rendelharris

Were the old baths where Dulwich Leisure Centre is now on CP Road? If so I'd say you've nailed it!

That's an interesting idea Y'man, that's not too far off the line I'd plotted the chimney on. Could well be. Great stories about your mum and grandma too, cheers.

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Going cashless means you can't stash your money > under the mattress. In a time of negative real > interest rates, putting some of your savings into > physical cash is not necessarily a crazy thing to > do. If all your money is in the digital realm it > is all traceable, taxable and, in the event of > another financial meltdown, bail-in-able. I'm not > suggesting that's the masterplan, but it's > intriguing how many governments around the world > have started a 'war' on cash. See Margaret Atwood's Handmaid's Tale - all women instantly disempowered by cutting off their card access.

"Collin leads a team of 16 officers. They are running a number of investigations..." So it's a team of detectives, one of whose cases is the cat killer, not seventeen officers on the one case.

"With trees the air is suppressed at ground level" - are you for real?

For God's sake pop/fazer, your posts really are the limit sometimes. Mental illness is a serious matter which destroys tens of thousands of lives in this country every year, equating it with people who want to preserve a few trees is pathetic.

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I agree that it is nice to have the odd nice > driver, but people really ought to be responsible > and cross at the best places to cross - > zebra/pelican/puffin crossings. > We don't live in Canada or the Netherlands and it > is appropriate to use common sense and understand > that walking in the road is more likely to result > in injury or death than walking on the footpath. > When throw a child into the mix, let alone a baby > in a buggy, that advice should really apply all > the more strongly, whether or not one would prefer > us to live in a world where striding out into the > busy thoroughfare would always and automatically > mean the cars would stop for us - happily and with > good grace, naturally. Well indeed, I was suggesting it would be nice to have the Canadian law, not that people should take it into their heads unilaterally to impose it, obviously.

Lowlander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- If I'm on a slow street like LL and > pedestrians want to cross, I just stop and let > them go with a smile. The fact that there was > traffic behind you is completely irrelevant. Good for you! As always with these sort of discussions, many people approach issues from the standpoint that roads are the unalienable preserve of the motor car and that everyone else should be shaping themselves to its demands if they set foot in it (people might do well to remember that the majority of roads in town weren't designed for motorcars, which are relatively recent interlopers, they were designed for people to live, work and shop in). In some parts of Canada they eschew pedestrian crossings in favour of a law where when the pedestrian signals they wish to cross, anywhere, cars have to stop and let them do so - civilised priorities.

scarlettbanks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Wow - thanks very much rendelharris and > Jules-and-Boo. > > rendelharris - thanks very much for describing the > two routes. Do you spend much time on busy > streets with this route (buses and trucks etc?), > or is most of it small streets, or even better > segregated cycle paths? > > Jules-and-Boo - that's very reassuring to hear the > journey isn't too bad. Which overground do you > get on? (Denmark Hill, NOrth Dulwich, HOP?). How > long does it take you, and are the trains not too > crowded? You say 'hop on the tube' at Canada > Waters, but I'd heard it's very busy there with > long queues etc, and you have to push to get onto > a train - is this not true? > > Thanks again! Hi Scarlett, Those two routes I described are both really quiet - from the start of the Surrey Canal path (starts at the side of Peckham library) to the start of the totally segregated routes at Elephant there's about half a mile of quiet roads to negotiate between Burgess Park and the cycle path on the Old Kent Road, then if you go via Tower Hill you're totally separate from traffic all the way to Limehouse. The other way, via Greenwich, is on the Quietway which lives up to its name, a mixture of cycle paths, one way streets, parks etc. Both routes suitable for even nervous cyclists! From Herne Hill to Peckham library, depending which bit of HH you settle in, you can probably join the Greendale cycle path, come round the side of Dulwich Hamlet, across Dog Kennel Hill and down Bellenden Road. Southwark bike train run guided rides on the Blackfriars route - you can contact them via Sally Eva on this forum - or just give me a shout when you move down here, a loop comprising both routes is one of my favourite training rides, be glad to show you around (ETA Mrs H comes with me on weekends lest you be rightly cautious!). Cheers, Rendel

