TFL email, cycle paths in South London

hegyestomi

Recieved this email today:

We would like your views on proposals for the new Barclays Cycle Superhighway Route 5 which would run between New Cross Gate and Victoria, via Peckham, Camberwell, Kennington and Vauxhall.

To improve safety for cyclists, the new route would bring road layout changes including:

New mandatory cycle lanes
Improvements for cyclists at 52 junctions
20mph speed limits in some areas
You can view and feedback on proposals at public exhibitions in Peckham, Oval and Victoria. For details of these and to have your say, please visit https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs5

This consultation will close on Friday 11 January 2013.

What do you think?

Kieran_Burns

MANDATORY cycle lane?????

roger_merriman

Kieran_Burns wrote:

MANDATORY cycle lane?????

as in Cars/Mopeds out! rather than bikes must use them.

BigLights

20mph speed limits are a great idea - even when I'm driving I don't really feel the need to go much over that in central London. Plus, it's not like it's saving you any time anyway, just gets you to the next traffic lights a few seconds faster.

I think mandatory cycle lanes are very much a double edged sword...ie, all cyclists are reduced to the slowest common denominator, which can be veeeery slow......

daviesee

roger merriman wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

MANDATORY cycle lane?????

as in Cars/Mopeds out! rather than bikes must use them.

I hope that you are right but I can see a thin edge of a wedge here......

rjsterry

Kieran_Burns wrote:

MANDATORY cycle lane?????

Calm down petal, like RM says, it just means that other vehicles 'have' to stay out of them, rather than dashed line lanes, where vehicles are just supposed to stay out of them 'if possible'. In practice, the solid line means jack as it is completely unenforced. Scooters and m/bikes weave in and out of the lanes at random.

Kieran_Burns

rjsterry wrote:

Kieran_Burns wrote:

MANDATORY cycle lane?????

Calm down petal, like RM says, it just means that other vehicles 'have' to stay out of them, rather than dashed line lanes, where vehicles are just supposed to stay out of them 'if possible'. In practice, the solid line means jack as it is completely unenforced. Scooters and m/bikes weave in and out of the lanes at random.

Oh shush :P

I saw mandatory and read compulsory.

daviesee

Kieran_Burns wrote:

Oh shush :P

I saw mandatory and read compulsory.

Trouble being, so do drivers.
I have already had this discussion with one old geezer as to why wasn't I on the expensive (but useless) cycle path.

kelsen

20MPH speed limit?????

That would mean I'd take longer to get into work!

kieranb

so are they going to try (again) improve the junction around kennington, why don't I have much hope.

Pufftmw

I, for one, am glad that they have cut down the length of CS5 as it started in Loampit R/about and went up Loampit Hill, Lewisham Way and down to New Cross Road, so I now don't have to contend with a silly blue line on the road funnelling people along. The other good point about that is that most people don't go up Loampit Hill but instead use Brookmill, so really a waste of resource IMHO.

I then question the amount of traffic going west via Peckham and Camberwell and whether or not a full CS effort is justified anyway? That and its not really "going into town" like the other lanes are. OKR is not too bad though I guess & doesn't need it.

A better use of a CS would be Evelyn St/Jamaica Road etc as so many people use that route.

hegyestomi

Pufftmw wrote:

I, for one, am glad that they have cut down the length of CS5 as it started in Loampit R/about and went up Loampit Hill, Lewisham Way and down to New Cross Road, so I now don't have to contend with a silly blue line on the road funnelling people along. The other good point about that is that most people don't go up Loampit Hill but instead use Brookmill, so really a waste of resource IMHO.

I then question the amount of traffic going west via Peckham and Camberwell and whether or not a full CS effort is justified anyway? That and its not really "going into town" like the other lanes are. OKR is not too bad though I guess & doesn't need it.

A better use of a CS would be Evelyn St/Jamaica Road etc as so many people use that route.

I think Evelyn St/Jamaica Road are ok but you need to widen the coverage of cycle paths more to the south, away from the city centre. Also people from SE heading to W/SW don't have to go that far north anymore then.
IMO the more cycle lanes are the better: it will increase the awareness’ of motorist towards cyclist (as we are going to be everywhere!).
What I'm more worried is plans like the one of the bottom of Pepys road with the path moving east towards Peckham: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/9e081f40
Between Pepys road and Erlanger road the cycle path is quietly disappearing, then it comes back and then it turns into bus stop. That section is not really wide enough to accommodate a "safe pass" by a car so they just removed the path(?).

cyclingprop

I've got a feeling we live on the same street.

