News RSS Feed


Top stories for Bexley, Bromley, Lewisham and Greenwich and Dartford and Gravesend, and elsewhere in south east London and north Kent.
Register now to post your comments. It’s free, quick and easy. £20 prize paid for best comment.
Sign up for News Shopper's free email bulletins and text alerts.
Email your photos and videos or text keyword NEWS SHOPPER with your message/photo/video to 80360.

Borough go-slow on cards

1:08pm Thursday 7th February 2008

comment Comments (27)   Have your say »


LEWISHAM borough could be the first in the capital to get 20mph speed limits across the whole area.

Lewisham Council's sustainable development committee, which scrutinises the council's work on environmental issues, wants to make Lewisham the first London borough to be completely 20mph.

Showers in workplaces for cycling employees, tax-free loans for workers to buy bikes, more cycle racks and more free cycle training for children and adults are also among the proposals raised.

Following a three-month investigation, the committee's 10 councillors unanimously said Lewisham Mayor Sir Steve Bullock should bid for newly available funding from the Greater London Authority to bring the measures into effect.

This funding comes from the Mayor of London to improve road safety.

Committee chairman and Lewisham Green Party councillor Sue Luxton said car ownership was lower than in some boroughs and there were a number of good schemes in place to promote walking and cycling.

But she added: "There is still much more we can do to make leaving your car at home the more attractive prospect and make the greener alternatives easier and more attractive.

"Making Lewisham known as the 20mph borough' would make the biggest, quickest difference to residents by cutting road accidents, making cycling and walking safer, cutting CO2 and even making traffic move more smoothly."

The committee's recommendations are expected to be considered by the Mayor at a cabinet meeting on February 13.

Lewisham Council deputy mayor Councillor Heidi Alexander, with responsibility for road and transport issues, said: "Lewisham council is 100 per cent committed to improving road safety and encouraging more people to walk and cycle more often, so we will be looking at the report's recommendations very carefully."

A spokesman for road safety charity Brake said: "This is a fantastic idea.

"Twenty miles per hour speed zones have been proven to save lives and reduce injuries.

"It will make the whole of Lewisham a better place to be in for cyclists and pedestrians, and have knock-on effects to things such as health and wellbeing as well as the obvious safety benefits."

Print article » Email to a friend »

Your Say YourNews Shopper

workin, N'Ampshur says...
1:25pm Thu 7 Feb 08

And a massive increase in speeding fine revenue no doubt!

Report this post »

Your Lord, Erastus Theobald Piggott The Great, The Garage says...
2:14pm Thu 7 Feb 08

Why don't they revert to the system that was in operation during my childhood?

Have a chap walking in front of every car waving a flag!

Your Lord, Erastus Theobald Piggott

Report this post »

mt, says...
2:57pm Thu 7 Feb 08

It's impossible to speed in Lewisham. Every 10 yards or so there are pelican crossings/traffic lights - always on red or so it seems.

Report this post »

Dave, Greenwich says...
3:22pm Thu 7 Feb 08

Excellent news! It's this kind of bold and forward looking thinking that makes Lewisham a 4 star council. I wish the councillors in Greenwich would take notice rather than allowing the race on our streets to go on.

Report this post »

Your Lord, Erastus Theobald Piggott The Racing Driver, The Pits says...
6:10pm Thu 7 Feb 08

Interesting view from Dave there, folks.

How is life in the fast lane, Dave?

Glad to see you are still driving the Sinclair C5.

Your Lord, Erastus Theobald Piggott




Report this post »

Concerned, London says...
9:30am Fri 8 Feb 08

We can't smoke, we can't drink, we can't tell our kids off, we can't drive a car..... is there anything we can do as adults??? They slaughtered Saddamm Hussain for his dictatorship but the Labour Government is a dictator too! If people vote this lot in again I think I will hang myself.

