Boris bikers beware - cycle accidents in Kennington on 6th and 7th October

Cyclists, motorists and pedestrians, please be careful on the roads. I noted some time ago that I intend to blog about all cycle accidents, mostly because I think it's very important to offer evidence to TFL on improving road safety for all users, but particularly cyclists and pedestrians.

Yesterday on 6th October 2011, at around 10:15am, a female cyclist (possibly Boris Biker) in her 20s was taken to St Thomas' hospital with minor injuries after having been involved in an accident on Albert Embankment with an ambulance.  The ambulance was flipped on to its side, but both crew members escaped with minor injuries.  It resulted in the closure of Albert Embankment for several hours yesterday.

Today (7th October 2011), a male Boris Biker heading south on Kennington Road near Kennington Cross was involved in an accident with a car.  A witness on Cycle chat noted that the cyclist was knocked unconscious, but came to by the side of the road.

Additionally, I didn't report it at the time, but on 20th September, a male cyclist was involved in an accident with an HGV lorry in Vauxhall Cross near the tube station, in which he suffered serious injuries.

Please be careful cycling through SE11.  There are some very wide and busy A-Roads running through and around Kennington, and we have numerous cycle lanes, a Cycle Superhighway and stacks of London Cycle Scheme aka. Boris Bike docks in the area.  Vauxhall Gyratory and Elephant and Castle roundabout are particularly difficult.

Vauxhall Gyratory: Greed, irresponsibility and entitlement.

(Photo taken from Tradescant Rd blog)

In a post-riot London, whilst our current Prime Minister is waxing lyrical on greed, irresponsibility and entitlement, Lurking about SE11 continues to think about local matters.  "Local" names where we're brought up, how we're socialised, who we talk to and how we learn to interact with others.  Smart phones, iPads and technology aside, our built environment, communities and neighbours are where we learn to discover shared goods.  On a positive note, I'd like to point to a great photo from Vauxhall City Farm, applauding the efforts of Clapham residents to repair their local community.  But just over a mile away from Westminster, in Vauxhall, decisions will need to be taken that speak into what sort of city we'd like London to be.  The future of the Vauxhall gyratory remains a tiny decision for politicians, but a massive concern for drivers and residents, cyclists and businesses.

Listening to the voices on the ground is something that both politicians and decision makers will need to do in the days to come.  Readers might suggest that it is fatuous to try and draw links between riots and city planning, but much of the issues boil down to who is being heard.  Anybody who has attended a local consultation will understand that the question is always whose voice counts?  Concerning our own gyratory, we must ask "who is being greedy given the current road layout?",  "who is being irresponsible in the face of death?" and "to whom is entitlement owing?".  These are the questions David Cameron wants us to think about concerning rioters and bankers, but they affect ordinary people in their daily routines too.

Plans concerning the Vauxhall Gyratory, are slowly chugging through the wheels of local government.  Val Shawcross (chair of Transport Committee on London Assembly) confirmed at the end of July that Lambeth Council are now to work with TFL to carry out a "Vision for Vauxhall" exercise on an improved public space and transport plan for Vauxhall to add to the VNEB OAPF.  Val Shawcross is "hopeful" that this might lead to a "better pedestrian and cycling environment" for the whole area, as opposed to it remaining a "motorway blighted backyard" (private email).  There are currently no dates for the proposed consultation.  At present, we know that Lambeth Council and Val Shawcross both support the removal of the gyratory, but there are concerns about Boris' "traffic smoothing" policies.  When you read "traffic", in that phrase, you need to think vehicle rather than pedestrian or cyclist.

