20 MPH Limit Lordship Lane

[Earl Aelfheah]

I read in SE22 magazine that Southwark are looking to introduce a 20 mph speed limit to Lordship Lane. Really is there any point to this. Those who speed down the lane aren't doing so because of a lack of signage. Must we add more visual clutter in the form of big painted numbers on the road and even more posts and signs? How about just policing the dangerous drivers for once? The council won't stop until every public area is covered in signs.

[Lowlander]

Can't see a problem for this from the Plough Pub down to Goose Green, not many opportunites to get above 20/25 going uphill anyway, and there's been a few nasty prangs on the steep bit with traffic coming out of side streets - I'm always wary pulling out there.

It would lead to a huge reduction in street furniture as it would remove the need for the 20 end / 30 start signs on all the side streets :-)

I mean, what's it going to costy you - a few seconds at the most before you hit the next set of red lights anyway?

[edhistory]

Can't be done.

It's the A2216.

John K

[Lowlander]

John K - why? TfL support 20mph on their roads in many cases, given that the A2216 is low speed anyway, can't see much opposition for it either at the lower end or up to the Plough. Might be trickier but not impossible to impose it on the whole stretch.

[ennevive]

I support this. I am tired of being almost run over by cars/vans speeding along lordship lane at well over 30mph.

[DJKillaQueen]

John K is right. It would require TFLs say so and they are unlikely to grant it for an A road.

[henryb]

TLF aren't that hostile to 20 zones. Their own reseach shows they reduce fatal and serious casualties by half. There might be one at Elephant and Castle which is an A road.

[DJKillaQueen]

I agree that where data supports it TFL may consider it, but Lordhip Lane is not an accident or fatality blackspot, and as someone pointed out above, natural congestion already controls speed along the parts most densely populated.

[James Barber]

hi rahrahrah,

Southwakr Council is not considering making Lordship Lane.

East Dulwich councillors are and have allocated money to bring about this speed limit. Its taken us so far 12 months to get two trafic counts and acceptance by council officials that it can be done. They next line of defence officers have moved to - very Yes Minster - is that it shouldnt be considered in isolation, its needs to be in a report covering the whole borough of SOuthwark, in the fullness of time minister.

The Cabnet member for Transport Cllr Barrie Hargrove had appeared to fall for this. But kindly called me and let me rant for a few minutes and promised to consider whether he really needed to be involved in a borough wide report/project later this year. I promised he could cut a ribbon if he helped!

Hi Lowlander,

Tory councillors in Dulwich Village ward have consitently been against 20mph speed limits and zones. Its why the section of Melbourne Grove between East dulwichb Grove and Lordship Lane has speed cushions but not 20mph speed limit or zone. Lordship Lane from Melbourne Grove southwards forms the border between East Dulwich ward and Dulwich Village ward. Also the argument for 20mph speed limit is about reducing craches and making it a better shopping experience. Most crashes are between Whateley Road and Goose Green proportionally.

Hi edhistory,

Walworth Road A215 is an A road and 20mph.

Hi ennivive,

Thank you.

Hi henryb, DDJK,

The two traffic counts I arranged with officers are a LOT of nagging show that the mean average speed is below 20mph but that the 85th percentil is much higher. The research suggests this happens when a minority are not clear what speed is correct. The recommendation under such circumstances is to have a 20mph speed limit with appropriate signing to make it crystal clear. I would be surprised if TfL didnt want to follow DfT guidance. Such limits increase capacity under such circumstances because the flow is more regular smothing out excessive speeding. This should mean buses are more regular.

As for craches Lordship Lane has a high number as most such roads do. They are ribbon of crashes infiulled with 20mph zones with much fewer craches.But it hasnt yet had a recent fatility. If we do nothing it will at some point. Even if we do something we will at some point - but it would be hugely less likely.

Take a look at www.crashmap.co.uk

Its shows 2005-2011 reported craches - 4 serious crashes and 70 minor crashes. with another 20 or so crashes close to the border which I'd expect to reduce with 20mph being introduced. DfT costs such crashes at http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/documents/expert/pdf/u3_4_1-accidents-120817.pdf

?215,683 per serious crash and ?22,758 per minor crash involving injury.

So society at large is currently incuring costs of around ?0.4M pa just from this section of Lordship Lane.

[Coops46]

Great idea - brings down road noise too, which is a bonus. Have you looked into average speed cameras?

[James Barber]

Hi Coops46,

Yes. They cost around ?50,000 a pair. Can be added onto strong lamp posts. O they can be funded by 3 or 4 1st time caught speeders being spent on a spend awareness course. That requires Police cooperation.

As this can only be achieved by the Labour administration running the council I've passed all the tails onto them.

Hopefully they'll take up this idea. Ideal at the entrances to Southwark at the borders. Half of all traffic just passes through and most likely to speed.

[DJKillaQueen]

The problem I have with crash map data is that it doesn't account for volume. Minor accidents can be anything from a car reversing into another car, to an emergency stop gone wrong. A 20mpr won't necessarily prevent accidents, because it doesn't challenge driver error.

I would say in fact that -1 serious crash per year on a busy A road is a very low occurance. If you remove the slight accidents from that crash map then you have a clearer idea of what's going on. The serious accidents are usually near to junctions, but don't happen often enough imo to warrant forcing all vehicles to 20mph the length of Lordship Lane.

Where the data would support that though seems to be between Grove Vale roundabout and East Dulwich Grove (but I've never got above 20mpr on that stretch anyway). Move further up the map and take a look at the serious accident rate on London Road and around the junction of East Dulwich Common. It makes the southside of Lordship Lane look like nothing to worry about at all.

And it gets more interesting still when seperating the types of casualties involved. For example, a good proportion involve pedstrians not using proper crossing points. That is in fact the highest group injured in the serious section after other motorists.

And it also has to be said that serious accidents still happen on those residential roads in between the A roads that are already under 20mpr rules. It's hasn't stopped serious accidents at all and the number of them is proportionate in traffic flow terms to the busier A roads.

And having said all of that, the vast majority of people using Lordship Lane manage to navigate it every day without having an accident.

And edited to add....two of the minor accidents involving cyclists on that map are where I was the cyclist. In neither case would a 20mpr enforced speed limit have prevented the accident or changed the outcome. That I think illustrates the problem with crash map data being used to justify a reduced speed limit. There is no way of knowing...without looking at the corcumstances of every accident if a reduced speed limit would have been of use. Assumption that speed is a factor in the severity of every accident is a red herring.

[Coops46]

Very interesting, but don't quite understand "funded by 3 or 4 1st time caught speeders being spent on a spend awareness course. That requires Police cooperation."

Does that mean that 3/4 first time speeders cost the system ?50k?

Most of my commute in Southwark is 20mph, but very often cars will do 30mph - think you need to communicate to drivers they're entering a 20mph borough through more than just signs.

Drove through Islington the other day, strange sticking to 20mph on a main, wide road, much more natural on narrower, calm streets.

[Burbage]

Coops46 Wrote:

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

> Great idea - brings down road noise too, which is

> a bonus. Have you looked into average speed

> cameras?

My understanding is that average-speed cameras will only really work when the whole borough is 20mph, rather than a patchwork of little ones.

That's one of the reasons why Southwark is pushing for a borough-wide 20mph zone. Others being the savings in signage, traffic calming, consultations, bickerfests etc. And 'accidents', naturally.

The most compelling reason, however, is in a TfL-commissioned report showing that the current 20mph zones disproportionately affect different minority groups. Effectively, those who live in the leafy bits where the zones exist can walk about with a 42% lower risk of being flattened, while those in the deprived margins of TfL's asphalt empire, where the zones don't, have to make do with older odds. Which, in a certain light, could be presented as a callous indifference to the continuing slaughter of certain ethnic and economic minorities, a headline that both Southwark and TfL might prefer to avoid.

A whole-borough zone would not only save money and universalize the benefits but, via the cameras, offer a much-needed solution to a growing lack of enforcement. As a further benefit, such cameras would provide further fuel for the road-going paranoid, without whose contributions this forum, and much of the internet in general, would be very much the poorer.

[DJKillaQueen]

This is madness...are we to make entire swathes of London 20mpr throughout? Travelling accross the city would be ridiculously slow, and yes some people have no choice but to drive through and/ or around the city.

What world do some of you live in? Maybe you should try having the kind of job that takes you out to Shepparton from South East London six days a week (to work 12 hour long days) or have the kind of job that is shift work, and then you'll understand just why some people have to use the roads and their own transport.

We are not faced with ridiculously high rates of carnage on ours roads....nothing of the sort. So some common sense would be appreciated.

Average speed cameras would never work in this way anyway as certain A and B roads will never be reduced to 20mpr for obvious reasons.

[Huguenot]

DJKQ are you not slightly guilty of making the assumption that a slower speed limit will reduce your journey time?

Have you got a smart phone with one of those runner/skier apps that could measure your journey to Shepperton each day and see what proportion of that is made over 20mph?

You may find it will make no significant difference?

[DJKillaQueen]

A slower speed would definitely make the journey longer. There are many sections that can be travelled at 30 or more in a car (because of the time of travel and the hours of work - having to be there by 7.30 am and not leaving until 7.30 pm) and on a motorbike, I can get there in an hour. People who call for 20mpr speed limits boroughwide forget that traffic varies according to the time of day.

Now if someone were to suggest blanket 20mpr speed limits at peak times, then I'd have more time for that as a proposed method of improving traffic flow.

[Lowlander]

How about a blanket 20mph on non-red routes?

And, switch off selected traffic lights during off-peak times.

[Huguenot]

Go on, DJKQ do one of those app things!

I'd love to see it out of interest, not for niggling purposes! It would be great to see the equivalent for an urban commute also :)

[bonaome]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> The two traffic counts I arranged with officers

> are a LOT of nagging show that the mean average

> speed is below 20mph but that the 85th percentil

> is much higher. The research suggests this happens

> when a minority are not clear what speed is

> correct. The recommendation under such

> circumstances is to have a 20mph speed limit with

> appropriate signing to make it crystal clear.

Why not have ... appropriate signing to make it crystal clear .... it's 30?

[Annasfield]

Lordship Lane and strees like it should automatically be 20mph, for safety alone. Sorry if takes people longer to get places but it should be about the safety of pedestrians and other road users and the residents of that area.

[Cedges]

ennevive Wrote:

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

> I support this. I am tired of being almost run

> over by cars/vans speeding along lordship lane at

> well over 30mph.

I think this (unintentionally?) sums it up.

The cars that are generally the issue are the ones that take no notice of current 30mph speed limits.

The ones that do are generally sensible drivers who will adhere to a speed that is suitable and safe for the particular stretch of road they are driving, whether that be 20, 25 or 30mph.

Reducing the legal limit will do nothing to affect that minority of drivers who already disregard the speed limits and the safety of other road users as a result.

[James Barber]

Hi Cedges,

I'm sure you're right in some cases.

But the evidence is that with low mean speed and higher 85th percentile speeds that in such circumstances drivers are unclear the correct speed limit.

Making it 20mph will involve making this crystal clear.

[DJKillaQueen]

'Reducing the legal limit will do nothing to affect that minority of drivers who already disregard the speed limits and the safety of other road users as a result.'

This is absolutely the point. Poor drivers are poor drivers...end of. It is also why I perfer speed cameras as a method of controlling limits over other methods....because speed cameras do not impact on the vast majority of drivers who stick to the rules.

I also like lowlanders idea of flexible road speed management according to the conditions. Motorways already use this system and some traffic lights are also automated to read traffic flow.

H I will give the ap thing a go to satisfy intersest and report back when I've done it with the results :).

[Susan Pallister]

Strongly agree

Iv only moved to the area 2 weeks ago and have already noticed how motorists fly through Lordship Lane. I hate taking my children out with me when walking down that road just incase they run off if i ever turned my back for a split second.

Susan Pallister