Report this post »

Julia, Lee says...
10:01am Fri 8 Feb 08

At a ward meeting, a local police inspector had to admit that 20mph is, in practice, 'unenforcable' because panda cars do not have 'calibrated speedometers'. Thus, we will have large quantities of expensive and ugly 20mph street clutter all in the name of a grand, but totally useless gesture. We have 20 mph in our road and it has not made a hap'worth of difference

Report this post »

Sarah Lane, Lee says...
10:32am Fri 8 Feb 08

Yet another reason why I can't wait to reach retirement and get out of Lewisham borough and its dictatorial ways for good. Going slower will clog up the streets even more - but I suppose that's what they want so the sainted cyclists can take over. Some of us have physical problems (arthritis in my case) which means cycling and walking long distances are impossible and public transport is pretty dire.

Report this post »

bob, Blackheath says...
2:53pm Fri 8 Feb 08

We wouldn't need this if we didn't have a problem with drivers who endanger other people's lives by driving dangerously. I've lost a loved one in a speeding related collision and I think 20 mph is a small price to pay if it can save lives, especially as more than one person's life is ruined in most accidents.

Report this post »

n, says...
10:08pm Fri 8 Feb 08

Concerned wrote:
We can\\\'t smoke, we can\\\'t drink, we can\\\'t tell our kids off, we can\\\'t drive a car..... is there anything we can do as adults??? They slaughtered Saddamm Hussain for his dictatorship but the Labour Government is a dictator too! If people vote this lot in again I think I will hang myself.
What a thoughtless person, a 5 year old little boy was killed this week due to speeding in Lewisham Borough! Being hit at 20mph he may still be here!

Report this post »

t, says...
2:53pm Mon 11 Feb 08

workin wrote:
And a massive increase in speeding fine revenue no doubt!
And car jackings by immigrant gangs.

Report this post »

rod King, Warrington says...
8:23pm Wed 13 Feb 08

Congratulations to Lewisham for following in the footsteps of Portsmouth and most Northern European towns by planning to implement 20 mph as the limit where people live.

Yes, a vocal minority will huff and puff about it, but the vast majority of ordinary people know that 20 mph makes sense.

Rod King
www.20splentyforus.o
rg.uk

Report this post »

Gilmore Road Resident, Lewisham says...
1:22pm Wed 20 Feb 08

I never voted for this, I never saw Sue Luxton on the vote card! I knew nothing about this until now, what a stealth tactic - where on earth did this come from? All this would do is cause even more congestion and there will be more low speed accidents as car and cycles start bunching up and pedestrians take more liberties crossing the road dodging cars. It amazes me that the pro-20 mph limit writers aren't even Lewisham residents and sound an awful lot like eco-fascist lobbyists, aka watermelons - thin green skin but red to the core.

Report this post »

Cllr Sue Luxton, Lewisham says...
7:22pm Wed 20 Feb 08

Gilmore Road resident - you won't have voted for me, as you don't live in Ladywell ward, but you will have the opportunity to not vote for me in the London Assembly elections in May, if you so wish, as I am the Green Party candidate for Greenwich & Lewisham!

Just to clarify, however, these are at this stage just recommendations the committee has made (with cross-party agreement), based on the evidence collected during our scrutiny. I very much hope that Lewisham will follow the example of places like Portsmouth and adopt a default 20mph zone, with a few main arteries such as the South Circular exempted, but the final decision rests with the directly-elected Mayor and TfL.

I don't believe it will cause congestion - too many cars on the road cause congestion and a lower speed limit will encourage more people out of their cars and onto bikes or to walk instead. As for accidents, far too many people are still being maimed and killed on our roads every year, but in London the figure is going down. A child hit at 20mph is more likely to live than if they are hit at 30mph.

Pedestrians don't "take liberties" when they cross the road, they have every bit as much right to use the space as motorists, and the sooner a minority of as yet unenlightened motorists learn to share the road with cyclists and pedestrians, the better.

'Fascist', like 'Nazi' are words I never use lightly and think are frankly out of order here.

