Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
Not just Brixton - it's a pattern I've noticed getting worse cycling all over London. I put it in the same pot as littering - once enough people do it, it becomes normalised.
Just don’t get how they can’t be bothered. Really highlights the selfishness of so many drivers!
CH1
"Red Guard"(NLYL)
With regard to this issue - I am partially deaf, which can be a problem with pavement cyclists coming up behind.
This incident this morning then the cyclist decides to go at it full tilt - just as the BEEP BEEPs start. I was just startled and pissed off.
What about if the pedestrian is BLIND. That could have been a nasty accident.
Not much point in the council investing thousands of pounds in blister paving at crossings for the benefit of BLIND and partially sighted people if the cyclists don't follow the law and GO on the audible signal for pedestrians.
Minor point and not a criticism but cyclists seem to get lumped in to a group in a way that drivers don’t.
Of course there are bad cyclists but it sometimes seems like they are representing all cyclists in a way in which the many many terrible drivers (that pose much more of a danger) don’t seem to tarnish all drivers.
A bad driver seems to be presented as a one off while a bad cyclists is often presented as representative of all cyclists.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
Also cyclists get given agency but drivers get depersonalised.
"I nearly got hit by a cyclist" vs. "I nearly got hit by a car"
You can't see much of a driver behind glass, but most cyclists are right there at eye level.
felonius monk
Well-Known Member
Maybe we hold cyclists to a higher standard, knowing that they are vunerable to vehicles and should consequently be more careful of pedestrians. It's therefore more disappointing when some fail to distinguish between red and green.
Maybe, but doesn’t really make sense especially as cars are so so much more of a danger to pedestrians.
sparkybird
ask the bird...
On similar lines...a 'car crash'. Nope, cars can't crash themselves.
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
I think it’s more likely that more people are/know drivers than are/know cyclists, therefore cyclists are easier to “other”. And everyone is a pedestrian at some point.
blameless77
Well-Known Member
When I'm on a bike, my default assumption is that pedestrians have the right of way. Isn't that the law nowadays? Should be!Again, I would agree that cyclists should stop at red lights and zebra crossings; it’s a no brainer especially in such a pedestrian heavy area. Though also IME, that area is notorious for pedestrians wandering in the street outside the crossings without looking. I try and avoid cycling down it for that reason and when I do it’s incredibly slowly so I can stop for said pedestrians, but if there is any cyclist/ped altercations around there I suspect that’s part of it.
Though I don’t actually recall him talking about verbal abuse to peds. Maybe the cat was looking particularly photogenic then.
Funny you mention Railton Road. It almost felt deadly to cyclists at times due to a minority of dangerously speeding drivers who would pass far too closely. I’ve found it much safer as an LTN but someone on here said it still happens.
That’s my assumption as well.
Even if they don’t, as pedestrians are a more vulnerable road user, cyclists should yield right of way anyway. As motorists should do to cyclists.
Unfortunately most tend to speed up!
felonius monk
Well-Known Member
It is now. The Highway Code was updated in 2022 but it seems few drivers, unless they passed their test since then, are aware of it. From the RAC website...
The revised Highway Code came into effect from 29 January 2022, following calls to protect vulnerable road users. There are a significant number of changes but, from a driver's perspective, some of the biggest are:
- creation of a new ‘hierarchy of road users’ that ensures those who can do the greatest harm have the greatest responsibility to reduce the danger or threat they may pose to others
- clarify existing rules on pedestrian priority on pavements and when crossing the road
- provide guidance on safe passing distances and ensuring cyclists and horse riders have priority when travelling straight ahead at junctions
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
I think the rules to clarify that more vulnerable road users have priority over others are important to have in law and in people’s minds, though tbf I think that was unofficially the case in many instances previously (ie a car or cyclist wouldn’t just plough into a pedestrian walking in the road - once they’re there they’re prioritised because most people don’t want to maim someone). But I also don’t think the new rules mean that pedestrians should do anything they want without caution - walking across busy roads without looking first for example.
It’s legally stated now that pedestrians should have right of way when crossing road junctions. IME this has led to many pedestrians waking out right in front of turning cycles (almost always after not looking - the code also says they should always look) but holding back for cars
Post edited as I recalled this being a different thread
Last edited:
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
Btw, by the same token cars are meant to prioritise cyclists and yeah, that happens! 
Or pedestrians for that matter! (Unless it’s the just not crashing into someone already in your path mentioned above).
Or pedestrians for that matter! (Unless it’s the just not crashing into someone already in your path mentioned above).
