henryb

Atticus, are you saying that is it annoying when cyclists over take each because it means you can't overtake them both in your car for a bit when there isn't really room anyway?

I've resorted to whistling whilst I cycle - it actually works very well.

> 29 pedestrians were killed in Britain in accidents involving cyclists between 1998 and 2007. And how many of those were on the pavement or because of dangerous cycling?

northlondoner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What's wrong with pushing the bike on the pavement > rather than riding it ? Because there is no evidence that cycling slowly and sensibly on the pavement puts pedestrians at any more risk of harm. In Japan cyclists have been able to use pavements since 1978 and it has been very successful - pedestrian safety has not been compromised and it has encouraged many more people onto bikes especially amongst women and the elderly. There are many shared spaces in London which again have few problems. Obviously behaving in a reckless or dangerous fashion in a public space should not be allowed and should be stopped but that applies to all modes of transport. The restrictions, controls and penalties should be appropriate to the actual risk of harm to others caused.

> > It's only reassonable criticism if you haven't > just made it up. As it is, you did make it up, and > it's wrong. So it's not reasonable criticism. > > Southwark's transport strategy is completely in > line with the Mayor of London's strategy, and the > alternatives are regularly and comprehensively > considered. Can you provide the details of the alternatives to the Grove Vale road narrowing plan Southwark looked at then, specifically the designs for a shared space?

Was this along Grove Vale by any chance? Unsurprising cyclist go on the pavement there - it is particularly dangerous. I cycle on the pavement when I feel the roads are too dangerous. I justify it to myself because I consider a major risk to my life more important then a irritation or at worst a very minor risk to pedestrians. I don't see a problem if cyclists slow right down to a jogging pace, cycle with care and attention and always give way to pedestrians. Here some statistics compiled by the Mayor's Office a couple of years back. It puts the "cycling on pavement menace" into perspective. ? The figures show that, in London during the period 2001-05: There were 101 times as many reported pedestrian injuries due to collisions with motor vehicles than with pedal cycles (there were 34,791 pedestrian injuries involving motor vehicles, compared with 331 involving cycles). Motor vehicles were involved in 126 times as many fatal and serious pedestrian injuries as cycles (there were 7,447 fatal and serious injuries involving motor vehicles compared with 59 involving cycles). 534 pedestrians were killed in collisions with motor vehicles, compared with just one killed in collision with a cycle.? That one fatal collision with a cycle occurred neither on a pavement nor a pedestrian crossing point. Even on the pavement, there were 2,197 reported pedestrian injuries arising from collisions with motor vehicles, including 17 fatalities.? These injuries outnumbered those involving cycles by a factor of 42 to 1. The total number of reported pedestrian injuries in London due to collisions with cyclists on pavements was just 65 in the year 2001, and 69 in 2005.? In the meantime, the figure went down, up and back down again, showing no clear overall trend.? This was despite a 72% increase in cycle use over the period. On average just under 18% of cyclists ran red lights, whereas over a third of motorists encroached into cyclists? ?Advance Stop Lines? (cycle boxes at traffic lights).

More reason for a shared space then. I was walking around Kensington the other night and there are a few there. I was most impressed - the new one outside Sloane Sq tube is a massive improvement - car drivers slow down and make eye contact with pedestrians when it is busy and get a clear run when it is empty - it used to be very dangerous. Surprising most car drivers do quite quickly get it into their heads that they no longer have priority over pedestrians and seem ok with that. Obviously one would need be tailored specifically for the needs and problems of Grove Vale but from the sound of it they are a key part of Mayor's Office transport strategy. Southwark spending a lot of money on something that is not inline with City Hall's strategy and when alternatives haven't been looked at is a reasonable criticism. I doubt simply complaining that these traffic calming measures are annoying and will slow down car commuters will get much get traction.

We've had couple of frogs making sweet love in our pond for last few weeks - they finally stopped this weekend. I haven't spotted any spawn yet but I haven't poked around for it. It was more exciting than I think should probably admit on a public forum and I am glad they got there themselves as I would have been in dilemma about transferring and the risk of spreading disease and so on. The pond was in the garden when we bought the house so I don't know if it will be successful or what is in there already. It is quite small - 1m by 30 cm Does anyone have any advice on things we can go do to help them along. It is quite bare around the edge and the surface is mostly covered in what looks like tiny Frogbit no other larger plants as far as I can see.

Yes it is but in Drachten and other places it was tried on busier roads and junctions as well. It was found to not only reduce serious accidents but also decrease congestion and reduce car journey times by nearly a half - all at a fraction of the cost of conventional traffic calming measures. The mantra that private car use is always a priority and that pedestrians and other road users should just get out of the way and be segregated by pavements, barriers and designated crossing points just isn't sustainable and creates a very hostile environment for people who want to use a street to shop, work, have fun and well.. live. A viable alternative to more road narrowing, bumps and platforms is something like this.

Both the articles you linked to are about Monderman's shared space principle. It works on roads busy with cars just as well as on quiet ones. By removing signs and segregation car journey times and congestion are reduced even though cars go slower. Here is another more in-depth article about it http://www.hamilton-baillie.co.uk/_files/_publications/18-1.pdf

A couple of articles about the success of the shared space principle Penguin68 linked to when it was implemented in New Road Brighton http://www.urbandesigncompendium.co.uk/newroad http://www.civictrustawards.org.uk/winners/2009/CTA006050/

Penguin68 So you would be happy if Grove Vale looked like this? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:New_Road,_Brighton_-_shared_space.jpg

Hi James Thanks for your reply. Yes I am sure you could be right that these plans are not cost effective or may not achieve the intended goal and the lack of local democratic input is bad. I still stand by my point which is that it is incorrect, as was implied up thread, that all local car users would appose any additional crossing or anything that would impede car journey times. I am a local resident, I am a car user, I welcome any additional crossings either here or anywhere else up lordship lane. Yes raised platforms and bumps are expensive, annoying and slightly ridiculous if you consider the amount of effort and technology people have put into making roads flat just to put bumps back in again. However whilst there so few ped crossings, whist most car drivers fail to give priority to pedestrians at junctions, whilst many car drivers break the speed limit which is already too high for a high street then in my opinion they are a necessary evil. Grove Vale/Lordship Lane is an important through route but it also a high street where pedestrians should be able to go about thier business safely and easily. I have always thought council run speed cameras would be a better alternative to platforms and bumps.

It makes sense for there to be another crossing there: it is long way between the existing ones, the traffic very busy and there are many aggressive car drivers going very fast (when they can) so it is difficult to cross. I haven't seen the markings but road narrowing with traffic calming are generally the best option for pedestrians. The whole stretch should be a 20 zone. I do not commute with a car the choosing the rather less antisocial bike or train for that but I am guilty of being a car owner and drive down Grove Vale regularly. I am more than happy for delays to those journeys if it improves crossing ease and pedestrian safety. I do sympathise with anyone trying to get to West London by any other means than car - it is practically impossible. However that isn't a reason to resist improvements for other road users - it is a reason to lobby local politicians for better public transport in Southwark, which as far as I can see gets a really raw deal relative to other London boroughs. The East London Line extension to Clapham needs to happen, as does CrossRail and a Bakerloo line extension to Lewisham via Camberwell and Peckham would mean the area would reasonably serviced. Better bus links to the existing services would help right now but from the Route 63 thread even that is difficult.

> TFL have costed it at 600k per annum? How did they work out it is going to cost that much?!! Did they provide a breakdown? What if they just loop at Brockley Rise and come back? They can use the existing layover. That won't cost anything. I would probably use it everyday - at the moment the P12 isn't frequent enough and so I make the 20 min walk. Elderly, disabled and those with small children can struggle with that - its a big hill and waiting for a two busses for a short journey is frustratingly slow.

There is a campaign to extend the 63 over the hill which would make getting to HOP a lot easier- if you're interested. Stopping just the hill before seems just wrong - no justification for it all. http://campaigns.libdems.org.uk/extendthe63 Trains direct to Highbury & Islington trains were running this morning.

Cycling is definitely the answer - I cycle slow enough so I sweat less than I would walking and it takes about 20-25 min to Tower Bridge. Route 22 from the top of Bellenden Rd is great - lots of other cyclists on it - best to go down by Peckham Library rather than along Trafalgar Ave and Summer Rd- that way you are in park all the way to Burgess Park. I feel so healthy and full of beans since I started. Get home feeling great rather than grotty and tired.

huncamunca Do you have green fur and live in a trash can?

Please no. The best thing about East Dulwich is all the independent shops in Lordship Lane and the community spirit they bring. You can actually get know shop owners who in turn have a long term interest in their customers and the area. Turning Lordship Lane in yet another bland corporate high street, a clone of pretty much every other high street in the country would be just depressing.

Yes it would great to be open on Sunday and a Farmers Market an fantastic addition. A good farmers markets can provide great value for money especially if you bargain hunt seasonal stuff - as you are missing out a big cooperate middle man. Ideal for the current climate. A road closure would ideal - but I imagine a bit of problem for local car drivers. Would blocking the road for access only work? It is not really safe for ambling peds at the moment

Yes it would great to be open on Sunday and a Farmers Market an fantastic addition. A good farmers markets can provide great value for money, especially if you bargain hunt seasonal stuff - as you are missing out a big cooperate middle man. Ideal for the current climate. A road closure would ideal - but I imagine a bit of problem for local car drivers. Would blocking the road for access only work? It is not really that safe for ambling peds at the moment.

Apologies if it has been mentioned before but wouldn't the best solution be to turn he LB-Peckham-ED-TulseHill line into an Overground line and run trains every 5 mins. Wouldn't that keep all the people can't remember the timetable happy? Although the Sunday timetable is weak - it has to be said.