Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists

[teuchter]

There seems to be some explanation here:

About Railton Neighbourhood

A space to learn about and feed into the Railton Low Traffic Neighbourhood.

rtstreets.commonplace.is

As part of our response to the current pandemic we will be creating low traffic neighbourhoods across Lambeth.

In the Railton neighbourhood we will be introducing "bus gates" in 3 locations (Atlantic Road, Leeson Road and Herne Place) and modal filters in 2 locations (Shakespeare Road and St Matthews Road)

• The 3 temporary bus gates will open up the streets to people walking, cycling and taking the buses while make the area access only for motor vehicles. Essential vehicle movements such as emergency services, 322 bus, refuse collection will still be able to use the street as they do now.
• The 2 temporary modal filters will open the streets to people walking, cycling and to essential services only making these streets accessible from either end, but vehicles will not be able to drive through, end to end.
• Business and social distancing space will be created by extending footways in the carriageway. We will do this by changing the appearance of the carriageway through the introduction of colourful asphalt art installations to provide a flexible space for businesses to load, to accommodate customers social distancing and to provide opportunity for local businesses to extend their operations on the space created with, for instance, additional tables and chairs.

All temporary traffic restrictions will be delivered by introducing a combination of community planters, traffic signs and ANPR cameras. These restrictions will be clearly marked with advance warning signs located on surrounding roads as well as with clear traffic signs at the point where the traffic restriction will be enforced.

And

How will the Railton LTN be delivered?

The low traffic neighbourhood will be delivered in two stages:

1. Immediately creating a low traffic neighbourhood using temporary features
2. Developing a permanent design with the community, informed by engagement and learning lessons from the temporary scheme

The Council had been engaging with the community around the creation of a low traffic neighbourhood in the Railton area before the pandemic, as a key part of the Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood programme. We have had to adapt to the changing circumstances and fast track the delivery of the proposals. The temporary scheme won't get everything right. This website allows us to hear your feedback on what is working and what isn't.

It would seem that this stuff is being done as part of the emergency Covid stuff, rather than the necessary conclusion of what happens as a result of the BLN.

So in effect the consultation is still ongoing, and people can make their comments.

If people are worried that Shakespeare Road is going to become a lorry racetrack then they can see what happens. If it does, the evidence will be there, rather than speculation.

 

[Rushy]

They clearly know what it is they are planning to do. It would not take very much for them to clarify the information properly to the people it will affect. Or make it easily accessible rather than have to search high and low for it. The link in the letter is all but useless.

I can see no emergency to deal with on St Matthews Road. The pavements are never crowded with walkers. The road is not all that busy and feels safe to cycle on. Unless you count the north end which is usually chock full of illegally parked council cars (which wardens ignore) displaced by Lambeth's "Car Free" Town Hall development. Again, not saying that a "modal gate" will be a bad thing (so long as Lambeth do not turn it into a council car park). What is poor is the typically crap communication.

A bike link from the Town Hall to the North end of St Matthews Road would be very useful. Loads of bikes currently have to take to the pavement or risk going the wrong way in the one way system (or take the A23).

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

They clearly know what it is they are planning to do. It would not take very much for them to clarify the information properly to the people it will affect. Or make it easily accessible rather than have to search high and low for it. The link in the letter is all but useless.

I can see no emergency to deal with on St Matthews Road. The pavements are never crowded with walkers. The road is not all that busy and feels safe to cycle on. Unless you count the north end which is usually chock full of illegally parked council cars (which wardens ignore) displaced by Lambeth's "Car Free" Town Hall development. Again, not saying that a "modal gate" will be a bad thing (so long as Lambeth do not turn it into a council car park). What is poor is the typically crap communication.

A bike link from the Town Hall to the North end of St Matthews Road would be very useful. Loads of bikes currently have to take to the pavement or risk going the wrong way in the one way system (or take the A23).

Yes, similar to North Shakespeare Road: wide pavements never crowded so no need to widen them with barriers.

 

[thebackrow]

I can see no emergency to deal with on St Matthews Road. The pavements are never crowded with walkers. The road is not all that busy and feels safe to cycle on.

