Traffic jams around Red Post Hill/East Dulwich Grove

[first mate]

Wulfhound,

I would suggest the changes are not being "done right", if they were I submit that opposition would not be so great. people drive for complex reasons, trying to solve all that in one cackhanded effort is not the way to go.

[rodneybewes]

first mate Wrote:

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

> Wulfhound,

> I would suggest the changes are not being "done

> right", if they were I submit that opposition

> would not be so great. people drive for complex

> reasons, trying to solve all that in one

> cackhanded effort is not the way to go.

Anything that gets in the way of letting drivers get from A to B as quickly as possible meets with massive opposition in London. Even/especially when it's other drivers. There was a massive furore over the congestion charge and that's had a massive positive impact on central London. Of course now no-one wants to go back to the way it was before, because they have got used to it.

[first mate]

RB, People are not saying they reject cycling or reject any notion of change, it is the timeframe (5 years to "design out" cars on residential streets and remove parking from main roads)the manner and the complete lack of public consultation and, it would seem, real joined up thinking. In short, ideals trounce commonsense.

We keep hearing about Amsterdam and Copenhagen but both have a long history of cycling and have slowly built an infrastucture to support that- it is cultural, we cannot simply try to change London into Amsterdam in a few years. Additionally, I gather Copenhagen now has cycling problems in that cyclists are complaining of cycle congestion.

[richard tudor]

Townleygreen Wrote:

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

> first mate, these schemes' aims are directed at

> making cycling easier and safer for those who are

> too scared to cycle on our present all-too

> dangerous roads.

>

> Therby making cycling "owrk" as you put it for

> more and more of us.

>

> I suggest you take a close look at Copenhagen or

> Amsterdam and how families are able to cycle

> easily together (or apart) in those people

> friendly cities.

>

> It would be wonderful if London could be so

> pleasant.

Holland and Denmark are completely different animals to London.

Their infrastructure is different and most cities have a cycle system that has developed over decades going back to the war when a lot was rebuilt.

It just shows you live in a dream world.

[first mate]

Precisely and The Hague does not, for instance, share the cycling success of Amsterdam...why, I wonder?

[Huggers]

I prefer Rome

[first mate]

I do accept we need to be mindful of that extreme, but change is good if the pace is moderate and considered.

[Townleygreen]

richard tudor,you said "Their infrastructure is different and most cities have a cycle system that has developed over decades going back to the war when a lot was rebuilt. "

Not so. The Dutch didn't start redesigning their cities to make them people friendly until the mid 70s.

You're the one living in a dream world, imagining you can carry on polluting your fellow man for as long as you like.

Why haven't you addressed my 3 points?

Presumably you have no answers except keep on driving until you reach your happy gridlock. :-)

[richard tudor]

Your right. Will leave my wicked ways with you to worry about and be off to give myself a good thrashing with a wet lettuce leave.

As regards to Holland I have been married to a Dutch National for the last 45 years and know the country very well.

Dutch cities, towns and villages have always been people friendly.

They have just improved what was always there over a long period of time, as you point out, the 70's.

Not this instant let's save the world in our tea break.

Again Holland is not London

[Townleygreen]

But London could be more like Dutch cities and that is what we should be aiming for. But I agree, not imposed but by persuasion.

You still haven't addressed my 3 points.

[Gadge]

With the introduction of the 2m box at many of the lights for bicycles only. When the lights are red cyclists tend to park in the centre of the box even when they are on their own. When they pull away at the lights, cars have to follow behind and the upshot is that fewer cars get through these days which has lead to new tail backs at busy periods. I do recognise that this has to be of course.

[spider69]

Why do they have to be in front of the traffic?

Why not behind each other in an orderly line?

When traffic moves they move off in a sensible fashion.

Still if you have spent lots of dosh on butt enhancing Lycra I guess you would want all to see

[EDOldie]

Townleygreen Wrote:

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

> But London could be more like Dutch cities and

> that is what we should be aiming for.

That could be fun, cannabis cafes in Lordship Lane, some er, ahem, other attractions, for the area as well. Perhaps we'll all end up very tall and blond too!

The point really is that London is not a designed city, it is a series of villages that over the years has merged together. In Europe cities have often been planned and have less dense populations and often more space so they work in a way London never can and never will despite the best efforts of TFL, local councils, etc., etc.

We have to achieve some sort of balance and people giving up their cars is a pipe dream (whoops back to Holland) and there are some people particularly the elderly and disabled who rely on their cars for mobility and social interaction. I very occasionally cycle but I could not do my job without a car and this is true for millions of others. We have to live with cars and make provision for them to move round London quickly, safely and in the least polluting way possible. Traffic jams caused by silly planning exacerbate the situation and simply make things worse.

[rodneybewes]

EDOldie Wrote:

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

> Townleygreen Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > But London could be more like Dutch cities and

> > that is what we should be aiming for.

>

> That could be fun, cannabis cafes in Lordship

> Lane, some er, ahem, other attractions, for the

> area as well. Perhaps we'll all end up very tall

> and blond too!

>

> ..... We have to live with cars and make

> provision for them to move round London quickly,

> safely and in the least polluting way possible.

> Traffic jams caused by silly planning exacerbate

> the situation and simply make things worse.

Again with this. It's clearly not going to happen. Whatever you think of the rest of it, that bit is not going to happen. And I'm talking about the traffic here unfortunately.

