Jump to content

New traffic calming and cycle lane on Sydenham Hill


Recommended Posts

For info as likely to be a route used by ED residents:


https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IssueId=50029845&OptionNum=0


Apparently consultation done in Feb/ March 2020 with flyers to residents within 50m and something on the website - I think most people had other things on their mind!


As I interpret the final drawings they’ve decided not to go for the floating bus stops that Southwark Cyclists were lobbying for, which as a pedestrian/ bus user I’m glad of as am not a big fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I particularly enjoyed the weasel comment in the report "The majority of residents in Southwark do not own a car, we are providing facilities for those walking, cycling and using public transport. There are still locations to park for those who need to use a car." - which is comparing the flat, highly public transport supplied inner London part of the borough with a part so far south, hilly and without good public transport that it is virtually not in Southwark at all - and whose car ownership (and needs) much more closely allies to the outer London boroughs it is surrounded by.


But then lies and obfuscations are what we expect from this source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like a sensible suggestion - speed is a big issue on Sydenham Hill.


You're right - the council really needs to stop using the "most Southwark residents don't own a car" nonsense as they know car ownership is very high in the south of the borough due to the poor PTAL scores (I think it is around 70%) and they keep trotting their stat out as if it applies across the whole borough. I agree it's more spin to help justify any measure they put in but has zero relevance to local traffic issues and very much falls into the "never let the truth get in the way of a good story" category of council misinformation. And remember, they originally said it is areas in the north of the borough that are more suited to LTNs etc because of the plethora of other transport options available to residents.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cycle occasionally up/down and across Sydenham Hill. There is a cycle lane on part of it and a lot of cars park on it especially by the new flats where motorists are more in fear of private parking restrictions than council restrictions so segregation/rediweld curb in this case is good.


Speeding is generally not such an issue where the road is used by cars to park on both sides or near the speed camera.


I am not sure that removing parking will reduce speeding. I would expect it to increase with motorists not having to worry about parked cars or cyclists.


I do think the main requirement for a cycle lane is on the hill part rather than the ridge/plateau. I have always found this the most hazardous, and often a major bottleneck for cars/bikes/buses because of parking on both sides combined with the speed going down and effort required going up as a cyclist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Southwark residents don't own a car. Most journeys in Southwark aren't made by car.


East Dulwich is one of only 4 wards in Southwark where most households have a car: 41.5% of households in East Dulwich don't have a car. It's not because of PTAL scores - it's because those 4 wards are richer and/or because there is more off-street parking and free (council-provided) onstreet parking.


https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s89832/Appendix%25202%2520Car%2520Ownership.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Southwark residents don't own a car. Most journeys in Southwark aren't made by car.


East Dulwich is one of only 4 wards in Southwark where most households have a car: 41.5% of households in East Dulwich don't have a car. It's not because of PTAL scores - it's because those 4 wards are richer and/or because there is more off-street parking and free (council-provided) onstreet parking.


https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s89832/Appendix%25202%2520Car%2520Ownership.pdf

 

So the council constantly rolling out the most Southwark residents don't own a car is somewhat misleading then when applied to areas like East Dulwich because most residents of Southwark in this area do own a car?


It's a bit like saying most Southwark residents live within walking distance of a tube....when it is clearly not the case as it only applies to those living in the north of the borough (but where the population density is higher).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most Southwark residents don't own a car. Most journeys in Southwark aren't made by car.


East Dulwich is one of only 4 wards in Southwark where most households have a car: 41.5% of households in East Dulwich don't have a car. It's not because of PTAL scores - it's because those 4 wards are richer and/or because there is more off-street parking and free (council-provided) onstreet parking.


https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/documents/s89832/Appendix%25202%2520Car%2520Ownership.pdf

 

So the council constantly rolling out the most Southwark residents don't own a car is somewhat misleading then when applied to areas like East Dulwich because most residents of Southwark in this area do own a car?


It's a bit like saying most Southwark residents live within walking distance of a tube....when it is clearly not the case as it only applies to those living in the north of the borough (but where the population density is higher).


And there is a direct correlation between PTAL scores and car ownership figures - the council cites it as part of there reasoning for higher car ownership in the Dulwich area due to the poor PTAL scores.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Popular with a certain type of cyclist, and in the minority, I'd think. Possibly club members.


You have to be pretty fit to cycle up Lordship Lane and then further up Sydenham Rise. Hands up, on the rare occasions I have tried I have had to dismount and walk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question relates to the simple point that if cyclists don't use it, will a cycle lane be good value for money ?


As said, I can see the need in some traffic calming, but is there justification for a cycle lane?


A slightly more expensive, but possibly ground breaking could be to reopen the old train tunnels under Sydenham Hill and make them cycle and walking highways, allowing cyclists to avoid the hills to get to the other side of Crystal Palace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've debated the need for cycling infrastructure in the lounge in the past. My view remains that segregation should not always be needed. National and local government, and many cycling groups disagree. If vehicles stuck to 20 MPH, and treated other road users equally, there would not be so a strong case for segregation.