Not at the times I've ridden it. A fair proportion of the vehicles from Brixton Water Lane (next to Hootenanny) drive at high speed (usually pushing dangerously past any cyclists either in the junction or alongside Sainsburys) along to St Matthews road and then at high speed down St Matthews Road. Presumably their satnavs tell them that this is slightly quicker than Effra Road.

Brixton Water Lane is part of an old cycle route that runs from Clapham Common to Dulwich and beyond.

"No one swims across the river so we don't need to build a bridge"

 

[Rushy]

Not at the times I've ridden it. A fair proportion of the vehicles from Brixton Water Lane (next to Hootenanny) drive at high speed (usually pushing dangerous past any cyclists either in the junction or alongside Sainsburys) along to St Matthews road and then at high speed down St Matthews Road. Presumably their satnavs tell them that this is slightly quicker than Effra Road.

Brixton Water Lane is part of an old cycle route that runs from Clapham Common to Dulwich and beyond

Sure. There are occasionally twats like in every street. But it is actually a pretty quiet road. And comparatively wide. Not saying it should not be improved. Just that it does not appear to justify emergency measures.

 

[thebackrow]

Sure. There are occasionally twats like in every street. But it is actually a pretty quiet road. And comparatively wide. Not saying it should not be improved. Just that it does not appear to justify emergency measures.

That's the point though. If you cut out the rat running through traffic the twat quotient drops considerably as people tend to drive a bit more slowly when they're close to home and around their neighbours. You only need a few of those twats to make that route uncomfortable for people cycling (and I reckon I've probably met at least one of them every time I've ridden a bike on there). It will almost certainly reduce congestion on the southern section of the "gyratory" as well as the rat runners regularly block vehicles trying to head south on Brixton Hill there. And not having vehicles turning out of St Mathews Road will improve safety for anyone on a bike unlucky enough to to be trying to get east-west and reach Acre Lane at that point.

 

[teuchter]

Sure. There are occasionally twats like in every street. But it is actually a pretty quiet road. And comparatively wide. Not saying it should not be improved. Just that it does not appear to justify emergency measures.

The state of road safety, air pollution and pedestrian/cyclist accessibility, in general in London justifies emergency measures, Covid or not, in my opinion.

 

[Rushy]

That's the point though. If you cut out the rat running through traffic the twat quotient drops considerably as people tend to drive a bit more slowly when they're close to home and around their neighbours. You only need a few of those twats to make that route uncomfortable for people cycling (and I reckon I've probably met at least one of them every time I've ridden a bike on there). It will almost certainly reduce congestion on the southern section of the "gyratory" as well as the rat runners regularly block vehicles trying to head south on Brixton Hill there. And not having vehicles turning out of St Mathews Road will improve safety for anyone on a bike unlucky enough to to be trying to get east-west and reach Acre Lane at that point.

To be honest, that junction is one of the reasons I think consultation is essential. It's not clear where the modal gate is proposed for. If it is placed at the north end, then no one will have to use that junction. If it is half way down the road then half the locals are forced to use that junction which many drive to other end to avoid. The bus lane turning north is too long so cars can only leave st matthews road to go north if is clear and the next lane is fully clear (as well as both south bound lanes). Often they sit blocking the southbound lanes so as to avoid entering the bus lane. Or don't exit the junction and jams build up on St Matthews Road which prevent vehicles entering the road from the gyratory. And because the council dumps all it's non existent car free development vehicles on the yellow lines (against all guidance), no one can pass. It's a shit show. (Yes, I appreciate that is not entirely clear ).

I will be delighted if the council, recognising the need to make the road more people friendly, stops allowing its employees to chogg up the end of the street too. But I suspect that they just want it to be a council carpark.

 

[teuchter]

Yes, similar to North Shakespeare Road: wide pavements never crowded so no need to widen them with barriers.

And there's no proposal to widen them on N Shakespeare Rd, as far as I can see. The pavement widening is for Atlantic Rd.

 

[Rushy]

The state of road safety, air pollution and pedestrian/cyclist accessibility, in general in London justifies emergency measures, Covid or not, in my opinion.

