20 mph limit?

[malumbu]

I've hit a few cars. Rarely though. An open palmed slap on the boot/tailgate to show my displeasure when they drive head to tail over the traffic lights and block the pedestrian's right of way when the lights change. I tried other tactics in the past, yelling or trying to remind drivers not to do this would usually end in conflict. The slap does no damage, gives them a bit of a jolt, and generally does not end in verbal abuse.

Anyway, most of us road users get on irrespective of whatever means of transport so always wonder why some feel that this is the opportunity to have a pop at cyclists. The first para was just to get a few of you anti cyclists going.

I did some research a few years ago based on the ksi (killed and seriously injured) published by DfT. Cyclists causing injury to pedestrians is pretty rare and the data does not say who is at fault, or how/where it happened eg pavement, road, running red lights etc. All of my near misses have been pedestrians crossing without looking (worsened in recent years by phones, texting, music etc). Of course we cycling heroes adapt by watching out and anticipating, as we have to similarly do for metal boxes (often where the drivers are similarly distracted).

The stats also show that pedestrians are far more likely to be hurt by drivers mounting the pavement. So I worry that pedestrians may be hurt by cyclists as they are avoiding the pavement due to the risk of a car mounting it.

[Bic Basher]

Apparently the 20mph speed limit will be introduced to TfL managed roads in the near future. This would include the section of LL between Melford Road and Wood Vale, along with major trunk roads such as the A23, Old Kent Road, North/South Circular etc.

As a bus user, the service has got worse since the speed reduction. It can take 20 mins to get from the Horniman end of LL to Dog Kennel Hill off-peak when traffic is light. Not helped by the enforcement of gaps in the service where drivers are instructed to wait at bus stops.

[JohnL]

first mate Wrote:

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

> There are good and bad drivers and the same goes

> for cyclists. I've had cars driving right up

> behind me revving loudly, the driver gesticulating

> and cursing, when I have adhered to 20mph- which I

> always try to do. However, I have also had

> cyclists kick the side of my car and others bang

> the roof as they passed me, for no other reason

> than I was in a car.

>

> I reckon aggressive car drivers will behave in

> similar fashion on a bike. Let's not make it an us

> and them.

They'll be the same ones who honk loudly at 4:00AM.

[DulwichFox]

Having a MAX speed of 20 MPH does catch some motorists out and could be a good be a nice little earner.

BUT a real money spinner on Lordship Lane would be a MIN speed of 20 MPH and fine any motorist not acheiving 20 MPH

Much of the time it is impossible to do 20 MPH.

I should be working for Southwark Council.

[exdulwicher]

Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> Apparently the 20mph speed limit will be

> introduced to TfL managed roads in the near

> future. This would include the section of LL

> between Melford Road and Wood Vale, along with

> major trunk roads such as the A23, Old Kent Road,

> North/South Circular etc.

>

> As a bus user, the service has got worse since the

> speed reduction. It can take 20 mins to get from

> the Horniman end of LL to Dog Kennel Hill off-peak

> when traffic is light. Not helped by the

> enforcement of gaps in the service where drivers

> are instructed to wait at bus stops.

TfL's documentation on it:

content.tfl.gov.uk/speed-emissions-and-health.pdf

Lower speed limits means a shift to more walking and cycling, so fewer car journeys. And therefore the buses can get around more easily. Buses are only held up by crap driving, parked cars in bus lanes, too many cars on the road. Get rid of most of that and you get nice clear bus lanes.

[RichH]

Buses are slow because, like dustbin lorries, they have to stop every few yards to pick up the garbage :))

I just made up that joke. If it's found to be original then any budding stand-ups here can have it for free.

You're welcome!

[Bic Basher]

exdulwicher Wrote:

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

> Bic Basher Wrote:

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

> -----

> > Apparently the 20mph speed limit will be

> > introduced to TfL managed roads in the near

> > future. This would include the section of LL

> > between Melford Road and Wood Vale, along with

> > major trunk roads such as the A23, Old Kent

> Road,

> > North/South Circular etc.

