Southwark plans to be 1st London council to be 20mph thru-out

[PeckhamRose]

The Southwark Council Road Safety Plan Consultation from Southwark's webpage link.

This is the PDF file itself which is very big to download.

Since they asked us nicely, I wrote a lengthy document with my thoughts and opinions and ideas.

A reply arrived today from Simon Bevan, Head of Planning and Transport, and with the solicitation "Dear Sir/Madam", thanked me for my comments and the 2 page letter includes this paragraph:

"The majority of responses supported the idea of 20mph limits throughout Southwark, although there was some concern about how these are currently delivered and enforced. The council is investigating better ways to achieve speed reduction and make our roads safer and will continue to strive to become London's first 20mph borough. This includes working with the police to deliver better levels of enforcement, further engaging the community, monitoring existing 20mph zones and exploring the use of new technology."

Here are my thoughts:

1) Southwark is one borough on a plot of land in London. Many road users going from A to B will pass through Southwark and have a whole new load of road signs and rules to read and thus take their eye off the road / cyclist / pedestrian whilst taking in information. I believe it would be better if all boroughs in London had one rule for the whole of London's roads, and stopped trying to make political points and macho-posing amongst one another. Councillors and the chiefs within them have a far too greater sense of their own importance and it is all unnecessary. The whole of the USA has pretty much one rule, with a comparative few differences between entire states! Yet in this tiny plot of land called London we have 33 boroughs all making up new rules. All I wanna do is go for a ride!

2) Many accidents are caused NOT by speed (this is supported by evidence on insurers and police statistics), but by people using mobile phones, or driving lorries on the offside so they can'tsee what is overtaking them, by pedestrians behaving stupidly etc. Not all road users are bad irresponsible road users. By "forcing" everyone to do 20mph, maybe the surrounding boroughs will suffer because many may choose to drive alternate routes on their way through.

3) One of the points I made was about bad phasing of the far too many unnecessary traffic lights. After ALL they said and did and asked and talked about they (rightly) whined there was nothing they can do as traffic lights are under the Transport for London remit. So what is the point of all that!

4) It's a money making scam! We should be able to demand major council tax decreases with all the money they'll make fining people for doing a reasonable safe speed that happens not to be 20mph!

Email your comments to: [email protected] and [email protected] himself the Head of Planning and Transport.

Over to you lot!

[Mick Mac]

This will be a slow thread.

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

I don't have a problem with it if it means speed bumps will be removed. Don't see how it will be policed, though; I frequent East Dulwich Rd on a regular basis in the early morning which seems to make drivers think they can go at about 50 mph and nary a copper around.

[bawdy-nan]

I think its a mighty fine idea

[Huguenot]

As with the M25, you may be surprised that the traffic will move faster on average at lower speed limits.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> As with the M25, you may be surprised that the

> traffic will move faster on average at lower speed

> limits.

Morning H. (or Evening/Afternoon M8)...I can assure you we move faster on the M25 (2 miles away) when we are "all" travelling at 80/85 MPH on this Motorway outside rush hours, like when I return home from working in Essex on Saturday Night, for example..:)

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Three Southwark stabbings 'linked'

Thursday, 16 April 2009

There were three stabbings in one evening

By Jenny Clover

COPS investigating three vicious stabbings of young men in one evening think the attacks could be linked.

Two men were left with serious stab wounds after three separate attacks around Southwark last Tuesday.

In the first incident, an 18-year-old man was chased by a group of men on bikes and attacked at 6.50pm in Harmony Place, Willow Walk, Bermondsey.

He was rushed to hospital and had to undergo emergency surgery for his injuries.

Later that evening, a man in his late 20s was stabbed in Cronin Street, Peckham, at 9.30pm.

He also suffered serious injuries and had to have emergency surgery at hospital.

Both are now in a stable condition.

The last attack happened just after the second in nearby Chandler Way, Peckham, when a man in his late 20s was stabbed.

Silly suggestion, I'm fully aware, and I realise its not important at all, but couldn't Southwark concentrate more energy in liaison with The Police to try to curb this instead?

[bawdy-nan]

perhaps there are more injuries caused by vehicles in he borough than by knife attack?

[ratty]

I rarely get above 20 mph on my journey to and from work anyway so I would be in support! Speshly if it got rid of the speed bumps!

[SteveT]

It will feel as if we are all constantly travelling over Tower bridge, which is a drag as I cannot 'cruise control' below 25mph.

I use it all the time to prevent me from inadvertently going over the present limit.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Come on PR, I know your views on traffic by now but those points seem a bit knee-jerk

To say that "many" accidents are not cause by speed to make a point is disingenuos surely? Even by your "many", that means many more are caused by speeding. And your chances of surviving if hit at 20mph are hugely increased

Money making scam is just such a clich? as well - it carries no weight. Show me the balance sheet where income exceeds expenditure on this and I might concede

People complain when elected officials show no leadersip and now they are complaining when Southwark is taking a lead - fair play to them I say. Southwark is a largely built up area close to central London - the gains from travelling above 20mph (whenever THAT is possible) are slim.

You just want to go for a ride, I get that - but Zones 1-5 of a city based around medieval streets maybe not the best location

[Torben Pieknik]

The money making argument is such rubbish. Speeding fine revenue goes to the Treasury not the borough council. I doubt Southwark Council has any desire to bolster the Treasury's coffers.

Five people died on Southwark's roads in 2007 (most recently available data) and 130 people were seriously injured. People (in particular children) are less likely to die or be seriously injured if hit at lower speeds, regardless of whether speed is a factor in the collision.

As for the argument that motorists are distracted by varying speed limits - it is a pretty fundamental principle of learning to drive to be able to register what the speed limit is.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Can someone PLEASE answer me this question.

