Consultations: Cycling Plan, Walking Plan, Electric Vehicle Plan

[legalalien]

Apologies if these have been posted on here already as the consultations opened more than a week ago. Couldn’t spot them after doing a cursory scan.

 

Consultation on Southwark Cycling Plan https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-cycling-plan/

And Electric Vehicle Plan https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-electric-vehicle-plan/

And Walking Plan (hooray!) https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/streets-for-people-walking-plan/

close on 31 Jan 2024. Haven’t read them yet so no idea what they say/ask.

Also a whole lot of Streets for People consultations which close at end March. Ignore these kind of things at your peril as you will end up with the kind of borough wide CPZ plans that stem from the previous Movement Plan consultation.
 

(but not a referendum etc)

[Rockets]

Agree with a lot that's being suggested in the documents (and hurrah for a walking plan - better late than never but my goodness that plan is lacking anything of any substance!!!) but do wonder how much of the cycle plan infrastructure for parking and storage is actually e-bike infrastructure. I do wonder how much of a catalyst for a lot of the cycle proposals is actually to satiate the commercial demands of Lime etc.

 

Also, how is the council publicising these consultations and what is their objective? Kind of surprised that as someone who has contributed to many consultations previously I am not alerted to the existence of these new ones and then when I look at the questions I do wonder how the council might be using them (especially with the various lobby groups).

To be fair I wish the council had made some of these commitments three years ago when the opportunity was ripe to make tangible change - unfortunately they got seduced by the cycle lobby and followed a single (cycle) path! 😉

Be warned, they do seem to be making a commitment/statement to more LTNs (might be worth responding to the consultation for that one to make your thoughts clear on that - and as someone who got caught in the awful traffic coming down Red Post Hill this evening - my goodness is it always that bad - you have to wonder how the council things more LTNs are going to be a good thing):

• Shared carriageways: Most of the roads in Southwark aren’t suitable for segregated cycle lanes, they also don’t have sufficient space, but these are the roads that connect peoples homes and destinations. We must make these roads as safe as possible by reducing through traffic and making roads safer where necessary. We will do this by installing bus gates and modal filters that remove through traffic and installing traffic calming measures to reduce the speed of motor vehicles.

 

Thank goodness they have a dedicated EV plan as Southwark has been woefully neglectful of this (the report states that the council has just 15 charge points for it's entire electric fleet). Although the plan talks about creating EV charging spaces in CPZs - no mention of what the plans are in non-CPZ areas.

In the EV plan why are they using Southwark Transport Mode Share data from 2017/`8 to 2019/2020? The source they quote is from TFL and TFL has published figures up to 2022. Is it because since 2020 some modes have shifted that doesn't help the council's narrative?

The council also seem to be warning that they will be coming after anyone who charges their EV from their home via cables that cross the footpath - which seems a little unfair and probably seen as a revenue generating opportunity for them.

 

 

[legalalien]

On that note the Environment Scrutiny Commission have the issue of EV charging cables to the kerbside on their agenda for next week with some providers of cross-pavement gully infrastructure coming in to talk I think. There’s a desire to avoid people paving over their front gardens so that they can park next to an EV charger close to their house.  Good to see it’s being thought about.

https://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?MId=7858

 

[first mate]

I may have missed and someone please point out if I have, but in the cycling plan two key issues that do not seem to be addressed in terms of safety are road surface quality (potholes/cracks) and crime. I may be in the minority but these two factors have deterred me from cycling at night. 
 

I have friends who have suffered awful injuries coming off their bikes in London because of poor road surfaces. I have had a few near misses. I have also been assaulted while on a bike in the local area. Not sure what can be done about the latter but it at least needs to be acknowledged. It has certainly put me off.

The last is also a barrier to walking, especially for more vulnerable people. What is the point of sinking money in these projects if there are certain insurmountable barriers like this?

Edited November 24, 2023 by first mate

[Stuka]

On 23/11/2023 at 19:19, Rockets said:

Thank goodness they have a dedicated EV plan as Southwark has been woefully neglectful of this

How so?

There are hundreds of EV charge points in SE22 and just a handful of roads that don't have one.