Watermelon? I'm Green through and through and proud of it, though we do have strong social justice policies which are probably 'of the left' too.

Report this post »

andy, lewisham says...
11:08am Thu 21 Feb 08

The optimum speed for most cars is around 50mph -- 20mph speed limit will lead to MORE EMISSIONS not LESS!

Report this post »

andy, lewisham says...
11:33am Thu 21 Feb 08

one more thing --why not bring back the Green cross code bloke and actually educate the kids on how to cross the road?? you cant always blame the driver when people are stepping out in front of cars.

Report this post »

Tim, London says...
1:06pm Thu 21 Feb 08

Traffic conditions allowing, it is perfectly reasonable to drive at 30mph along most London streets currently limited to 30mph; it's not unsafe and uses less fuel than driving at 20mph. A blanket 20mph limit, therefore, would criminalise reasonable behavour. To criminalise reasonable behavoiur is wrong in principle, but it also leads a more general disrespect for the law and those who enforce it, which is something that we could do without in this day and age.


Report this post »

Gilmore Road Resident, Lewisham says...
1:35pm Thu 21 Feb 08

Sue, I've worked in environmental science and engineering in public and private sectors for 15years and I'm politically neutral and not tribalistic on transport modes. I'm all for clean air and quieter streets AND darker skies. Sue, your thoughts are well-meaning, but not thoroughly thought out. Lewisham has one of the highest commuter populations - 34%; to many, walking/cycling to work isn't feasible.

Road safety isn't about over simplistic physics; it's about all road users behaving in a safe manner. Concentration, alertness, and observation are fundamental factors required for safe driving, which are maximised by the driver setting a speed appropriate for the prevailing road conditions. Forcing drivers to travel below an appropriate speed is therefore detrimental to road safety.

I should like to draw you attention to the fact that peer-reviewed DfT figures show that there were more killed or seriously injured casualties in 20 mph zones than in 30 mph zones. The 20 mph limit makes for more cavelier driving not less. You mis-understood what I meant by taking liberties, pedestrians do have the right to cross the road responsibly, but some weave about slow traffic thinking its safe, we've all done it at some time, I've done it especially to catch a bus! And this is what I mean taking liberties, else familiarity breeds contempt. Speedo's usually read +5mph from true, so an indicated 20mph will mean 15mph actual speed - bicycle speed, this is how most people will drive. The psychological fear of prosecution by a Benthamesque Panopticon for the roads will only make over-observation of the speedo where it is of least importance. These are the major factors in the surprise KSI stat from DfT. The main reason why London KSI has gone down is largely down to motorists converting to public transport - buses have seen much growth.

On pollution. 20mph makes more noise and pollution since lower gears need to be used to maintain low speed so there's more engine power strokes per driven wheel revolution, so more polluting fumes per mile results, this really is an own goal, it is a classic case of ill thought out political environmentism giving us environmental science/engineering workers a bad name. I hate speed humps especially when in a taxi, but the lesser of the two evils is the speed hump since it's a physical deterrent to rat run useage.

I should like to know what traffic modelling LBL have conducted and how has it been peer reviewed by say TRL or MIRA. Drivers tend to space themselves in 2 - 3 second gaps, at 20 mph this means more cars per unit distance, all using lower gears - more noise and fumes down my street - no thanks. As for cycling, I prefer the quieter speed hump roads to main roads, the blanket 20 mph will make cars even more omnipresent since the blanket 20mph has no rat run deterrent. Do re-consider, kick it in the long grass.

As for fascism, no hard feelings intended, but this philosophy opened up a pandora's box and gave the world packaged political techniques that are still being used today by all sorts of political parties in democratic nations and they don't even realise they're using them! As a Liberty supporter, I'm only too sensitive to them.

On a lighter note - literally. If you want to save heaps of CO2 and reduce electricity bills, please spend my council tax on street lights which have efficient reflectors that stops energy wasting sky glow. I want quiet streets, less fumes and a dark sky to see the stars.

