Consultation on ?improving? the junction of East Dulwich Grove, Townley Road and Green Dale

[Charles Notice]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Near misses shouldnt be ignored. Classic H&S

> pyramid.

> Lots of near misses, a number of slight injuries,

> a few serious injuries and the thankfully

> occassional death.

> If you can reduce the near misses then you reduce

> the occurences of more serioues events.

An ED near miss is another's Grand Canyon. Why can't all be aware.

[Townleygreen]

Too many cyclists and pedestrians are dying or being injured on the capital's roads. i find many of the comments here smack of complacency. We have a bit of a problem at this junction and it should be addressed. It must be safe for children and teenagers to walk or cycle to school.

Not to mention the improvement in their health that this would bring.

I am now beginning to be persuaded that a no right turn for vehicles is what is needed.

Well done, BrandNewGuy. You are very persuasive.

[BrandNewGuy]

So why weren't you campaigning for these changes before these proposals were made, if it's so dangerous? Talk of 'too many cyclists and pedetrians are dying' does not help us one bit to decide what to do.

[Townleygreen]

Of course it does. No right turn for vehicles!

[ed_pete]

I'd be really interested to see the statisitics:

- number of cars turning right from Townley vs number of cyclists heading straight on.

- number of times cars turn right from Townley and there is no cyclists coming the other way.

Banning the right turn seems like a sledgehammer to crack a nut, and I say this as a regular cyclist, someone who commutes to London daily and has done so for almost 20 years.

I'm sure that the best way to alieviate this would be a cycle only green light from Greendale that operated for 5-10 seconds before the lights went green in both directions. It would need to be either button operated or sensitive to the prescence of a cyclist so that it didn't operate when there was no one waiting.

[intexasatthe moment]

I'm sure that the best way to alieviate this would be a cycle only green light from Greendale that operated for 5-10 seconds before the lights went green in both directions. It would need to be either button operated or sensitive to the prescence of a cyclist so that it didn't operate when there was no one waiting.

now that does sound like an answer

[James Barber]

Hi ITATM,

I think that's partly what the consultation includes. A green phase headstart for cyclists ahead of the green phase for other vehicles. Suspect it isn't 5-10 seconds. But even a few seconds gets most cyclists across the area that would conflict with right turning vehicels from Townley Road.

Bizarre to have both proposed - banning right turn and cyclists head start.

Hi ed_pete,

Could you do a short survey during morning rush 'hour' from 7.30-9.30am and tell us. I suspect many more cars than cycles. Bit chicken and egg. Some would suggest remove the right turn and more people would cycle.

[BrandNewGuy]

Townleygreen Wrote:

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

> Of course it does. No right turn for vehicles!

 

[ed_pete]

James - much as I'd love to, my day job prevents me from carrying out such a survey and anyway, in reponse to an earlier question on this very thread you said that the Council officials would already have data on traffic volumes and flows. It's just a pity they didn't include this information in the consultation. Given the budget of circa ?200k, I would have thought that they could pay for some people to count the cars and bikes for a few hours for a few days. TBH, I would have thought this a pre-requisite.

[wulfhound]

Sounds nice but I can't see a few signs helping to prevent drivers running over cyclists. Paint doesn't do very much either.

Exactly - if they're not paying attention enough to notice another human being, what makes anyone think they'll notice a sign. Probably too busy playing with their phones.

@BrandNewGuy, cyclists have been hit at this junction - at least three recorded incidents (injuries serious enough to need a hospital visit) since 2006. And with more & more kids cycling to school in the area, the council should be doing everything in its power to prevent a reoccurrence.

[Zebedee Tring]

Unfortunately it's not only motorists who fail to pay attention enough to notice other human beings. Cyclists have been known to exhibit a similar failing. And they have also been known to ignore the existence of red lights and pedestrian crossings, thereby putting themselves and others at peril.

[BrandNewGuy]

wulfhound Wrote:

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

> > Sounds nice but I can't see a few signs helping

> to prevent drivers running over cyclists. Paint

> doesn't do very much either.

>

>

> Exactly - if they're not paying attention enough

> to notice another human being, what makes anyone

> think they'll notice a sign. Probably too busy

> playing with their phones.

Based on what evidence? None.

> @BrandNewGuy, cyclists have been hit at this

> junction - at least three recorded incidents

> (injuries serious enough to need a hospital visit)

> since 2006. And with more & more kids cycling to

> school in the area, the council should be doing

> everything in its power to prevent a reoccurrence.

