure, the schools themselves don't willingly foster that culture, which is wholly contrary to everything in the brochures, but there's not much they can do about it without posting staff permanently in corridors and dormitories and washrooms, which would, I'd suggest, create a whole other set of problems, not least financial. So, like any other business, they take care of the money and keep aloof from the rest. That, to my mind, is the problem. They've turned something into a business that really shouldn't be a business. Education is one thing, raising a child is another, and limited-liability corporations, however charitable, tend not to make the best parents. And so, in retrospect, I'm inclined not to blame the students either (though, for years after, I eagerly read the my Old School magazine, my heart doing a little dance at every black-edged announcement of a yachting tragedy, avalanche or coup). They get chucked into this swamp where they have to learn to fend for themselves and so many, naturally, will behave like predators in an attempt to fit in. Not all, certainly. Some will keep their heads down and hope not to be noticed while others, if they have a particular talent, might find that it protects them. But that leaves more than enough to keep the toxic culture alive, and it is no surprise at all that when they emerge they appear damaged to the outside world. For that's exactly what they are. They might, and sometimes do, improve once returned to the normal stream of life if given time and support, and that's good. But the damage lasts, all the same, and isn't a reason to vote for them. * Not, if it helps to disappoint any lawyers, at Dulwich, though there's nothing in the allegations that I didn't instantly recognise, 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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