Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So I was very happy to see a lollipop man by the crossing of Crystal Palace Road / Whately Rd / Underhill Rd. I have kids in Heber and I have to dodge the traffic (including P13) every morning taking them to school.


But it seems that the lollipop man is only supposed to help people cross Crystal Palace Road from one side to another. When I asked why they wouldn?t help us cross the other way - eg crossing Underhill or Whately to continue towards Heber, I was told that ?to cross CPR was the safest way to cross the road? according to ?the study?. When I told the lollipop supervisor that most people didn?t just want to cross CPR with their kids they actually want to cross Whately or Underhill to take their kids to either Heber or Harris I kept getting the answer that ?it was the safest place to cross.


Does anyone know who to contact at the council in regards to this(I literally just want to give them the feedback)? I am super happy to see a lollipop man there but if he could help people cross the other direction that would be even better!

Hi edcam - the point is that if I do what the lollipop man said (it was his supervisor actually who was there on the first day who said it) then I don?t get to where we need to go! We need to cross Whately or Underhill to continue walking on CPR towards Heber. The lollipop man will not help you to cross either - he will only take you over the island part of CPR. We?ll still be on the ?wrong side? of Whately and Underhill..and as he is on his own he is only allowed to help in that spot. No other lollipop men or ladies :).


Thanks for suggestions as to who to turn to.

Oh my goodness. To call the lollipop man ineffective would be doing him a massive kindness. It really winds me up. He stands leaning against the island on Crystal Palace Road - which is the safest part of that junction, and therefore the least necessary spot. He doesn't even step into the road when people cross at that point, he just holds the lollipop stick out *behind* them as they cross over. I don't understand why he's there in the first place, he might as well not be, he provides no barrier between pedestrians and the traffic. It's really baffling!
There was one like this on the Heygate. I'm afraid that lollypopping requires courage and dedication to child-welfare. Complain to your councillor and Apcoa. The council funds them to keep children safe. If they are not doing that then the money is not being spent properly. The council can tell Apcoa to get real. Lollypop people have to go where it's dangerous not where it's safe.

tarafitness Wrote:

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

> Oh my goodness. To call the lollipop man

> ineffective would be doing him a massive kindness.

> It really winds me up. He stands leaning against

> the island on Crystal Palace Road - which is the

> safest part of that junction, and therefore the

> least necessary spot. He doesn't even step into

> the road when people cross at that point, he just

> holds the lollipop stick out *behind* them as they

> cross over. I don't understand why he's there in

> the first place, he might as well not be, he

> provides no barrier between pedestrians and the

> traffic. It's really baffling!



I'd argue that it isn't the safest place to cross and that the island is a contributing factor in making it more dangerous than elsewhere. If you see reaching the island as a sort of safe haven to reach while crossing, you tend to only look in the direction you would expect a vehicle to come from. Because of the island and the fact that parking is legal quite close to it, it often makes it difficult for larger vehicles to get by.


Due to this, sometimes they will pass the island on the wrong side on the road rather than go slowly. A while back I was a microsecond away from being flattened by a van which accelerated to do this. So in my opinion far from being safe, its position with parking in close proximity, make it a potential death trap as I almost found out.

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

    • 🤣 at the puns. Seriously though, thank you for not assuming he must be lost just because he followed you a long way. Thank you for posting on here rather than  taking him back to your house!
    • I'm disgusted and outraged...at the Telegraph. I'd much rather have sex parties happening around the corner than have some of the Telegraph's oligarch owners infesting the neighbourhood. https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/may/14/foreign-states-limited-to-15-stake-in-uk-newspapers-amid-telegraph-uncertainty
    • Apparently this forum  is " brimming with disgust and outrage" 🤣 I thought that was The  Telegraph 🤣
    • This is fascinating about how Lambeth are thought to be getting around the High Court ruling to allow the Brockwell events to proceed.....seems a risky legal strategy if true...and not sure I would want to be the council planning legal person who signs this off.....   https://www.brixtonbuzz.com/2025/05/protect-brockwell-park-fires-fresh-warning-as-lambeth-council-doubles-down-on-disputed-festival-plan/ Worth reading the whole piece for context but this section stands out: Despite this, Brockwell Live has submitted a new certificate application — one which they admit still covers more than 28 days, and is therefore not materially different from the version the court already struck down. It looks like instead of going to the Court of Appeal — where they’d surely lose — Brockwell Live is now asking Lambeth Planning to second-guess the High Court and decide whether the judge was right. Despite the clarity of the court’s decision, Lambeth appears to be doubling down, relying on a legal interpretation that’s already been rejected by a judge — and now asking its own planning department to endorse a position the judiciary has ruled unlawful.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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