Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi rahrahrah,

Sadly Southwark Council has decided it doesnt want any cycle street clutter of the likes of cyclehoop products. REally frustrating as we had funding for such measures but were rejected!


Hi veralucia,

I understand ths townley Road/East Dulwich grove junction will have diagonal crossing points recognising those 'desire lines' as well a regular junction arms.

Does the ?285k include providing cycle storage facilities on the schools premises and if so is there room ? Most of the local state schools seem pretty tight on space.

Which schools in Dulwich and Herne Hill will benefit from the funds ? I'd be unhappy if public funds were being used to subsidise the private schools.

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Hi rahrahrah,

> Sadly Southwark Council has decided it doesnt want

> any cycle street clutter of the likes of cyclehoop

> products. REally frustrating as we had funding for

> such measures but were rejected!


James make sure the decision to reject cycle "parking" is widely circulated. It's already impossible to find a proper lock up space when you are shopping.

Is this linked in anyway to the survey carried out by Dulwich Young Cyclists, that was promoted on a previous thread? The schools involved in that were:

- Alleyn's School (including Junior)

- Bessemer Grange Primary School

- The Charter School

- Dog Kennel Hill School

- Dulwich College (including Junior and DUCKS)

- Dulwich Hamlet Junior School

- Dulwich Infants School

- Dulwich Prep London

- Dulwich Wood Nursery

- Herne Hill School

- JAGS (including JAPS)

- Kingsdale Foundation School

- Langbourne Primary School

- Oakfield School


So most of the East Dulwich schools were not included.


As someone who cycles across the Townley Road/East Dulwich Grove junction on a daily basis, and sometimes with my children (aged 9 and 7), I would say that was one of the safer juctions to navigate. They should try Dunstans/Underhill or Townley/Lordship Lane.

That's a real shame regarding the Lambeth hangers - I believe the lack of secure, on-street parking for bikes really reduces take up. Most people either don't have the room to store their bike inside, don't have a garden / shed, or else can't be bothered carrying a bike through the house twice a day. It's interesting that cars aren't considered 'street clutter' despite the fact that one car takes up enough space for half a dozen bikes.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> That's a real shame regarding the Lambeth hangers

> - I believe the lack of secure, on-street parking

> for bikes really reduces take up. Most people

> either don't have the room to store their bike

> inside, don't have a garden / shed, or else can't

> be bothered carrying a bike through the house

> twice a day. It's interesting that cars aren't

> considered 'street clutter' despite the fact that

> one car takes up enough space for half a dozen

> bikes.


These "Lambeth Hangers" look like a great idea. Difficult to see why Southwark council would discount them as an option while spending ?285,000 on improving the cyclists lot?


Ron70

What are the actual current perceived hazards?


What are the "Cycling to School Partnership" and the "Schools Partnership", both mentioned in the above copy and in http://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/1449/285_000_of_funding_awarded_to_support_cycling_in_dulwich_and_herne_hill?

JackieO Wrote:

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

> That's brilliant news about funding for the

> junction, I have complained to the council in the

> past about it being unsafe for cyclists, I'm

> really pleased to hear improvements are being

> made.


It's just a shame they spent tens of thousands on redoing some of the crossings, the Townley Road / Calton Avenue junction and the junction's road surface not much more than a year ago. Joined-up thinking is only a dream when there's someone else's cash to be spent.

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> I emailed Southwark Council about the Lambeth Hangers. Apparently they have not discounted there

> installation in the Borough, but are in fact looking at 300 possible locations as part of a pilot!


Thanks very much for (1) your asking the council clearly (2) their quick response (3) relaying it here. Now we're all better informed. That's the way to do it.


I see btw that the Lambeth Bikehangars are a different animal from the cycle hoops, of which ISTR Southwark trialled a few several years ago.

Cyclehoops http://www.cyclehoop.com/product/cyclehoops/cyclehoop-for-lamp-post/ are banned from Southwark street by council officials.


so amazed if officers now telling you people cycle hangars are acceptable - http://www.cyclehoop.com/product/bike-lockers/bike-hangar/

Re cyclehoops: I emailed the council in September 2010, after seeing the mentions in this thread, to ask how I could distinguish them on the interactive map. After a reminder, I got a reply in November 2010, from which:


We do indeed have some trial sites for this particular type of cycle

parking. A couple of sites that I am aware of are Union Street by the

Palestra building and Cathedral Street by Borough Market.


