Residents across Thamesfield ward are angry. Eight-and-a-half-feet metal bike hangars have appeared on their streets this week. In some cases residents say they actively told the council they didn’t want them; in others, they were never consulted, and at other locations, there are serious safety concerns.
And then there’s the fact that they have been placed in the middle of parking spaces.
Readers have shared with Putney.news several email threads with council officials in which they have complained bitterly, to no avail.
On Pentlow Street, residents told the council they didn’t want one. The council installed it anyway. On Borneo Street, the council’s transport planner claims consultation letters were sent; residents say they never saw them. On Esmond Street, a similar story, no consultation and no demand. On Bangalore, residents can’t understand why the metal structure was put in the middle of two parking spaces.
So far, of the nine installations, residents are up in arms over five.
What the council said, and what it did
Putney.news has seen the email trail.
In November 2025, while the Phase 4 consultation for 34 Putney locations was open, resident Alex Sandberg opposed the Pentlow proposal. Ward councillor Ethan Brooks filed a formal enquiry the same day: “It doesn’t seem to be a popular choice amongst residents there.” The council’s transport planner, Margo Turner, replied that she would consider responses alongside others received. She sent Sandberg the same assurance three days later. The consultation closed in November. Turner did not contact Sandberg again for five months.
On Tuesday, out of the blue, a parking suspension notice appeared. The hangar went in the next morning. Cllr Brooks responded while the installation was under way: “This wasn’t our decision as local councillors… we weren’t consulted.” Sandberg emailed Turner the same day: “You said my and my neighbour’s views on imposing a bike shed on our street would be taken into account. They have not.”
Another resident told Putney.news not a single household on the street’s WhatsApp group supported the hangar. The flats already have their own garages for bikes. Neighbours who have checked the nearby Werter Road hangar say it is rarely full.
Three more streets, the same pattern
On Bangalore Street, resident Shane Gwinnutt says the hangar has been placed in the middle of a parking bay rather than at the end, taking two spaces instead of one. He was told the installer had “specific instructions” for that position.
On Esmond Street, Mick Stone of the Putney Action Group says the people most affected simply weren’t reached. “They couldn’t have consulted anybody in Esmond Street because it’s all back gardens,” he said, “and you’ve got three [residents at the Wadham Road end]. Not one of those were consulted.”
The junction at Wadham Road has a history. Last year, Mick warned a council officer and a local councillor in person that an existing bike hangar was a line-of-sight concern. A hangar under a District Line bridge blocks both drivers’ and pedestrians’ view of the road. Mick told us how a mother and child had a near-miss, sparking him to contact the council and insist on a meeting. The hangar is still there; the council has now installed another one in a similar spot one street down on Esmond Street.
Borneo Street: one account from the council, one from the residents
On Thursday morning, Hotham Road resident Emily Reed emailed the council to ask about a hangar that had just appeared on Borneo Street, one street over from her home.
Council transport planner Turner responded. The proposal had been “overwhelmingly supported by local residents,” she stated. Reed asked for the figures: 44 letters sent, 23 responses, 18 in support, 5 against.
Reed asked whether Hotham Road had been included:
“Letters were sent to addresses on the southern half of Borneo Street and the nearby properties on Hotham Road. This is in line with our standard procedure that we have undertaken for well over 500 local transport consultations over the last several years, including bikehangars and dockless e-bike bays.”
Emily Reed says no such letter reached her. The Hotham Road neighbours she has spoken to say the same. She lives metres from the Borneo Street installation.
Putney.news has filed a Freedom of Information request for the list of addresses the letters went to.
How this started, and who is responsible
Wandsworth approved its first bike hangar strategy in September 2019. The borough was under Conservative control, as it had been since 1978. Local councillor John Locker was the Cabinet Member for Transport. Labour won the council in May 2022 and approved Phases 2, 3 and 4. By October 2024, 229 hangars had been installed across Wandsworth. Phase 4 is the round going in now and it is focused on Putney in particular.
Mick Stone’s question is the right one: “I want to know the rationale for these things and where they’re being put… who’s responsible for such a stupid decision and failure to communicate?” he asks.
Locker, the man who designed the framework, is not standing for re-election in Thamesfield on 7 May. He has moved, late, to a ward on the other side of the borough. The residents living with the consequences won’t be voting on him.