I got the flyer yesterday.... for me they need to (re) sort out the junction a the bottom of Pepys.

hegyestomi

cyclingprop wrote:

I've got a feeling we live on the same street.

I got the flyer yesterday.... for me they need to (re) sort out the junction a the bottom of Pepys.

I hope not: it will probably take them 2 more years to do that.
I live on Pepys Road. You?

cyclingprop

Then we live close enough for a local pint or a Saturday ride...?

hegyestomi

cyclingprop wrote:

Then we live close enough for a local pint or a Saturday ride...?

Got 2 kids and commited to a martial arts 2x a week (one is Sat morning).
I would love to have a ride somewhere but don't know when, I went with the DP on Wednesday night a couple of times, it's fun.
Once/if/when my miss takes the kids to parents in law then I'm in to pretty much any riding.

Pufftmw

What martial arts?

cyclingprop

hegyestomi wrote:

cyclingprop wrote:

Then we live close enough for a local pint or a Saturday ride...?

Got 2 kids and commited to a martial arts 2x a week (one is Sat morning).
I would love to have a ride somewhere but don't know when, I went with the DP on Wednesday night a couple of times, it's fun.
Once/if/when my miss takes the kids to parents in law then I'm in to pretty much any riding.

Ah fair enough. I very much doubt im quick enough for the DP chaingangs, though I really ought to pull my finger out and go on a Saturday.

daviesee

hegyestomi wrote:

cyclingprop wrote:

Then we live close enough for a local pint or a Saturday ride...?

Got 2 kids and commited to a martial arts 2x a week (one is Sat morning).
I would love to have a ride somewhere but don't know when, I went with the DP on Wednesday night a couple of times, it's fun.
Once/if/when my miss takes the kids to parents in law then I'm in to pretty much any riding.

I can almost hear Steve Wright playing "Our Song".

Origamist

I see they are thinking of massive ASL Zones - 15+ metres deep in certain locations. This is a new departure. Traditionally the argument was that ASL zones should not be deeper than 5m due to the likely encroachment of motor vehicles if they were longer. Encroachment never happens with ASLs less than 5m.............

There appears to be another innovation: an "early light" phase to let cyclists stop ahead of motor traffic at the Vauxhall/Millbank junction and then go through the junction before motor traffic on a dedicated green light. This measure would have to have received the go-ahead from the DfT.

The rest looks like the usual hotpotch of cycling infrastructure.

rjsterry

Origamist wrote:

I see they are thinking of massive ASL Zones - 15+ metres deep in certain locations. This is a new departure. Traditionally the argument was that ASL zones should not be deeper than 5m due to the likely encroachment of motor vehicles if they were longer. Encroachment never happens with ASLs less than 5m.............

There appears to be another innovation: an "early light" phase to let cyclists stop ahead of motor traffic at the Vauxhall/Millbank junction and then go through the junction before motor traffic on a dedicated green light. This measure would have to have received the go-ahead from the DfT.

The rest looks like the usual hotpotch of cycling infrastructure.

Isn't that the same thing as has been introduced at Bow roundabout (and widely derided as next to useless).

Origamist

rjsterry wrote:

Origamist wrote:

I see they are thinking of massive ASL Zones - 15+ metres deep in certain locations. This is a new departure. Traditionally the argument was that ASL zones should not be deeper than 5m due to the likely encroachment of motor vehicles if they were longer. Encroachment never happens with ASLs less than 5m.............

There appears to be another innovation: an "early light" phase to let cyclists stop ahead of motor traffic at the Vauxhall/Millbank junction and then go through the junction before motor traffic on a dedicated green light. This measure would have to have received the go-ahead from the DfT.

The rest looks like the usual hotpotch of cycling infrastructure.

Isn't that the same thing as has been introduced at Bow roundabout (and widely derided as next to useless).

Very similar - it has been trialled at Bow (after some ongoing modifications, I believe) and the site has been monitored for months. I am assuming that the reports were favourable - hence why it is being rolled out at other sites.

rjsterry

Origamist wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Origamist wrote:

I see they are thinking of massive ASL Zones - 15+ metres deep in certain locations. This is a new departure. Traditionally the argument was that ASL zones should not be deeper than 5m due to the likely encroachment of motor vehicles if they were longer. Encroachment never happens with ASLs less than 5m.............

