Lower Road Safety Consultation
wrote:
I went to the useful exhibition at Holy Trinity Church Hall yesterday
(Saturday 17 July). The display helpfully expanded on the July 2004
four-scheme leaflet.
Below are my comments on the Lower Road proposals. I'm Coordinator
of the 580 member Southwark Cyclists (www.southwarkcyclists.org.uk)
but these are my personal views.
It would be very helpful if someone from Mott McDonald and
Southwark Council could be at our next monthly meeting on Wednesday
11 August to let us have your thoughts on my views and any others
received from Southwark Cyclists and others: 7pm, Blackfriars
Settlement, 1/5 Rushworth Street, London SE1. (Bike parking in the
hall. Southwark tube station is 2 minutes away. Loads of buses). Let
me know please.
General comments
1. The leaflet is "your guide to road-safety proposals in the
area". "These measures will help protect local people from the
adverse effects of road traffic". That's laudable and very welcome
but there is no stated mission statement, no clear overall aim or
intent. What was the brief?
2. The 4 road safety projects are being handled by you, Mott
McDonald as Southwark Council's consultants. This is nowhere
explained in the leaflet - or at the exhibitions. Phone the number on
the leaflet - 020 8774 2300 - and the tape says "This is Southwark
Road Safety hotline". Only the leaflet's email address - the one this
email is sent to - provides the clue:
LBS-safety@m... I am of course absolutely comfortable with the use
of specialist consultants, but such use needs to be explicit.
3. Anyone who wants to have a say in the consultation exercise is
asked to complete a postcard and return it by 30 July 2004. There
were comment forms available at the exhibition, but these were A5
size. I presume that longer comments by email and letter will be
acceptable.
4. I use all 4 areas being consulted one very often, and Lower Road
is my daily commute to work. Yet I first heard of the scheme by
seeing a leaflet at a Bankside Community Forum meeting. I saw nothing
in Southwark News.
Detailed comments on the Lower Road proposals
1. One new speed detection sign will say "Slow Down" but the
current 30mph limit stays unchanged. It should be dropped to 20mph.
Nothing improves road safety as much as lower speed limits. If
Southwark Council really wants to improve road safety here, 20mph is
quite fast enough. Mott McDonald said at the exhibition that the
police would not enforce a 20mph zone here. That is no argument for
keeping the 30mph limit.
2. Lower Road is still treated as a fast through road. This road
safety plan needs to recognise the many changes to the area over the
last 20 years. This is a major road artery into central London that
runs through increasingly high-density residential areas. There are
new Jubilee line stations almost at each end of the study area and
many more buses run the route. Yet there is nothing here that
recognises these very substantial improvements or plans to limit
private car use.
3. Proposed new details such as the anti-skid surfacing will only
encourage faster driving. (The Mott McDonald staffer on site on 17
July said that the prime function of the anti-skid surface was to
stop fast vehicles skidding).
4. The bus-lanes here should not be truncated as planned. They
should be extended. (Mott McDonald say that this truncation is to
stop cars colliding head on with each other at these points. Such
collisions are caused by excessive speeds and bad driving).
5. there should be raised speed tables at every junction to calm
traffic and help pedestrians.
6. speed cameras should cover the entire road.
7. all junctions should have Advanced Stop Lines and yellow boxes.
8. only one electronic speed detection sign is planned. Six are
needed to cover the road.
9. several more zebra crossings are needed.
10. there is no evidence that cyclist-specific improvements have
been planned at all along here. That is a very strange omission that
needs explanation please. General trafffic calming will of course
make the street much safer for all users.
11. Mott McDonald staff at the exhibition - who were involved in
drafting these proposals - were not aware of the huge development
scheme at Canada Water that starts in a year's time. The intention
there is to produce 5,00 more homes and 4,000 new jobs with little
new vehicle impact. (Nor were those staff aware of the Walworth Road
project or the Elephant and Castle regeneration schemes. Local
knowledge is important).
I look forward to your comments on the above. I'm copying this to
my 3 local Councillors, to Richard Thomas, to Roger Stocker,
Southwark's Cycling Officer - who I understand was not consulted in
the drawing up of these proposals, and to Southwark Cyclists.
Best wishes.
Barry Mason
18 July 2004