Yes yes. I know you do. But that is not what is happening, is it.

 

[teuchter]

Yes yes. I know you do. But that is not what is happening, is it.

I think it is what's happening. The Covid emergency has highlighted the wider emergency. It turns out that when a greater number of people want or have to walk/cycle, due to the Covid situation, the infrastructure is all wrong. Of course many of us have been saying for ages that it's all wrong, but now it's been made obvious.

I'm sure it could all be done better, seeing as it's Lambeth that's doing it, but it's better than nothing, which is largely what would be happening otherwise.

 

[Winot]

I think Lambeth are using the Covid emergency as an opportunity to introduce quickly lots of other traffic measures that they have been thinking about for some time.

Inevitably anything done quickly will have a few failures but on the whole I think this is going to be A Good Thing.

Frankly I am tired of decades of mealy-mouthed inaction and consultations that slow down progress. Fuck it - a revolution is needed.

 

[teuchter]

I think Lambeth are using the Covid emergency as an opportunity to introduce quickly lots of other traffic measures that they have been thinking about for some time.

Inevitably anything done quickly will have a few failures but on the whole I think this is going to be A Good Thing.

Frankly I am tired of decades of mealy-mouthed inaction and consultations that slow down progress. Fuck it - a revolution is needed.

I reckon a fair proportion of people complaining about things being done too quickly now, are the same people who have spent the past few decades being obstructive to the various schemes proposed and considered in that time. So, because it's been held up for so long, now it just has to be done in a rush because that's the only option, and they've only got themseves to blame if they don't like it

 

[Gramsci]

I think Lambeth are using the Covid emergency as an opportunity to introduce quickly lots of other traffic measures that they have been thinking about for some time.

Inevitably anything done quickly will have a few failures but on the whole I think this is going to be A Good Thing.

Frankly I am tired of decades of mealy-mouthed inaction and consultations that slow down progress. Fuck it - a revolution is needed.

I have real concerns about this way of viewing it.

As I said previously at last neighborhood meeting in LJ the Cllr said that these are temporary measures put in place due to the pandemic. After that they will be evaluated and consulted on. At the moment its in place due to the health crisis.

I accept that.

On consultation. Just been having a disagreemnt with the Council about lack of consltation on a local park.

One Cllr has a habit of accusing those who critically support/ scrutinise Council plans as being "unrepresentative". The Council really hate it when locals ask questions. Officers just look flabbergasted that people might scrutinise the plans they produce.

One of the reasons the Council end up getting opposition is their piss poor social skills and total lack of ability to win people over. Thats some Cllrs and some officers.

Take the Liveable Neighbourhood Consultation. Officer turns up to LJ meeting and says those present were "privileged". Making effort to attend a metting denoted "privilege". I let that one pass. Im so used to this shit from officers.

Its not that consultations slow down progress its that the Council just is incapable of working with residents.

Estate Regeneration is another one where the Council is taking action and bypassing any meaningful consultation with residents.

I don't want the Council to get to used to emergency powers that it has for the pandemic.

Im critically supporting what they are doing now re streets- but expect consultation afterwards.

 

[Gramsci]

Another view which I understand ( from a local campaigner ) is this is a moral issue and so normal democratic process can be set aside. Its the morally right thing to do in time of climate change. Its also a move to greater equality as car ownership in Lambeth is low.

So that is another way to look at it.

Council should use powers it has to push this through as its for the greater good.

Its similar to XR take on green issues.

 

[Rushy]

I have real concerns about this way of viewing it.

As I said previously at last neighborhood meeting in LJ the Cllr said that these are temporary measures put in place due to the pandemic. After that they will be evaluated and consulted on. At the moment its in place due to the health crisis.

I accept that.

On consultation. Just been having a disagreemnt with the Council about lack of consltation on a local park.

One Cllr has a habit of accusing those who critically support/ scrutinise Council plans as being "unrepresentative". The Council really hate it when locals ask questions. Officers just look flabbergasted that people might scrutinise the plans they produce.