There appears to be another innovation: an "early light" phase to let cyclists stop ahead of motor traffic at the Vauxhall/Millbank junction and then go through the junction before motor traffic on a dedicated green light. This measure would have to have received the go-ahead from the DfT.

The rest looks like the usual hotpotch of cycling infrastructure.

Isn't that the same thing as has been introduced at Bow roundabout (and widely derided as next to useless).

Very similar - it has been trialled at Bow (after some ongoing modifications, I believe) and the site has been monitored for months. I am assuming that the reports were favourable - hence why it is being rolled out at other sites.

Not according to my latest LCC magazine. Reports of lots of people (2 & 4 wheeled) not really knowing how to use it and it still not solving the left hook problem that killed one of the cyclists at that junction.

Origamist

rjsterry wrote:

Origamist wrote:

Very similar - it has been trialled at Bow (after some ongoing modifications, I believe) and the site has been monitored for months. I am assuming that the reports were favourable - hence why it is being rolled out at other sites.

Not according to my latest LCC magazine. Reports of lots of people (2 & 4 wheeled) not really knowing how to use it and it still not solving the left hook problem that killed one of the cyclists at that junction.

That doesn't surprise me. I have not used the junction since the re-design, but are there cameras monitoring the junction and vehicle movements? This is how TFL usually get an idea if conflicts are arising between different road users, post-implementation. I'm touchingly naive sometimes, so I'm assuming they have the pre-implementation data as well and can compare the collisions and near miss data sets...If it is just the occasional site visit, it's a crap way to judge the success or otherwise of the "early start" and segregated lane at Bow.

As it is only an "early start" for cyclists, it's not going to eradicate the problem of left hooks as not all cyclists will pass through when the light turns green. Thinking about it, I'm not even sure they would need DfT special authorisation or legislation to do this.

Applespider

My immediate interest is from Vauxhall onwards since I cycle via Herne Hill/Stockwell now because Camberwell New Road is so unpleasant - and I get less of the Vauxhall gyratory coming in from South Lambeth Road.

Immediate thoughts are that I am very glad to see right turns being proposed along Vauxhall Bridge Road. I definitely prefer option 2 as far as going over Vauxhall Bridge. I would far rather share a wider space with a few buses than end up on a shared pavement with pedestrians running for trains and dodging around walkers into the cycle lane. Plus for those of us who want to filter over to turn right along South Lambeth Road, it will be easier to do so. The new 'early bird' lights only help if you arrive at a point where the lights are red. If you are in free flowing traffic, getting off the pavement and over will be tricky.

I'd also prefer the road option for the gyratory but could see that less confident cyclists might prefer the shared footpath option.

I am not convinced by it stopping at Neathouse Place as it does. It handholds and then dumps cyclists at the start of the horrible one way system. There is no easy/direct way to get to the western end of Victoria St on two wheels. It's either taking your chances with multiple lanes of traffic around Bressenden Place, going on a detour through the back streets round St Vincent Square (incidentally also full of one-way streets) or getting off the bike and manoeuvring it through already crowded pavements.

Will definitely give the online survey some comments and try to get along to one of the exhibitions

Origamist

rjsterry wrote:

Origamist wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

Origamist wrote:

I see they are thinking of massive ASL Zones - 15+ metres deep in certain locations. This is a new departure. Traditionally the argument was that ASL zones should not be deeper than 5m due to the likely encroachment of motor vehicles if they were longer. Encroachment never happens with ASLs less than 5m.............

There appears to be another innovation: an "early light" phase to let cyclists stop ahead of motor traffic at the Vauxhall/Millbank junction and then go through the junction before motor traffic on a dedicated green light. This measure would have to have received the go-ahead from the DfT.

The rest looks like the usual hotpotch of cycling infrastructure.

Isn't that the same thing as has been introduced at Bow roundabout (and widely derided as next to useless).

Very similar - it has been trialled at Bow (after some ongoing modifications, I believe) and the site has been monitored for months. I am assuming that the reports were favourable - hence why it is being rolled out at other sites.

Not according to my latest LCC magazine. Reports of lots of people (2 & 4 wheeled) not really knowing how to use it and it still not solving the left hook problem that killed one of the cyclists at that junction.

I've emailed TFL to discover how they came to this conclusion:

The cycle early-start would improve safety, due to the reduced risk of conflict between cyclists travelling straight ahead and vehicles turning left. We have already introduced a cycle early-start facility at Bow roundabout in east London. Our provisional monitoring to date shows that it has been effective in reducing risk of conflict between cyclists and left-turning motorists.