Brockwell Park loses a chunk due to junction alterations at Herne Hill Junction

[Tattie Boggle]

So the scheme isn't for the benefit of local residents and park users?

That's exactly what I thought!

You say it wont improve your life ..... well it will for thousands of others.
A nice brings over 4,000 people into Brockwell Park and with the Lido open
that should be more.

 

[gaijingirl]

So try thinking outside your own envelope.

Is this some kind of cross between thinking outside the box and pushing the envelope?

 

[Jonti]

You say it wont improve your life ..... well it will for thousands of others.

Where did I say that?

And who are these thousands who will have their lives improved by your road widening scheme?

 

[OpalFruit]

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!

I agree that they are likely to be the last to be thought about, EXCEPT for the fact that 'containing' them addresses exactly the citizens you mention - plus those you might approve more of. Not much of the puritan in my make up, but as someone who has been bitten by one of the drinkers dogs, and had their shit (the drinkers, not the dogs) in my running shoes, I am quite keen to see them accommodated in a way that allows them their rightful democratic use of the park while not impeding mine.

This whole thing can't be deliniated along class war lines, you know!

 

[kyser_soze]

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!

What on EARTH are you talking about? The Brockwell Park Brew Crew have their own little seating area just to the left of the gates (as you walk in from HH) which was made for them about a year ago.

 

[corporate whore]

Simple congestion-easing measure: remove the mostly unused pavement that runs up Norwood next to the park fence, creating another lane for traffic feeding left at HH into Dulwich Road. This helps ease the traffic back-up all the way to the Croxted Road junction that reallly fucks things up.

FWIW I reckon removing a scintilla of park is worthwhile if the junction at HH is made pedestrian safe.

 

[goldengraham]

There's an artist's impression of the new junction here - it looks like the drinkers will be forming a circle in the middle of the new traffic island!

http://hernehillforum.blogspot.com/

It's a good debate about this on here. Personally though - I'm all for it.

 

[beeboo]

I've passed that way a couple of times lately and I must say I'm a bit more perplexed about why they need to take away a chunk of park to improve the junction. Overall I know it's only a small chunk but still, it's park.

On the other hand I nearly got run over at the rubbish pedestrian crossing - it really needs work, it's a shambles.

 

[Dan U]

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.

i can't think of many worse roads in London for sending that volume of traffic and big buses down to be honest

The schme I understand will pedestrainize part of Ralton Road .
Haevnt you noticed the decay in the centre of Herne Hill

yes i have. lot's of vacants and getting decaying one's at that.

opportunity cost here isn't it really

 

[Rich]

Latest Plans for Herne Hill Junction

HERNE HILL JUNCTION PLANS

SCHEME DESIGN AND OPTIONS
ARTIST'S IMPRESSION OF PARK ENTRANCE

The latest proposals for the junction have been published on the herne hill society web site (below)

http://www.hernehillsociety.org.uk/

It appears that despite the initial plans been abandoned due to public outrage at losing part of the park, the new option been promoted Project Board involves moving the slip road just 4 meters towards the junction. This really does appear to me to be totally ignoring the concerns raised by the previous scheme. I'm all for regenerating this area of Herne Hill and improving pedestrian access to the park but this scheme just appears to be putting cars first by adding extra road width and capacity. This just seems so short sighted when its been proven that extra road capacity is always taken up and only releives the problem for a short period. In the process we set a president for removing public open space and create a bigger, more unpleasant barrier to the park. Likewise apart from token forward stopping bays the scheme doesn't appear to be taking advantage of this opportunity to improve the lot cyclists on this dangerous junction.
Anyway realise these concerns have been raised before but was just shocked that there appears to be a desire to push through a scheme which is fundementally the same as one roundly rejected by the public and council so recently. Its made all the more laughable that the promotion material claims that the Boards favoured option - the one removing the most of the park and creating the biggest increase in road capacity has the overwhelming backing of Herne Hill residents - have they consulted them since they and their Councillors rejected the principle of losing a wedge of the park within the last couple of months?

 

[gaijingirl]

For anyone who is against this development I just received this from the FoBP:

"Please come tomorrow
Lambeth is receiving a delegation from the Friends of Brockwell Park about the proposed road at the meeting of the full Council tomorrow (Wednesday 30th January). Sorry for the short notice, but we were only told yesterday.
Please come along to Lambeth Town Hall to support the delegation: come at around 6:45 and ask for the Public Gallery. We'll try to arrange for a FoBP representative to be at the main entrance, please make yourself known to them. The delegation should have been heard before 7:30 so you'll be able to get away then. Forward this email to everyone you know who loves the Park so they know what's happening.
4,000 objections received
Lambeth has now received more than 4,000 objections to the proposed road across Brockwell Park. If you haven't already sent in an individual objection please do so today - as they are taken much more seriously by the Council. The official deadline for objections was in November, but the Council will continue to receive objections up to the date of the Planning Committee - they wanted this meeting in December, but there were so many objections they had to put it off.

It is vital that Lambeth Councillors know how we feel about the scheme so
Contact Lambeth Councillors to say you object to the scheme.

If you want to do more - handing out leaflets at the Railway or Underground stations, getting signatures door to door, or anything else you can think of, contact the Chair of the Friends of Brockwell Park: laura.morland@brockwellpark.com "

(The message also contained links to make your own objections as well as a facility to enter your postcode and see your Councillors' contact details and how they voted on the road plan - these links are also to be found on the FoBP website: http://www.brockwellpark.com/)

 

[kyser_soze]

This is fucking ridiculous. I've seen the paint markers in the park, and it's getting rid of concrete, tar and about 3 sqm of grass.