> >

> > As a bus user, the service has got worse since

> the

> > speed reduction. It can take 20 mins to get

> from

> > the Horniman end of LL to Dog Kennel Hill

> off-peak

> > when traffic is light. Not helped by the

> > enforcement of gaps in the service where

> drivers

> > are instructed to wait at bus stops.

>

> TfL's documentation on it:

> content.tfl.gov.uk/speed-emissions-and-health.pdf

>

> Lower speed limits means a shift to more walking

> and cycling, so fewer car journeys. And therefore

> the buses can get around more easily. Buses are

> only held up by crap driving, parked cars in bus

> lanes, too many cars on the road. Get rid of most

> of that and you get nice clear bus lanes.

IMHO traffic is only a small issue. The roads are largely clear in ED outside the rush hour and yet buses drive at a snail's pace.

[Zebedee Tring]

RichH, so you think that bus passengers are "garbage"? I suppose that you agree with Margaret Thatcher that anyone over 30 who uses a bus is a failure. If so I am glad to be a "failure" in your eyes.

[Earl Aelfheah]

There is a new TFL map that shows all the Satander docking stations and all the cycle superhighways. It mirrors the tube map in that the whole of London is covered except for a massive hole over SE London. It's just not good enough. Why is there such a dearth of transport infrastructure in SE compared to every other comparable part of the Capital?

[Earl Aelfheah]

... All this talk of healthy streets and encouraging people out of their cars means nothing without proper efforts to bring SE London 'up to standard' in terms of public transport.

[wulfhound]

Boroughs have to contribute to the cost of the Santander scheme and Southwark have largely chosen not to.

They did have Ofo dockless bikes for a bit but the company withdrew after large scale theft and vandalism.

I'm not sure the Santander bikes would do well south of Peckham or so - they're disproportionately heavy and struggle on anything resembling a hill. The cycle superhighway that was originally supposed to run via East Dulwich to Penge was of very low quality - little more than stripes of paint along Lordship Lane and across the top of Dog Kennel Hill. A far cry from what's been built in the last couple of years, but hard to see how they could install something of that standard along LL without a massive outcry over lost parking etc.

[Earl Aelfheah]

@wulfhound - but without improvements to public transport / alternative transport infrastructure, there simply isn't going to be a step change in the way people commute.

Re. Santander bikes - they would be pretty useful for getting to Brixton tube from ED, or for getting to Oval / Kennington / Elephant from Camberwell or Peckham. This might help reduce the number of people driving into Central London. Instead Southwark seem to think the answer is speed bumps !?!?

[Earl Aelfheah]

... or, there is loads of space around Elephant tube and a lot of development (with Section 106 to be leveraged); Southwark could have built a secure bike park like the one at Finsbury Park. Lambeth could easily have done something similar at Brixton (where again, there is a lot of planning gain to be used).

[JohnL]

Those green bikes seem to have engines.

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/ebikes-london-lime

[goldilocks]

Not engines, batteries! They?re electric assist. You still pedal but it helps, especially with hills or not being all sweaty when you arrive at your destination. Becoming increasingly popular in other countries as a way of encouraging people to cycle longer distances or for older people or those with health issues. Definitely not an engine though.

[Earl Aelfheah]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> Not engines, batteries! They?re electric assist.

> You still pedal but it helps, especially with

> hills or not being all sweaty when you arrive at

> your destination. Becoming increasingly popular in

> other countries as a way of encouraging people to

> cycle longer distances or for older people or

> those with health issues. Definitely not an

> engine though.

... but again, they don't come to SE London (like nearly all significant new transport infrastructure).

[JohnL]

goldilocks Wrote:

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

> Not engines, batteries! They?re electric assist.

> You still pedal but it helps, especially with

> hills or not being all sweaty when you arrive at

> your destination. Becoming increasingly popular in

> other countries as a way of encouraging people to

> cycle longer distances or for older people or

> those with health issues. Definitely not an

> engine though.

I meant electric motor :)

[wulfhound]

rahrahrah - yes they do, have seen them around the area recently although not in any great numbers yet.

[goldilocks]

There was one outside Alleyns for a few days a while back. I have no idea how they spread them out though- ie are they just moved around by people hiring them and leaving them on the basis that they?re dockless

[seenbeen]

RichH Wrote:

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

> Buses are slow because, like dustbin lorries, they

> have to stop every few yards to pick up the

> garbage :))

>

> I just made up that joke. If it's found to be

> original then any budding stand-ups here can have

> it for free.