Cyclists in bus lanes, and restricting traffic to create quiet ways, is generally a good thing. I've lived and cycled in the area for decades so used to hills, and when my time comes I'm sure I will go to electric assistance


On the point of the thread, traffic speeds apart from by the camera. Like Brenchley a straight road and many can't resist putting their foot down. I prefer other measures to physical means for slowing traffic, even though it means greater surveillance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the ridge part of Sydenham Hill gets a lot of cyclists from my experience of cycling across it.


It is a local route feeding into the main cycling routes of College Rd or Kirkdale/Hill part of Sydenham Hill/London Road. There are 2 bus routes there that probably amount to more person journeys than are carried out by bike.


It is not very headline grabbing but as many people have said installing speed cameras that measure average speed on that stretch would be the most sensible thing to do.


If there is a need to spend money on a cycle lane then put it on the Hill part of Sydenham Hill where there is a greater need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is objecting, they are simply questioning if it is a justified scheme giving how many cyclists actually use the route.

If it's not justified then the money could be better spent elsewhere.

 

You don't look at the number of cyclists using a route before considering segregated infrastructure. If anything, it's the exact opposite - people aren't currently using it as a cycle route because of (perceptions of) road danger - add in proper infrastructure / remove the danger and it'll be used.


In the same way that you don't say "no wheelchair users are trying to access this building, we won't bother building a ramp" or "no-one is swimming across this river, we won't bother building a bridge"


The infrastructure is the enabler.

There have long been issues with that road anyway - people routinely speed down it, slam the brakes on for the 20mph cameras and then charge off after it. Wide road, good sightlines sort of tempts speeding. Narrowing the road using cycle lanes would solve a lot of the speed issues as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One part of the road deffo would support a cycle road is going up the hill from the Horniman. It's a slog and the road surface us poor. The cycle routes by Horniman are a mess too and I don't like any arrangement where it takes longer to do a junction by bike.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ex

People aren't using it simply because to get to it they have to slog up hills either side


It's not a case of cyclists wanting to use it but it's dangerous, it's a genuine concern that even when installed they still won't use it unless they have the legs of the incredible hulk to get up the hills to get to it.


As I suggested earlier, other schemes may benefit cycling more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big challenge is that so much money is being spent on cycle infrastructure on the basis of "build it and they will come". And that makes sense in many areas but the increase in cycling has not been anywhere close to what it needs to be to justify the negative impact on other forms of transport and the policy needs to shift to proper assessment of what happens to other modes of transport like walking, driving and buses when so much roadspace is dedicated to cyclists.


Remember in the pandemic and Will Norman stating that there would be a 10x increase in cycling - it just hasn't happened and growth isn't happening at a rate that suggests 10x will ever be achieved - the recent figures of a 25% increase in cycling compared to pre-Covid levels draws that into the harsh realities of daylight given the amount of money that has been spent and the hundreds of new miles of roadspace given over exclusively to bikes?


It does very much seem that the cycle lobby has hijacked the post Covid transport discussion and the Mayor's office and councils have been drawn into it and have prioritised cycling disproportionately over other modes of transport. As soon as equal weighting is given to all the better for everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looking back on this thread, at least three of you have an axe to grind against cyclists. Why? Most of us aren't extremists, many of us even occasionally drive a car but are happy with measures to promote active travel. Shame some have some fixed views.


I've cycled up and down Sydenham hill and never belonged to a cycle club. But even if I did why would that matter!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Plenty for sale online from various ticket vendors but you'll need to part with £250 and upwards by the looks of it. Out of interest i kept an eye on the prices for the England and Italy Euro final. At one point they were on offer for a couple of grand each. On the day sellers were obviously getting itchy feet and prices dropped somewhat but never went any lower than £400. That was a few hours before kick off. There was plenty still available half an hour before kick off.   Having been to Wembley a couple of times for play off finals i found it to be not a great place to watch football. Sat three rows back from the pitch side advertising hoardings for one game and way way up in the gods for the other. We felt to far away from the pitch on both occasions. Up in the goods was just stupid because we felt cut off as well.  I don't think it was rebuilt with acoustics in mind either. Even with most of our 25k fans singing it never sounded loud because it's pretty much uncovered and too open.   Happy hunting!
    • It doesn't work as a commercial venture.  Bit churlish to say I told you so.  I told you so.  I'll send less greetings cards.  What pees me off is international postage where you can no longer send light letters at 10 grammes, normal ones up to 20g, now all at the much more expensive 100 g  Didn't we vote to take back control and price everything according to irrational units like ounces? That's some obscure humour btw   
    • Available from Monday April 8th 2024, 2on2Walkies take pride in doggie care and only walk 2 furry friends at a time. I make sure that they get plenty of doggie interaction and socialisation in the park as well as making friends. Back home happy and tired I always check that the water bowl has fresh water and always make sure the doggie is left comfortable before I leave. I'm fully insured and have a couple of slots available for local walks to either Peckham Rye Park or Dulwich Park.  Thank you!  
    • Why would they only send them recorded delivery? I used the signed for option yesterday.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...