Ms Shawcross may well be hopeful, but I am not, mostly because the exercise is to involve TFL.  I regularly drive through Vauxhall, tube underneath it, bus into it, walk across it and wheel a Boris bike through it (I daren't ride through the interchange) so I  know my subject.  We all know that there are bad cyclists and bad car/lorry drivers.  It is the latter that tend to be involved in accidents that kill people.  Cyclists very rarely kill other road users.  And yet, despite their road use, they are not given anywhere near the amount of road space they require at Vauxhall.  Cycle London has pointed out that 20% of Vauxhall southbound traffic between 5pm - 8pm and 20% of Vauxhall northbound trafiic between 7am-10am is cyclist traffic.  Cyclists are not given 20% of the space, and this gyratory remains nasty, brutish and full of traffic looking to escape the congestion charge.  Something has to give, so let's raise David Cameron's first point.  Who is being greedy?  Before we move on, I urge you to read Cyclists in the City's post on the proposed cycle superhighway to pass through Vauxhall from Peckham to Victoria and the followup after his walkaround with TFL.

A number of angry emails continue to pass through my inbox, and one (or maybe several) anonymous commentators want me to oppose options concerning removal of the Vauxhall gyratory!  I am not clear that any of us fully understand the proposed options, but I cannot see that retaining the gyratory aids anything other than vehicular traffic.  It is time for south Londoners and residents (especially those that live on the gyratory) and cyclists to ask for their requests to be heard.  Vauxhall interchange is a blight upon Vauxhall, particularly given the pollution levels in the area.  Nobody wants it in their backyard.

I remain unhopeful because we know that even with cross-party support and London assembly support and a huge recent protest, Blackfriars' bridge cyclists were not heard.  So, here perhaps is a good time to raise David Cameron's second point.  Who is being irresponsible?  London Cyclist weighed in with a good answer concerning Blackfriars Bridge when he noted,

"I’m proud to live in a city where despite the Mayor saying “more needs to be done on cycling over Blackfriars Bridge”, despite unanimous support from all the political parties of the London Assembly, despite expert recommendations for 20mph speed limits on all of London’s central bridges, despite growing pollution levels and despite mass protests by cyclists, we have a transportation authority that can override them and do what it knows is right for London." 

The most recent published info. on ideas for the Vauxhall Interchange from TFL is found in TFL's Vauxhall Nine Elms Battersa report, catchily named, "Public Realm & Highways Modelling Study".  The relevant pages are p40 - p48.

There are seven options outlined in the report. Four options concern removing the gyratory and returning it to two-way working.  The other three options propose leaving the gyratory as stands...   My guess is that TFL will push for one-way working because even the minimum two-way working plan requires 31% reduction in morning peak-time vehicular traffic.  Despite the fact that it is clear that vehicle drivers are the greedy party, and despite the fact it is clear that TFL are the irresponsible party when it comes to addressing cyclist and pedestrian concerns, the question remains concerning entitlement, and those to whom is's owed.  Is entitlement owed to cyclists?  Residents?  Commuters?  Pedestrians?  Public transport users?  This is an eminently political question and there is no one good answer.  But I suggest politicians and TFL planners ask themselves the question, "would I be prepared to live and raise children on the Vauxhall gyratory?"

I have provided a summary of sketchy TFL options for Vauxhall gyratory, but it's rather difficult to imagine unless you know the roads and their names exceedingly well.  The diagrams in the document are not currently helpful (unless zoomed in closely) and contain too much detail to see traffic flow.  Ideally, diagrams would show basic arrows indicating traffic movement.  If anybody wants to email me simplified diagrams, I'll add them.

Removing the gyratory and return to two-way options

1) Remove South Lambeth Rd from gyratory and relocate the bus station to South Lambeth Rd.

Advantages summary:  

A new public square at the Underground and Rail station entrances (same as with option 2, 3 and 4), simplification of Vauxhall Bridge and other junctions (helps cyclists) and additional public realm at Southern end of Albert Embakment. 

Disadvantages summary: 

31% reduction of traffic required in morning and 21% reduction required for the evening, affecting network capacity and increasing congestion.  (Not clear if that's car/lorry traffic or bus capacity?).  Also traffic delays, bus delays and reduced bus station capacity.

2) Two-way with simpified layout at Nine Elms Lane / Wandsworth Road

You're going to have to go and look at the document diagram for more info. on this!

Advantages summary: 

Link between interchange and new linear park.  Carriageway reduction on Wandsworth Rd. New public square at Underground and Rail station entrances (same as with options 1, 3 and 4).  Changes to Wandsworth Rd and Nine Elms Lane, Albert Embankment and Vauxhall Bridge would reduce accidents and improve cycling conditions (same as option 3).  Wouldn't need to move the bus station. 