One of the reasons the Council end up getting opposition is their piss poor social skills and total lack of ability to win people over. Thats some Cllrs and some officers.

Take the Liveable Neighbourhood Consultation. Officer turns up to LJ meeting and says those present were "privileged". Making effort to attend a metting denoted "privilege". I let that one pass. Im so used to this shit from officers.

Its not that consultations slow down progress its that the Council just is incapable of working with residents.

Good post.

It is not that it is being done too quickly. It is that scheduled consultation stages are being blatantly skipped. This is not bringing the schedules forward. It's not a heroic rush that is causing the stages to slip. Obfuscation is not a special emergency measure. It is sadly predictable Lambeth behaviour. Announcing consultations after they are over - or when they have a day to run, or not making the information easily accessible - is just what they do.

 

[Rushy]

Another view which I understand ( from a local campaigner ) is this is a moral issue and so normal democratic process can be set aside. Its the morally right thing to do in time of climate change. Its also a move to greater equality as car ownership in Lambeth is low.

So that is another way to look at it.

Council should use powers it has to push this through as its for the greater good.

Its similar to XR take on green issues.

I agree with this with a caveat. Rather than using the situation to use exceptional powers, Lambeth is using the situation to justify continuing what it has been doing for years (ie. misinformation, piss poor consultation and inept engagement with the people they represent). If they had used the sunshine times to build trust then I would have confidence in their using exceptional powers.

 

[Rushy]

So, having seen Gramsci's link, this is why I have an issue with the St Matthews proposal.

In principle it would be fine. They have proposed a pair of modal gates with a pedestrian area in between about half way up the road which should in principle reduce it to local traffic only. I think this will work on the south end of the road. Problems arise at the north end which is currently being used as an informal carpark for the "car Free" town hall development. Since the Town Hall opened, every resident bay and yellow line has been taken up by council vehicles displaying Emergency and Statutory permits (obviously not just now). Although these are almost all parked illegally (and against policy for use of those permits), parking wardens will tell you that they have been advised not to carry out enforcement on those vehicles. These are constantly coming and going. All this traffic will still exist and it will all come and go through the north end junction. As they won't be able to drive through they will have no option but to turn in the road or drive onto private property to turn. The controlled areas around the junction back on to the gyratory are often blocked with parked council vehicles despite having yellow lines and make the narrow junction particular dangerous with cars queuing to go both ways and often waiting on the red route for blockages to clear. It's not fun cycling in or out. All this on a road which is supposed to become a calmed cycle route.

A solution would be to add that end of St Matthews Road to the list of streets which council vehicles from the "car free" development are banned from parking on (because they have been creating such a nuisance). And possibly change the parking zone from BR to BIR to discourage local drivers trying to park as close to the town center as possible.

Personally I don't like that it will limit me to using that particular junction onto the gyratory - as someone else has pointed out above, it is a horrible junction and I tend to avoid it. But I don't drive all that often, particularly during peak hours, and I drive a van so cars do tend to give way a bit more. So I can live with that.

 

[Winot]

Rushy sounds like the focus should be on getting Lambeth staff to stop parking there. Would have made quite a story of hypocrisy for SLP in the old days. Perhaps Brixton Blog could be alerted? I would definitely contact Claire Holland too.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

I agree with this with a caveat. Rather than using the situation to use exceptional powers, Lambeth is using the situation to justify continuing what it has been doing for years (ie. misinformation, piss poor consultation and inept engagement with the people they represent). If they had used the sunshine times to build trust then I would have confidence in their using exceptional powers.

I'll second that: that's my experience of my dealing with the council

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

Rushy sounds like the focus should be on getting Lambeth staff to stop parking there. Would have made quite a story of hypocrisy for SLP in the old days. Perhaps Brixton Blog could be alerted? I would definitely contact Claire Holland too.

Am I right in thinking the £1.8 million is the spend for this scheme in Poet's Corner. Jeez! That funding should be for urgent stuff across the borough. Also, what's chance the bill will go up (they usually do with UK civic/national building projects).

 

[Gramsci]

Am I right in thinking the £1.8 million is the spend for this scheme in Poet's Corner. Jeez! That funding should be for urgent stuff across the borough. Also, what's chance the bill will go up (they usually do with UK civic/national building projects).

