Weasel wording

[Spartacus]

Yesterday, at the Peckham Rye Fete, the highways department had a stall discussing a new consultation on cycle inferstructure through Nunhead. 

https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/c35-phase1/

Excellent that they are consulting on it.

Around the park they had put up flyers (? Illegal fly posting?) Advertising their presence which started off with the words "You said..." 

Who is this "you" they are referring to ? ( it wasn't I, was it thee?) When did the mysterious "You" say this ? And why was it not an open conversation where more people knew about it?  

Personal thought is that a small minority of people were asked if they wanted more cycle inferstructire and the council are using "weasel wording" to make it sound more popular than it is.

God loves a trier 🤣

[Nigello]

It’s gladdening to see at least one person has pulled them up on this. And why not just remove the flyers? The council never takes them down even after the date by which you’re supposed to object or approve has long passed. 

[first mate]

Sounds like another way to cause havoc on a main road. Given people already cycle through Peckham Rye in number every day, why is this necessary? 

[DuncanW]

Thanks for flagging this Spartacus. I wasn't at the fete and was unaware this was happening.

It looks like a very welcome improvement to me. I travel that way sometimes, often after dark, and it's quite unpleasant cycling up that hill with cars trying to muscle past inbetween the quite frequently spaced traffic islands. 

I tend not to use the dirt-track along the side of the Common for a number of reasons, mainly around poor visibility, personal safety and it getting quite muddy outside of the summer months.

A future link up all the way to pedestrian/cycle bridge by Brockley Mews would be awesome. I often cycle that way with my kids to access the Waterlink Way and though most the side roads in Nunhead are pretty quiet, the strectch as you go past Brenchley Gdns always feels a bit dicey.

Thanks again and sorry that you found the wording on the poster triggering.

[first mate]

Would it not make more sense to tarmac and widen the dirt track into a proper cycle way? Is it not close enough to the footpath to benefit from street lighting? 

[Spartacus]

Would it not also be a better financial use of funds as it is cheaper to widen and tarmac the cycle path rather than redesign a whole road. 

[first mate]

Indeed, and especially as I believe they are constructing a cycle path on the opposite side of the park; that bit opposite the boys Harris Academy, where they also intend to fell trees to improve drainage.

Therefore, if the relevant equipment will be on hand to do that work on one side of the park, why not the other?

[DuncanW]

  On 04/09/2023 at 11:42, first mate said:

Would it not make more sense to tarmac and widen the dirt track into a proper cycle way? Is it not close enough to the footpath to benefit from street lighting? 

Expand  

Apart from anything else, I'm not sure it's within the council's gift to tarmac over common land. 

[Spartacus]

I'm sure it is, otherwise they wouldn't have been allowed to put the path up to the cafe in, build a car park and associated road in the park. 

Therefore logic dictates that widening an existing path and making it better for cycling is within their powers 

[first mate]

Spartacus said "I'm sure it is, otherwise they wouldn't have been allowed to put the path up to the cafe in, build a car park and associated road in the park. 

Therefore logic dictates that widening an existing path and making it better for cycling is within their powers"

Just to get back to the need for a cycle path along the Nunhead side of Peckham Rye. Is there really any good reason why the track at the edge if the park could not be re-purposed, thereby avoiding a lot of hassle along the road?

[Earl Aelfheah]

I would guess that the 'you said' refers to some sort of survey they've undertaken. If they had a stall in the park were they were discussing plans and taking questions as you have said, perhaps you could have asked them? 

[Spartacus]

I did, they couldn't 

Next 

[Bic Basher]

More importantly, the northern side of Peckham Rye is in desperate need of resurfacing.  There are potholes everywhere when I cycled to Nunhead last week.

[ianr]

Could someone please post a copy of the flyer.

[BeatrixPaddler]

Excellent news.  That side of the Rye is horrible to cycle up. 

[Spartacus]

Ad mentioned above, a cycleway is great but why not build it in the park where the current dirt path is?

That would remove all conflict between vehicles and cyclists and make for a more pleasant cycling experience. 

I suspect it would also have cost savings over redesigning a road to include a cycleway.

[DuncanW]

Why encroach on the green space that we have?

 

[Spartacus]

  On 21/09/2023 at 08:06, DuncanW said:

Why encroach on the green space that we have?

 

Expand  

It's already a pathway, the only change would be making it a solid surface, its not going to take anything away from the green space and will add more users to the space to enjoy it.

[DuncanW]

It's moot point, as that's obviously not what the council are minded to do.  But it's not a path as such currently, it's part of the Common where the grass has gone from people walking along the side.

 

[alice]

Definitely agree with that. 

[Spartacus]

Out-of curiosity, are you advocating cycling in a shared space on the road with vehicle pollution only a few inches away against cycling through a greener space with less direct pollution ? 

[DuncanW]

Yes. 

I hope that's clear enough for you, and that's how pretty much all other cycle-lanes in London are.

Proximity to pollution isn't the core issue here, it's creating a space on the existing road for cyclists to use. It's not even a busy road but it's quite unpleasant and a little concerning to cycle up that hill at the moment being tail-gated by impatient drivers waiting to try and squeeze through the fairly short gaps between traffic islands.