Disadvantages summary:

Traffic reduction of 40% of current capacity in morning and evening which would produce congestion and delayed bus journeys.  But...  the bus station structure (is this the ski slope?) would need to be removed (as with option 3) and the bus station capacity would be reduced. 

3) Two-way with Buses and Cyclists only in Parry Street

Advantages summary:

Improvements for pedestrians crossing Parry St and other junctions, due to two-way working.  A new public square at Underground and Rail station entrances (same as with options 1, 2 and 4).  Changes to Wandsworth Rd and Nine Elms Lane, Albert Embankment and Vauxhall Bridge would reduce accidents and improve cycling conditions (same as option 2).  New uses for arches in South Lambeth Place.

Disadvantages summary:

Traffic reduction of 36% required in morning and 31% in evening, affecting network capacity and increasing congestion. Buses experience delays. Bus station structure would need to be removed (as with options 2 and 4).

4) Two-way with Buses and Cyclists only in Wandsorth Rd

Advantages summary:

Improvements for pedestrians crossing Wandsworth Rd.  Reduced carriageway improving public realm. A new public square at Underground and Rail station entrances (same as with options 1, 2 and 3). Simplification of Vauxhall Bridge junction which will help cyclists.  Improvements for pedestrian crossings.

Disadvantages summary:

Vehicular traffic reductions of approx. 50% required in both morning and evening(!!!) affecting network capacity and increasing congestion. Buses experience delays.  Bus station capacity reduced and structure would need to be removed (as with options 2 and 3)

Options for one-way movement

5) One Way:  Do Minimum

Advantages summary:

Improvements to pedestrian movements by adding pedestrian crossings, introduction of contraflow cycle lane on Harleyford Road and a nearside bus lane on Vauxhall Bridge to benefit cyclists.  Has negligible impact on traffic or bus station capacity.

Disadvantages summary:

Loss of one bus stop, no improvements to public realm or increase in public space and increased pedestrian congestion.

[Hmm, that options looks atrocious really, doesn't it?  Might as well be called "do nothing"!]

6) One Way:  Do something

This involves moving and relocating the bus station next to railway viaduct, replacing existing buildings. 

Advantages summary:

Improvement to cyclists by simplification of Vauxhall Bridge/Albert Embankment Junction.  Consolidated public realm and new public square at Undegeround station entrance.  Removal of buses from South Lambeth Place, making it a shared cyclist/pedestrian route.  Widened footways on South Lambeth and Wandsworth Rds.  Introduction of contraflow cycle lane on Harleyford Road and a nearside bus lane on Vauxhall Bridge to benefit cyclists.

Disadvantages summary:

10% reduction of vehicular traffic required in the mornings.  Existing buildings would need to be removed.  Bus station is completely separated by entry and exit routes from Underground station.  Bus station structure would need to be removed and capacity reduced.  Increased pedestrian congestion.

7) One way: Do something (else)

Consolidation of Public Square at Vauxhall undeground station, but with retention of bus station.  Bus station will become shorter to allow buses to enter from Kennington Lane.  New pedestrian crossing on Wandsworth Road.

[Option 7) should probably be looked at carefully.  The study notes that parts of this option were added at quite a late stage, making it a likely strong contender for TFL]

Advantages summary:

Improvement to cyclists by simplification of Vauxhall Bridge/Albert Embankment Junction.  Consolidated public realm and new public square at Undegeround station entrance.  Improved conditions for cyclists by reduction of left turn from Wandsworth Road on to Vauxhall Bridge Rd.  Increased public realm.  New crossing from St George Wharf to central gyratory area.  Lots of additional pedestrian crossings. Introduction of contraflow cycle lane on Harleyford Road and a nearside bus lane on Vauxhall Bridge to benefit cyclists.

