Jump to content

response to enquiry re Rye Lane Cycling


Recommended Posts

Here is the answer to an enquiry about the cycle path on Rye Lane raised by a cyclist in a unrelated thread (a thread on whether the ED forum is useful or not).


Dear Councillor Hamvas


Thank you for your email about the postings on the East Dulwich Forum. I understand that you will be responded to separately about the parking enforcement.


With respect to the cycle path through Rye Lane, we have carried out a number of temporary asphalt repairs where the buses (and possibly delivery vehicles) have damaged the kerb line. Our normal practice is to wait until we have a number of such repairs and then arrange for new kerbs to be installed under a full road closure, as obviously the costs for such closures can be significant compared to the actual works costs.


I wholly appreciate that the relatively narrow carriageway width is a contributing factor to the damage but the costs for any lane widening would be huge compared to the benefits obtained. Longer term there may be some scope for such works as part of the overall Peckham regeneration works but there is nothing planned in the immediate future.


Please don?t hesitate to contact me if you should require any further information.


Regards


Dale Foden

Street Care Manager

Highways Division

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other alternative is that cyclists could be more patient, accept that there is limited space on a shopping precinct and bus terminal, and slow down a bit for the 30 or so seconds they have to share that stretch with other people. And if they really can't bear that, there alternative routes south.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only Rye Lane is neither a shopping precinct (because it's not pedestrianised, however much many treat it as though it is), nor is it a bus terminal. There is plenty of room for sharing and some cyclists do need to slow down, but equally some pedestrians need to accept that there is one very thin cycle lane and try not to walk in it, nor down the middle of the road. If they really can't bear that, there are alternatives on both sides, they're called pavements.


Thanks Renata for raising the subject even though the answer is hardly satisfactory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure this must have been covered elsewhere but some of the problem is down to poor design. The cycle path is a slightly darker grey than the adjacent pavement and there is nothing else to distinguish it; many pedestrians are unaware that cycles have priority over that stretch.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mugglesworth Wrote:

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

> I'm sure this must have been covered elsewhere but

> some of the problem is down to poor design. The

> cycle path is a slightly darker grey than the

> adjacent pavement and there is nothing else to

> distinguish it; many pedestrians are unaware that

> cycles have priority over that stretch.


Absolutely - there may not be money for major works but a couple of cans of blue paint or a few yellow stencils would avoid a world of confusion-related conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agree that the fact that it is not an obvious cycle lane is part of the problem. I am not a fast cyclist (so it isn't that I need to slow down)and I take great care in this area.


I find that stretch of my journey the most nerve wracking due to pedestrians stepping out in front of me. I see a lot of people stepping out without looking and often have to slam on my breaks to avoid a collision. Some of the time pedestrians don't realise I was there or have stopped due to looking the other way or at their phone! It's always worse when someone does that from in front of or behind a bus so I can't anticipate them coming.


I am more than prepared to be cautious and wait but I think that the cycle lane needs to be marked out in a different colour so that pedestrians can be more aware and alert.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be such a in easy fix. Just mark it out with yellow lines, and more pedestrians will realise it's a cycle path.I cycle along it every day, and I can't blame the people who walk into it. Generally they just think it's a (particularly bumpy) section of the pavement.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Renata, much appreciated.


Abe, I think that's a really interesting principle and it does work well on that street in Kensington. The trouble on Rye Lane is that people have no reason to expect to see bikes on the pavement as they wander out of the shopping centre. It's pretty dangerous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As it says in that article, "Shared space is not for every road." It works well on two way residential streets, on a one way bus and cycle only street it wouldn't work so well, particularly for those pedestrians with poor vision. This is proved by the current situation of confusion at the end of Rye Lane, where the cycle lane is so poorly marked it may as well not be there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit of empirical observation would not go amiss here. Every day, you can witness altercations between cyclists and pedestrians on this stretch ranging from the benign "oops, sorry" to more aggressive exchanges. Statements along the lines of "well, it's fine somewhere else" do not change the evidence of experience.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> It's funny how there is't a similar problem using

> the shared space from the north end of Rye Lane

> across Peckham Road and past the library


Not funny at all: a) that space is a massive plaza, not a street, which has separate entrances for cyclists and pedestrians, b) there are no shop entrances which have people walking out of them, c) there are no buses driving across the plaza. So somewhat different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abe_froeman Wrote:

