Page no longer updated - see
stibasa.blogspot.com for news, views etc.
Wednesday 15 March 2006 - Church Road
I've been looking around the new development on and around Church Road. It did strike me that my efforts to overcome the
restrictions of the one way system in Queen's Rd and part of Church Rd (where I lived) seem to have come to nothing as Church Road is now
one way throughout its length from Queen's Rd to Tanner Street.
Monday 13 March 2006 - Indoctrination?
Barking & Dagenham Council send an 18th birthday card to borough residents to encourage them to vote. The card shows a car wrapped
in a ribbon - just a helpful reminder to them to aspire to owning a car!
Saturday 11 March 2006
The man who was killed in a crash while fleeing at speed from the police whilst well over
the drink drive limit and banned for causing death by dangerous driving - an offence he'd been in prison for for 3 years - was
described as 'always helping people'!
Wednesday 8 March 2006 - No more 87 Bus
Much hoo-hah in
The Barking & Dagenham Post today because TfL is withdrawing the route from
Saturday 25 March (the Post got the date wrong - the last day of operation is Friday 24 March). The 5 route will be extended to Romford to compensate - and there will be more 387s. From the comments of people in the
article, they seem to think the number of the route has some significance: "The ... 87 is a busy bus", "it's always packed", "many
people rely on the fact that there are two bus routes going into Barking [sic]". But the prize goes to the person who said: 'Tfl ... say that they will be putting on am increased service
on the number 5, but will we see that really?'. In other words, TfL is lying. This can only be countered by looking at the timetables.
It is sad to see the 87 go as a number - it has run since the mid 30s - but in practice it's only the frequency and size of vehicle, and route taken that
makes any difference.
Years ago the 87 ran - in theory - all the way from Rainham to Harold Hill. In fact, from what I remember, in practice it ran as
two routes one from Rainham to Beacontree Heath and one from Barking to Harold Hill. The detail may be incorrect here, but the
point remains the same. The tendency has been to shorten bus routes, and I wonder if the 5 will develop the same way. I've
given links to the timetables on the
news page, but haven't studied them.
8 March 2006 - Stop at Red campaign
This new campaign is about getting cyclists to promise to obey red lights. If you feel strongly about the
matter, sign up. However, I read this opinion:
"Obnoxious behaviour by people on bikes is not a major public health
problem - tales of bad cycling usually contain a 'nearly' or an 'almost'
- but oppressive behaviour by people on bikes is a serious amenity issue
that we need to address.
Anyone who travels by bike has circumstances in which they choose not to
acquiesce to highway law. Not all law-breaking is inconsiderate not all
inconsiderate behaviour is illegal. Any campaign for universal
compliance is based on hypocrisy and makes its advocates dishonest and
ridiculous. How can it succeed?
Authoritarian optimism - "it gets us all a bad name" - asserts that any
cyclist ignoring the law is delaying the day when cycle-traffic will be
given serious consideration. The theory that quiescence will be rewarded
may be heart-warming but where are the precedents for obedience
attracting attention, consideration or beneficial change?
When supermarket chains wanted laws on Sunday-trading relaxed they broke
them, with predictable results. What happened to the 1904 speed limit?
Obedience is not a target in itself, it has no practical value beyond
its contribution to making public space more convivial. A more
progressive basis for improving conduct on the highway is encouraging
consideration for the amenity and safety of others.
A campaign for consideration may not succeed but at least it promotes
thought about the wider issues; the origin and purpose of the 'Road
Safety' system and how it might be adapted and extended to fit today -
and tomorrow's - conditions better.
When the concept of a Highway Code originated many current realities -
speed bumps, controlled parking zones and congestion tolls - were
completely unthinkable. Lobbying to prevent dangerous amendments to the
Highway Code is necessary and important but is it time to question the
value of trying to apply a single, universal system - beyond the
common-law duty of care and perhaps a few formalities of traffic
circulation - to every road?
The idea that not all law-breaking is bad can easily be extended too
far. Optimistic authoritarianism's embattled counter-position, the
'victim mentality' suggests people on bikes are so oppressed and so -
relatively - harmless that they can be excused anything. That, because
even the rudest and most reckless lack the destructive potential of a
distracted saloon-car pilot, we should ignore bad behaviour from bike
riders. Like the authoritarian position it elevates a theory over reality.
Thinking realistically about the problem, addressing, not just the
function of the system, but the system itself, can produce a message of
rigour and clarity.
The target is not a culture of compliance, the target is a culture of
consideration."
28 February 2006 - Barking & Gospel Oak Line
I overheard a conversation on the train recently in which a woman was explaining how she had discovered the extra peak hour services
on the line. This should be a matter of advertising, not discovery. Only recently I met another person who had only just discovered
that the line exists - a problem made worse by the predominance of the tube map. It is frustrating that the new services have not been
widely publicised. (TfL now supports the following services: 0746 Upper Holloway - Barking; 0823 Barking - Gospel Oak; 1710 Gospel Oak - Barking;
2225 Gospel Oak - Barking; 2308 Barking - Gospel Oak; and all winter Sunday services.)
26 February - Good National Rail Service
Having lost my Oyster card and Gold card, I printed out an e-mail from Oyster confirming my order for replacements, in the hope
of avoiding paying any fares that I wouldn't have paid if I had those cards. At Seven Kings I showed the printout to the ticket
seller and he issued me with the ticket I would have got ordinarily, with no fuss. This is how it should be, of course, but it's good to
see it happening
19 February 2006 - East London Transit
Transport for London (TfL) is consulting on detailed plans for the East London Transit route from Ilford Hill, through Barking,
Thames View and Barking Reach to Dagenham Dock Station, and from Barking to Gallions Reach. Some fairly extensive changes are
proposed in Barking and Ilford Town Centres. Consultation closes on 13 April - and there will be exhibitions in Barking and
Ilford. See
TfL website for full details.