Last edited:
Agent Sparrow
the age of slippers and migraines
You all got me interested now in exactly what the rules are crossing roads so I looked it up. 
Whilst pedestrians get priority as a vulnerable road user, priority does not mean being in the road whenever and wherever you like.
Whilst pedestrians get priority as a vulnerable road user, priority does not mean being in the road whenever and wherever you like.
Rules for pedestrians - Crossing the road (7 to 17)
The advice given below on crossing the road is for all pedestrians
www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk
Rules for pedestrians - Crossings (18 to 30)
Always check that the traffic has stopped before you start to cross or push a pram onto a crossing
www.highwaycodeuk.co.uk
teuchter
je suis teuchter
It's up to the pedestrian though - there's nothing to say that you can't be in the road whenever and wherever you like as long as you aren't deliberately obstructing things. The advice is of course to look out for traffic as a means of increasing your safety.
I will sometimes start crossing the road when there's a car coming that will probably have to slow down a bit in order not to hit me. In many urban settings where there's a lot of traffic, there might be no alternative other than to take a much longer route involving a controlled crossing.
I will sometimes start crossing the road when there's a car coming that will probably have to slow down a bit in order not to hit me. In many urban settings where there's a lot of traffic, there might be no alternative other than to take a much longer route involving a controlled crossing.
Saw a well known anti-LTNer parking in the middle of the Brixton Sainsbury’s car park when there were plenty of marked bays available.
They also use Tulse Hill Estate as a shortcut which is really poor.
Really highlights how selfish these people are and why we need measures like LTNs to keep our streets save.
They also use Tulse Hill Estate as a shortcut which is really poor.
Really highlights how selfish these people are and why we need measures like LTNs to keep our streets save.
Last edited:
Actually in the middle of the car park, they just left it in the middle of the car park ?
Alex
Towards the side next to a marked pedestrian path but plenty of marked bays free so presumably just couldn’t be arsed to perm properly.
Is he not semi disabled or something? Were there disabled bays available?
Not sure - he wouldn’t give an explanation when I asked him but not sure that would be a reason for not using bays would it? The signs saying to use the bays don’t give that exception.
Plenty of drivers also park on the hatching in front of the emergency exit there. Pretty sure it’s just pure selfishness.
Plenty of drivers also park on the hatching in front of the emergency exit there. Pretty sure it’s just pure selfishness.
West Dulwich LTN begins on 2nd September - doesn’t seem to be much opposition presumably because normal people realise they are good things now (and Twitter is swamped by other right wing weirdo conspiracies to bother much about minor traffic changes now).
All the opposition seems rather ridiculous now - but there’s nothing more aggrieved than a driver who’s slightly inconvenienced to make things better for others!!
All the opposition seems rather ridiculous now - but there’s nothing more aggrieved than a driver who’s slightly inconvenienced to make things better for others!!
Last edited:
colacubes
Mr Hot Cookie
You’re obviously reading the wrong Facebook groups. I live very close by and the antis are very much out on the local Facebook group and a couple of WhatsApp groups I’m on. They’re shouting into the void though. Fuck em. Several of them also complaining about School Streets being dangerous as well. My kids school is on a school street and there’s still a lot of agro with people driving and parking irresponsibly. The teachers on gate duty regularly get abuse from drivers. People’s entitlement around cars is so odd.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
It's so predictable. The usual suspects, whatever they might claim, object to any motor vehicle controls at all - here conflating/confusing consultation on controlled parking hours with other West Dulwich area changes. NO consultations are 'votes' and a lot of Railton submissions were excluded because they were identical and submitted en masse in the early hours of the morning from the same IP address Smart council officers outsmart attempts to game consultations
Objections to the West Dulwich scheme range from - theres no problem here that needs addressing, it's all sorted by the cycleway (dont need anything else), the cycleway isn't used enough (it's part built - you'd kind of expect a cycle route to get more use when it doesn't end before it reaches the busiest roads), we're nowhere near public transport so have to have cars and shouldn't' have a coz (2 stations c10mins walk away).
We call for a 'holistic plan'. I mean to me it looks like a whole load of changes over a wide area to change the balance from motor dominated streets to ones that are safer, quieter and better for walking and cycling with, what is slowly becoming, a network of safe cycling routes and a more pedestrian crossings.
Torpid Scorpion
Basket case
A reasonable pro-ltn article today from a Tory who regrets their idiotic pandering to the motor lobby
www.theguardian.com
Labour is right about LTNs – the Tories need to learn the same lesson
For all the initial noise against low-traffic neighbourhoods, most people like them and they can benefit the public purse
Similar threads
