LTN Discussion

[Rockets]

Currently their two strategic goals seem to be:

1) Prevent emergency vehicle access through the Calton/DV junction by closing it to all vehicles again

2) Prevent school buses from dropping and picking up children at Alleyn's/JAGS etc.

 

The Tweets don't say that at all. You've made a leap of logic so big you could probably commute to the City on it...

 

Errrrr...I will just leave this here....

If you pitch one short I will knock it out of the ground.....;-)

[exdulwicher]

They're still not calling for the closure to all vehicles; they're calling for measures to prevent the illegal and dangerous driving going on through there. As an aside, you pretty much always get this with ANPR enforced "closures". There's always a few who'll cover number plates, use cloned plates etc to circumvent them.

Perfectly possible to have automatic bollards, or emergency service gates that prevent the illegal driving but allow emergency vehicles.

You seem very keen on crackdowns against these supposed hordes of pavement-riding, RLJ-ing, unlit, speeding cyclists so I can only assume you're also strongly in favour of preventing dangerous and illegal driving?

[ab29]

"measures to prevent the illegal and dangerous driving, automatic bollards, emergency service gates" - and all of this within a couple of streets in Dulwich Village. All the money, time and efforts spend on accommodating demands of a bunch of people who live in a bubble.

How about South Circular? What is the plan to reduce number of vehicles there? And EDG or Croxted? When will "the measures to prevent the illegal and dangerous driving, automatic bollards, emergency service gates" be introduced?

Oh the first world problems of Dulwich Village..

Not to mention there is no such thing as "Dulwich Square" - there is only closed Dulwich Village junction - and temporarily closed I hope.

[Rockets]

Ex- I am absolutely keen on a crackdown on illegal driving (and anyone who crosses the threshold of the junction will get a ticket which should be disincentive enough for all but the most hardened rule breakers) but Clean Air Dulwich have been campaigning, and lobbying the council and councillors, for a return of the old measures (the physical barrier) and a return to the permanent closure of the junction which whilst stops an vehicular traffic also restricts emergency service access and impacts response times.

And in equal measure I am keen to see a clampdown on pavement-riding, RLJ cyclists etc but the issue there is cyclists can jump red lights without any fear of fine or retrospective action for their law breaking and can do so scott-free - which is why there is such a huge problem with it at the moment. I have never seen CAD say anything about the biggest issue at the DV junction which is speeding cyclists (I read that there was an accident involving a child and a cyclist at the DV junction a week or so) - just an almost obsessional fixation with cars driving through the junction (at much slower speeds then cyclists go through it I hasten to add).

My personal opinion is that junction needs to be a cyclists dismount area (especially for anyone coming down Calton Avenue) as it is incredibly dangerous at the moment and that is the feedback I left when I responded to the consultation.

I note today that CAD has been talking again about the coaches (but they must read this forum as they have clarified that they accept that these coaches mean a reduction in private use!! ;-)) and they say that the "the Foundations' coach service create a hostile and dangerous environment for sustainable, active travel" which is exactly the way many pedestrians feel cyclists are making the DV junction - but CAD never mentions this yet purports to be a mouthpiece for local parents - I think what they mean to say is they are a mouthpiece for local cycling parents.

[northernmonkey]

@Rockets ‘the biggest danger at the DV junction is speeding cyclists’ really? Do we need to talk about the relative danger of cars vs bikes and how having vehicles driving through what is supposed to be a car free area is dangerous.

Secondly ‘I read there was an accident between a child and a cyclist’ - really? Did you read this anywhere other than the ‘clean air for all dulwich’ twitter account because it’s not exactly got form for telling the truth. More realistically it has form for lying to generate support and outrage. See todays comments on people being trapped in their homes for an example (just in case anyone is concerned, of course it’s not true and not even they believe it, it just suits them to instil panic!)

[exdulwicher]

My personal opinion is that junction needs to be a cyclists dismount area (especially for anyone coming down Calton Avenue) as it is incredibly dangerous at the moment and that is the feedback I left when I responded to the consultation.