We contacted the council this week posing a number of questions about each installation and the overall process. As usual, we have not received a response.
Can an installed hangar be removed?
Wandsworth hasn’t said. Putney.news has asked: what is the process, what does it cost, and who pays. Other London councils treat relocation as routine. Waltham Forest publishes the price in its maintenance contract. The Wandsworth answer will appear here when it arrives.
What residents can do
Contact your ward councillors: Cllr Ethan Brooks is the only current councillor standing for re-election. The council’s formal complaints route is at wandsworth.gov.uk/complaints. If you want the consultation data for your street, file a Freedom of Information request for free at whatdotheyknow.com/body/wandsworth_council.
Local elections are on 7 May. The hangars are in. The questions are not answered.
The whole basis of this piece is based on the false assumption that a local consultation is in some way axreferendum. It isn’t, so all it represents is a few local motorists doing what hingeing motirists do best, whingeing.
Entitled to your view, but the lack of information to council tax payers should be as in other boroughs & not need formal freedom of information demands. I have spent years in Putney living in roads off Lower Richmond Road, including Pentlow & Ashlone as well as Chelverton. All suffering in the last 4 years with the incumbent, incompetent Council.
Fortunately I moved out of Chelverton 2 years ago into an apartment with garages, not that I have a car nor bike, but great for storage.
The story doesn’t argue residents have a veto – it documents what the council said it would do (consider responses alongside others received) and what it then did (five months of silence, then a hangar). The consultation question is about the council’s own process, not whether opposition = refusal. Those are two different things.
I’ve noticed on the Cyclehoops website that almost all (in fact, all apart from two of those installed in West Putney) appear to be full, and waiting list only.
So the evidence seems to show that there clearly is demand from local residents!
This outrage seems to be a small subsection complaining the loudest, whereas the evidence suggests this is a good thing for the neighbourhood and demand outstrips supply…
You’re right that there is genuine demand – between the Cyclehoops and Falco rental systems there are 67 bike hangars in the Putney area alone, most with waiting lists.
Nobody is arguing against bike hangars in principle. The issue is placement: putting them on Lower Richmond Road where every parking space is in daily use rather than on quieter streets nearby, and in at least one case placing a hangar across the middle of a bay rather than at the end, removing two spaces instead of one. That’s a priority decision.
Combined with residents who say they raised concerns, were told they’d be listened to, and then got a parking suspension notice with 24 hours’ warning – it’s not surprising people are angry. The council is supposed to work with its residents, not impose on them.
Your point is fairly reasonable: but surely placement drives demand. If these hangers were placed at the end of the road out of the way they wouldn’t get used?
All decisions made by the council involve trading off the needs of different resident groups. The evidence is that the hangers are, already, oversubscribed. This is despite them being very recently installed. It feels this shows that the placement is correct and the council is meeting the needs of local residents?
Being honest, this outrage over placement just feels like NIMBYism by some of the loudest residents in the area.
Another excellent article. Some people will not appreciate highlighting poor process and a lack of transparency due to the subject.
The council should document the actual policy that they are following, which would enable councilors to communicate accurately to residents.
If the policy is to install where demand is high then that seems sensible.
However as already stated in comments above, this is not the case for some of the locations.
It’s a legitimate question to ask why are they being installed in a low demand location when there is such high demand elsewhere? What was the process followed in these instances one wonders???
Keep up the good work.
Considering that half of Wandsworth households don’t have access to a car (including my own), the long waiting list for bike hangar spaces, and that approx 6 bikes in a hangar taking only half a parking space (so 12 in a parking space – or maybe more in the space of a modern, larger SUV/ car) one hangar doesn’t seem a disproportionate use of public space on our streets. I am fortunate that I can park bikes at home but not everyone has the space. There are always extremely strong objections to change in use of parking spaces but this seems disproportionate to the possible mild inconvenience of finding a space slightly further away. Those with mobility issues excepted of course. Agree that the council could be more open about what they are doing as part of their strategy to help residents walk and cycle safely and easily, reduce car use for short local journeys, and improve air quality. It is in everyone’s interest including those who need their own cars to get everyone else who can using alternatives.