The Council should be doing everything in their power to assess the risks, assess the costs and act acordingly. They are not there to ensure no accidents occur. Otherwise they'd shut all the roads to any traffic over 10 miles per hour. You can't engineer a physical solution to a human problem. As I've said, it's a complex issue, but reducing it to 'They should do whatever they can to ensure the absolute safety of cyclists' is impractical and unhelpful.

[James Barber]

Hi BNG,

Yes you can target having zero crashes deaths - hence the Swedish Vision Zero http://www.visionzeroinitiative.com/

To make that happen you have to dramatically reduce all crashes.

[BrandNewGuy]

Hmmm "target", "vision" ? and according to the NYTimes: "Zero. It is the number of people permitted to die in Swedish traffic, according to national law."

Fine words, but do you really think they're going to 'make that happen'? At last count there were 254 road deaths a year in Sweden, 17 years after this was introduced, which is very creditable, but not zero. Nor will it ever be.

[James Barber]

Of course Vision Zero is mammoth long term plan. http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/02/economist-explains-16

But they've reduced road deaths by 4/5th and halved since 2000. 2012 they had one child death on the roads.

We've also halved the Police recorded road deaths since 2000 across the UK. But hospitals didn't see such a decline.

This problem hasn't been reported for Swedish stats.

Some research suggests UK roads are sufficiently scary to current parents such that children are much less indepedently mobile. UK is worse than the European average for children involved in crashes.

Eitherway, I think this junction needs improving. I hope others also complete the consultation so their views will be recorded and influence the final decision.

[BrandNewGuy]

James Barber Wrote:

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

> Some research suggests UK roads are sufficiently

> scary to current parents such that children are

> much less indepedently mobile. UK is worse than

> the European average for children involved in

> crashes.

Although you'll know that the number of children killed or seriously injured on the roads has been in decline for years.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/reported-road-casualties-great-britain-annual-report-2011

Scariness may have less to do with the facts and more to do with cultural change ? and spin.

[Townleygreen]

It my be in decline, but unless that junction is perceived to be safe, we're not going to get the mums in their 4x4s letting their kids cycle to school and reducing the jams at school times.

[@Woodwarde]

The issue of the consultation is getting much broader as concerns are being discussed and the right turn and associated road narrowing is repeatedly questioned, even by us as regular cyclists. Many of the local roads are grouping together as residents - we have a group on Woodwarde, Gilkes, Dovercourt, Carlton. Are there any other residents grouping together by road - it would be useful to know as we should prepare for the consultation on Dec 3rd: The Dulwich Community Council meeting is at 7 pm on Wednesday December 3 at Christ Church, Barry Road as a reminder. For those not aware, there is an ongoing debate with Southwark about a new large housing development on the SG Smith Audi site at Village corner of Gilkes. Discussions there are already looking at closing the EDG exit from Gilkes - narrowing traffic alternatives and meaning that a no right turn at EDG/Townley should not be allowed to slip through without debate. The optimum solution needs to understand the issues for pedestrians, cyclists and those who do need to motor and be done through a transparent and representative consultation. As an example of a Southwark Council consultation, tracing its origins and evidence base, flags quite a few issues about lack of representation and decision making. In summary:

1. Original consultation. The following link describes the funding allocation and the rationale and parties involved for selecting East Dulwich Grove/Townley Road as its focus. http://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/1449/285000_of_funding_awarded_to_support_cycling_in_dulwich_and_herne_hill. The Southwark website link referenced, notes a feasibility study. Has anyone seen this study?

2. Southwark Cycling Group seems to have taken the lead to apply this funding to the EDG/Townley junction. Its minutes are at: http://southwarkcyclists.org.uk/about/meetings-minutes. Chris Mascord (the Southwark consultation contact/planner on the document that we have received through our doors)and the new Councillor Mark Williams make some comments throughout these minutes. Note Oct 2013 AGM where it is recorded:

a.Unrepresentative Groups as seem to be disagreements even within the group. No mention of how the opinions of wider community are gathered or represented:

"Planning: some complaint that views forwarded to council as those of Southwark Cyclists did not fully represented those expressed on the e-group.

b. Self appointed spokesmen. So all members of the committee (which is " largely a list of people who were active in the group" assume named posts to make them seem more official. In particular someone has assumed roles as main council liaison and Community Council Liaison for Dulwich. Election of Officers summary without voting:

?BO challenged the need for a 21-member committee which had developed historically. AH said that a job title or named post was useful when dealing with outsiders...... It was agreed to elect three officers and remainder of committee would become named posts..............Without voting, the following were agreed: etc???.