 

Which doesn't work for cargo bikes, bikes/trikes for the disabled, recumbents and, depending on the setup, some bikes with kids in/on/on tow. It's also a total pain if you're using cycle shoes with cleats

And it's pretty much unenforceable.

[Rockets]

Northern - yes, absolutely without a doubt speeding bikes, e-scooters and mopeds are the biggest danger to pedestrians right now at that junction.

Are there cars that drive through the junction? Yes, there are, but I have never seen any going more than walking pace - often with drivers looking utterly confused by the signage and realising that they may be getting a fine (just look at the plethora of videos CAD has posted - all the cars are crawling through the junction far slower than a lot of bikes fly through it) - even those who have deliberately covered their numbers plates are driving slowly due to the layout.

The weekends are terrible for having to dodge "Olympic" cyclists bombing down Calton - it's that sound of an expensive cogset and cassette approaching at speed that strikes fear into many residents using the junction!

And yes I did see the report of the collision with a child on Clean Air For All Dulwich but I also heard about it from my neighbours (although I cannot vouch for where they got the info from).

Would you not agree that making cyclists dismount would be a sensible approach to ensure safety for all users of the junction - given the challenges always associated with mixing active travel types in a confined area - especially one that is at the bottom of a hill?

[exdulwicher]

Would you not agree that making cyclists dismount would be a sensible approach to ensure safety for all users of the junction - given the challenges always associated with mixing active travel types in a confined area - especially one that is at the bottom of a hill?

 

See my post above.

No.

[ab29]

"Do we need to talk about the relative danger of cars vs bikes and how having vehicles driving through what is supposed to be a car free area is dangerous."

How about the very real danger of cyclists vs pedestrians and how having cyclists through what is supposed to be a pedestrian free area dangerous?

Am walking from East Dulwich to Forest Hill train station often and then- Southern trains permitting - from London Bridge to St Thomas'. Not a single day goes by without a cyclist trying to run me over - nine out of ten cyclists do not understand what red / green lights mean!

I really would like to see people passing exams in order to get their cycle licence and a requirement for an ID in order to be able to cycle!!

[Rockets]

My personal opinion is that junction needs to be a cyclists dismount area (especially for anyone coming down Calton Avenue) as it is incredibly dangerous at the moment and that is the feedback I left when I responded to the consultation.

 

Which doesn't work for cargo bikes, bikes/trikes for the disabled, recumbents and, depending on the setup, some bikes with kids in/on/on tow. It's also a total pain if you're using cycle shoes with cleats

And it's pretty much unenforceable.

 

Sorry Ex- I was forgetting the first rule of active travel - do nothing that even slightly inconveniences cyclists and build everything around their, and only their, specific needs.....

[ab29]

Ex-Dulwicher: Hear hear, how about the junction of LL / South Circular and Sydenham Hill? And where does pedestrians come in to it? Or disabled?

 

"My personal opinion is that junction needs to be a cyclists dismount area (especially for anyone coming down Calton Avenue) as it is incredibly dangerous at the moment and that is the feedback I left when I responded to the consultation"

Which doesn't work for cargo bikes, bikes/trikes for the disabled, recumbents and, depending on the setup, some bikes with kids in/on/on tow. It's also a total pain if you're using cycle shoes with cleats

And it's pretty much unenforceable.

 

Sorry Ex- I was forgetting the first rule of active travel - do nothing that even slightly inconveniences cyclists and build everything around their, and only their, specific needs.....

[northernmonkey]

@rockets - no I don’t agree with cyclists dismount for all the reasons exdulwicher has outlined above.

It’s interesting to see how often all those against the measures claim to have been ‘nearly’ hit by bikes too. Nearly hit or ‘I saw a bike once’? If not maybe some of you are just spectacularly unlucky.

The square is shared space. Everyone needs to be careful. I regularly stop for small kids wandering out unsupervised but way more often for adults looking at phones rather than where they’re going, however because I am going slowly it’s fine. Most people do this. There are some people who are idiots on bikes, there are also idiots in all modes of transport, the advantage of having the idiots on bikes rather than driving an SUV is the amount of damage they can do I guess.

One final point you made was about the noise road bikes make and equating that with speed. I do think that the successful othering of cyclists has equated that noise with speeding bikes but all road bikes and even my Brompton makes it- people tend to hear it and assume speed but pootling along has the same effect and noise!

[first mate]

If we are to think of the junction as a tiny 'square' then cyclists should dismount; I am sure an exception could be made for cyclists with such limited mobility they are unable to walk.

Everyone else- dismount. Even those with cleats can walk a few paces in them. Cargo bikes can be pushed along a few yards by the parent or shopper, surely?

If it is not a square but a junction, then normal rules of the road should apply.

quote=northernmonkey post_id=2301556 time=1669656095 user_id=1102]

@rockets - no I don’t agree with cyclists dismount for all the reasons exdulwicher has outlined above.

It’s interesting to see how often all those against the measures claim to have been ‘nearly’ hit by bikes too. Nearly hit or ‘I saw a bike once’? If not maybe some of you are just spectacularly unlucky.

The square is shared space. Everyone needs to be careful. I regularly stop for small kids wandering out unsupervised but way more often for adults looking at phones rather than where they’re going, however because I am going slowly it’s fine. Most people do this. There are some people who are idiots on bikes, there are also idiots in all modes of transport, the advantage of having the idiots on bikes rather than driving an SUV is the amount of damage they can do I guess.

One final point you made was about the noise road bikes make and equating that with speed. I do think that the successful othering of cyclists has equated that noise with speeding bikes but all road bikes and even my Brompton makes it- people tend to hear it and assume speed but pootling along has the same effect and noise!

[Rockets]

@rockets - no I don’t agree with cyclists dismount for all the reasons exdulwicher has outlined above.

It’s interesting to see how often all those against the measures claim to have been ‘nearly’ hit by bikes too. Nearly hit or ‘I saw a bike once’? If not maybe some of you are just spectacularly unlucky.

The square is shared space. Everyone needs to be careful. I regularly stop for small kids wandering out unsupervised but way more often for adults looking at phones rather than where they’re going, however because I am going slowly it’s fine. Most people do this. There are some people who are idiots on bikes, there are also idiots in all modes of transport, the advantage of having the idiots on bikes rather than driving an SUV is the amount of damage they can do I guess.

One final point you made was about the noise road bikes make and equating that with speed. I do think that the successful othering of cyclists has equated that noise with speeding bikes but all road bikes and even my Brompton makes it- people tend to hear it and assume speed but pootling along has the same effect and noise!

 

I would prefer not to have idiots on any/in mode of transport and think we should all be doing our utmost to protect all road and pavement users from all of them - I don't want to be hit by an SUV and I don't want to be hit by a bike. But we legislate and try to protect people from idiots in cars but are somehow supposed to turn a blind eye to idiots on bikes. And, as a cyclist myself, I hate to admit it but there are far more idiot cyclists around than there used to be.

And the fact you don't want to protect pedestrians in the square because it might be inconvenient for cyclists speaks volumes - these are shared spaces and mixing cyclists and pedestrians is like mixing oil and water - especially when you only want to prioritise cyclists over everyone else.

On a recent trip into London (train to Victoria and walk to Soho before you start shouting about which mode of transport) I was walking up Regent Street St James and went to cross on the pedestrian crossing in front of the Vue cinema. Green man came on and I started to cross and had to stop suddenly to avoid being hit by a cyclist who had jumped the red light. He then proceeded to cycle on and off the pavements around Piccadilly Circus choosing to jump from road to pedestrian crossing to avoid having to wait at the lights outside Lillywhites. In the same week my wife was in the car and had stopped at the pedestrian crossing at Overhill and Lordship Lane and saw a cyclist jump the red light and run into a mother and her two young children who were crossing - sending them all crashing to the ground. And these are not isolated incidents.

Below is a great example from barbyonabike who is probably well known to many in Dulwich (many of whom may have received penalty points for parking illegally in Dulwich Village and being photographed by him) and as much as he hates bad car drivers he hates bad cyclists too. These are not things being reported on Clean Air For All Dulwich that you can challenge as fake - this is a shocking reflection of how bad some cyclists are in the area and why people are massively concerned.

