• Hello, I'm not sure if this warrants its own thread, so I have decided to start here.

    On August 6th last year, I crashed on the new cycle lane going north at Kennington, on the junction of Kennington park road, and Kennington road. A section of the cycle lane is raised, and a section is not and it's hard to tell the difference. I hit the kerb and landed on my left side, breaking my hip. I have been commuting on this route for 15 years and negotiated this junctions 1000s of times with no problems before this new lane was introduced.

    Breaking your hip is much worse than breaking your leg. I was on crutches for 3 months, walking stick for another 3 months and have only been cycling again for a few weeks. There is still a small risk that my hip will die and need to be replaced.

    My problem is with TFL. Here is what has happened;

    1. I reported the accident via their website upon discharge from hospital. This was ignored.

    2. I wrote to the CEO of surface transport, Leon Daniels and received no reply.

    3. I raised an FOI request asking how many cycling complaints had been ignored. Suddenly a reply. I was told their would be a full investigation, that standards of safety are high, and that there would be a full safety audit of the oval triangle cycle tracks in January 2016.

    4. The full investigation has never materialised - at least no one has been in touch with me, and I fail to understand how the investigation is full without that.

    5. In April 2016, I asked for a copy of the safety audit and a list of changes made as a result. I was told that the audit has been delayed, and that I would hear in "a few weeks". To date I have heard nothing.

    My confidence in TFL and this process is rock bottom. It's just appalling. The tracks are badly designed and dangerous. Moreover, TFL provide no proper way for reporting accidents, and clearly have no process for managing or handling. The emails are all polite, but the inaction is verging on negligent.

    I have limited energy to pursue this as it makes me angry and sad. I am genuinely concerned however that there will be a serious accident caused by the new facilities, and I would like this to be taken seriously.

    Any suggestions as to which brick wall to bang my head on next?

  • The FOI commissioner might be a good idea if they ignored your request.

  • I'd love to see this happen just to piss of Westminster council.

  • Should be Soho next, the pavement culture could be brilliant if you didn't have honking cabbies and aggressive drivers screaming around crowded streets.

  • But will cyclists be allowed?

  • Cyclists are pedestrians too.

    Perhaps you mean 'will cycles be allowed to be ridden?'?

  • Dear willski
    Really sorry to read about your horrible experience. I comiserate with you dealing with a serious injury.

    I am very nervous of these sloping curbs you see around seg tracks. I hope you get some response eventually. Could you take it up with your MP?

  • I talked to a TfL planner working on the Nine Elms project last night.

    Cycle provision along 9 Elms Lane is still being planned but might be 5 foot wide bus lanes.

    He looked horrified when I told him that I cycled round the gyratory rather than using the tiny (and usually obstructed) cycle path past St George's Wharf.

    Wish they'd spend more time out talking to our observing actual cyclists and how they deal with road hazards.

    But overall I'd say he seemed like he actually cared a bit about doing a good job so fingers crossed.

  • 5 foot wide bus lanes

    Seeing as buses are about 8' wide, that seems unlikely. :)

  • It would be great if they would add more signs or way-markers above ground.

    For example a light blue line painted on the pavement all the way from Brixton to the other end of the Victoria line.

    They could add signs saying how far it would take to walk or Boris Bike to the next station.

  • Kings Cross gyratory is to be replaced by area wide two way running...
    70% approval rate for initial plans, full consultation to come in the new year.

    https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/k­ings-cross-gyratory?cid=kings-cross-gyra­tory

  • Ouch. I'm sure the LTDA oppose pretty much any attempt at pedestrianisation or similar with cries of how people need access to taxi services.

    Respondents ranked ‘Access to taxi services’ as the least important consideration of the options provided.

  • Just looked at the report in some more detail. It seems the LCC and Camden Cycling position was to oppose the plans, not sure why.

  • Respondents ranked ‘Access to taxi services’ as the least important consideration of the options provided.

    I don't think that's very surprising if your primary consultation respondents are local residents and not tourists and other more likely taxi users. But TfL will know that.

  • Because they put forward their own ideas:

    http://camdencyclists.org.uk/2016/02/cha­nges-to-the-kings-cross-gyratory-consult­ation/

    Also referenced in the TfL report.

  • I assumed that would be the case and saw some references in the report as I skimmed through it.

    I guess it's difficult to get across in such a report as they appeared to strongly agree with most of the points but strongly disagreed with the scheme overall.

  • It is always interesting to talk to taxi drivers. My most recent driver was opposed to developing E&C because making it nicer will cause more people to go there and it is already too busy on the roads.

  • That's the spirit!

  • Ahhhhh, so that's what the plan was with Detroit.

  • And Swindon

  • If only there was some other way to get to E&C which was faster, healthier, and used less road space per person than a taxi.

  • One of these?

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Centralised discussion space for TfL plans and cycling in London

Posted by Avatar for skydancer @skydancer

Actions