A word to LL pedestrians...

[Penguin68]

... if you want to cross the Lane, try doing so (a) at the many crossings and (b) looking where you are going. Too often I see pedestrians crossing at a long diagonal, with their backs to oncoming traffic and not looking at it. And if you do cross at a zebra crossing, please don?t suddenly turn and dart out into the road ? you may have the right of way but cars drivers cannot easily anticipate pedestrians who appear to be walking towards them, but suddenly deviate and cross. Make sure that oncoming traffic has seen you. And don?t expect every cyclist to take account of any normal road rules ? most do, but it is the 1% that don?t that will run straight into you as you cross (legally) on a red light. And if you are walking with a drunk, please keep an eye on (normally) him. And pull him back when he lurches into the path of oncoming traffic. Of course car drivers have to drive carefully, but others acting half way sensibly would really make life so much easier for everyone. And ensure we all have a happy Christmas.

[Peckhampam]

Wish there was a "like button" on the forum

[Lowlander]

Other car drivers:

-Right up my rear at 20mph, or, worse, one overtaking me around about outside Franklins a few weeks ago

-Pulling out without looking, or cutting corners, and making me brake sharply

-Parking on double yellows so I can't see round junctions (with hazards flashing, as if that's ok)

-Driving the wrong way up one way streets (Saturday afternoon, Matham Grove)

I don't even notice the pedestrians or cyclists :-)

[Rosetta]

Like. What did their parents teach them about crossing a road?

[tarafitness]

Can something be done about the zebra crossing at Goose Green? In particular, where you cross going towards LL and with your back to the edge of Goose Green itself? It's a lottery as to whether cars will either a) see you, and b) stop (even if (a) applies).

I feel very anxious and uneasy on something that purports to making crossing a safer experience, especially when with my young son. However, I do understand that the way it's set up makes it difficult for motorists too.

And yes, as someone who's just learning to drive - all the above applies. Pedestrians thinking it's a given that traffic will stop (perhaps they should consider that there are learner drivers whose natural driving reflexes aren't that honed yet!). Unlike on East Dulwich Road - where the entrance to GG is cleverly positioned halfway up the road, which no crossing nearby - there are numerous pedestrian crossings to use (though there's still the unsafe junction of East Dulwich Grove and Lordship Lane...).

also agree about other drivers blatantly flouting the 20MPH rule, despite this area being heavily populated by children. Worst seems to be the delivery drivers speeding along in white vans while checking their phones! Not to mention we're in prime Christmas Drink Driving season now :-/

Wow, that was cathartic!

[KidKruger]

yeah I've been commenting on the 'long diagonals' recently, often people with prams which seems both stupid and overly self-secure.

Just cross at a tangent to the pavement FFS.

[tarafitness]

as a pram-pusher (well, buggy), there are few things that anger/concern me more than parents who push their - supposedly precious - children out into the road before actually looking at the traffic first. It happens so frequently!

[Nigello]

I travel to work very early and therefore often in the dark and am startled and upset to see so many pedestrians dressed in dark clothing and with no reflective strip or anything else to make it easier for drivers to see them. When you add in speeding motorists and jaywalking it's an accident waiting to happen.

On LL I have seen men with yound children on their shoulders dashing across the road, even though a crossing is close by. I suppose people think "it won't happen to me".

[Seabag]

And and and....people on their phone with junior in tow, not really taking much notice as they talk/cross the road

I fear for those kids

[Toffee]

Penguin. Totally agree with you. A few days i was actually called a selfish person by a mother with a pram wanting to cross in front of me whilst the traffic was still moving.

[Lowlander]

Toffee Wrote:

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

> Penguin. Totally agree with you. A few days i was

> actually called a selfish person by a mother with

> a pram wanting to cross in front of me whilst the

> traffic was still moving.

Legally speaking, neither of you has a right of way. If I'm on a slow street like LL and pedestrians want to cross, I just stop and let them go with a smile. The fact that there was traffic behind you is completely irrelevant.

Highway code Rule 206

Drive carefully and slowly when

in crowded shopping streets, Home Zones and Quiet Lanes (see Rule 218) or residential areas

driving past bus and tram stops; pedestrians may emerge suddenly into the road

passing parked vehicles, especially ice cream vans; children are more interested in ice cream than traffic and may run into the road unexpectedly

needing to cross a pavement or cycle track; for example, to reach or leave a driveway. Give way to pedestrians and cyclists on the pavement

reversing into a side road; look all around the vehicle and give way to any pedestrians who may be crossing the road

turning at road junctions; give way to pedestrians who are already crossing the road into which you are turning

the pavement is closed due to street repairs and pedestrians are directed to use the road

approaching pedestrians on narrow rural roads without a footway or footpath. Always slow down and be prepared to stop if necessary, giving them plenty of room as you drive past.

[uncleglen]

(I think KK means cross perpendicular to the pavement)

The jaywalking has got worse since the crossings and since the 20mph...

And, as Lowlander quite rightly points out the Highway Code is on the side of the pedestrian. There was a case where a completely drunk person wandered into the road in the City, was hit by a car, and it was deemed to be the car driver's fault because he was not careful enough given where he was and the time of night

[Penguin68]

And, as Lowlander quite rightly points out the Highway Code is on the side of the pedestrian.

He'd been right, dead right as he'd walked along

But now he was as dead as if he'd been dead wrong!