Report this post »

Tim, London says...
4:07pm Thu 21 Feb 08

Gilmore Road resident wrote:

"I should like to draw you attention to the fact that peer-reviewed DfT figures show that there were more killed or seriously injured casualties in 20 mph zones than in 30 mph zones."

This comes as no surprise to me, as I suspect that most drivers would either lose concentration, or concentrate only on their speedo, if forced to travel everywhere at 20mph.

I should be grateful if you would be so kind as to identify your sources, so that I can quote them to others of an authoritarian bent who wish to impose daft speed limits on us (for what I suspect are political motives that have nothing at all to do with road safety).

Report this post »

Cllr Sue Luxton, Lewisham says...
12:21am Fri 22 Feb 08

Dear Gilmore Road Resident:
You're right to say that a large number of Lewisham residents commute out of the borough to work, but the majority do so by public transport, not private cars, with 29% using national rail (more than any other London Borough).

The full report is available online here: http://tinyurl.com/2
q8e8y, but I would stress again, these are at this stage just initial recommendations by the scrutiny committee; the Mayor of London's feasibility study on a London-wide 20 mph zone etc are all still to come.

I don't really follow the argument as to why drivers would pay less attention when driving slowly than driving quickly.

Re street lighting, for better or worse, last year Lewisham signed a joint PFI (Public Finance Initiative) deal with Croydon to upgrade its street lighting. Details here: http://tinyurl.com/2
j78j4
Not exactly my favourite choice of financing, but it does promise "better white light sources . . . minimising light pollution by using an improved design for the light bowl and monitoring the performance of individual lights, etc".

Report this post »

Simon, London says...
7:36am Fri 22 Feb 08

20 mph is mad. Car drivers (most of the population-it seems this is forgotten) are being hit left, right, and center. Tragic though loss of life may be, ruining the quality of life for everyone else does not help anyone. People die all the time from hundreds of stupid things. People die falling off ladders - are we going to ban ladders? People have died from head injuries from running into things. Are we going to ban that too? The fact remains that if a pedestrian is in the road, and not on a crossing, then if they get killed it is their fault. You can't stand in the middle if a railway track and call the train a maniac if it hits you. If someone hates cars and wants to walk, cycle, or use pulic transport, thats up to the - but DONT force those views on the rest of us!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this post »

John, London says...
8:02am Fri 22 Feb 08

Sue - Facist is not a word i use lightly either. And you, and your fellow watermelons are Facists. If you wish to lead a "Green" way of life, based on spin, lies and very little fact thats up to you. Do not impose this on the rest of us.

Report this post »

Jennifer, Lewisham says...
8:18am Fri 22 Feb 08

Sue Luxton - I would like to take this opportunity to remind you that 18,000 SCIENTISTS so far say that humans are not damaging the environment anywhere near as much as "Greenies" say, and that we are certainly not causing global warming. These scientists are far more qualified to speak about these issues than any of you or your kind. As for road safety motorists get the blame far too often.If pedestrians and cyclists were anywhere near as alert and careful as most drivers, there would be far fewer accidents. Rather than hounding motorists (most of the population-rightly said)how about education and enforcing laws on cycling and pedestrians running out in the road. If i had a pound for everytime i was cut up by cyclists or had a red light jumped by a cyclist, i could fund my petrol and congestion charge.
People seem to forget - running out in the road / cycling through red lights / cutting up cars&buses is just as dangerous and negligent and driving while on a phone or excessive speed. Also, the stopping distances for buses are huge, and they pump out huge quantities of diesel smoke - should they therefore be banned? Oh, no, wait, public transport can do no wrong, can it?