Chrise Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dulwich Fox - What a load of tosh, of course the > Police want to catch people committing these > thefts. As for your comment on box junctions, > these fines go to the local authority and not the > police. The police have nothing to do with them. > ANPR is also a useful took to detect stolen cars > and vehicles without insurance etc. Spend a bit of > time chatting to local officers and you will soon > find out how keen they are to rid the streets of > thieves stealing mobile phones. And speed camera fines go straight to the H.M.Treasury consolidated fund, not the police - worth pointing out that the government give more to local councils for road safety measures such as cameras than the cameras bring in, so the idea that they're a cash cow is nonsense. Oh and if you don't break the speed limit, they can't catch you...

I cycle to Canary Wharf two or three times a week, it's a very pleasant ride and, taking it fairly easy, can easily be done in forty minutes, it's about eight miles from East Dulwich (it's only five miles going absolutely direct, but that involves going along Queen's Road and New Cross Road which are to be avoided at the best of times, let alone rush hour). There are two good routes, both going along the Surrey Canal path then through Burgess Park onto the North-South cycle superhighway. You can turn off this into Weber Street (right off Blackfriar's Bridge Road) and follow the Quietway all the way into Greenwich, or go straight on, over Blackfriars, take the East-West superhighway to Tower Hill then the segregated cycle path down Royal Mint Street and Cable Street to Limehouse and follow the river. Greenwich foot tunnel has an experimental system in place which measures the balance between foot passengers and cyclists and changes the signs at each end to either "consider pedestrians" or "no cycling" which should be fully operational next year, I'd guess at that time of the morning it's most likely to be no cycling but it's only a five minute push anyway. Good luck!

Don't think so - never heard of one - but it's certainly on the right line.

Thanks for the interesting suggestions, photos are difficult but I get the impression it's more northeast than due north, as it would be for Burgess Park/Camberwell buildings. I've tried drawing a rough line of the photographer's eyeline on the attached, working on the basis that s/he seems to be about fifteen yards south of the Shawbury/Lordship junction, so taking a line through the street corner it would seem the chimney is somewhere in the Rye/Nunhead direction. Could of course be totally out! ETA But if not, have noticed the line goes almost exactly through No.70 Nunhead Grove, which was apparently the site of the Besfoldas pram factory, though unfortunately I can't find a picture to see if had a chimney or not.

Thanks for that BNG, fascinating indeed. Anyone one know what the tall object on the horizon is, just right of centre? A factory chimney?

KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Which part of "I don't want to cycle" does not > penetrate to the bit of the brain that says 'Oh, > OK, I recognise that is your CHOICE' ? Why the entirely unnecessary aggressive response? I said I quite understood the reasons for not cycling, I just wanted to point out - as far as I can see, completely non-judgementally and politely - that fear of pollution shouldn't necessarily be one of them. It's a discussion board. People make comments, other people respond to them. That's kind of the point. ETA: By the way, both the people on here to whom I've responded with what are intended to be helpful comments didn't say "I don't want to cycle," they said "I'd like to cycle but...", so I was just addressing the but.

Jess85 Wrote: > I'd love to cycle but personally I would not do so > in London due to the pollution and I'd be worried > about being knocked off etc, however safe a > cyclist I was I do appreciate that cycling in London can seem incredibly daunting (though the new segregated cycle routes and quietways are amazing - I can now get from Peckham Library to Canary Wharf with only about half a mile on-road, and that on quiet backstreets) but in terms of pollution, a King's College study in 2014 demonstrated that cyclists have the lowest pollution absorption of any road users, with car drivers having the worst, bus passengers next, then pedestrians, then cyclists, so nobody should let pollution levels put them off.

What Henry said, better than I could. I'd only add that the section of the junction there is about thirty yards long, so car drivers slowing for a cyclist changing lanes will cost them what, about five seconds on their journey?

