first mate

For some, not all.

Maybe for some, others not so much. CPR Dave, apparently there are issues with the CPZ site. Can this be checked? Duwlich Hill - this one has the most signatures: https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=50000037&RPID=9133390&HPID=9133390 Nunhead - this one has 460 signatures. If it can get to 500 I think it has to go to a debate in cabinet which will really show them the strength of feeling and given what's just happened in Uxbridge it might make them have a think... https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=50000035&RPID=9133395&HPID=9133395

Don't worry, I don't think anyone thinks you have headed up and all powerful cyclists lobby. But the cycling lobby groups have had the ear of Southwark Council for some time and at one point you could even see the incredibly chummy, mutually backslapping communications between them. Lobby groups can be very powerful, not even worth debating that. It just so happens, in this case, that the needs and agendas of each help further the other. I don't know what you mean by JFK. Was he a cyclist? Bit left-field Mal, even for you.

Thanks CPR Dave.

But I don't think Rocks does do that, however much you want to create that impression. And he is himself a cyclist, so it doesn't quite make sense. You seem ever so sensitive about any hint of criticism around cycling behaviour; almost in denial. I think most of us who are not convinced by the LTN, CPZ, 'cycling rules' agenda, at least in so far as local implementation is concerned, have also expressed issues with car driving behaviour. I know I have. The title of this thread suggests that your focus is not local or is it?

I think there is little doubt that once they have dealt with diesel and then petrol cars they will go after EVs. Catherine Rose has said as much. They just don't want private cars in the borough, unless owned by a large hire car company.

Go to opposethecpz.org

Not so refreshing when it is ill thought out and undemocratic.

In terms of PSPOs, what would be the problem with one that said no cycling on pavements unless a dedicated, marked cycle lane?

I think people on both sides of the argument are busy and unable to attend meetings. Many of those people also have children but they live on the streets that are suffering displaced traffic and the negative effects of LTNs. Many residents oppose LTN's because they increase pollution on their streets. Clearly if you live in an LTN there is a stronger chance you are going to like it, humans are naturally quite selfish in seeking the best for their own, even if it is at the expense of others. That said, even those living within them see how unjust and inequitable they are and oppose them. Given the 'selfish gene' element, I really do not see that parents or non parents on either side of the debate are any more or less community-minded.

Ex, I assume there will soon be a big increase in parking wardens, or CSO's, they should be well placed to 'police' poor cycling behaviour as they go on their patrols. I don't believe I have ever seen any guidance from the organisations mentioned. It does not feel as though it is 'out there'. Sure there are still those who ignore guidance on safe driving, but there are penalties if you are caught. The whole cycling on pavements issue is wide open to abuse and the council are turning a blind eye.

Nonetheless, anyone who does wish to take a stand on this can go to opposethecpz.org

But I live in Southwark and they have a big role in managing the roads and pavements, and they apparently have a whacking great cash surplus farmed from that role too. Perhaps some of that money could be used to manage cycling behaviour, rather than leaving it to the police. There is also a great deal local cycling activists and cycle lobby groups could do to get the word out that it isn't 'cool' to cycle on pavements.

Yes go to opposethecpz.org

The current laissez faire attitude to cycling on any pavement and general muddled approach by the council has encouraged this behaviour, albeit illegal. Convenient but slightly misleading to say it's all the fault of the public in encouraging delivery by e-bike or scooter. The aim is to encourage use of such vehicles for myriad businesses, is it not? I suspect there are also those who just enjoy speeding and the thrill of dodging obstacles and pedestrians. Doubt it is just delivery drivers.

It is good to see that there is some sort of record of what was said by Cllr McAsh on CPZ plans at the recent Assembly. That was the meeting where the sound was so bad on the YouTube video, it was unintelligible. On reassurances that he gave in the past he is pretty shameless, saying that because there is a new plan no undertakings or promises given prior to that count in any way. We should all remember that. https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/councillor-under-fire-for-a-blog-post-from-4-years-ago-that-contradicts-councils-cpz-policy/

Thanks Joe, I am hoping that if there are obvious attempts to derail a thread that you have some consequences up your sleeve. It is hoped that the era of the serial thread saboteur is now at a close!

I think the danger here is being too, dare I say, literal. There are few deaths caused by cyclists on pavements to date, so we don't need to worry. Having to dodge cyclists or discarded bikes may be a mere inconvenience to younger, fitter pedestrians but if you are vulnerable or less physically able it becomes something more. There can also be a sense of menace or a perception you are not safe if you have a few near misses- a bit like the mother of the four year old who started this thread. Pavements should be places you can feel relatively safe and where pedestrians must have priority. There is the additional aspect of mugging and phone snatching. Again, let's not pretend that normalising cycling on pavements is not going to increase those risks. Finally, it is not just push bikes but also e-bikes and sometimes modified e-bikes, like the ones on Peckham High St, where riders are doing 50mph. Pedestrians are already complaining and saying they feel menaced. I believe the police are starting to take notice and action. For reference https://southwarknews.co.uk/area/southwark/police-to-target-modified-e-bike-riders-who-speed-down-peckham-high-street-at-50mph/

I have asked admin if this section of the forum is uniquely immune from lounging. It would seem a little unfair to mix in local issues with anything else anywhere that just happens to touch on roads or traffic. I have not yet had a reply.

Is it clear who in a given area they accept input from?

Policing this will require many more wardens and with the massive surplus swishing around in council roads funds no doubt we'll soon see a lot more of them. What would be great is if similar fines could be levied on inappropriately parked hire e-bikes and scooters. If not on the individuals using them then on the hire companies. With many more wardens this should be feasible.

Perhaps it is the impatience that needs scrutiny, for all vehicle users? The inclination to take short cuts, or the gap, whether driver or cyclist. If people were less stressed they'd probably be more patient? There is also the odd thrill seeker but on the whole a lot of these driving and cycling issues revolve around a need to do everything as quickly as possible. I read some research somewhere about how the cycling style in Amsterdam is very different. People don't change their clothing, they use sit up and beg rather than racing-style bikes, and on the whole cycle at a much more leisurely pace.

Problem is even some people on this thread feel cycling on pavements is a non issue. It is clearly on the increase and without some clear guidance I suspect people will get injured at some point. Perhaps there needs to be a combined council and Southwark Cyclists education campaign, saying "no cycling on pavements, if you need to use the pavement dismount and walk". I do think pedestrians, the vulnerable and disabled must have priority on pavements and should not be made to feel uncomfortable, on edge or intimidated, by inappropriate cycling. That message needs to go out so everyone is clear. The current lack of clarity is part of the problem.

Thinking in terms of mitigation. How about all adult cyclists should dismount on pavements unless: -it has a dedicated marked out cycleway -it is wide enough to accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists, without crossover -there are no pedestrians in sight -adults accompanying children on bikes on pavements should always dismount and walk -no e-bikes or scooters on pavements, unless a marked cycleway - cyclists should always stay close to the outer edge of the pavement unless a marked out cycleway - when on a pavement cyclists should adopt the minimum speed possible and always give priority to pedestrians, mobility scooters and small children on scooters or bicycles - wherever possible, adult cyclists and older children should use the road, especially on residential and side streets

Just to be clear, is this section unique on the forum in that subjects do not have to be ED specific? One for admin, I think. Of course, there are poor drivers in ED but Mal you don't live here so...