Disadvantages summary: 17% reduction of morning vehicular traffic, and 8% reduction of evening vehicular traffic.  Reduced bus station capacity.  Pedestrian congestion likely to increase in vicinity of Nine Elms Lane, Wandsworth Road  and bus station.  Train station entrances remain separated by carriageway.  Bus station separated from underground station, requiring pedestrians to cross busy carriageway (ARGH!)

Now, those are my written sketches.  If you've managed to make it this far, I congratulate you.  I think it's time for a public consultation, but I challenge people to continue to keep asking the question of entitlement.  Who benefits from what you propose, both concerning Vauxhall gyratory and in wider society, and do they deserve to benefit?

Several proposed docks in Lambeth missing from TFL London Cycle Scheme Olympic Expansion

I'm not ready with any detailed posts just yet, but have stumbled across the following today.  Somebody submitted a FOI request re the Olympic expansion of the Boris Bike Scheme requesting details of the proposed new bike docks.  South London people might have been hoping for additional stops to Camberwell, Peckham, Clapham, Stockwell etc. but it seems (unsurprisingly, given the Olympics), that Tower Hamlets will be the real beneficiary, with Westminster gaining substantially too.  It will be interesting to observe the Boris Bike dock on Park Lane during the Olympics...  I fear for hapless tourists.

The Lambeth (Kennington/Oval/Vauxhall) proposed docks and extensions were catalogued in a magisterial post over at the Princes Ward (Labour) blog in November last year.  In that post, it appeared that nine docking stations were submitted for planning approval, but I wasn't clear about how quickly they'd be phased in.  I'm guessing that they'll now form part of the TFL Olympic expansion because they seem to be listed on TFL's proposed Olynpic expansion list except we're four docks short of the 9 submitted, and St Thomas' Hospital appears to have made its way back on to the TFL list:

1.  Kennington Cross/Sancroft St (extension) - On TFL list.
2.  Vauxhall Walk - carriageway - On TFL list
3.  Kennington tube - footway - On TFL list listed as Kennington Park Road
4.  Lambeth Road (opposite China Walk estate) - On TFL list
5.  Oval tube - On TFL list
6.  Baylis Road (extension) (outside Lambeth North tube) - This is not on TFL's list.  Is it being expanded as part of the original phase?
7.  Kennington Lane (underpass at Vauxhall Station) - This is not on TFL's list, and again, I'm wondering what has happened to it.  The scheme needs to be expanded more fully at Vauxhall Station.  Am I missing something?
8.  Albert Embankment - Lambeth Bridge footway - This is not on TFL's list, but I suspect that it forms part an original phase dock, and is probably one of the original "missing" Lambeth stations.  I expect it will be built prior to the Olympics.
9.  Cleaver Street/ Bowden Street - This is not on TFL's list, but again, I am guessing that it is part of the original phase and not part of the Olympic expansion, but I don't know.  Can anybody confirm?
10.  St Thomas' Hospital - This didn't appear on the list from Lambeth's Dawn Rahman, but it seems to be an addition to the TFL list.

I'd be delighted to hear from anybody that could explain why the proposed expansion at Vauxhall Station seems to have disappeared from the board?

Also, I'd like to quickly plug Transport Mark's  new spreadsheet which runs from the opening day of the Cycle Hire to 12th October 2010 and calculates revenue from various docking stations as a result of longer journeys.  It doesn't say anything remarkable about Lambeth usage except to note that the Concert Hall Approach dock (2) and Vauxhall Cross (15) rank well for income and have generated £3,670 of revenue between them.  Unsurprisingly, Lollard Street (ranking last at 345) has raised only £17.  It pays to be cautious about the placement of the docking stations.  I'm wondering whether I've missed something though because although that does not include subscription fees, figures like that seem too low to pay for the scheme.

Pedal Power review of Cycle Hire and superhighways from London Assembly Transport Committee

The  London Assembly Transport Committee has released its report, Pedal Power and an accompanying set of survey highlights, on the topic of TFL's Cycle hire (aka Boris/Ken bikes) and the TFL superhighways.

