SE23.com - The Official Forum for Forest Hill & Honor Oak, London SE23
Online since 2002  -  10,000+ members

Home | SE23 Topics | Shops & Services | Wider Topics | Offered/Wanted/Lost/Found | Advertising | Contact
Geddes Hairdressing & Barbering Studio One Armstrong & Co Solicitors Adult Learning Lewisham


Post Reply  Post Topic 
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »
Improved parking for Dartmouth Road shops
Author Message
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #1
28-03-2008 01:16 PM

Walking the dog the other day, and a thought crossed my mind.
On one side of the railway lines you have a barely used car park, which serves very little. Not even the parent dropping their kids to school at local Christchurch Primary can walk THAT far.

On the other side of the lines you have Dartmouth Road, slowly slowly falling off the radar for local traders, businesses coming and going. With of course a few remaining and working out.

So..... maybe a foot bridge over to the other side of the lines? Connecting both sides of Forest Hill, conviniently etc. Giving local shop keepers somewhere to direct people to park to use their shops, and giving FH a boost?

Surely that would help commuters too?

I know there is the subway, but we all know how vunerable people feel in these things, and its hardly disabled friendly either.

Thoughts?

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #2
28-03-2008 01:39 PM

Sounds a good idea butb probably more expensive than you think.
I am always surprised how few people seem to use The German Bridge as it is.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #3
28-03-2008 01:51 PM

Yeah I would not expect it to be a cheap fix. Just thought it was something obvious that would help FH as a whole.
Surely more thriving shops, more parkers, more rates, and more access to both sides of the lines, now FH is becoming the thriving area for residents that it is.

Maybe something with the tubeline extension eh? Could work hand in hand Smile

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #4
28-03-2008 02:02 PM

a footbridge still wouldn't solve the accessability problem for people with mobility problems, buggies etc - unless it had lifts each side which would be really expensive (and unreliable). I think the answer lies with the subway, which I understand is going to be improved by the people developing the new flats. I am not sure what they are gong to do with it - it would be difficult (impossible?) to make it step free. I believe there will be lifts to get over the tracks in FH station when it gets done up, but you will need an Oyster card to use them!!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #5
28-03-2008 02:18 PM

thenutfield Wrote:
a footbridge still wouldn't solve the accessability problem for people with mobility problems, buggies etc - unless it had lifts each side which would be really expensive (and unreliable). I think the answer lies with the subway, which I understand is going to be improved by the people developing the new flats. I am not sure what they are gong to do with it - it would be difficult (impossible?) to make it step free. I believe there will be lifts to get over the tracks in FH station when it gets done up, but you will need an Oyster card to use them!!


I think the car park certainly allows ample room for a ramp to be used for a footbridge. The other side is indeed a little more restricted, but im sure a spiral ramp like in ladywell park could be effective.

The plans for the subway sound rather empty, and I agree, the longer flight near WH Smiths is a little harder to resolve, would be one hell of a steep ramp.

As for the station and lifts, that should be fun to see. Station could do with an overhaul. As for the Oyster card users only, but of course !

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #6
28-03-2008 03:22 PM

"the longer flight near WH Smiths is a little harder to resolve, would be one hell of a steep ramp."

The original subway had no steps so it is more than possible.
There is quite a distance from the rail and road to make a reasonable slope.

The German/Iron bridge is disaster waiting to happen - the steps are very steep and to make matters worse, who ever repaired the bridge a few years ago neglected to put the hand rails back. All 4 are missing from the top of both sides. It probably could do with a cage over it as well, to deter objects being lobed over - there was an old bike by the line a few months ago!

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #7
28-03-2008 04:11 PM

Perryman Wrote:
"the longer flight near WH Smiths is a little harder to resolve, would be one hell of a steep ramp."

The original subway had no steps so it is more than possible.
There is quite a distance from the rail and road to make a reasonable slope.


Whats a workable gradient for wheelchair users to climb, cant be much. To be honest I would expect the ramp to have to start half way through the subway to get any reasonable gradient on it. And of course to keep the PC people happy too.