The vast majority of these are lamppost chargers. You can request these to be installed via the Council's website at no cost to either the resident or the Council itself, which then benefits you as the user and provides the Council with a revenue stream.

[malumbu]

In deed Stuka.  In deed.

It's good that these documents are out and provide clarity on where Southwark is going.  I hope most will welcome this,

On your points FM, all cyclists will have the same concerns.  Roads, it is very much down to knowledge and experience, I get to know where most of the hazards are but can be a little out of my comfort zones in new area.  It amuses me that some cycle lanes are not cleared of leaves, may be down the slope and fill with water, and will often include manholes and drain covers.  They are of course not all like that.  I've had my fair share of buckled wheels, but dare I say less so in recent years - again probably down to experience.

I've always been more bothered by cycle theft, having been a victim of this four times.  My bikes are security marked and I try not to leave them in places where they are more likely to be nicked.  I'd love a national programme of secure parking facilities in our high streets and other places I may leave my bikes, but fear it will be piecemeal and up to local authorities.  I'm not keen on having to pay unless it is very low cost - the 'manned' cycle storage facilities can be pricey for example it is £600 a year at Lower Marsh in Lambeth.  I do understand the need to pay for secure storage outside your own home.  I did find an American manufacturer who made racks with locks in them (combination I expect) and they had been used at some locations in the UK eg at colleges, but can't find this on a Google search.  I expect this would be a subscription service, but could be provided subsidised or free.  If I can't find the link hardly worth lobbying government, local authorities, LCC etc.

I found this article interesting www.theguardian.com/environment/commentisfree/2023/nov/22/car-culture-car-industry-consumers-debt

It's main point is debt being built up as we are encouraged to lease our cars, and go for more extravagant models rather than utility ie being sold the dream.  As car manufacturing is seen to be far more important to our government rather than putting the money into active travel and businesses that support this you could even see this as government spending more on inactive travel.  The article covers car culture and the manufactured culture wars.  Whatever your viewpoint it is a provoking read, it could have been posted on other threads that lean towards being anti-cyclist.

 

Edited November 26, 2023 by malumbu

[Rockets]

On 25/11/2023 at 13:19, Stuka said:

How so?

There are hundreds of EV charge points in SE22 and just a handful of roads that don't have one.

The vast majority of these are lamppost chargers. You can request these to be installed via the Council's website at no cost to either the resident or the Council itself, which then benefits you as the user and provides the Council with a revenue stream.

Because the council and councillors have repeatedly stated that they do not think that EVs are the answer and consider them as part of the "4-wheel" problem - they are 100% ideologically opposed to the idea. They have tried to pedal the narrative that EVs are still bad because of tyre and brake wear and even went as far as to invite a tyre specialist to one of their scrutiny committees to try and make the case but surely the bottom line is if you have to use a car then an EV is far better than a combustion engine version?

The fact you have to apply to have a lamp-post converted seems another strong signal that really they do not want to be proactive around this. After I read your post I walked to Camberwell for a Sunday pint and counted (non-scientific research) the number of lamposts that could be used (discounting those that aren't in the right position or those on Greendale ;-)) for charging points and of the 50 or so I passed there were only 9 that had the facility. How much would it cost for the council to proactively fit them - surely they could divert some of the millions made on the LTN cameras in Dulwich Village to be a bit more proactive and encourage more to make the switch?

Additionally, the fact they are saying in the consultation that they are going to start enforcing cross-pavement charging cable enforcement is another example of how they are not doing everything to try and enable it - build a bike shed in your front garden without permission and they'll turn a blind eye - but run a cable (the only times I have seen this the cable invariably  has protection to ensure it is not a trip hazard) out to charge your EV and they'll prosecute you.

That all speaks volumes.

[malumbu]

What do you reckon to the Guardian article Rocks?

[Rockets]

I think it's another one of your diversion tactics and probably needs a dedicated thread if you want to discuss it as I don't see how it has much to do with the Southwark Consultation topic in hand.

 

I also think the Guardian needs to fire their picture editor/caption writer as the author of the comment piece says he lives in Levenshulme and the picture that carries the caption: ‘Walking around my local area, I couldn’t help but notice the sheer number of expensive and very large SUVs racing around the narrow streets and blocking pavements.’ 