Kennington gets a mention under the "initial issues" of the Cycle hire section on p18:Hopefully we should see improved service in Kennington if Lambeth Council are successfully granted planning permission for the new docks around Albert Embankment, Cleaver Square and Kennington and Oval tube stations etc.  Thanks to Prince's Ward Councillors, who've provided full feedback from Dawn Rahman and a comprehensive review of the suggested docks in the area, and comments upon whose suggestions were taken forward.  Unfortunately, a number of suggested docks were outside of the current zone (although it's unclear where the boundaries lie).  Considering the lack of tubes further south in London, I hope we'll see the scheme extended in the future. Oval/Vauxhall seems an arbitrary cut off and demonstrates a lack of interest by the Mayor in South London infrastructure.

The Pedal Power report, also reviewed the Cycle Superhighways (CS7 runs through Kennington/Oval), and rather alarmingly states:

"Although the cycle superhighways are designed to provide safer cycling routes, it is not clear the pilot routes are achieving this." p27

and

"Whilst in some places there are full advance stop lines of 5 metres depth and mandatory cycle lanes of 2 metres width, elsewhere there are just narrow ‘ghost’ lanes (sections of blue paint without any legal status). However, it is most concerned that there are virtually no measures to reduce motor traffic volumes or speeds." p27

I was very excited about the announcement of the Cycle Superhighways, but despite my initial enthusiasm, back in May 2010, I noted that "the Superhighways are rather rash ideas when they do not give cyclists the room they need to co-exist with buses and cars on trunk routes".

And indeed, on p28, Sustran conclude of the two initial pilot superhighways (CS7 and CS3), "the greatest barrier to Londoners cycling, or cycling more, is fear of traffic yet the cycle superhighways generally follow busy arterial roads and provide no or minimal segregation from traffic. It therefore concludes that in their current form the cycle superhighways have limited scope to facilitate an uptake in cycling, particularly by new cyclists."

"There has been a lack of bikes and available docking points in certain areas, particularly at peak periods. The Committee’s survey revealed [ac lack of bikes and was a particular problem in Covent Garden, Holborn, Kennington, Westminster and Waterloo. One respondent commented: "There is a shocking lack of available docking points in Vauxhall and Kennington. Twice I had to cycle further than I had to travel from where I picked the bike up. Once I was told to take the bike home. Not fun to carry up 4 flights of stairs. I was charged £50…and told to wait 5 days for a refund.""

Keeping it real - the reason for the tube strike at Kennington

At the moment, we don't know which tube lines will run or at what times because nobody knows how many staff will strike tomorrow.  Tube strikes are always a nuisance for Londoners.  Listen to the chatter of the ordinary working folk on the buses tomorrow.  They won't see why the train drivers need more money.  There's always somebody who argues that strikes are called to early, and never as a last resort.  Somebody else will argue that they're only paid when they go into work, and that they don't have the luxury of striking.  The current tube strike is not about money though, it's about jobs.  TfL currently employ 4 full time staff at Kennington station.  If the TfL cuts go ahead, only 1 full-time member of staff will be employed at the station, and they'll only staff the ticket office for 3 and a quarter hours each day (during the morning).  If you want to speak to a member of ticket office staff (if the machines break, or you need a season ticket), you'll have to go to the underground ticket office at Elephant and Castle or Oval.  Perhaps you can't see a good reason for retaining so many staff members with the current degree of computerisation.  I'd tend to argue that staff members who know the station are more important for emergencies (eg. fire or terrorist attacks), but then London's only on "severe" threat for a terror alert, so the risk is slight, right?  Arguments can be made in several directions.

One of the members of staff that will lose his job is Paul.  Say "hello" to Paul if you see him at Kennington.  I only know him by sight.  The strikes (in my view) are unlikely to prevent the job losses, so he probably won't be around for much longer as his job (as with the other 2 full time Kennington staff members) is on the line.   I'm not sure I can make a convincing argument about why one particular member of staff should be retained so I'm just putting one name to a face.  When you're on the rammed buses or can't find a Boris Bike tomorrow, don't moan about the strikers, just ask whether you'd be willing to justify the redundancy of an ordinary man named Paul.

When they came for the communists...