Henry_17 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sally, > > Easier still to understand had you used the word > "weaving" correctly. Your complaint it seems is > about cyclists changing lanes at a point at which > they are required to do so by the road lay out. > All vehicles wishing to follow the route under > discussion are also required to change lanes at > that point. None of them are weaving. Spot on Henry - coming from Chadwick one has to move to the right of the lane in order not to block those wishing to carry on up the hill, then once round the bend one has to move to the left if wishing to go straight down Lyndhurst. Not 'weaving' - whatever that may be - following the rules of the road.

Hi Indiepanda, Managed to get out for a quick look this morning and there's a nice little virtually traffic free route for you: From the Ryedale/Underhill junction go back up Ryedale, left onto Balcher Road and right down Dunstan's Road (traffic controlled) At the bottom of Dunstan's Road dismount, push over the pelican crossing and enter Peckham Rye park (where cycling is permitted, before any naysayers jump in, I checked the signs!). Go straight ahead then take the first path to the left and follow it round to the park gate. Exiting the gate turn left on the path back towards Forest Hill Road/Peckham Rye. When you reach the road, either push your bike along the pavement twenty yards or there's a dirt path to the side which is fine in all but the nastiest weather. Take the diagonal path on your right across the common. At the end of the path, dismount and walk across the lights and take the short, usually quiet, stretch of road up to the Rye pub. If you don't like traffic you probably won't want to ride round the junction, so dismount, walk across the zebra and remount at the buses and cycles only left turn into Rye Lane. Straight up Rye Lane, come out at the traffic lights by Peckham Library (which cyclists are allowed to ride across), ride across the plaza and the Surrey Canal path starts to the left of the library. The Southwark bike train can show you the rest of the route, briefly it's (or the way I go is) Surrey Canal path to Burgess Park, exit Burgess Park by the BMX track, all the way up Portland Road and Brandon Street (both very quiet), top of Brandon Street a short cycle path takes you onto Rodney Road, right into Rodney Place, pavement cycle path to your left takes you along OKR to Elephant from where you join the wonderful new totally segregated cycle tracks which can take you to Blackfriars and on to the city, Westminster, Farringdon, Limehouse etc all without ever sharing a road with motors. Hope that's some use, I've drawn it out on the map attached. The one drawback is, obviously, that in winter the park will be closed in the evenings. However, even if you got off and walked from the end of the diagonal path across the common (opposite Roy Brooks) it's only a third of a mile to Dunstan's Road, so an extra 5/10 minutes. The whole route to the centre of Blackfriars Bridge is 5.7 miles, so even at a very gentle pace you'll get there in half an hour. Let us know how you get on! Cheers, Rendel

Will have a look round when I'm up there, let you know if I can see a good route!

Give us a rough idea of your starting point, I'm riding round there most days at the moment for the hills (Canonbie Road, ouch!), sure I could pick out a safe run...

indiepanda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 63 has been my usual route to work in the city for > years after getting fed up with unreliable poorly > timetabled Thameslink services, but it's been > getting slower and slower in recent years so I am > seriously thinking of getting into cycling. > > I can ride a bike but never done so in London, but > am told that it's possible to get into town > without having to dodge too much traffic now what > with some segregated cycle lanes and so forth. > Southwark do courses to help you get into cycling > and my office has secure bike storage and showers > etc. Might leave it to the spring when it will be > light when I leave work though - not best to do in > the dark when am a bit nervous. The Southwark courses are brilliant - turned Mrs.H from a keen but nervy rider into a thoroughly confident one. The cycle routes are absolutely superb, from Peckham library to the City there's only one short stretch on very quiet streets, otherwise all off road and safe as houses. I've heard the bike trains are excellent too - good luck and enjoy, the privilege of being in control of your own journey instead of relying on traffic/public transport/strikes cannot be overestimated!

Lowlander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now that Khan is our Labour mayor, and Chris > Grayling / Conservatives in charge of Transport at > a government level, there will be no > collaboration. Things seem to get worse when the > mayor is of a different political orientation to > the ruling government. Indeed - particularly as Grayling has reneged on the agreement struck with Boris to hand Southern to TfL for, it appears, no other reason than petty party politics.

How about cycling - cover four miles in about 15 minutes?

Occasionally I might feel too knackered (aka lazy) to get my bike out and leave it in the car until morning, yes, so a timely warning to take more care does no harm.