Why are the "Pro" 20 MPH Limit Guys not requsting or insisting on a 10 MPH Limit?

Surely that will be safer still?

[Xena Worried prince]

More importantly

Where us Tufty when you need him

If he was on the job then we wouldn't need 20mph zones !!!!

[Cassius]

How will it be policed - even more speed cameraa? I saw cars speeding down Gallery Road yesterday evening at about 7.00pm - they must have been doing at least 60. Whether the limit is 20 or 30 there will still be idiots going as fast as they can where they can.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Its called balance - the need to move people around whilst protecting as many people as possible from the negative impact of busy roads. It shouldn't be seen as the only factor in better managing roads however - ongoing enforcement of alohol limits, encouraging public transport, smaller vehicles, harsher penalties for bad driving etc

Twice in the last week, I and my gammy leg have nearly been obliterated by people driving whilst on a mobile phone (do ya wanna description of what they look like Tone?? Then you can keep an eye out for them!) - and if anyone says better enfocement of fines on these idiots is a money making scam I will use my PIP Bout to track you down and get all medieval...

[SeanMacGabhann]

Cassius - true, there will always be idiots driving at 60mph

But it's amazing how so many "normal" drivers think they can classify their behaviour as different from the idiots...

Whenever any law is changed or enacted, people say it will just affect the average Joe whilst the ciminals will get away with whatver they get away with . This ignores the fact that criminals will always exist and in many cases their behaviour is not part of the consideration. They are almost statistical outliers. Changing the "average" persons driving habits will have a far more profound affect.

[Torben Pieknik]

TLS - because at 20mph the chance of a pedestrian being killed is very low.

If a pedestrian is hit by a car travelling at 35 mph they have a 50 per cent chance being killed

If a pedestrian is hit by a car travelling at 30 mph they have a 20 per cent chance of being killed

If a pedestrian is hit by a car travelling at 20 mph they have a 2.5 per cent chance of being killed

Sean is right it is about balance - driving at 20mph significantly reduces a pedestrian's risk of being killed. I think it is worth cutting the speed limit to cut the risk to pedestrians so significantly.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

..(do ya wanna description of what> they look like Tone?? Then you can keep an eye out

> for them!) -

I hope your Gammy Leg is not making you more irritatable Seany:))...and I hope it gets better as soon as, for all our sakes...;-)

I'm coming round to the view that not only "descriptions" should NOT be given but people should not even mention. let alone report crimes...if only I was "poor" and "18" and "unemployable" and "criminally minded" what a Haven London would be...sigh

Sadly for me I'm none of these things...well I am a bit strapped for cash, as it happens, but you get the point.

In any event after over 500,000 Miles driving since 1980 (mostly in London ) I have built up a very vivid picture of who to be aware of on the roads and it ain't bespectacled Middle Aged Ladies on their way to the job as Librarian at Spa Road in Bermondsey for Southwark Council...:))

[PeckhamRose]

Interesting thoughts, but my points were misconstrued so I apologise for not making them clearer.

Obviously I live in Southwark and I go work all over London as well as working from home. I ride for the wonder of it, and I ride for business. My point is that Southwark is just one small geographical area, and it is just so futile for so many millions of trucks lorries vans cars and so on who - when all they want to do is go from A to B - are faced with yet another set of rules for this relatively small area. If London wide had one set of rules, as I made the point about USA - it would be simpler and fairer and safer, since everyone would know those rules and you'd need less signage that changes each borough you come to.

Today for example, riding down Peckham Rye. Was riding safely and aware of surroundings, concentrating, aware of people and other cars. Realised I was riding safely at 29mph yet come next year they've made a criminal out of me. I am concerned at this, that they are punishing everyone. And it is a punishment, because it is unnecessary. Yes as above why 20mph? Why not 10mph?

[first mate]

PR,

I'm with you on this. We all know that those who want to speed and to break the law will continue to do so, whatever the speed limit; they have their little ways of disguising number plates etc..., leaving the rest of us to foot the bill for the new legislation when we accidently go one mile over the 20mph limit.

The whole thing is a nonsense and it is, absolutely, about garnering revenue for cash-strapped councils like Southwark. Just like the traffic calming measures that are being reinstated all over roads off Lordship Lane, having being ripped up only a few years ago. But it's for our own good say planning, they want to keep us safe. Wait a minute though, it's also the end of the financial year and any underspend has to be put to "good" use- the real reason behind the speed bumps/traffic calming measures, I suspect

[SeanMacGabhann]

first mate - do you have anything to back that up whatsoever - or is it just a convenient peg to hang your bias on

As Road fatalities continue to come down and down

one report here

is it any coincidence that it happens as road users protest ever louder about their rights and how they are being penalised?

of course you would have to be a fool (and a communist) to make any link between the two, right?

[Torben Pieknik]

But you will never get one set of rules, there are 33 London Boroughs all of different political leadership, all with different priorities.

There are different speed limits on different roads whereever you are, it is a motorist's responsibility to be aware of the speed limit.

Yes people just want to go from A to B, but unfortunately lots of people get killed while people go from a to b. By lowering the speed limit hopefully less people will die or be seriously injured. 20mph reduces risk to 1 in 40 chance of being killed - I think that is a fair balance.

So what is the objection to driving at 20mph?

[*Bob*]

The reality is that with a speed limit of 30mph, most people will squeeze up to over 35, slowing only to bunch up dangerously when a speed camera hoves into view - then accelerate again.

With a limit of 20mph, there's more liklihood of most people staying below 30.

Of course all is this is meaningless when the average speed of traffic probably averages no more than 12mph.

[SeanMacGabhann]

Not so sure I agree on the never part of this Torben. I predict that a 20mph zone will be xity wide in the not too distant future

It will be amazing how many things will stop "coming out of nowhere" at 20mph as well..