Report this post »

Tim, London says...
9:25am Fri 22 Feb 08

Sue - The reasons why drivers would lose concentration on the road ahead if forced to travel at 20mph are simple. If not kept busy by a task, the human brain will wander from that task and think of other things. If a task puts the brain under time pressure, it will make mistakes. As a result, we naturally try and do things at a comfortable pace at which things happen fast enough to keep the brain adequately busy but not too fast for it to keep up, as this minimises the chance of a mistake and is therefore the safest option. This means that, when driving, most people naturally drive at the speed they feel comfortable at given the prevailing traffic conditions. On an uncongested average urban road, this is around 30mph for most people. Thus, if forced to travel more slowly, because their brains would not be kept sufficiently busy by the task of driving, most drivers would fail to concentrate adequately on this task.

Secondly, because travelling at a comfortable speed does not require a driver to concentrate on staying under an arbitrary speed limit, when doing so they will always be looking out of their windscreens and concentrating on the road ahead. To travel more slowly, requires drivers to concentrate more on their speedometers (as they would naturally travel faster) and nobody can see a child running into the road when looking down at a speedometer.


Oh, by the way, I agree with much of Simon's post.


Report this post »

Cllr Sue Luxton, Lewisham says...
9:35am Fri 22 Feb 08

The percentage of households with access to a car in Lewisham is actually only around 57%, much lower than the national average, with wide variations between the south of the borough (67% of Grove Park residents have cars) to less than 50% in the north (New Cross).

Jennifer - do you believe that emissions from cars can cause health problems such as asthma in kids, or is that all a big conspiracy in your book too?

Report this post »

Tim, London says...
11:43am Fri 22 Feb 08

Sue,

In case it has escaped you notice, 57% is in fact a sizable majority! So it is rather disingenuous of you to refer to the households concerned as "only 57%".

Report this post »

Gilmore Road Resident, Lewisham says...
1:16pm Fri 22 Feb 08

Tim/Sue/Andy. It appears that I've been pipped to the post as to why drivers would pay less attention when driving slowly, but the previous writer omits an important element. Its something I learnt as a biology student and again when doing my flying exam on human factors and personal near miss flying incident - my fault. Its origins are physiological and it is the way how the brain processes data to meaningful information - this then becomes cognative behaviour response. If situational awareness is in steady state the brain recognises that the rate of change is slow and reduces the amount of processing time until there is a change event, the brain does this to save on processing power, the idea is copied by computer programmers in CGI work in the 1990s, if its moving - more processing to that object only & vice versa. Try this one of many experiments; stare at letter in a word or minute hand of a clock, soon your eyes loose focus since the brain has recognised that there is a slow or no change and shuts the amount of processing time to that event. It's the main reason for human error in any transportation accident (linked to a growing concern of increased HGV RTA's), its typical of looked but didn't see accidents. The method is applied to all sorts of things, machine design, training, sports. Its probably the underlying reason why the flashing watch your speed signage is more effective than speed cameras, and definitely the reason why tunnel walls change colour schemes.

Low car ownership is down to demographics, the area has a high proportion of low skilled and low paid workforce who cannot to run a car legally, it was an illegal driver who killed my aunt! Another is improvements in public transport though I do wish more go by car so I can step on the train let alone get a seat.

Emissions - read my previous comment.

Ah Andy - dunderheads like you give us classic car buffs who take pride in roadcraft a bad name - optimum speed isn't 50mph, its the highest ratio gear at the rpm of the low point of an engine's specific fuel consumption curve for a given throttle setting. Diesel buses can run on anything from oil to gas. Current bus exhaust filters chuck out nitric acid.

Sue - get buses on gas - no more asthma inducing particles, acid or soot on my windows. No filter required.

White streetlights,ta for link, I can't filter it out for astrophotography, and it shines through my curtains, rip-off PFI contract should supply cheaper yellow sodium and you save more CO2.

Report this post »

Comments are closed on this article.

In this section

Essential Links

Sponsored Links



When news happens – email newsdesk, call 01689 885703 or text keyword NEWS SHOPPER along with your news, pictures and videos to 80360.

Local Advertisers


Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »