Brockwell Park loses a chunk due to junction alterations at Herne Hill Junction
- Thread starter gaijingirl
- Start date
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Not necesariily. You get that on m-ways and big a-roads because they are created as direct routes, but somewhere like this has a natural limit since it's only really useful for getting to certain places.
Funniest thing? Temp lights on some long roadworks on Norwood road have actually made the inbound 68 bus journey quicker than it usually is...
Funniest thing? Temp lights on some long roadworks on Norwood road have actually made the inbound 68 bus journey quicker than it usually is...
Tattie Boggle
New Member
This distorted campaign to undermine the Herne Hill Junction campaihn is being put about by a bunch of people who are also supposed to be the Community's Partner in the development of the Lottery Bid for BROCKWELL PARK.
The aims of the Heritage Lottery Bid are inter alia to improve the entrance to Brockwell Park, to rebuild the toilets and to creat safe access to the park. THE HLF bid includes none of these things as the Council have determined that these can be achieved through theHerne Hill Junction improvement plans and can be funded by Transport for London leaving the Lottery funds for other things such as pulling down the changing rooms and moving the paddling pool.
The About to be adopted Unitary development plan allows exceptioanlly for the tking of a small piece of brockwell Park to allow this to happen . Its probably about 1,000 sq mtrs and the park is 500,000 sq mtrs.
The toilets have been closed for 4 years so much for the effectivenes of the Fiends of Brockwell Park.
This project is need for many reasons not least to lead to a regeneration of the public realm in Herne Hill..
The aims of the Heritage Lottery Bid are inter alia to improve the entrance to Brockwell Park, to rebuild the toilets and to creat safe access to the park. THE HLF bid includes none of these things as the Council have determined that these can be achieved through theHerne Hill Junction improvement plans and can be funded by Transport for London leaving the Lottery funds for other things such as pulling down the changing rooms and moving the paddling pool.
The About to be adopted Unitary development plan allows exceptioanlly for the tking of a small piece of brockwell Park to allow this to happen . Its probably about 1,000 sq mtrs and the park is 500,000 sq mtrs.
The toilets have been closed for 4 years so much for the effectivenes of the Fiends of Brockwell Park.
This project is need for many reasons not least to lead to a regeneration of the public realm in Herne Hill..
Structaural
in Chatsubo
Ah the gentrifiers have arrived.
It isn't going to do shit for congestion, if it does then the traffic will increase anyway negating any effect.
I'm glad you've admitted your true intentions, to raise Herne Hill house prices.
It isn't going to do shit for congestion, if it does then the traffic will increase anyway negating any effect.
I'm glad you've admitted your true intentions, to raise Herne Hill house prices.
dogmatique
merde alors
What's happening to the grey bits then? Turning into road?
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Way to go bud, slur people with your first post.Tattie Boggle said:
Perhaps the "bunch" you slur care about the park and green space in London -- and that's why they are happy to help make a lottery bid, but unhappy at giving park land up to the insatiable demands of the motor car?
FYI, I am not a member of the "bunch" of people you decry but nor do I want I do not want to see Brockwell Park lose any land. I will certainly oppose it unless there are firm and guaranteed plans to add back at least the same area.
Sure, the problem of road traffic crime around the junction is appalling. But I disagree that the best solution to criminals in motor cars is to pander to their demands.
Is the light grey 'road' area directly in front of the new park gate a cycle lane or road?
To be honest, the whole area round Herne Hill junction is horrible for pedestrians and generally unpleasant.
I'm not in favour of a bit of park being nibbled off because it's an easy option, but if this really is the best solution, than it's a very tiny piece of park to loose for hopefully a big benefit.
To be honest, the whole area round Herne Hill junction is horrible for pedestrians and generally unpleasant.
I'm not in favour of a bit of park being nibbled off because it's an easy option, but if this really is the best solution, than it's a very tiny piece of park to loose for hopefully a big benefit.
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
beeboo said:
The light grey areas are road (as opposed to segregated cycle lane).
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
According to the FoBP website, there was an earlier proposal which improved the junction and had cycle lanes which whilst it took some park, did not take nearly as much which ended up being opposed. Friends of Brockwell Park are asking for a similar scheme.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Well, the pavement at the end of railton road is certainly an improvement, as is the junction opposite the half moon. But the brockwell park corner seems a bit odd to me.
I can see what they're trying to do by shifting the left-turn lane down - it means traffic can feed into it without getting in the way of the queue for the lights. But I don't see why such a large amount of park has to be taken up with this.
I might have overdone things a bit there, but why not something like that?
I can see what they're trying to do by shifting the left-turn lane down - it means traffic can feed into it without getting in the way of the queue for the lights. But I don't see why such a large amount of park has to be taken up with this.
I might have overdone things a bit there, but why not something like that?
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
Crispy said:
I don't think that FoBP are saying that particular proposal should be reinstated. I think the point they're making is that if a proposal using less park is potentially possible (as you yourself question) - it should be further explored.
All this info is on their site - I'm just repeating what's been said - take a look at the correspondence they've put up there. Nor am I a traffic planner.
I am not convinced, however, that there is no better solution than this. I do think there is more than likely a way to make that junction safer without shaving off a large area of park - one less bit of green we won't be seeing again! And I'm, frankly, surprised that in general people wouldn't rather see this being explored rather than just go ahead and chop up the park!
ETA - and whilst the cycle lanes in the first proposal might be useless - at least someone was considering that cyclists might also want to use that junction - not just cars!
Taking park sounds bad - instinctively bad. But the bit of park being tinkered with is largely under asphalt anyway, and includes horrible unused (but much needed) toilets and unkempt pieces of land. (I hope the drinkers will be properly accommodated?). It seems to be pedestrian park users who are amongst the most disadvantage by the current traffic arrangements - crossing is anightmare, so if a bit of the park can be used, if the entrance to the park can be made welcoming and nice, then I could see that overall it could be of benefit.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
Nah, minimal work is needed to free up the left turn out of Norwood Road into Dulwich Road. The lane only needs to be a couple of feet wider for a distance of about 10 feet. Then a proper pelican crossing over the Norwood Road would complete the job.
Think how many cars you could fit in a car park 100 metres long by 10 metres wide. Turning such a large chunk of Brockwell Park into a car park would do far more for local trade!
Think how many cars you could fit in a car park 100 metres long by 10 metres wide. Turning such a large chunk of Brockwell Park into a car park would do far more for local trade!
Tattie Boggle
New Member
Structaural said:
Do you live in Rymer Street--- 350 plus bus movements per day and night inthis tiny narrow Victorian Road. Loud noise from newly expanded posh pubs and late night drinking.
Public realm is not just private housing . Its the shithole that is currently the end of Railton Road and corner of hurst Street empty shops of which we have at least 18 in the immediate area.. and decaying railway arches
There seem to be some activity in the six empty arches in Milkwood Road road at longlast and buidling preparation has started on the old post office.
The schme I understand will pedestrainize part of Ralton Road .
Haevnt you noticed the decay in the centre of Herne Hill
Tattie Boggle
New Member
gaijingirl said:
The cycle lane is not now there it has been removed at the request of the cycling lobby in the interests of safety.. The English Heritage brief is to
support the project taking only a small part of the park. its a matter of definition. £20,000 has been spent additionally to consider the options made by other non engineering people and they have all come up with negative impact results. This schme will improve lives of local residents pedestrians drinkers park users.
Jonti
what the dormouse said
I *walk* through that junction at least twice a day, and yes, the motor traffic makes it hideous and dangerous. But the unpleasantly constricted and dangerous pavements under the railway bridge will not be made wider or more pleasant under the proposals. And the danger from criminally irresponsible car drivers could be relieved by adequate Pelican crossings.Crispy said:
The argument that people walk through a park, so that space should be given over to road traffic seems illogical and perverse to me.
Tattie Boggle
New Member
pugwash said:
So have you got a solution.?
Structaural
in Chatsubo
Tattie Boggle said:
It's always been a bit of shithole and designed around cars rather than pedestrians (Clapham Common suffers the same fate). I've always thought that Rymer Street was a ludicrous detour for buses and cars to take, they need to change the way the junction works. Maybe come up with some crazy scheme like they did at Tulse Hill (fuck that's complicated).
Personally I don't want to see any more green space taken by road users, it's a slippery slope. More and more cars are on the road all the time in London and I don't want them catered for over and above the pedestrians and residents that live locally. That part of the park is full of people during the Country Show, it has flower beds and seats, leave it alone.
Hey! hardly anyone uses the bit of grass that runs around Norwood Road, lets use that up too and make the street wider! That Park Lane could do with an extra lane - I wonder how residents around Hyde Park would feel about chopping a bit of that away.
Most of the traffic that goes through Herne Hill is passing through to the South Circular and they should just have to wait. Improve it for pedestrians, more pelican crossings - especially from the central reservation to the beginning of Norwood Road. Sod the traffic, you'll never relieve the pressure on it as more and more people drive, they're sitting comfortably enough.
I first went to that park when I was 8 years old, leave it alone.
gaijingirl
Well-Known Member
Tattie Boggle said:
Sorry - as a local resident and park user, I don't agree that it will improve my life.
Tattie Boggle
New Member
Crispy said:
Get rid of the pavement(s) under the bridge and creat a new safe walkway through existing arches is one idea.
Tattie Boggle
New Member
So try thinking outside your own envelope.gaijingirl said:
OpalFruit said:
unfortunately, drinkers are the least consideration in their minds in schemes like this, they get pushed out everyone some bourgeois/puritan/upight citizens wakes up on the wrong side of the bed, plus they don't vote, so no electoral advantage to listen to their grievances and lobbying (especially after a few tinnies....)
.Drinkers of the World, rise up!
Rights for the Drinkers!
Similar threads