Some classic moments in this video, with some superb examples of terrible cycling by Dulwich folks at 0.05/0.40/2.48/3.27/3.54/5.24 and , I especially like the one at 6.26 when the bad cyclist abuses the Barbyonabike who is obeying the rules of the road....this is what we are dealing with constantly in Dulwich and something has to be done.

Perhaps we can start a local rogue's gallery of Dulwich cycle offenders based on these videos alone....anyone recognise themselves - come on admit your crimes! ;-)

I challenge anyone to watch that video and suggest all is well and that pedestrians are getting the protection they need from cyclists.

The point is - DV/Calton is a still junction and, per the Highway Code, pedestrians have priority over cyclists so cyclists should be stopping to let pedestrians use the space. But, very few cyclists seem to realise that, under the new Highway Code rules, they have to give way to pedestrians at junctions and few are doing so at the junction so we need to force the issue and I think making all cyclists dismount is the only way to do it. Much of the problem is the way the council has created that cycle speed lane through the middle of the junction. It should be broken with a stop and give way line at the point outside Knight Frank - would you agree that that is a good compromise if you refuse to agree with Cyclists Dismount?

[Bic Basher]

The video posted above is basically my experience of cycling in Dulwich and Peckham, especially the Dulwich Library crossroads where jumping the lights and riding on pavements is all too common while I wait at the lights.

[legalalien]

This document prepared for next month’s cabinet meeting is worth a read. It sets

out the council’s future strategy on use of streets, with particular reference to on street storage of cars and cycles (as previously suggested, borough wide controlled parking, more cycle storage including for hire bikes (hooray!) and e-scooters (not so keen). There’s a specific reference to the south of the borough in this regard so maybe various complaints about badly parked hire bikes have not fallen on deaf ears.)

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s110560/Report%20Streets%20for%20People.pdf

This bullet point makes me wonder whether removal of on street parking in Croxted might be in the offing:

“ Parking controls that enable the council and TfL to deliver much-

needed comprehensive bus prioritisation schemes that improve the journey times, frequency and ridership of our bus network, through greater confidence in the bus network.”

And this one surely refers to Dulwich:

“29. Creating safer roads and streets for all schools, with improved air quality for those schools on main roads. Tackling local area issues in relation to clusters of schools and the parking and vehicle volumes associated with term time traffic and car use generated by non-catchment schools.” (this is in a list of things to be achieved in the context of greater resident engagement). I think we can all agree on the target but as always the “how, exactly?” is the difficult part.

Parking charges also due for an overhaul. There’s a comment that “Parking is managed on our streets through the implementation of a simple emissions based parking charging structure. The impact of this charging structure on change of vehicle ownership to less polluting vehicles has been minimal.”. Not sure what the implications of that are - removing the discount for EVs and putting parking charges up generally?

Anyway, plenty to digest and speculate about.

[legalalien]

Also on the agenda, report in response to local petition regarding blue badge holder etc access through the Court Lane / Calton junction, and the redesign process

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s110558/Report%20Petition%20Calton%20Avenue%20and%20Court%20Lane%20Access.pdf

Not sure who all these locals they have consulted with are, I live very local and walk through the junction at least once a day and haven’t heard anything...

[jt1234]

Sad example of an ambulance not being able to get anywhere. East Dulwich Grove with roadworks and just an utter mess. Feel so sorry for not just the patient who clearly has a much increased chance of death but the paramedics who literally have further obstacles to do what they are so passionate about, and that is saving lives.

This whole process of getting through and then having to tackle LL at 8:15 probably adding twenty minutes to getting to King’s. It’s simply outrageous and baffling.

I’m against LTN but I can understand both sides’ points of view. What is unequivocally wrong though are delays to ambulances.

If someone with more social / political clout than myself could make use of the photos that would be great. I’ve got a video which is better for the overall context but can’t seem to add. Let me know if I can forward.

[heartblock]

It’s not a ‘square’ its a junction, but if closed to vehicles - Either bikes can transit, with no sitting area or pedestrianisation or it is a area where people might sit /walk and bikes can’t transit, so cyclists have to dismount. Having both is going to lead to someone getting injured.