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

> It's funny how there is't a similar problem using

> the shared space from the north end of Rye Lane

> across Peckham Road and past the library



Abe_froeman I'm struggling to understand what your angle is here. Are you against suggestions to try and make this strip a little safer and clearer for pedestrians and cyclists? Are you a cyclist that doesn't find this road tricky/ risky maybe? There will always be cyclists and pedestrians that could take more care of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would say scrap the badly-signed path and widen the road a short width with an aim to stopping the plenty of cyclists who cut the corner and then ride over the pedestrian crossing into the (pedestrian) piazza at the library. Shared spaces can work, but not here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nigello Wrote:

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

> I would say scrap the badly-signed path and widen

> the road a short width with an aim to stopping the

> plenty of cyclists who cut the corner and then

> ride over the pedestrian crossing into the

> (pedestrian) piazza at the library. Shared spaces

> can work, but not here.


The piazza outside the library is not a pedestrian area, it's a shared space where cycling is permitted. Similarly cyclists are not "riding over the pedestrian crossing": it's a shared cycle/pedestrian crossing (ETA so, apparently, a "puffin" not a "pelican"), as can be seen from the fact that when crossing is permitted there's not only a green man but a green bicycle as well. I agree there is a problem with cyclists cutting the corner from the cycle path to the crossing rather than following the path round to the crossing (there have been CPOs there in the past to monitor this) but neither the crossing nor the piazza are banned to mounted cyclists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

alice Wrote:

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

> now's the time to resurrect a previous popular

> thread. but how to find it?


Search via your username and lo!


http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1624090


The above just makes me even more convinced that the fault there is not pedestrians or cyclists, it's actually the design. Councils once again wasting taxpayers money and putting in substandard designs that actually make things worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

whilst they're at it they could take a look at resurfacing the eastbound Peckham Road. It's not fit for purpose, with more potholes than good bits of road. It is safer to cycle out in the road than down it, and then you have impatient cars wondering why you're not cycling in the cycle lane.
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

    • LTNs were pushed by the Conservative government (as was ULEZ). They were one of several active travel measures which were a condition of the TFL funding settlement post Covid.  £69m of direct borough funding (per year) was also provided to support more localised investment in walking and cycling schemes across the city and to accelerate the roll-out of LTNs…but we all know that Boris Johnson and grant shapps are secret commies 🤣 I’ve no idea. I do know that people are covering their plates and driving through, and that’s probably an accident waiting to happen (although clearly down to signage 🤣). The emergency services have agreed the changes, so I would assume that on balance they think it’s the right move. Whilst ‘One’ are suggesting the emergency services have agreed the changes under pressure, they wont say what sort of pressure, or who it’s coming from 🤔. Perhaps it’s the commies again 🤣😂
    • A bit like this: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/apr/27/tory-staff-running-network-of-anti-ulez-facebook-groups-riddled-with-racism-and-abuse
    • Because the council responsible for it is far-left....   And you haven't answered whether it is worth diverting emergency vehicles because a few cars drive through the LTN and why some lobby groups have been so desperate to close it to emergency vehicles.    Emergency services hate non-permeable junctions as they lengthen response times....f you remember it's why the council had to redesign the DV junction because emergency services kept telling them they needed to be able to drive through it...but the council resisted and resisted until they finally relented because the emergency services said their LTN had increased response times....sorry if the truth gets in the way of a good story but those are facts. The council was putting lives at risk because they refused to open the junction to emergency services. Why? What could have been the motivation for that? So, in fact, it was the emergency services who forced the council (kicking and screaming) to remove the permanent barriers and allow emergency services access. So the council finally opened the junction to emergency services and is now coming back to re-close part of the junction.  Why?  Perhaps you should be asking who is lobbying the council to close the junction or parts of it or why the council is happy to waste so much of our money on it - who are they representing as even their own consultation demonstrated they did not have support from the local community for the measures? The results showed the majority of local residents were against the measure...but they are going ahead with them anyway.   In time, I am sure the truth will come to light and those rewponsbile will be held accountable but you have to admit there is something very unusual going on with that junction - its the very definition of a (very expensive) white elephant.    
    • A Roadblock that a civilised society wouldn’t allow. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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