Thursday, 18 December 2014

TfL's consultation on Stamford Street / Cornwall Rd Junction - Quietway 1



TfL have just opened a consultation about a Lambeth junction, where Cornwall Road crosses Stamford Street, on the Quietway which will run between Waterloo and Greenwich. Subject to the outcome of this consultation, TfL plan to start construction work in early 2015. The consultation runs until 9th February.

TfL's consultation page doesn't include a map to show where the route in Lambeth will run, but the SE1 website put up a piece on Tuesday stating that, "In SE1, the Quietway route will run from the South Bank via Cornwall Road and Webber Street to Great Suffolk Street and Trinity Street".

Unlike Southwark, Lambeth has not yet published, and consulted on, the proposals they have for the Quietway on their streets. Without knowing the wider plan in Lambeth there are limited comments one can make on an individual junction. So, while I urge people to comment, it may be worth waiting a while for the borough's plans to be published.




Sunday, 14 December 2014

Last chance to respond to CS5 consultation

Please take one moment tonight to complete a TfL consultation survey 
 https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/cycling/cs-5-harleyford-road  giving your views, even if a one line 'I support TfL's plans', on the proposed Cycling Superhighway 5 route (blue below). 

I'd also strongly suggest that you also ask TfL to REJECT the plan in red below, submitted in a letter by the Chair of the board of the Kennington, Oval, Vauxhall Forum, which proposes that CS5 diggles around the back of the Oval, along the Inner Ring Road (Kennington Lane), across the road and behind the Royal Vauxhall Tavern then over the bridge.

The full letter to TfL from the Chair of the KOV Forum board is below

Re: CS5 consultation on Harleyford Road
Further to our earlier correspondence, I would like to raise a number of points, many of
which were brought out at our Public Meeting you so kindly attended.

As you are aware, the Kennington, Oval and Vauxhall Forum (KOV) is a volunteer
organization supported by a small grant from Lambeth Council. It has several objectives
including Neighbourhood Planning and helping to deliver local consultation by using
local networks (whether Friends of Parks, Libraries, Residents and Tenants
Associations etc.) to increase the reach and deliver rounded feedback. We have
accumulated a database of some 500 email addresses. We also work closely with
businesses in the area, having on our governing Board, two members that represent
Vauxhall One, the Business Improvement District for our area.

This letter has been prepared with the input of a number of people and local groups we
represent and has been possible as a result of significant work by many in the area
thinking through the consequences of the proposals.

We acknowledge that TfL has done a lot to improve the scheme since the original
consultation. However, having listened to the feedback of our members and others
locally, KOV does not support the current approach to CS5 along Harleyford Road for
the following reasons:

• Increased journey times for all road users (except cyclists) and pedestrians
too.
In particular, an adverse impact on thousands of bus users heading from Oval towards
Vauxhall and beyond The section of road from the Oval to Vauxhall (Harleyford
Street/Kennington Oval/Harleyford Road has a bus lane servicing bus numbers 185, 36
and 436. At peak times, 21 buses per hour take advantage of the bus lane – say up to
2,000 passengers per hour. The current CS5 proposal will effectively make the 21
buses per hour heading for Vauxhall join a stream of relatively slow moving traffic. Not
only would the buses be significantly slowed so too would other traffic.

• Increased C02 emissions and reduced air quality resulting from the traffic
sitting idle for longer periods of time.
Stationary traffic, e.g. cars with engines idling at lights, contribute approximately 1.2g
per minute CO2. The removal of the bus lane will result in increased congestion and
delays on most journeys thus increasing carbon emissions.

• Adverse economic impact
TfL has a responsibility to deliver the most efficient and effective usage of the roads
under its jurisdiction to allow the safest and most economic travel for all. With the use of
additional fuel consumption as a result of vehicles going longer distances and sitting idle
as well as loss of time for everyone other than cyclists, this is not an efficient solution for
the London economy.