Find all posts by this user Reply
steveb


Posts: 113
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #8
28-03-2008 05:17 PM

Good idea, but the main reason the car park isn't used by shoppers is that you are restricted to half an hour free. Not enough time for more than a few quick purchases (with or without a ramp link). 2 hours free would encourage shoppers to Forest Hill and help revitalise the centre. Present restriction encourages people to shop at the Sainsburys in Lower Sydenham.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #9
28-03-2008 05:30 PM

Aaah is it? Having not really parked in there I didnt know that, but agreed, a reduced rate for short term even would encourage use too. 50p for a couple of hours maybe.

FH does really need a little boost, in certain respects that housing growth is helping that, but I would rather not live in a town full of trendy bars and places to eat, and nothing more.

FH lacks so many business types these days Sad

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #10
28-03-2008 11:56 PM

Perryman Wrote:
The original subway had no steps so it is more than possible.


thanks for the info Perryman, I didnt know that. When was it turned into steps? Any photos, anyone?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #11
31-03-2008 04:07 AM

1/12/1881 (British Railway Journal):
A major dispute arose over the subway. As the railway effectively split Forest Hill in half, the importance of the subway as a link to the main shopping area was considerable.
The original subway was a gentle slope and Banister's proposal was to replace this with some 27 steps.

The Gazette denounced the proposal :
A mount of 27 steps between you and your dinner will be the last straw.
Others may like the exercise and find it a pleasant substitute for a summer holiday and alpine climbing, but for gentle ladies and tender children, the 27 steps is a piece of positive cruelty.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Here here! My kind of Newspaper.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Sherwood


Posts: 1,347
Joined: Mar 2005
Post: #12
31-03-2008 04:59 PM

Why would they put steps in place of a ramp?

Was it to keep the riff-raff out?

Find all posts by this user Reply
thenutfield


Posts: 235
Joined: Nov 2007
Post: #13
31-03-2008 09:06 PM

fantastic nugget of info Perryman, thanks.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Snazy


Posts: 1,495
Joined: Jan 2008
Post: #14
31-03-2008 09:11 PM

Good find Perryman Smile Im guessing this was all while the lines for the railway were maybe 2 lines only and not the current 4?

Either way, a ramp in there now would require the depth of the subway to be increased surely?

Find all posts by this user Reply
Perryman


Posts: 809
Joined: Dec 2006
Post: #15
01-04-2008 05:26 AM

I do not know how the gentle slow was achieved, but there were 4 lines (and a central platform), so it was a similar problem. (thanks Falkor @sydenhan town forum for the extract).

Since we can no longer seem to present a united front on the closure of FH pools, I doubt there is the will power to push through a new subway project, when presumably half of FH would prefer it to be just bricked up, (or perhaps made into low cost housing)....

Find all posts by this user Reply
dom


Posts: 2
Joined: Jun 2008
Post: #16
03-06-2008 02:26 AM

Until the council stops enforcing parking regulations throughout the village it is pure suicide to open a shop in Forest Hill. Potential clients cannot find parking spaces and here goes the clientele to other venues where they can stop without walking 1 mile.

The South Circular is a great asset and sees thousands of cars passing through Forest Hill every day but no one can park.

Pubs and restaurant when not too large can probably survive better with local clients who just have to walk there, but no other shop can - of course.

And the council keep on his mission to destroy this area by implementing paying parking in streets which did not need any like Waldenshaw Road. Since they have done this 1 year ago, the resident on the other side of London Road are left with Taymount Rise to park there car. Result? Well go and have a look a 6pm:
Waldenshaw road has 20 to 30 parking spaces available - empty - and the residents on Taymount rise & London Road have to park their cars at the top of the hill.... when there is space... They cannot park in Waldenshaw Road anymore and do not have the option to buy a yearly parking license!

The next move of the council will most probably be to implement paying parking in Taymount Rise. This of course will make the matter worse.

It is quasy-criminal for the council to do this. Shops open, go broke and close down.... and this since the have implemented double yellow lines and red lines everywhere in town.

This was the death of Aceri as well.

No serious business will hire the ex-Mc Donald until free parking is re-implemented.

I live in Forest Hill for 8 years and have seen it go to pieces for that very reason.

I have emailled the council, and of course they do not give a damn.

It's a shame.

Find all posts by this user Reply
brian


Posts: 2,002
Joined: Apr 2005
Post: #17
03-06-2008 09:10 AM

I am not sure you are correct but do appreciate the problem.