I believe that the interactive map has been removed from the website

pending an up to date audit of cycle parking across the borough.


I'm also aware that these stands have not proved to be very popular with

our engineers and our Streetscape Design Manager and so will most

probably not be used within the Borough in the future.


Please contact me should you require any further details.

The project is being managed by Phil Thompson at Southwark Council. Here is an excerpt from his email:


"...We have over 300 locations around the borough that we are currently looking at and from this number we will hope to install a small handful of hangers in order to gauge response from our residents. All being well, after this stage, we will be looking to install cycle hangers borough-wide..."

In my opinion as a cyclist first and aesthetically as well I just want loads, hundreds, of standing lock loops


http://www.cycle-shelters-direct2u.co.uk/sheffield-bike-loops.html


James Barber Wrote:

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

> Cyclehoops

> http://www.cyclehoop.com/product/cyclehoops/cycleh

> oop-for-lamp-post/ are banned from Southwark

> street by council officials.

>

> so amazed if officers now telling you people cycle

> hangars are acceptable -

> http://www.cyclehoop.com/product/bike-lockers/bike

> -hangar/

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Cyclehoops

> http://www.cyclehoop.com/product/cyclehoops/cycleh

> oop-for-lamp-post/ are banned from Southwark

> street by council officials.

>


Why on earth are they banned? You can retrofit to existing street furniture, don't need to dig up streets and look quite pleasing to the eye. They must be a cost saver?

  • 3 months later...
Just to let you know that Southwark Cyclists are having a public meeting on Wednesday 12th Feb at 6.30pm at the Peckham Liberal Club to decide on a list of demands that they will try to get candidates to commit to ahead of the local elections. All are welcome.
I would be interested to know why this junction was chosen specifically. Is it based on statistics? I have cycled through it many times and with the traffic lights etc, it has always struck me as being safe. How does it compare with, for example, the junction of Barry Road and Underhill Road / Upland Road?

the OP says 'decision to improve the East Dulwich Grove and Townley Road junction follows a feasibility study carried out earlier this year. Analysis showed the junction was potentially hazardous to the four schools located nearby.


other junctions, some mentioned above are 'actually' rather than 'potentially hazardous' and don't get a penny.


same old

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

    • Whilst I agree, I have been thinking about this recently in relation to some of the other posts on here about anti social behaviour. We are all products of our upbringing - our experiences at home, school and beyond - plus whatever we have inherited genetically which might affect our behaviour (the nature/nurture thing). So in this case, if people haven't been brought up to love and appreciate trees and other wild things, plus as you say they may be deeply unhappy (or have other undiagnosed issues) it's easy to see how they could have ended up doing this. Also, it's possible they had quite low intelligence and didn't really grasp what they were doing and the effect it would have on so many other people. But that's just surmise and possibly completely wrong. From what I've read about it, they seemed to be two mates egging each other on, like two big kids. I'm not for a minute excusing what they did, and it's right they should be punished, but I really hope they might get some sort of rehabilitation in prison (it would  be appropriate to have them do some kind of community service like planting saplings, wouldn't it, or working in woodland conservation). And the same goes for phone robbers and shoplifters (rehabilitation, not planting saplings), though for SOME  shoplifters there might also be other issues at play, not excluding poverty. Sorry Jasonlondon,  I've gone off at a real tangent here, lucky it's in the lounge! Oh oops I've just noticed it isn't. Sorry admin. Oh, and then there's a whole philosophical discussion to be had about free will and determinism ..... 🤣🤣🤣
    • Thanks! I'll find out in a few weeks when I get the results! It was one of those disconcerting things where a disembodied voice keeps booming  at you to breathe in and hold it, then breathe normally. Apart from that it was OK, all completely painless. I imagine there will be quite a few people going from ED, though I presume it covers the whole Southwark area 
    • Two men behind ‘senseless’ felling of Sycamore Gap tree jailed for more than four years Good to see these two jailed today for four years. There’s something deeply disturbing about people who destroy trees—any tree. Whether it’s a centuries-old landmark or a sapling in a quiet park, trees are living beings that offer beauty, shade, and life. The men who cut down the Sycamore Gap tree are a stark example of how far some people will go to lash out at something peaceful and meaningful. People who harm nature like this aren’t just destructive—they are often deeply unhappy. It takes a troubled mind to look at a tree and see something to ruin instead of something to protect. Read more here  
    • What a brilliant idea. I hope it went OK, Sue. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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