• Increased risk of accidents and congestion on other local roads
Rat-runs are likely to increase, particularly Fentiman Road, for cars trying to avoid
Harleyford Road.

• Severe problems outside the Royal Vauxhall Tavern (RVT)
In this latest design, we recognise that TfL has made efforts to mitigate the risk of
conflict between pedestrians and cyclists at the RVT junction but the design still falls
short of what is needed. For example, cyclists wishing to stay on the left hand side of
Vauxhall Bridge will continue to cut through the pedestrian tunnel on the station side.
Had CS5 continued on the other side of the road under the viaduct before crossing over,
more cyclists would have the option to avoid the pedestrian tunnel. A further limitation
of the design is the one-way routes on the CS5 around the viaduct. These do not reflect
how cyclists will behave and are at odds with proposed two way working. We would
expect the majority of cyclists currently going under the viaduct to turn right into South
Lambeth Road. Only a minority will use the pedestrian tunnel on the RVT side.
It is a feature of CS5 that cyclists will be able to reach relatively high speed along the
Harleyford Road stretch of the superhighway heading towards the RVT junction. In spite
of the mitigation measures, we would expect cyclist/pedestrian collisions to be
inevitable. At best, it will create severe conflicts. We believe that the design can be
improved significantly by taking into account some of the ideas put forward by the
community. A more modest cycle lane provision that does not encourage high speed
cycling would help.

Furthermore, the consultation has highlighted some severe inconsistencies:

1. CS5 does not address the concerns of most local cyclists when
approaching the Vauxhall Gyratory. 
A majority of cyclists use the gyratory as an interchange with South Lambeth Road
rather than Harleyford Street. My fellow KOV Board Member, Michael Keane was kind
enough to run a brief survey on Friday 12th December to record travel and his results are
appended to this letter showing the need for a better link between the Gyratory and
South Lambeth Road. This evidence is further supported, in that sadly, the most recent
cyclist deaths, related to problems with South Lambeth Road where it meets the
Gyratory at Parry Street.

2. CS5 is being introduced out of sequence with other changes proposed to
the Vauxhall Gyratory
The current proposal does not take adequate account of the proposals to reverse the
mini Gyratory suggested as part of the ‘Transforming Vauxhall’ consultation. If the
proposals for the Gyratory were implemented, the CS5 suggestion to relocate a bus stop
to Durham Street becomes problematic, and the investment in a floating bus stop no
longer makes sense on Harleyford Road.

3. Inadequacies of the consultation process
As a forum, we naturally take consultation very seriously. We are concerned to note that
our area seems to be given less choice than other local consultations and insufficient
evidence to justify the benefits or otherwise of the proposal. Key differences between
the CS5 consultation and others we know of is explained here:
• TfL’s consultation for Stockwell Cross helpfully provides additional information on
the traffic impacts that the scheme might have – when the hyperlink is viewed it
shows pedestrians crossing the area, bus journey times and car journey times at
peak flow in the morning and the evening. Yet this data is not supplied by TfL to
show the likely impacts of CS5.
• During the earlier consultation on CS5, residents of Belgravia were given a
choice of routes to consider. The residents in Oval have not been given a choice
– other than which side of Harleyford Road it could travel.

4. An alternative route proposed by residents merits further consideration
and consultation
As you are aware the residents of Harleyford Road have prepared an extensive critique
of the CS5 proposals and the disadvantage it puts on local residents, particularly the
restriction on receiving deliveries or any other emergency needs. The residents have
also outlined their concerns over HGV transport at the interchange with Durham Street
as a result of reduced road widths.
Additionally, the residents of Ashmole Estate have made representations about the
spacing of bus stops and the removal of one on Harleyford Road and placing it on
Durham Street. For the elderly and infirm coming from the Estate every pace makes a
significant difference to their travel time.
There is an alternative proposal to put the Cycle Superhighway around the back of
Kennington Oval and through Vauxhall Street, which is a very quiet road where there is
already a segregated cycle lane, and onto Kennington Lane. Although not suggested by
residents, there is the potential then to allow the cycle lane to run along the edge of
Vauxhall Pleasure Gardens towards the river (behind the RVT). This proposal merits
serious further consideration if CS5 must be delivered.