East Dulwich had to my knowledge more restrictions than Forest Hill and seems to be thriving.
I have lived in SE 23 for 59 years. Although had a car for last 30 years I never ever used it for shopping locally. It was quicker and more relaxing to walk.

Surely there are enough people within 1 mile of the town centre to sustain many businesses, without having to utilise a motor vehicle. Think of the environment plus your health.

I appreciate if you live in Waldensham Rd must be a problem , but great exercise walking up Taymount Rise.

I live at Perry Vale end of Dacres Road and would welcome parking restrictions. At evenings and weekends possible 1 or 2 cars in spaces for about 20 or so. From 7.45 weekdays full up with people using the station. Result we have delivery difficulties. Even funeral cars had to park in middle of the road. Why oh why cannot these people walk to the station and get fit.

Where do you suggest the council release more road space for free parking apart from Waldenshaw Rd.
London Rd under TFL
Dartmouth Rd far to narrow for any cars to be parked in my opinion as major bus route.

Where else?

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #18
03-06-2008 12:27 PM

[quote=brian]
East Dulwich had to my knowledge more restrictions than Forest Hill and seems to be thriving.

On a Saturday you can park on Lordship lane quite comfortably most of the time - on a week night you can park there as long as you like - maybe the difference is that they have a big long road with room for parking both sides (and lots of shops worth parking for) unlike Forest Hill. You can park on a lot of the side roads too.

Find all posts by this user Reply
jon14


Posts: 145
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #19
03-06-2008 12:28 PM

brian Wrote:
East Dulwich had to my knowledge more restrictions than Forest Hill and seems to be thriving.


On a Saturday you can park on Lordship lane quite comfortably most of the time - on a week night you can park there as long as you like - maybe the difference is that they have a big long road with room for parking both sides (and lots of shops worth parking for) unlike Forest Hill. You can park on a lot of the side roads too.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Baboonery


Posts: 581
Joined: Sep 2007
Post: #20
03-06-2008 12:43 PM

brian Wrote:
I am not sure you are correct but do appreciate the problem.

East Dulwich had to my knowledge more restrictions than Forest Hill and seems to be thriving.
I have lived in SE 23 for 59 years. Although had a car for last 30 years I never ever used it for shopping locally. It was quicker and more relaxing to walk.

Surely there are enough people within 1 mile of the town centre to sustain many businesses, without having to utilise a motor vehicle. Think of the environment plus your health.

I appreciate if you live in Waldensham Rd must be a problem , but great exercise walking up Taymount Rise.

I live at Perry Vale end of Dacres Road and would welcome parking restrictions. At evenings and weekends possible 1 or 2 cars in spaces for about 20 or so. From 7.45 weekdays full up with people using the station. Result we have delivery difficulties. Even funeral cars had to park in middle of the road. Why oh why cannot these people walk to the station and get fit.
Where do you suggest the council release more road space for free parking apart from Waldenshaw Rd.
London Rd under TFL
Dartmouth Rd far to narrow for any cars to be parked in my opinion as major bus route.

Where else?


Because they're motorists, who believe that the universe should revolve around them solely because they have a car. Personally I'd let them do what they like for a week: park absolutely anywhere, drive however fast they like, pay whatever they want to for petrol: half of them would be dead by Thursday and the rest of us could get on with it.

Come on, then, Dom, where has double yellows or reds that doesn't need it? London Road? You really are joking here, aren't you? Dartmouth Road? Which has restrictions that everyone ignores, increasingly on both sides, causing congestion on both road and pavement? Where else? Free parking wherever you like was all very well when there were 25% fewer people in London, not as many of them had cars, and the outer suburbs of the city hadn't been designed around the car, but that time's gone.

I've had my share of experience with small businesses, and sadly, the parking lament is all too often a convenient excuse for the failure of an unsustainable or just plain unlucky business idea.

Find all posts by this user Reply
Pages (2): « First [1] 2 Next > Last »

Friends of Blythe Hill Fields


Possibly Related Topics ...
Topic: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  Traffic lights Dartmouth Road/London Road robin orton 111 44,677 22-11-2013 06:14 PM
Last Post: rbmartin
  Warning: Dartmouth Arms parking JulietP 16 7,339 01-09-2013 05:54 PM
Last Post: Doodle