 

....is most definitely not Levenshulme but of Sloane Square in Chelsea!!! 😉

[malumbu]

Sounds  like you ducking the issue again Rocks.  Go on, I am genuinely interested on what you think on the article.  "Go on Rocks!", I hear the rest of the forum say,

[Rockets]

Malumbu, you are trying to divert and derail threads again (you have been warned numerous times about this) - start a new thread and I will happily comment.

Edited November 27, 2023 by Rockets

[first mate]

3 hours ago, Rockets said:

Because the council and councillors have repeatedly stated that they do not think that EVs are the answer and consider them as part of the "4-wheel" problem - they are 100% ideologically opposed to the idea. They have tried to pedal the narrative that EVs are still bad because of tyre and brake wear and even went as far as to invite a tyre specialist to one of their scrutiny committees to try and make the case but surely the bottom line is if you have to use a car then an EV is far better than a combustion engine version?

The fact you have to apply to have a lamp-post converted seems another strong signal that really they do not want to be proactive around this. After I read your post I walked to Camberwell for a Sunday pint and counted (non-scientific research) the number of lamposts that could be used (discounting those that aren't in the right position or those on Greendale ;-)) for charging points and of the 50 or so I passed there were only 9 that had the facility. How much would it cost for the council to proactively fit them - surely they could divert some of the millions made on the LTN cameras in Dulwich Village to be a bit more proactive and encourage more to make the switch?

Additionally, the fact they are saying in the consultation that they are going to start enforcing cross-pavement charging cable enforcement is another example of how they are not doing everything to try and enable it - build a bike shed in your front garden without permission and they'll turn a blind eye - but run a cable (the only times I have seen this the cable invariably  has protection to ensure it is not a trip hazard) out to charge your EV and they'll prosecute you.

That all speaks volumes.

One thing is for sure, Southwark are gearing up to charge EV users down the line. They are already discussing the rationale for this in terms of heavier cars, more pollutants from braking etc..

I think they are circling around waiting to find more opportunities to monetise any kind of car ownership. So, on the one hand they'll make encouraging noises about EVs, only to swoop in with the charges at a later date.

[Penguin68]

23 minutes ago, first mate said:

I think they are circling around waiting to find more opportunities to monetise any kind of car ownership

This must be understood in the context of the council's additional stated desire to 'drive out private car ownership' from Southwark. So presumably intending to draw revenues in future from non-Southwark residents who have the misfortune of crossing the borough's borders in their cars. Not much chance of doing so through the ever truncated public transport services of course. Or maybe their thinking isn't really joined up?

[Stuka]

19 hours ago, Rockets said:

The fact you have to apply to have a lamp-post converted seems another strong signal that really they do not want to be proactive around this. After I read your post I walked to Camberwell for a Sunday pint and counted (non-scientific research) the number of lamposts that could be used (discounting those that aren't in the right position or those on Greendale ;-)) for charging points and of the 50 or so I passed there were only 9 that had the facility. How much would it cost for the council to proactively fit them - surely they could divert some of the millions made on the LTN cameras in Dulwich Village to be a bit more proactive and encourage more to make the switch?

You can apply but you don't have to apply - the providers work with the Council using geospacial planning to work out how many chargers an area needs, where to put them and when to install. That's probably a better way of assessing demand and supply rather than your "non-scientific research".

 

[Rockets]

But if you're committed to EVs then why not just proactively install it on every lamppost where it makes sense to? You know the same council takes an approach of "if you build the infrastructure they will come" when it comes to bike lanes so why not the same approach to EVs? Charging infrastructure if one of the biggest hurdles to adoption of EVs and most people don't have a driveway to charge their cars on so I just think the council has been caught sleeping at the wheel on EVs due to their ideological view of anything on 4-wheels. But I am very glad they seem to be taking proactive steps in the right direction - but saying they will go after people charging across the pavement does show that deep down they are still struggling to embrace it.

[Stuka]

My guess would be they haven't installed them on every lamppost because the companies like Char.gy and Ubitricity are telling them the geospatial planning shows they aren't yet needed. 