Additionally, KOV as you are aware has produced a proposal for the Vauxhall Gyratory
which was presented at our meeting on 9th December. This proposes closing off South
Lambeth Road to through traffic. This road closure would make this a much safer route
for the majority of cycle journeys.

We welcome better provision for cyclists in our area and trust you will consider these
alternatives as a more cost-effective and improved offer.
Yours sincerely,
The Chair of the KOV Forum

Wednesday, 3 December 2014

A few Small Business Saturday inducements

Here's a little trawl from a Google search on Small Business Saturday (this weekend).

Lots of free parking this Saturday, and the occasional bus offer. No mention of a more frequent bus service, inducements to cycle etc. My guess is that quite a few of the free parking spaces will be fully occupied by staff of the small businesses.
---------
Free on-street parking and £2 bus journeys across Gloucestershire next Saturday

Parking in Taunton’s 19 town centre car parks will be free from 2pm for the rest of the afternoon on Saturday, December 6.
The park and ride service operating at Taunton Gateway and Silk Mills, is offering a shoppers special on Saturdays leading up to Christmas with a discounted ticket of £1.50 for up to five people travelling together.

THERE will be a free parking bonanza in Poole and the New Forest in the lead up to Christmas. Borough of Poole will be running a free park and ride service from Creekmoor to the town centre every Saturday from November 29. There will also be free parking in all town centre car parks every Sunday between 10am and 6pm from November 23 to December 21 and Thursday nights between 6pm and 9pm from November 27 until December 18

Parking in Haringey's pay and display bays and council-run car parks will be free on December 6 as the borough celebrates Small Business

Weymouth & Portland Borough Council is offering free parking for Weymouth Victorian Shownight and Small Business Saturday

SELECTED car parks run by Portsmouth City Council will be free on Small Business Saturday

Shoppers across Ashfield can take advantage of free parking across the whole district as the council supports Small Business Saturday

Shoppers and visitors to Oakham and Uppingham can enjoy free parking after 10am on Saturday, December 6, as part of Small Business Saturday.

East Lindsey District Council car parks will be free to use on December 6, in a council drive to help support local businesses.

PARKING in Bishop's Stortford will be free all day next Saturday (December 6) to celebrate Small Business Saturday.


Free festive parking will come into effect next month, as Mendip District Council’s Cabinet has agreed to support Small Business Saturday by providing free all day car parking at the following car parks on December 6.

Free festive parking will come into effect next month, as Mendip District Council’s Cabinet has agreed to support Small Business Saturday.




Sunday, 30 November 2014

A quick, easy and cheap way to reduce the likelihood of bike theft


You can lock your frame and both wheels to Sheffield Stands but only the wheel to 'wheel-bender' stands. Why has the management of the Elephant and Castle Shopping Centre left these theft-inviting racks in place, given there are now a large number of conveniently located and more secure Sheffield Stands? I think the shopping centre management are almost as responsible for the theft as the person who took advantage of their slackness to steal most of the bike. When will they remove them?

I would also like to know why the police and PCSOs who patrol the area haven't demanded the shopping centre's management remove them.

Friday, 28 November 2014

Obstructing safe streets


I have been meaning to write to Lambeth Council concerning parking at the mouth of the junction of Renfrew Road and Dugard Way. Most evenings and weekends the junction is blocked by cars, restricting pedestrian, wheelchair and push chair movement and creating a sight-line hazard for people on bikes. 

There need to be double yellow lines here - especially as this is the only non A-road link between two cells of quiet roads. It should be made safe for children to cycle around.

