Elephant & Castle Northern Roundabout - latest plans

Remember that 10% increase in pedestrian journey times we've been banging on about here at www.ElephantandCastleRoundabout.org and www.SaveOurSubways.org. Well further analysis reveals this average disguises some pretty awful specifics. Journey times will actually increase up to 41%! Most routes will be longer, some by an indiscernable difference, a couple improved. Remember that regardless of overall length, that pedestrians will mostly have to pause will cause frustration vs their current ability to always be making progress towards their destination, all be it in a sometimes circuitous route because not all the subways follow a desire line. The attached graphic is TfL's with pink bits our annotation.


It's perplexing any increase in journey time for pedestrians is considered acceptable. It's also perplexing that the impact of what they propose is significantly different depending on whether you're going from A to B or B to A. The current situation shows fairly similar journey times regardless of whether you start at A or B. Why? Dodgy modelling, baffling phasing of pedestrian lights or a misunderstanding on our part?

To come to a more accurate cost benefit analysis you will have to multiply the time changes by the numbers of people carrying out each movement.

Great idea Johnnytee. I've done the maths and calculated using TfL's pedestrian flow data measured over a 1 hour period in the subways as they are now that the proposal would waste a total amount of pedestrian time by 19 and a half hours! Yes, that's in just a one hour period. Imagine how much waste, life, human capital, that would add up to over a longer period... and how much frustration would be tangible leading to risk taking behaviour. You can read TfL's pedestrian data with our annotations in pink by downloading the document here:
http://www.elephantandcastleroundabout.org/data/TfL_annotatedfiles/Pedestrian%20Data.pdf

johnnytee wrote:

To come to a more accurate cost benefit analysis you will have to multiply the time changes by the numbers of people carrying out each movement.

Three cheers for Perronetonian for his tireless research! I agree wholeheartedly with his views but would never be able to do all those calculations! Thanks!

My pleasure Jackie. Lots more charts to come, including a very compelling case for how well the current set up serves pedestrians... though it's quite obvious there's room for improvement given the overall dilapidation of the junction and denigration on this forum of the sacred subways.

jackie rokotnitz wrote:

Three cheers for Perronetonian for his tireless research! I agree wholeheartedly with his views but would never be able to do all those calculations! Thanks!

Good work, Perronetonian.

Not sure the figures show the full story.

From looking at the plans it appears the new layout is far more pedestrian friendly. There are only a small number of crossings so the locations to cross the road are concentrated, compared to a labyrinth of subways!
And walking above ground compared to up and down stairs and round the houses. And a lot more space to mingle.

Even with waiting times at the signals - which is the only reason I can see why there should be these long delays for walkers - my "feeling" is that the new is better.

In no way can the current layout be considered a nice place! So maybe the figures dont tell the whole story.

Johnnytee. If only the full story was shown. We have to press hard to get anything more than the publicised gloss and map from TfL. The current place isn't nice, no one is saying that, everyone wants improvement, there are plenty of us who want really radical change here not preservation. Opposing the proposal isn't an opposition to change. But we're just not hoodwinked by the artists' impressions, the politician's spin, the impatience for improvement and the sometimes nasty prejudices of those who can't see beyond grime.

The fact remains TfL forecast the new crossings to be slower for pedestrians in 7 of the 9 routes they measured, and particularly slow in some directions. Several key pedestrian desire lines (e.g. south side London road to the centre, from the Tabernacle to railway station and across New Kent Road closer to Newington Causeway) are ignored and require detours, so pedestrians still have to go 'round the houses' and pause to get from A to B or, as they will do, try their luck in The Ring road. Pedestrian casualties will rise. Remember TfL gets it wrong - in 2011 they removed the guard rails opposite the tabernacle in the spirit of fashionable de-cluttering and making the place nicer... they went back up within months due to the crazy behaviour from pedestrians despite the brand new surface level crossing near by (and of course the subway which is the most badly signposted on the shopping centre sign of the whole set of seven).

The subways are not a labyrinth. But there is a vast amount of excessively nonsensical labelling down there (why for example number the subways 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 rather than 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) and a severe lack of valuable information (e.g. even one simple basic diagram or map within the subways) that certainly causes confusion for those who have not got used to them. This is not the fault of the subways but the information designers.

I wish I had your naive feelings of optimism. Listen instead to the prophet of doom. The end is nigh. But we have a track record of miracles, so all is not lost.

not quite the roundabout I know, wonder if they will put barriers up between the lanes of traffic in new kent road near the coronet? Was amazed yesterday to see people sauntering accross the road, weaving between buses that were parked up. No wonder there always seems to be accidents there.

No plans to put barriers here. This kind of strolling through The Ring road will however increase, and it is to some extent encouraged by the removal of the subway here (the subway under New Kent Road is by far and away the busiest, in fact more than twice as busy as the other six according to TfL stats). The new pedestrian crossing proposed thankfully appears to be a 'one phase' arrangement, avoiding the frustrating and risk inducing wait on a traffic island as is being proposed for three of the five other locations, but it isn't where the pedestrian desire lines are as I see it. Jeremy Leach, chair of Southwark Living Streets and safer road campaigner shares my concerns here about the inadequate provision of surface level crossings.

But the most vocal fans of the proposed Bodge tend to be fit strong men (judging by their Facebook profiles), for whom zig zagging through traffic is a doddle, and won't be concerned about these dangerous details.