Here's the text of my e-mail to
elt@tfl.gov.uk:
1/ I have just got hold of a copy of the consultation brochure, and whilst I am generally in favour of ELT, I am very concerned
at the almost total lack of reference to the needs of people who cycle. In particular, there is no mention of the work of your
colleagues on the pilot CRISP (Cycle Route Implementation and Stakeholder Plan) in 2003, which affects some areas covered by
your scheme.
2/ I am not going to comment in detail on the Ilford parts of the proposal - my counterpart in the Redbridge branch of LCC will
be doing that, but any major works on the dreadful Ilford Hill gyratory need to incorporate improvements for cyclists,
not just buses. This is the main principle of my response.
3/ I am not happy about the widespread change of zebra crossings to traffic light controlled ones. Cyclists too often finish up
waiting at red lights with no-one crossing, and this produces the temptation to proceed at red. The zebra is much more interactive,
though the most hi-tech traffic light controlled crossings can ease the problems I describe, albeit expensively compared to a
zebra.
4/ From now on I'll follow the pages in your brochure.
Page 8 - Ilford Lane / Fanshawe Avenue:
5/ If the junction with Tanner Street is to be traffic light controlled, then the opportunity ought to be taken to reopen the
blocked off end of Park Avenue. This was closed to prevent rat running without any reference to the needs of cyclists -
an injustice that could be remedied by your scheme.
Pages 9 - 11 Barking Town Centre
6/ I'm in favour of allowing ELT past where the bandstand currently is. The text here says that "current access arrangements
would continue", but the artists impression shows cyclists riding against what is currently a one way restriction. This makes
me doubt that this was written without the "current access arrangements" clearly in mind. It is essential that cyclists rights
to use this route through the town centre are restored, with removal of the one way and no-entry restrictions and replacement
of the gates with cycle-friendly devices to stop unauthorised motor vehicles.
7/ I'm concerned about the proposal to combine the taxi rank and feeder rank in Wakering Road. You do not seem to have taken
into account the cycle route from Barking to Ilford which theoretically uses Wakering Road, and is referred to in the CRISP
report. This route has suffered a constant onslaught of schemes over the years - yet none of the ones which might improve
conditions for cyclists have got off the ground. You present yet another one. I think taxis should continue to be allowed
to use the front of the station - access will be far better (especially for people with mobility problems) and this would also
free up Wakering Road to restore two way access for cyclist. If there needs to be a feeder rank it should be on the other side
of Wakering Road. Changes to the link road joining Wakering Road to the Northern Relief Road would enable it to be used two way
and reduce the number of vehicles coming up to the junction by the station. Banning motor vehicles except taxis might even be
possible - though some goods vehicle access is needed - which may require a permit system.
8/ The stop lines for SW bound traffic in Station Pde (o/s the Station) should be moved or repeated further NE so that stopped
traffic doesn't block Salisbury Avenue. Similarly to Wakering Road, all efforts to re-open Salisbury Av to both way cycling have
thus far failed, but this design could be yet another nail in the coffin. Cyclists need to be able to use this cross-roads
without restriction and your scheme is - or should be - an opportunity to move towards this, not to make it worse. This junction
is a better candidate to be signalised than the one with Cambridge Road. I repeat my disappointment that you seem unaware of
the CRISP report.
9/ I like some of the changes to what you call the Lidl Gyratory (more commonly called Stag Island): In fact I suggested similar
changes myself some years ago. I don't agree with the bus only restriction in the stretch labelled "10" on page 11 as this will
displace some cyclists into the large junction labelled "9". I am also disappointed that the opportunity to remove the block-off
in Axe Street has not been taken. This block-off has been a bugbear for many years and spoils Axe St as an alternative to
St Paul's Rd for cyclists. The restoration of two way working to the short stretch of Axe St shown on your page 11 map is
welcome, but the advantage should be driven home by restoring to cyclists the full two way access to the whole of that road
which should never have been taken away.
10/ I am totally opposed to the introduction of one way working in Sunningdale Avenue (SA) and St Erkenwald Road (SR). In
particular SA forms part of an important route between the Station and Stag Island, via St Awdry's Walk (Peto Alley). SA along
with St Awdry's Rd forms an alternative route to part of Ripple Rd, giving some respite to cyclists. Turning it into a one way
system with inevitably increased speeds is not on.
11/ The alley way shown between SA and SR has just been gated and soon will no longer provide a link between the two roads as
your map suggests.
12/ To reduce traffic movements at the junction of SA with Ripple Rd (RR), would suggest a cycle plug, allowing cycles but not
motor vehicles to enter SA at that junction. This will create a "false one way street" and fits in with current cycle design
standards.
13/ A similar plug at the junction of SR and St Awdry's Rd will achieve a "false one-way" for SR.
Page 12 - Cranborne Road
14/ Here your overlooking of cyclists shines out. "The Cranborne Road arm of the junction would be closed, with drivers using
one of the several alternative routes available". What about cyclists? There is no need nor justification for restricting cyclist
movements yet further.
Pages 12-14
15/ I am not so familiar with these areas, but they still need a proper cycle audit/review, and based on the evidence of the
other parts of the brochure, you have not carried this out. You badly need to speak to your TfL cycling colleagues, and the
cycling officer of B&D council. I can provide you with more information / explanation.
I wish the scheme success, but not at the expense of yet more inconvenience to cyclists.