I walk and take public transport and the main danger for me is cyclists and scooters ridden by adults and children on the pavement, I’m not young and my eyesight is a bit dodgy, I’m usually carrying books, files and a heavy laptop, so can’t move as quickly as I could. This autumn so far, a child hitting my ankle with their scooter and a cyclist forcing me onto the road and a one forcing me against the wall under the pedestrian only tunnel at HH station.

Yes more cycling, yes more cycle racks, yes more cycling lanes, but please keep off the pavement.

[first mate]

I find it odd that some cyclists would feel it necessary to press so hard to be allowed to cycle within a designated very small 'square'.

The notion that the vast majority of cyclists somehow cannot dismount and walk a few yards is utterly bizarre and seriously unconvincing.

In my view this junction should never have been closed to traffic but if it is to be permanent then this should include cycling, scootering etc.. those who are disabled and unable to walk, excepted.

 

It’s not a ‘square’ its a junction, but if closed to vehicles - Either bikes can transit, with no sitting area or pedestrianisation or it is a area where people might sit /walk and bikes can’t transit, so cyclists have to dismount. Having both is going to lead to someone getting injured.

I walk and take public transport and the main danger for me is cyclists and scooters ridden by adults and children on the pavement, I’m not young and my eyesight is a bit dodgy, I’m usually carrying books, files and a heavy laptop, so can’t move as quickly as I could. This autumn so far, a child hitting my ankle with their scooter and a cyclist forcing me onto the road and a one forcing me against the wall under the pedestrian only tunnel at HH station.

Yes more cycling, yes more cycle racks, yes more cycling lanes, but please keep off the pavement.

[legalalien]

Just seen one of the latest tweets with an extract from correspondence between Southwark and TfL, presumably released in response to an FOI request to TfL, in which Dale Foden says local councillors “seem to want blood” as a result of the TfL report about the cause of Croxted congestion,and describes the Turney closure consultation as like “dropping a ten tonne concrete block”.

Interesting thought: after the last couple of years, Mr Foden must be very well aware that a succession of FOI requests are going to be submitted to TfL and that TfL have a history of responding to them thoroughly. Is this a back door way of making a degree of frustration with the councillors public?

Will look for the relevant response on the TfL site.

ETA: link to TfL response here (I haven’t read through it yet)

https://foi.tfl.gov.uk/FOI-1820-2223/FOI-1820-2223_Redacted.pdf

Idle thought, I note the various foi requests are limited to emails, which made me wonder if requests could extend to things like text messages and what’s app as well - from a quick google it seems that in principle they can

http://publicsectorblog.practicallaw.com/its-the-message-not-the-medium-that-matters-information-commissioner-comments-on-digital-communications-and-social-media-and-the-extent-of-foia/

( from 2017 , would be surprised if it had changed since then)

[Rockets]

So if Dale is disparaging of his own council's consultation plans are we to assume that, as head of Highways for the council, he doesn't get any input into the process of initiating a consultation or the right of review or veto?

The tone of his email suggests councillors (or someone else) is determining highways strategy and proceeding with these consultations no matter what the input of the people with responsibility for them. Do we know who was the architect of, and who are the local champions for, the Turney closure plan?

It seems all is not well in Southwark council right now.

[CPR Dave]

This was in October 2022 too. Doesn't that post date the intervention by the TfL cycling Tszar who had to tell them to dial down the bullying?

[malumbu]

Coming to this correspondence cold and with no assumptions of any conspiracy this is transport professionals and a councillor looking to resolve some issues. This will happen in most areas of work, but without people trying to disect your every word. These appear as genuine people trying to improve the built environment and public health.

[Spartacus]

Coming to this correspondence cold and with no assumptions of any conspiracy this is transport professionals and a councillor looking to resolve some issues. This will happen in most areas of work, but without people trying to disect your every word. These appear as genuine people trying to improve the built environment and public health.

 

Nice spin attempt mal

If you read the whole tfl FoI document then you will see the issues that are being discussed

It's quite worrying that it feels like Southwark against the community in some of the exchanges.

Aren't the council supposed to be working for those who elected them ?