Cycling in Kennington and people on bikes

I can't believe I didn't spot this before, but somebody has started a new local cycling blog, Kennington People On Bikes. It details a recently won bid to set up a cycle hub project for Lilian Baylis (and other local) schools.  I note with interest the fact that the bike project was initially unable (see entry on 1st March) to obtain meeting space in the Sports Action Zone on the former Lilian Baylis site.  However, it appears that a meeting with the Director of SAZ resolved that... 

More recently, KPOB have turned their attention to corresponding with Princes ward councillors and candidates re. their views on cycling in the area.  If you are passionate about being on two wheels (or three!), it's a good time to be quzzing candidates on their cycle-friendly policies.  I note with interest the suggestion of bringing down speed limits to 20mph, in some areas. That would be one consideration re. reducing casualities on some of our trunk routes, and would be good for pedestrians too (although I can't see drivers being keen).  I'm often struck by the fact that Kennington (and undeniably, Vauxhall) can feel rather like a "through-route" for heavy goods vehicles accessing the rest of London.  Since we're soon to have our "bike hire" scheme bikes installed all over SE11, now is probably the time to increase the focus on road safety.  (Visions of untrained tourists hopping on to hired cycles and heading down Kennington Park Road to the Elephant roundabout fill me with dread).

The Cycling hub project may well be looking for volunteers, or have meeting times to publicise in the near future.  I'll post it as soon as I've obtained further info.

In the meantime, I telephoned TFL (8th April) to see when our new CS7 route cycle "superhighway" would be completed in SE11.  The person I contacted said it would be finished in "the next month or so".  I've no details on whether TFL have started painting the roads blue (is that the opposite of painting the town red?) and moving street furniture in deepest south London (other than a short trial stretch), so would be grateful for more info.

More TFL cycle scheme pod / bay placements for SE11 and SE1

Further to my previous post on the TFL cycle scheme and initial cycle pod/bay placements, there have been some additional requests:

1. 09/01864/FUL 12/06/2009 Pavement Opposite 1-12 Adam Court, Kennington Lane London Installation on pedestrian footway of cycle hire docking station for the Transport for London Cycle Hire Scheme containing a maximum of 35 docking points for scheme bicycles plus a terminal to secure and release scheme bicycles and to provide registration and payment facilities and wayfinding mapping.

2. 09/01766/FUL 05/06/2009 Outside Former Lilian Baylis School, Lollard Street London Installation on pedestrian footway of cycle hire docking station for the Transport for London cycle hire scheme comprising a maximum of 25 docking points for scheme bicycles plus a terminal to secure and release scheme bcycles and to provide registration and payment facilities and wayfinding mapping.

3. 09/01765/RG4 05/06/2009 Outside 1-28 Tresco House, Sancroft Street London Installation on the pedestrian footway and vehicle carriageway of cycle hire docking station for the Transport for London Cycle Hire Scheme comprising a maximum of 29 docking points for scheme bicycles plus a terminal to secure and release bicycles and to provide registration and payment facilities and wayfinding mapping.

4. 09/01755/RG4 05/06/2009 Opposite Prince Consort House, Albert Embankment London Installation on pedestrian footway of cycle hire docking station for the Transport for London Cycle Hire Scheme comprising a maximum of 24 docking points for scheme bicycles plus a terminal to secure and release bicycles and to provide registration and payment facilities and wayfinding mapping.

I don't see a problem with any of these. The Albert Embankment cycles will be useful for tourists and handy for getting to and from the Albert Embankment, which is somewhat off the tube map and not well connected via the rest of SE11 by bus (there is a Black Prince Road bus route, but that's the only route which takes SE11 residents to the Albert Embankment). The Sancroft street bays are quite central, and a much better suggestion than Windmill Row.

I'm not sure what to make of the ones by the former Lilian Baylis cycle placement (the second half of Lollard St is rather quiet due to being a no through road), but no doubt local residents might comment on the position. I suppose the new bikes could be used by church members, rather than parking in local roads, if the former Lilian Baylis is purchased by the ANC!

Further info on crossing the road at Vauxhall

You'll see on the post that I made a week ago, I reported that some of the traffic lights at Vauxhall would be re-phased so that pedestrian crossing times would be reduced. This is a general concern because Vauxhall is not the safest or easiest place to cross the road, even with current phasings.