There is, normally, less of a problem Monday to Friday 8.30am to 6.30pm when the single yellow line explicitly prohibits parking and, crucially, wardens enforce it. However this morning the drivers of the two vans pictured had ignored the yellow lines and dropped kerbs. They were still there at lunchtime. Both had blue folders in the windows, the sign of a police vehicle. The drivers are presumably in the police section house on the road - hardly an emergency meriting such anti-social and hazardous parking.



Here's a reminder of Highway Code 243 (Apart from parking on the yellow line, wardens in London can issue a Penalty Charge Notice for blocking a lowered kerb).

DO NOT stop or park:
near a school entrance
anywhere you would prevent access for Emergency Services
at or near a bus or tram stop or taxi rank
on the approach to a level crossing/tramway crossing
opposite or within 10 metres (32 feet) of a junction, except in an authorised parking space
near the brow of a hill or hump bridge
opposite a traffic island or (if this would cause an obstruction) another parked vehicle
where you would force other traffic to enter a tram lane
where the kerb has been lowered to help wheelchair users and powered mobility vehicles

The police locally have form on ignoring parking rules for their own convenience.


Wednesday, 26 November 2014

Kate Hoey MP will attend Vauxhall Cross discussion on 9th December

Please be advised that the next public meeting of the Kennington, Oval, Vauxhall (KOV) Forum will take place on the 9th December 2014 at 7pm at the Carmelita Centre (Registration from 6:30pm).

The main item on the Agenda will be the 'Vauxhall Cross' latest developments and associated consultation (more information on http://www.kovforum.org.uk).

Kate Hoey MP will be attending this public meeting.

A full detail Agenda will be issued soon. In the meantime keep checking the KOV Forum website, Facebook and twitter for the latest updates.





Tuesday, 25 November 2014

Road Safety messengers have to change their spots

It was the easiest thing in the world for a Road Safety Officer to blag a pile of high viz landfill from a company that realised spending 3s 6d on tat is cheaper than spending proper money sorting out their drivers and vehicles, and it fulfilled their role as a cheap sop to politicians who couldn't care less for people walking and cycling.

But those days need to be put behind us. In London, at least, the active traveller  should absolutely not need to kowtow to the motorist.

Let's remind ourselves for the umpteenth time why:
1) 60% of London car journeys only have the driver in the car, squandering the capacity of valuable road space. It's a dumb way to move lots of people around, especially when half of all car journeys in London are under 3kms - a distance so easy to cycle or walk for the vast majority.

2) A third of men aged 35 to 65 are too fat to be able to see their penis. They need to build exercise into their daily routine, easiest done by travelling. (Apart from not being to see their best friend, they're more likely to develop diabetes, heart disease and cancer).

3) 6 out of 10 London households don't have a car, and getting on for half of outer London households don't either.

4) Cars pump out CO2 and exhaust emissions. It's bad for the planet and bad for us - there'll be 50,000 premature deaths due to poor air quality this year and each year we continue.

5) motor vehicles have a shudderingly high amount of kinetic energy compared to the pedestrian or cyclist, and a driver therefore has a hugely disproportionate likelihood to cause serious injury or death.

Okay, enough already. It's blindingly obvious that promoting walking and cycling is the way to go for urban trips, and we're not going to achieve that if we take every opportunity to portray cycling as an incredibly dangerous activity.

I mean, look at this recent image of training for riding on local streets, published in the Western Gazette - does it encourage parents to let their children cycle around their neighbourhood?


By all means take sensible measures to have cyclists use lights as nights. For example, like the Germans historically, you ensure lights are built into bicycles, with dynamo lighting, so they're always present, in the right place, and reliable.

Control the speeds and access of motor vehicles. Adopt the Dutch method of sustainable safety, based on the proven principal that a 21 year old male is a nutter for reasons well beyond their own control.

And focus your road safety attention on the vehicles with the greater kinetic energy.

And if you watch this you'll see why I went on this rant this evening. A really good beginning for change would be for the BBC and other media to agree a code of conduct that ensures road safety messages are not at the expense of promoting active travel.

If you want to read more I suggest you start with the Road Danger Reduction Forum