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

    • Yes they do, but that is not the core tenet of representative democracy. At that level, we are voting for a parliamentary representative, irregardless of whether parties exist or not. It's why candidates can stand as independents. 
    • Sadly I think you will never convince people like this. They think gardens have to be kept chopped back and controlled. My theory is that this comes from being (or trying to be) controlling in every aspect of their lives, so I doubt if anything you could say or show them would have any effect. But are they actually coming into your garden or leaning over into it and pulling up/damaging things? If so, maybe one of our community police people could have a word with them?
    • Dear Nature lovers - advice please. I am being harassed by a neighbour who doesn't like my standard of gardening which she calls 'messy'. (I have rewilded my garden with advice from the London Wildlife Trust and a gardening expert from The Times.) I have twice caught this neighbour and her husband pulling up my plants and damaging my trees. Plus she has photographed my house, and sent a dozen complaints to the Dulwich Estate about my plan to rewild the verge outside my property - approved by the Estate some 4 years ago in line with their stated policy of supporting biodiversity in and around Dulwich. What can I do to introduce these neighbours  to the benefits to us all of returning a portion of our gardens to nature?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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