I absolutely agree that the Council will eventually look at every possible way of charging EV owners. I also agree that charging infrastructure throughout the country as a whole is a huge barrier to EV take up, but I don't accept that the specific lack of infrastructure for charging is a barrier to people in SE22 because in fact in ED we have good provision.

[malumbu]

They are not installed on every lamppost because it costs money.  Duhh.

[Rockets]

Yes. But so does cycle infrastructure and look at the money that has been wasted on that cycle lane abomination that is now Sydenham Hill - surely the council can repurpose some of the millions made from LTN cameras to installing more EV infrastructure rather than ludicrously expensive cycle infrastructure that, in some places like Sydenham Hill, hardly gets used?

It’s another very clear example of the council pouring money into those things it is ideologically wedded to and ignoring other measures that would have a positive impact on climate change. We would be a lot further progressed had the council taken a balanced approach rather than over-weighting cycling.

[malumbu]

Probably worth doing a little research and if you are still angry engage with Southwark about this issue.  According to the Mayor London currently has one charge point for every four registered electric vehicles in the city, compared with the national average of one charge point for every 12 vehicles. London also has the most public rapid charge points by volume and share of any European city.

https://www.london.gov.uk/Mayor of London and London Councils announce thousands more electric charge points across the capital

or if your street needs one why not apply?

www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/electric-cars?chapter=2

[Earl Aelfheah]

Great to see a walking strategy. It's quite remarkable that 'designing public spaces around pedestrians' is not what we're doing already (but it's definitely not).

[Rockets]

2 hours ago, malumbu said:

Probably worth doing a little research and if you are still angry engage with Southwark about this issue.  According to the Mayor London currently has one charge point for every four registered electric vehicles in the city, compared with the national average of one charge point for every 12 vehicles. London also has the most public rapid charge points by volume and share of any European city.

https://www.london.gov.uk/Mayor of London and London Councils announce thousands more electric charge points across the capital

or if your street needs one why not apply?

www.southwark.gov.uk/parking/parking-projects/electric--cars?chapter=2

Malumbu, more than anyone you know I do my research!!! 😉

 

The more the council can do to to make EV transition easier the better and I think they should be pro-actively installing charging points on all lamp-posts that are suitable in areas where residents may want them.

 

Yes Earl, I just wish the council had come up with all three of these policy documents after lockdown when the opportunity was the greatest - it seems that a huge opportunity for progress with walking in particular was missed.

Edited November 30, 2023 by Rockets

[malumbu]

Exciting stuff on trambuses in the ED part of the forum.  Well done TfL and Mayor Khan.

[Earl Aelfheah]

On 30/11/2023 at 17:34, Rockets said:

Malumbu, more than anyone you know I do my research!!! 😉

Really? I've yet to find any academic research concerning transport and / or transport policy that you haven't rubbished. Twitter comments and opinion pieces don't count as research you know. 

On 30/11/2023 at 17:34, Rockets said:

Yes Earl, I just wish the council had come up with all three of these policy documents after lockdown when the opportunity was the greatest - it seems that a huge opportunity for progress with walking in particular was missed.

I may be wrong (I apologise if I am), but I thought you supported the removal of pavement widening on Lordship Lane that was implemented as a covid measure?

Edited December 7, 2023 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

2 hours ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

I may be wrong (I apologise if I am), but I thought you supported the removal of pavement widening on Lordship Lane that was implemented as a covid measure?

Are you talking about the temporary widening measures outside of Moxons? If you go back further into my posts you'll see that I was very critical of Southwark for not pavement widening soon enough (based on how quickly Lambeth had done), supportive when they did finally do so on Lordship Lane but critical again when they didn't put cycle parking infrastructure in place and again critical when they left the widening measures in long after lockdown as a tool to limit car parking.

 

I might also remind you that a lot of the Dulwich LTN's was brought in as a Covid measure which was utterly laughable and made no sense (unless you desperately needed a reason to railroad your plans through without proper consultation or scrutiny).

[Earl Aelfheah]

So you did support the removal of the pavement widening on Lordship Lane that was implemented as a Covid measure? 

Are there any real life interventions for pedestrians or cyclists that you support in practice, and not just theory.