[Townleygreen]

What will happen is that the drivers who have alternatives will presumably use them!

Leaving you some space to do your job, EDoldie!

[Penguin68]

The Randstat conurbation on the Netherlands (Amsterdam, Rotterdam, The Hague and Utrecht) has a population of just over 7m (Amsterdam itself is well under a million) and covers an area of 8287 square kilometres. Greater London, with a population of 8.2m holds these in 1572 square kilometres. The whole Dutch area is flat (have you noticed that London, particularly around here, isn't?) To try to compare cycling strategies for these two areas is frankly ludicrous. [The urban density of Amsterdam City proper (occupying only 219 square kilometers) is equivalent to that of Greater London as a whole - but of course the overall scale is very different. Most people who live and work in Amsterdam City can walk to work (let alone cycle) reasonably easily, not true of most who live and work in Greater London.

[Townleygreen]

No I am sure we can't exactly duplicate the Amsterdam cycling thing, but we could have a pleasant urban environment where people can feel safe about walking and cycling to school (which is nearly always not too far).

Some will need to drive, and will do so.

Taking all those cars away from the school run would go a long way to sorting out some at least of our city's transport problems.

Drivers say that during school holidays the roads are much quieter - so one aim could be to achieve this on every week day, maybe?

Properly designed Quietways could achieve that.

Others could cycle to a station and train in.

[Huggers]

Once the cycle highways are up and running presumably it will remove bikes from the car using bit of the roadand ahead at the lights.

[mikeb]

Townley Green - not sure the projected increase in population of wider London, most of which is happening to the east of London and further out, is a good reason to restrict transport options in an already-densely populated central / urban area.

Let's be clear: no-one in their right mind voluntarily drives for pleasure in London's rush hours. But plenty have to for many diverse reasons that are not hard to imagine, whether it relates to their children, health or their job.

By all means consult on the changes, make incremental changes etc, but it seems to me that there has recently been a step-change in attitude that is driven more the need to "do something" - anything - rather than engage communities in viable change. Also: more carrot, less stick.

[Townleygreen]

I think the Mayor is to blame: it surely is his job to explain why we're having these changes and to "sell" them to us.

[bil]

How can we compare London to Amsterdam? London area 1,572 km? (, Amsterdam 219 km? (and flat). I clap (virtual clap) every time I see someone cycle up red post hill or Denmark hill. They must have thighs of steel! Even roads that appear flat often have some sort of gradient (I'm an ex-cyclist). Where are the hills in Amsterdam?. yes cycling up and down hills is good exercise but you don't want to do that and arrive sweaty (and smelly) in your smart clothes for dinner with your friends. You want to drive, take a cab, bus or tube. In Amsterdam people will cycle to dinner in their jeans, scarf and smart jacket (or whatever outfit they choose). They will still look smart and not flustered or sweaty; it is just more practical. (my experience)

I've cycled in Amsterdam on a number of occasions; it's relatively effortless, the pace is usually slower. In fact the cyclists don't seem to have much regard for pedestrians (that's been my experience anyway).In London you will sweat and pant and usually need a shower after each cycling journey; that's if your bike or bike seat has not been stolen (I've had my seat taken and it was not fun trying to cycle home without a seat)

Our weather is dreadful! My car keeps me warm and dry! My bags can sit on my seat or in the boot. I don't have to carry heavy items very far.

I don't live near a station but when I've used public transport in the past I'd have to wait for 2-3 buses to pass before I could get on! and then pay for the privilege?? Oh and then get to Camberwell and have the bus driver stop the bus, turn off the ignition and wait 15-20 minutes because some idiot has decided not to pay (this was a regular experience)...I have better things to do with my time..No thank you!

To be fair, using the Victoria line from Brixton is super quick and easy. Getting there from where I live isn't so easy!

I've started to become more relaxed with all various traffic problems locally. I've decided to sit in the traffic for as long as it takes and not be bullied into using substandard and expensive public transport which still takes too long.

Until the council and London Mayor give me better transport options in this area I won't be getting rid of my car...

[hopskip]

https://www.change.org/p/lambeth-council-reverse-the-loughborough-junction-road-closures-now?recruiter=9143844&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-no_msg

Note this petition - the closure of Loughborough Junction is adding to local congestion at Red Post Hill and Herne Hill. See separate thread.

P4 seriously affected

[wulfhound]

Why do they have to be in front of the traffic?

It's by far the safest place to be, at lights. You can't not be seen (well, unless it's midnight and you've no lights, in which case more fool you), and no matter which way traffic turns, with or without indicating, you won't get hit.

Waiting at the side of traffic is not a good place to be - especially when anything big or with significant blind spots is on the road. That's why the cycle boxes were designed the way they are - a feeder lane up the side to get bikes to the front while the light is red.

A common cause of serious crashes is when the lights go green, a cyclist is still riding up the feeder, and somebody turns. If one or other person isn't paying 100% attention, it'll end very badly.

That's why a lot of new designs have a separate lane and traffic signal for cyclists. There's an early release (to get cyclists waiting at the junction across before traffic starts turning) and a hold signal (so they don't proceed through once the traffic's turning).

It's reasonable, if unfashionable, to ask why everyone can't just pay attention and use their common sense - fact is though, they don't.