 

[gaijingirl]

This is fucking ridiculous. I've seen the paint markers in the park, and it's getting rid of concrete, tar and about 3 sqm of grass.

to replace it with concrete, tar, about 3 sqm of grass and lots of cars!!

 

[kyser_soze]

There are already lots of cars.

 

[hendo]

I've seen the markers too (although the council went through a phase of getting rid of them, only for them to reappear). I drive my car round there sometimes, and it is rubbish, but this proposal takes up so little of the park I can't see how it will improve life for drivers.

I'd rather they leave things alone. To tug up park for road seems to fly in the face of current sentiment about our environmental responsibilities.

As for the owners of the houses on Rymer Road, they saw the traffic when they bought them - as did we when we decided against buying there. House values shouldn't be a factor in this debate.

 

[gaijingirl]

There are already lots of cars.

not on the bit that's currently inside the park but will no longer be if this goes ahead - that has lots of runners, cyclists and pedestrians!

 

[Crispy]

And this new junction is designed to get those cars through more smoothly = less pollution from idling cars.

 

[gaijingirl]

Well I've said it before - but no one seems willing to consider the possibility - I'm pretty sure there will be a way of achieving that which does not involve chopping off bits of park. It's just ridiculous. Chop a bit of park off to make room for more cars. Then when the cars overfill the capacity of the junction again - then what? Chop some more off? No - find an alternative solution!!

 

[hendo]

I'm on gaijingirls side. I'm a driver and a jogger, and I say, keep the park.

 

[kyser_soze]

TBH I'm not *that* fussed one way or another, but the whole FoBP campaign, and indeed this thread, is a good example of how to effectively use language to intensify something. For example, the use of 1000sqm - that sounds like a lot, but is less then 0.05% of the park's total area - which isn't quite so impressive, especially when you consider that its mainly non-grass that's being torn up! The same thing goes for use of the word 'Threat' in the thread title - it's not exactly true that the whole park is under threat is it, but that's the implication of the thread title, and much of the literature that FoBP have circulated.

Not having a go, just intrigued to see 'good guy' spin...

 

[Slow Hands]

... No - find an alternative solution!!

TUNNELS!

 

[Bob]

TBH I'm not *that* fussed one way or another, but the whole FoBP campaign, and indeed this thread, is a good example of how to effectively use language to intensify something. For example, the use of 1000sqm - that sounds like a lot, but is less then 0.05% of the park's total area - which isn't quite so impressive, especially when you consider that its mainly non-grass that's being torn up! The same thing goes for use of the word 'Threat' in the thread title - it's not exactly true that the whole park is under threat is it, but that's the implication of the thread title, and much of the literature that FoBP have circulated.

Not having a go, just intrigued to see 'good guy' spin...

To be fair to them they've made an effort on their website to show the extent of the land taken (have a look here: http://www.brockwellpark.com/herne_hill_junction.htm)

Basically my objections are:

a) You can tidy up the junction without taking a bit off the park - and get most of the advantages - this plan uses the footprint of 16 buses - which seems quite a lot to do some tidying
b) This is a classic Lambeth plan (as with Rushcroft Square) that will cost millions and look good on the plans but on their track record not work
c) We lose the public toilets - they may not be open but at least there's a possibility of getting them back
d) We lose (I think) the mini railway
e) We lose the rather sweet gates to the park
f) In classic Lambeth fashion they announced a consultation in only one place - over a couple of weeks - kind of reeks of wanting to slip the thing through.
g) The tarmac was going to be made into flower beds and the toilet block improved with lottery money

Strangely the politics of this has been very good mannered for Lambeth - Lib Dems & Conservatives against, Labour in favour - but all in a very moderate way.

 

[Bob]

PS Some historic irony. Back in the 1970s Labour wanted to put a motorway through Brockwell Park. Opposed by Ken Livingstone.

Not sure where he stands on this scheme today.

 

[Winot]

PS Some historic irony. Back in the 1970s Labour wanted to put a motorway through Brockwell Park.

Presumably with the cafe on the hill as the service station?

 

[T & P]

I'm on gaijingirls side. I'm a driver and a jogger, and I say, keep the park.

Without bothering to get a calculator to work it out properly, I'd hazard a guess that about 99.95% of the surface of the park is being left untouched.

If the proposals are carried out wisely and the changes were to improve the traffic around that corner to any significant degree, then everybody would benefit greatly, not just drivers. Provided better crossing is incorporated into the redesign, park users would actually benefit more than most. Reaching the park gates from the other side of the road is currently not a pleasant or very safe experience.

 

[lang rabbie]

I heard a suggestion that the layout of the new bus lane - which appears to dictate the new park boundary -has to allow for the remote possibility of bendy buses ever being scheduled to run on the Norwood Road/Dulwich Road routes.

Any TfL lurkers/bus spotters know better

 

[Termite Man]

Reaching the park gates from the other side of the road is currently not a pleasant or very safe experience.

I really don't understand this mantra that that junction is "unsafe" , I regularly walk and cycle through this junction and as long as your sensible then it's a perfectly safe crossing to make

From what I've been able to work out from the plans and the painted marks in the park the bit of park that will be lost is going to be used for the cycle lane which I think is unecessary , and the little pedstrianised island which again won't provide any real tangible benefit to road users or park users .

 

[Winot]

I really don't understand this mantra that that junction is "unsafe" , I regularly walk and cycle through this junction and as long as your sensible then it's a perfectly safe crossing to make

It's very difficult to cross with a pushchair and/or children in tow. There is no safe route (by which I mean there is always the possibility of traffic coming from somewhere). Also, the traffic tends to snarl up on the Bandidos side going up Norwood Road leaving no gap to get a pushchair through.

 

[mccliche]

is the an email addy to register objections

 

[Crispy]

http://www.brockwellpark.com/herne_hill_junction/objection.php