Street Cycle Store (at the end of Thorncombe Road)

[fruityloops]

Penguin68 Wrote:

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

> But if you

> care to read many posts here you will find numbers

> of people saddened by any proposed changes - to

> road lay-outs, to shops, to building heights etc.

> etc..

I see people that like having a good moan about anything new. I understand the permitted room size comment - I live with an architect. It means the commodity of our generation is space, not possessions. Therefore making a hangar on a road, where many users do not even own cars a fantastic idea, that I can't understand why any progressive thinker cannot get behind.

[DulwichFox]

Sue Wrote:

>

> ETA: But yes I would be happy to have it outside

> my house if it was that or not have the hangar at

> all.

Sue.. do you actually have a bicycle.. ? I often see you walking or in your car.. I haven't see you cycle,

There are a couple of my neighbours living opposite regularly cycle (daily) but they keep their bicycles indoors..

So what next.. Pram sheds for buggies.. ?

We lost 4 spaces on the corners due to safety, quite acceptable.

We have a couple of disabled bays. quite acceptable.

Then we got the hire van thing up near Whateley rd.

Now we are getting Cycle bays which presumable will be used mainly at night and will become targets

for vandalism and thieves.

We have increased parking problems with the market both shoppers and traders..

One of the points people ask when buying a house is. 'Is there off street parking?'

Parking restrictions greatly reduces the saleability of a property.

DulwichFox

[Sue]

DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> Sue Wrote:

>

> >

> > ETA: But yes I would be happy to have it

> outside

> > my house if it was that or not have the hangar

> at

> > all.

>

> Sue.. do you actually have a bicycle.. ? I often

> see you walking or in your car.. I haven't see you

> cycle,

>

As you know from a previous thread, Fox, which you posted on when this subject was discussed previously(!), I have a place reserved in the hangar when it arrives. I was one of at least two people in the road who originally requested this hangar, two years ago.

I do not have a bike yet because my house is the same size as yours and it would be extremely inconvenient to store it in there, which is why I've never bought one before.

Once the hangar is in place, I will be getting a bike. I will need L plates :))

[Cedges]

I'd love one of these near me - my bike is languishing in my back garden as there is nowhere to store it on the front of our house and dragging it the whole way through the house every time I want to use it is a nightmare. My housemate who cycle commutes keeps hers in the dining room along with my other housemates racing bike - I frigging hate bikes indoors so I think these are an excellent idea. In fact I'm going to put in my request right now.

[DaveR]

"Many people, with children, with infirmities, racked with age (I've worked through all three of these!) finds car travel, at times, a boon, and cycle travel an impossibility."

True, but many people with none of these qualities nevertheless travel by car. Or, looking at it from another perspective, there are other cities where bike use is substantially higher and no reason to believe that their population is substantially different from London. There is also plenty of evidence that being active before you are infirm makes it less likely that you will become so. So I don't really see that as a valid objection to measures encouraging people to cycle.

[first mate]

DaveR, should those who seek or have one family member who seeks, a bike hangar outside their house, immediately relinquish any family car ownership or would the expectation be that you can have both? I'm thinking parents who might want a bike hangar so kids can cycle to school but might also want regular use of a car.

In terms of comparisons with other cities, the fact that ED has rather large hills either end must surely be taken into account?

[keano77]

Posted by DaveR Today, 02:49PM

So I don't really see that as a valid objection to measures encouraging people to cycle.

It is really about encouraging people to cycle? Seems more like a storage initiative. I've got a couple of my children's bikes in my shed which they rarely use. If a bike hangar appears on my road or nearby I might be tempted to declutter and store them in the hangar to free up space - cheaper than a storage unit.

[LondonMix]

That's good the hear Sue. I've noticed they tend to be at the side of end of terraced properties so they aren't in front of any individuals house. I think that's a smart approach and was going to suggest that. I think its a great idea but I equally think there are a lot of people who while supporting the scheme in general wouldn't want it directly in front of their own house.

Sue Wrote:

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

> DulwichFox Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Sue Wrote:

> >

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

>

> > -----

> > > You're lucky, to the best of my knowledge all

> > we

> > > have in Ulverscroft Road so far is a barrier

> > which

> > > has been leaning against a wall for ages with

> a

> > > scrappy bit of paper on saying the space is

> > > reserved for a bike hangar.

> > >

> > > Which is rather frustrating when I've been

> > waiting

> > > for it for around two years now and getting

> > older

> > > and older :))

> >

> > Well that's is fine if you are happy to have it

> > placed directly outside your house.. where you

> > normally park your car.

> >

> > Foxy.

>

>

> As you well know, Fox, residents were consulted -

> presumably including you! - and it is being placed

> at the end of the road where nothing will look out

> onto it apart from a wall.

>

> ETA: But yes I would be happy to have it outside

> my house if it was that or not have the hangar at

> all.

[first mate]

The best thing would be to site them on existing yellow lines, so long as they do not cause issues with lines of sight or turning cars. I would be reluctant to see parking reduced further by just plonking them anywhere in the street.

