davidk

BUMP Here is the latest peer reviewed evidence on 20mph zones for anyone interested: http://dro.dur.ac.uk/13621/1/13621.pdf?DDD14+dbl4jk+d700tmt

I thought you meant drivers more broadly. I completely agree. Bus drivers are incentivised (and punished) on the basis of speed of service, not ride quality or safety. And bus companies are extremely poor at dealing with complaints about poor/dangerous driving. No real reason apart from politics and culture that the speed of buses (and all motor vehicles) couldn't be restricted to the posted limit remotely using GPS systems.

What pressures do you suppose are causing these KSI stats? And what measures do you think would improve things?

Of course roads can be and often are dangerous places. But the point of 20mph and other threads like this is that some roads are far more dangerous than they need to or should be. Barry Rd is a classic example. I have zero sympathy for someone choosing to drive a bus at 36mph in a 20 zone (if that is what happened). That is criminal negligence.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > > The solution in all these cases is not reducing > existing capacity?its about improving the > attractiveness of the alternative, WITHOUT majorly > compromising the primary option?. Or you could do both? In some places you'll probably have to in order to do anything worthwhile.

Urgh, four paragraphs and she managed to drop so many clangers. The whole point of investing in cycling infrastructure in London is to change the demographic away from the "white, under 40 [middle class] male" that currently dominates. Arguing against these measures in these terms is like arguing against building a bridge because no one currently crosses the river at that point. Has anyone seen the cycling super highway stuff starting to open around Oval/Elephant and Castle and Blackfriars Rd? It's bloody brilliant and we need more of it. There was ample warning of this closure. I knew about it from a public consultation not far off 12 months before it happened. This closure hasn't been brilliantly handled, but at least Lambeth are trying to do something. By far the least pleasant thing about living in London is the traffic and the pollution. The status quo is not sustainable.

This is being very poorly managed and is really dangerous, especially for vulnerable road users. I've reported to Southwark twice now. This morning there was a flat bed parked on Crystal Palace Rd, right on the corner with Upland Rd, completely blocking sight lines. This is absurd, especially during busy times.

Probably just farting in the wind here but I was around LL and North Cross Road on foot yesterday and I'm quite pleased with the results. It looks a lot nicer than before and the (sort of) continuation of the footpath over the junction mouth makes me a lot more confident crossing the road there and claiming my right of way as a ped. Hard to understand why it took so long though.

It's tricky. There are stretches of Lordship Lane, especially the main bit of the high street, where it makes perfect sense. But Sydenham Hill feels horrendously slow. And, as others have said, if it's not going to be enforced then it feels a bit pointless. That said, it has been shown that average speeds do reduce in 20mph zones, even unenforced ones. I attended a presentation by the City of London Police who produced some data that showed average speeds in The City have reduced by 2mph since the introduction of the 20mph zone. Which doesn't sound like much, but they reckon it reduces the risk of death from a car on pedestrian collision by as much as 25%.

Completely agree. Barry Rd is a horrible environment in just about any mode of transport. For 20mph to be taken seriously in the Borough it needs to be enforced and this isn't happening.

Yeah, that corner is not being managed very well. I ride through there every morning and do so very carefully and slowly!

Cycled through here last night (around 7pm) turning right to go down towards Lordship Lane. Apart from a nice, smooth new surface there doesn't really appear to be any provision for cyclists at the junction. Had a 4x4 up my trumpet so 'took the lane' until I was through the junction and then got buzzed and a lungful of exhaust fumes for my trouble. Thanks for nothing Southwark. I hope they have at least improved the pedestrian experience otherwise what the hell was the point?

Good work. More of this please.

It didn't during the trial closures. But your point highlights the main issue with any scheme like this: If there is not a coherent, borough wide system in place then changes like this can only have limited effect. Thankfully Lambeth does have such a plan.

Apologies, that should have read "through motor traffic" So, yes, cycles are traffic. Do you understand the difference to the public environment between designing permeability for cycling and walking versus allowing permeability for motor traffic? There are plenty of available parallel routes for motor traffic around Loughborough Junction.

Good news. There have already been some trial closures that worked well. Really no good reason that there should be traffic along there. Should hopefully open up another safe corridor for cycling into the City from South and South East.

Why does collective responsibility and punishment apply to people on bikes in a way that it doesn't apply to people in almost any other way? I cycle most days. Like 80% of British Cycling members I also own a car and have a driving licence. And my activities on my bike are insured through my home insurance and my cycling club membership. I am a responsible, careful and confident cyclist. There are far more people like me on bikes than people like those described above. So why the hate?

A good service continues to operate on my 10 year old Dawes Galaxy. ED to Westminster in 30 minutes, with only occasional delays due to an unusually large number of numpties in stationary metal boxes.

To be fair, the bloke who last night tried to run me over in his BMW whilst rat running down Crebor St did look a bit Viking-ey

VED? The thing you pay to compensate everyone else from the emissions from your vehicle? My point is that doesn't "entitle" you to use the road. And your paying of it certainly doesn't constitute and argument against traffic calming.

spider69 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bobbsy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Please don't force more rat running onto > Underhill > > Road. Even with traffic calming measures most > cars > > exceed the limit. > > > > Potential idea - close Underhill halfway along > so > > its no longer a "through" road, and residents > can > > access from the appropriate end? > > > Why? If people have paid their car licence they > are entitled to use the road. > What's this "car licence" you speak of? The general movement to strategically close roads in certain places is mainly because people are sick of selfish, rat running motorists bringing noise, pollution, death and destruction to otherwise quiet residential streets. I hope we see a lot more of it in ED.

Agreed Wulfhound. Given the proximity of Barry to Friern (and CP road for that matter) there really is no good reason that the latter is still available for rat running. A few sensibly placed modal filters (like the one near the bottom of Friern) would do the trick without major expense.

Yeah pretty much. Too much rat running and school running down Friern in the mornings and evenings. Sorry, it's for the greater good. With a bit of luck it'll achieve enough of a modal shift to cut out rat running all together.

Just for your guys, in my benign dictatorship you can have residents exemptions to the no through road. I would also close Friern. That way motor traffic would have Barry and Underhill to get between Peckham Rye and Lorship Lane. More than enough and then we wouldn't have all the rat running that plagues that area.

Seems like some fairly sensible improvements. I'll be objecting to the widening of the junction mouth with Lordship Lane. It's a shame they aren't prepared to close it entirely as a through route for motor traffic. But otherwise supportive.