[ianr]

> the Highway Code is on the side of the pedestrian. There was a case where a completely drunk

> person wandered into the road in the City, was hit by a car, and it was deemed to be the car

> driver's fault because he was not careful enough given where he was and the time of night

Each case depends on its own facts. A driver can sometimes be guilty of careless driving, or worse, even if his victim is a drunk pedestrian and also at fault: as for example in this case: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2397909/Drunk-pedestrian-knocked-killed-car-heard-quiet-hybrid-vehicle-approaching.html. He would still have been culpable if the victim had been another driver or rider. Conversely, a driver unavoidably hitting a pedestrian who enters his path without warning, is not necessarily at fault: cf for example the case of the poor woman who crossed in front of a lorry in Peckham High Street a year ago: http://www.southwarknews.co.uk/news/driver-blameless-road-death-peckham-pensioner/

[jaywalker]

my guess is that jaywalking is becoming more dangerous because pedestrians are so used to being molly-coddled. This is probably irreversible: no doubt soon it will be illegal as in some US states. A pity, but once you start ...

Same as with cycling: as a grad. student I used to cycle round Hyde Park corner every morning to go to uni - no traffic lights, just continuous 3 lane traffic flow. And it felt reasonably safe (really) as motorists and cyclists had a kind of mutual respect. Then the controls started, building a sense of entitlement on both sides ...

In ED there are two things that scare me at the moment. On the way back from Nunhead last Sunday I had a white BMW 4x4 tail-gaiting and hooting me all the way to overtaking me just before goose green (much good it did him, not). The 20mph limit of course. Very dangerous limit in my view. And the evidence from some areas (in so far as one has any evidence one can trust) is that accidents do indeed increase in such zones. Of course the outcome may be less severe.

And driving to Nunhead last month I went round the corner before the fishmonger and there were two 12 year olds doing wheelies on the wrong side of the road in the afternoon dark - presumably assuming cars would stop for them given only doing the limit ...

[Cardelia]

Lowlander Wrote:

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

> Toffee Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Penguin. Totally agree with you. A few days i

> was

> > actually called a selfish person by a mother

> with

> > a pram wanting to cross in front of me whilst

> the

> > traffic was still moving.

>

> Legally speaking, neither of you has a right of

> way. If I'm on a slow street like LL and

> pedestrians want to cross, I just stop and let

> them go with a smile. The fact that there was

> traffic behind you is completely irrelevant.

>

> [Highway code Rule 206]

My understanding was that legally speaking 'priority' lies with the main direction of traffic flow. Therefore any road user wishing to make a manoeuvre which goes against the direction of the main traffic flow has to give way to other road users. This includes pedestrians who want to cross the road: unless they use something which gives them priority, like a zebra crossing, they have to give way to the main traffic flow.

Remember also that the Highway Code is not a legal document. The parts which specifically reference statute (use of "MUST NOT") should be treated as legally binding but the rest is just advice.

[Jeremy]

Well yes of course drivers have to give way to pedestrians if there's a danger of hitting them!! That's just stating the bleeding obvious.

It doesn't mean pedestrians SHOULD step out into the road if there's a car coming though, does it? Stop, look, listen, etc... it is still taught to kids today, with good reason.

[rendelharris]

Lowlander Wrote:

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

If I'm on a slow street like LL and

> pedestrians want to cross, I just stop and let

> them go with a smile. The fact that there was

> traffic behind you is completely irrelevant.

Good for you! As always with these sort of discussions, many people approach issues from the standpoint that roads are the unalienable preserve of the motor car and that everyone else should be shaping themselves to its demands if they set foot in it (people might do well to remember that the majority of roads in town weren't designed for motorcars, which are relatively recent interlopers, they were designed for people to live, work and shop in). In some parts of Canada they eschew pedestrian crossings in favour of a law where when the pedestrian signals they wish to cross, anywhere, cars have to stop and let them do so - civilised priorities.

[Nigello]

I agree that it is nice to have the odd nice driver, but people really ought to be responsible and cross at the best places to cross - zebra/pelican/puffin crossings.

We don't live in Canada or the Netherlands and it is appropriate to use common sense and understand that walking in the road is more likely to result in injury or death than walking on the footpath. When throw a child into the mix, let alone a baby in a buggy, that advice should really apply all the more strongly, whether or not one would prefer us to live in a world where striding out into the busy thoroughfare would always and automatically mean the cars would stop for us - happily and with good grace, naturally.

[rendelharris]

Nigello Wrote:

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

> I agree that it is nice to have the odd nice

> driver, but people really ought to be responsible

> and cross at the best places to cross -

> zebra/pelican/puffin crossings.

> We don't live in Canada or the Netherlands and it

> is appropriate to use common sense and understand

> that walking in the road is more likely to result

> in injury or death than walking on the footpath.

> When throw a child into the mix, let alone a baby

> in a buggy, that advice should really apply all

> the more strongly, whether or not one would prefer

> us to live in a world where striding out into the

> busy thoroughfare would always and automatically

> mean the cars would stop for us - happily and with

> good grace, naturally.

Well indeed, I was suggesting it would be nice to have the Canadian law, not that people should take it into their heads unilaterally to impose it, obviously.

[Siduhe]

I think that the changes to LL over the last few years (20mph, more crossing points etc) have definitely given it more of a "shared space" feel - people feel comfortable crossing where ever, not just at the crossing points and as a driver, I kind of expect them to do this now and slow down/give way accordingly. It does feel a bit odd to be doing this on such a main road and if you didn't know the area then I can see why it might be dangerous, but I don't mind it that much myself if its done with courtesy and an acknowledgement that there is a driver giving way. If someone just walks out - particularly with children - or takes a slow diagonal meander across the road, then I would share the frustration.

[pop9770]

What Southwark may do is close LL to all but Bus traffic to kill trade so that fewer people will be need to cross the road.

That's standard Southwark logic .... where these issues become a problem .

Be warned .. we're dealing with a council happy to destroy anything good to keep themselves busy and make our lives worst,.