[fruityloops]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> That's good the hear Sue. I've noticed they tend

> to be at the side of end of terraced properties so

> they aren't in front of any individuals house. I

> think that's a smart approach and was going to

> suggest that. I think its a great idea but I

> equally think there are a lot of people who while

> supporting the scheme in general wouldn't want it

> directly in front of their own house.

>

>

NIMBY's - this forum is full of them.

Stick one right in front of my front door. I'd be happy to take it (car owner - and not currently a cyclist).

[keano77]

Not so much NIMBYs fruityloops, more NIMS (not in my street).

The serious point I'm interested in is how do you object? For example, my street is mainly homeowners or people with mortgages with the exception of two houses rented out. If one of the rented houses has a couple of cyclists who apply why should the rest of the street have to accept a bike hangar? - especially as the applicants could be moving on to another area of London after their 6-month or yearly tenancy expires.

[rupert jones]

You can rest assured you would not get too much help from the local Cllr.

[first mate]

Floops,

Inevitable on a local forum I'd gave thought.

[fruityloops]

first mate Wrote:

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

> Floops,

> Inevitable on a local forum I'd gave thought.

Aye.

Keano77 - forgot to add home owner to that list of car owner and non-cyclist.

First mate - yep, a shame though when it could be filled with the positive things that are going on in the area.

[first mate]

Keano77, exactly, this is a good example of a throwaway idea that sounds good on the surface but once you begin to unpick it there are fairly obvious shortcomings. I therefore cannot applaud those who are encouraging residents to get asking. This feels like someone creating a demand to fulfill yet another agenda that ticks some political or funding box. There is too much of this random meddling without proper planning or forethought going on...look at the whole Northcross Rd junction redesign at astronomical cost fiasco. The premise there was to make it safer and nicer!!!!!

All I can say is that these hangars are a sort of cyclist CPZ and bring us one step closer to CPZ en masse..job done.

[first mate]

Fruityloops, bless you, bad news has always outweighed good, twas ever thus.

[DaveR]

So the objections are (i) I don't like the look of them and (ii) I want to park my car there. Obviously dressed up with all sorts of nonsense like this:

"All I can say is that these hangars are a sort of cyclist CPZ and bring us one step closer to CPZ en masse"

but that's the size of it. You should start a petition immediately.

[DulwichFox]

Perhaps if Southwark council were really serious about more people cycling and giving up there cars..

.. they could introduce a scheme were those people who do relinquish there cars would get a ?50.00 voucher

towards the cost of a new bike.

This would free up spaces and make parking easier for the likes of people who rely on their cars and those who for what ever reason cannot cycle.

DulwichFox

[first mate]

Yes, DF, that is why I asked DaveR if he thought those/any family who requested a hangar on their street should also give up their car, if they have one. He did not answer.

[LondonMix]

Its hardly NIMBY to say you wouldn't want one in front of your house. I wouldn't want a big tree in front of my house either but equally I wouldn't campaign to stop it going forward. Honestly, its an obvious enough point that the council have already clearly thought about citing them in a way that makes sense away from front doors. What exactly is your problem?

fruityloops Wrote:

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

> LondonMix Wrote:

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

> -----

> > That's good the hear Sue. I've noticed they

> tend

> > to be at the side of end of terraced properties

> so

> > they aren't in front of any individuals house.

> I

> > think that's a smart approach and was going to

> > suggest that. I think its a great idea but I

> > equally think there are a lot of people who

> while

> > supporting the scheme in general wouldn't want

> it

> > directly in front of their own house.

> >

> >

>

> NIMBY's - this forum is full of them.

>

> Stick one right in front of my front door. I'd be

> happy to take it (car owner - and not currently a

> cyclist).

[DulwichFox]

Well I reckon if we ever get Community Parking Zones (CPZ) in the area, every available space will be made available for parking.

Bike hangers will disappear.. Most Yellow Lines where parking was considered as unsafe areas to park will be erased

and made available for paid parking.

You mark my words..

DulwichFox

[first mate]

LondonMix, I agree, it's a lazy, kneejerk term that becomes pretty redundant and meaningless when used in the context of discussion on developments that have local impact.

[first mate]

DF,spot on, sure you're not in local politics?

[fruityloops]

LondonMix Wrote:

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

> Its hardly NIMBY to say you wouldn't want one in

> front of your house. I wouldn't want a big tree

> in front of my house either but equally I wouldn't

> campaign to stop it going forward. Honestly, its

> an obvious enough point that the council have

> already clearly thought about citing them in a way

> that makes sense away from front doors. What

> exactly is your problem?

>

>

>

NIFOMH doesn't quite roll of the tongue as well.

[LondonMix]

Talking about the best place to put them isn't NIMBYism. Its just discussing the practicalities and understanding the strategies in place to reduce the impact. If you can't see the difference between discussing policy and NIMBYism then I'm afraid you don't know what the term means (or any of its alternative acronyms).