I do believe that as a community we should be presented with facts about the original funding, the representation that has taken it forward and full consultation around that; the facts and evidence about junctions that need to be considered; the facts and evidence about the EDF/Townley junction itself; specifics about the modelling and assumptions for proposing the no right turn and the rationale for its selection amongst the range of options considered. We are a community with a lot of projects (inc ED Hospital, SG Smith and road changes) proposed and do need to get voices heard and proper transparency and decision making.

Voice your opinion to Chris Mascord and perhaps TFL who are on the Southwark Cyclsits committee. Preferably join together to really represent your street and petition that opinion while we still have chance.

Here endeth.............

[edhistory]

Who posted the anonymous "leaflet" through the letterboxes of properties near the road junction?

Is anyone who has posted to this thread a member of Southwark Cyclists?

[@Woodwarde]

what did this leaflet say out of interest? Worth posting here for the record of lobbying going on perhaps? Many individuals on our roads are prompting each other as neighbours to take note and reply - not throw this consultation in the bin.

[@Woodwarde]

James Barber has mentioned on this thread that he was a member of Southwark Cyclists and his name appears in some of the minutes.

[@Woodwarde]

Southwark Cyclists (southwarkcyclists.org.uk)

From the website text. Look at Oct 2013 AGM minutes to see how representation happens and is positioned as representing local communities. Great to see the focus on cycling; transparency and representation of a community is not clear. It says:

is a very mixed group of people who believe that cycling as transport is undervalued, under used and under supported.

We are regularly consulted on cycling issues and infrastructure, such as the redevelopment of Elephant & Castle, Camberwell, London Bridge area, design of the London Cycle Network, collision remedy schemes, location of cycle racks and standards for these, and making sure that cycling is well represented in Southwark?s bids for money from central government.

We campaign on all cycling issues in the borough, run events, cycle socially, carry out research, support London Cycling Campaign?s work, and usually manage to have fun in the process. Our successes are due to our very active membership which includes a team of fantastic volunteers and committee, but we always welcome new people. Why not give some time?

There are lots of options, every little helps and support will be given. No need to commit your life away!

We have a formal constitution that declares our clear mission to:

◾encourage more people to cycle,

◾improve conditions for cyclists,

◾raise the profile of cycling.

We also have a clear Equal Opportunities policy.

The borough has much to offer ? it?s central, large, extremely diverse, steeped in history, brimming with the new, dotted with parks and waterways, home to the Mayor and full of opportunities.

We look forward to meeting you!

[spider69]

With regard to the proposal for this crossing I would like to put forward a very radical and possible live changing suggestion.

If you are coming down Greendale and want to get to Townley Road and feel nervous just get of your bike and use the crossing facing Alleyns School. Alternatively if you want to cycle towards Herne Hill again get off the bike and use the crossing by the James Alleyn Girls to reach the road. .If you are coming Townley Road and want to go towards East Dulwich and feel nervous use the crossing and then proceed.

No doubt the cycling brethren will insist they should be able to go anywhere willy-nilly without thinking. The same applies to our motorised drivers.

You could even push your bike on the pavement to either school from these points if you are a child.

As I have said it is a very radical suggestion and would need the application of common sense which seems to be lacking in many things these days, it would also save a great deal of money.

I have been using this route since I was able to on a bike for almost 60 years in safety and am what you would call a local who has managed to survive.

I cannot see why people cannot be responsible for their own actions in every day life.

Unfortunately many local decisions are taken by faceless Southwark Officers after a single complaint and committees you never hear of in the local real world

[mikeb]

Removing the right turn is likely to very materially increase traffic to get onto Lordship Lane at the other end of Townley Road. At peak times, there is already a long queue here, particularly when the school coaches appear. And this is already a dangerous junction with cars speeding down Lordship Lane, often failing to stop at the pedestrian lights. There have been plenty of accidents at this junction reported in the EDF over the years.

Before removing the right turn, a step which in practice is unlikely to be reversed, Southwark should commission and publish some proper modelling of likely changes to traffic flows.

[Penguin68]

Particularly as, if this speculation is true, they will be feeding traffic past the new primary school in the old police station.