I then wrote to both Caroline Pidgeon and Valerie Shawcross. Both responded quickly.

It appears that Caroline Pidgeon asked Boris Johnson whether London Boroughs would be consulted on the traffic light re-phasings back in March, and she specifically asked, "what will happen if boroughs object to a reduction in crossing times for pedestrians?". Boris responded by saying, "TfL has a statutory duty under the GLA Act to consult with the relevant borough officers before and after signal timings are changed and they always adhere to this".

Consequently, I wrote to ask the councillors whether the borough officers would consult the community. It appears, however, from my response from Caroline Pidgeon, that Boris' answer was incorrect re. the consultation of the Borough officers.

Caroline's answer is as follows:
"TfL does not (contrary to the Mayor’s statement) have a duty to consult on signals timings changes on their network (however signals timings must be within the limits set by DfT guidance).
If however TfL decides (voluntarily) to consult Lambeth it would be with our Traffic Manager (Thuraippah Sivalingam)."

So, effectively, TfL can rephase the lights without being statutorily required to consult the boroughs. There is no way for local residents to object.

It's all a teensy weensy bit totalitarian for my liking.

Crossing the road at Vauxhall Cross

Are you an older person who walks slowly?
Are you a person with disabilities that cause you mobility problems?
Are you a parent with small children who has to cross the road slowly?
Do you suffer from asthma/breathing problems related to pollution?

Well... let's hope you don't live in Vauxhall!

According to the Evening Standard, TFL are about to "re-phase" the traffic lights in many locations, including at Vauxhall Cross. This is "clever-speak" for covering up the fact that pedestrians will be given less time to cross the road in certain locations in order to increase "traffic flow" (which will inevitably increase traffic itself).

In the article, Alan Bristow (TFL director of traffic operations) notes "Our timing review programme is aimed at making life a little bit easier for everyone who uses a particular junction, be they pedestrians, cyclists or motorists." But I fail to see how reducing the time given for people to cross the road makes life in any way easier for pedestrians.

And Vauxhall, as we all know, is very pedestrian/cyclist friendly. Not.

I don't even know if it's possible to object to the rephasing of the traffic lights. Looks like it's one of Bojo's not so good ideas.

Quite helpfully, Valerie Shawcross (Labour, Lambeth and Southwark, London Assembly member) asked Boris about some of the re-phasings in March this year, although she asked about Wandsworth Road and not Vauxhall Cross. In response to one of her questions, Boris said: "TfL is discussing proposals for timing changes to junctions at Wandsworth Road, with the London Borough of Lambeth. I will ask TfL to write to you with the details once their discussions with Lambeth are concluded." I wonder whether they'll provide her with info. about Vauxhall.

In addition, Caroline Pidgeon (Lib Dem, Londonwide, London Assembly member) asked about whether London boroughs would be consulted re. changing the phasing on traffic lights and what would happen if the boroughs object to the reduction of crossing time? Apparently, TfL have a statutory duty to consult with "borough officers".

That raises the question:
a. Who are the Lambeth Borough officers that would be consulted on the matter?
b. Do the Lambeth Borough officers have a duty to consult the public?

I'll inform you of any updates.

Croydon Tram? Cross River Tram?

Some interesting news just in from The Mayor Watch blog on the fact that TFL are buying out Tramtrack Croydon. I wonder if this is potentially a piece of joined up strategising by the mayor. It would eventually fit well with my pipe dream of linking up Croydon with the Cross River Tram and giving south London an alternative transport infrastructure. All that is required is a "yes" to go ahead with (at least) the southern section of the Cross River Tram. On the other hand, it may be that the Croydon Tram buyout has nothing to do with an overall plan, and is just "one of those things".

Ed: Unfortunately, the comment left in the comments section by James appears to reflect that the purchase of the Croydon tram by TFL was one of the last moves of the mayoral regime of Ken Livingstone, and consequently does not imply anything about Boris' commitment to tram policy in South London. So, back to waiting for furthur news...