>

> You're welcome!

Obviously from the Danny Baker School of Comedy!

[Sally Eva]

there is a great deal of bike parking at the Elephant and Castle around the back of the Bakerloo station. The whole area is covered 24/7 by South Bank Uni security who have people on the road between the University buildings (which is part of a major cycle route)

Anyone wanting advice or assistance to do this journey by bike should email [email protected] (can be slow) tweet @southwarkcycle or text 07842 640 207

rahrahrah Wrote:

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

> ... or, there is loads of space around Elephant

> tube and a lot of development (with Section 106 to

> be leveraged); Southwark could have built a secure

> bike park like the one at Finsbury Park. Lambeth

> could easily have done something similar at

> Brixton (where again, there is a lot of planning

> gain to be used).

[Earl Aelfheah]

wulfhound Wrote:

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

> rahrahrah - yes they do, have seen them around the

> area recently although not in any great numbers

> yet.

Fair enough, for some reason I thought that they were only operating across a few boroughs - I stand corrected.

I have already seen a couple of nicked Limes, with the batteries removed locally - but not spotted any 'legit' ones yet.

[DulwichLondoner]

malumbu Wrote:

> I did some research a few years ago based on the

> ksi (killed and seriously injured) published by

> DfT. Cyclists causing injury to pedestrians is

> pretty rare and the data does not say who is at

> fault

I am not particularly worried about cyclists injuring or killing other road users.

I am VERY worried about cyclists doing something terribly stupid and borderline suicidal next to my car or motorcycle, them getting hurt, and me taking the blame. E.g. every time a cyclist tries to undertake me when I'm about to turn. I think Darwinian selection is a wonderful thing - I'd just wish these people darwinianly selected themselves without involving me.

[DulwichLondoner]

KidKruger Wrote:

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

> A 20mph restriction makes roads for drivers and

> pedestrians safer.

Says who? There were a few discussions about 2 years ago here, on how there were lots of different studies with inconclusive results. Sure, being hit at 20 mph is better than being hit at 30 mph, but there has been little to no actual conclusive evidence that 20mph zones mean fewer accidents. I also wonder about the impact on pollution: at rush hour the 20mph limit probably makes no difference to total journey times, but it does at night. Is it really better to have an engine on the road for longer?

[exdulwicher]

DulwichLondoner Wrote:

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

> KidKruger Wrote:

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

> -----

> > A 20mph restriction makes roads for drivers and

> > pedestrians safer.

>

> Says who? There were a few discussions about 2

> years ago here, on how there were lots of

> different studies with inconclusive results. Sure,

> being hit at 20 mph is better than being hit at 30

> mph, but there has been little to no actual

> conclusive evidence that 20mph zones mean fewer

> accidents.

There's a whole host of studies out there although not many yet have significant primary data around traffic volumes, pollution levels because the zones haven't been in place for long enough.

There's the other factor that different places in Britain have different transport policies, road design, population density etc and what works in one area might not be as beneficial in another so getting actual nationally applicable data out of it is quite difficult.

A lot of the time 20mph zones are put in place alongside other measures (like closing off rat runs, making parking residents only, making some streets one-way) so it's not always possible to tell if any reduction in injuries, deaths, collisions etc was the result of a 20mph limit or some other factor. If you close a road to through traffic then fairly logically there'll be far fewer collisions on it but that's not necessarily anything to do with the 20mph limit that now applies on there!

> I also wonder about the impact on

> pollution: at rush hour the 20mph limit probably

> makes no difference to total journey times, but it

> does at night. Is it really better to have an

> engine on the road for longer?

Pollution isn't just the emissions from the engine. It's noise pollution (slower speeds = less noise) and particulates from tyres, brakes (slower speeds = less wear and tear). again though, that only applies if the vehicle is being driven sensibly. Slowing to a crawl for a speed hump, traffic island or speed camera, flooring it away, repeating is clearly worse for pollution than driving at a steady 20mph but that's a factor of the idiot behind the wheel, not the policy itself.