No its not just for Poets corner. Its the whole borough.

If I remember correctly Lambeth is fronting up some money in hopes that Government will fund it later. Government did make a big thing about extra money for these measures.

 

[Rocky Sullivan]

No its not just for Poets corner. Its the whole borough.

If I remember correctly Lambeth is fronting up some money in hopes that Government will fund it later. Government did make a big thing about extra money for these measures.

Thanks for the clarification.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Details of the Railton rd scheme here:

About Railton Neighbourhood

A space to learn about and feed into the Railton Low Traffic Neighbourhood.

rtstreets.commonplace.is

 

[Rushy]

Details of the Railton rd scheme here:

About Railton Neighbourhood

A space to learn about and feed into the Railton Low Traffic Neighbourhood.

rtstreets.commonplace.is

That's the document Gramsci linked to. It has helpful details. Why Lambeth did not distribute those links either with the letter or when requesting additional information from councilors is beyond me.

(ETA, it's not really beyond me.)

 

[Winot]

That's the document Gramsci linked to. It has helpful details. Why Lambeth did not distribute those links either with the letter or when requesting additional information from councilors is beyond me.

Yes their comms are dreadful.

 

[Rushy]

Yes their comms are dreadful.

Having seen the way they have handled numerous other consultations, I've no doubt that it's quite deliberate. And Jim Dickson (whose ward this is in) is cabinet member and ex leader of the council. His day job is no less than Director of Public Affairs (previously Politics Director) at an international corporate communications consultancy. He specialises in public affairs relating to infrastructure, development and transport. So when I read posters dismissing irate and uninformed neighbours knocking on eachothers door as organised ideologues taking advantage of little old Lambeths poor communications, I weep.

 

[teuchter]

Having seen the way they have handled numerous other consultations, I've no doubt that it's quite deliberate. And Jim Dickson (whose ward this is in) is cabinet member and ex leader of the council. His day job is no less than Director of Public Affairs (previously Politics Director) at an international corporate communications consultancy. He specialises in public affairs relating to infrastructure, development and transport. So when I read posters dismissing irate and uninformed neighbours knocking on eachothers door as organised ideologues taking advantage of little old Lambeths poor communications, I weep.

To be clear - I don't think that worried locals knocking on each others' doors are "organised ideologues" - that's an understandable response, and my point was that I would want to encourage people not to assume the worst, and not to throw the baby out with the bathwater just because Lambeth is involved in something.

I do, however, think that it's not uncommon to see "organised ideologues" getting involved in these situations. They might be local residents, or they might be external to the area. I believe I saw both of those scenarios play out during the Loughborough Junction fiasco.

 

[thebackrow]

Having seen the way they have handled numerous other consultations, I've no doubt that it's quite deliberate. And Jim Dickson (whose ward this is in) is cabinet member and ex leader of the council. His day job is no less than Director of Public Affairs (previously Politics Director) at an international corporate communications consultancy. He specialises in public affairs relating to infrastructure, development and transport.

He may well do, but that's not his role and responsibilities at Lambeth where he's a councillor not a salaried officer. Thats like criticising the Government Health Minister for the performance of the Air Force because they used to be a pilot. (that analogy may or may not work)

I do, however, think that it's not uncommon to see "organised ideologues" getting involved in these situations. They might be local residents, or they might be external to the area. I believe I saw both of those scenarios play out during the Loughborough Junction fiasco.

So yes, you'll likely see walking, cycling, air quality and environmental campaigners cheering these plans while the Association of Bad Drivers, Cabbies, the Freight Transport Association and usually some (mostly conservative) politicians who think the ability to drive unhindered wherever you want is crucial to life in general (possibly because they fear having to mix with the common people if they can't lock themselves inside their car from door to door).

Some of these people will be from outside the area because they think whats happening there will either be good or bad for them personally - theres a pro-driving/anti-20mph campaigner from Croydon who turned up at meetings about New Park Road.

It does always strikes me as odd that the Conservatives think everything should be governed by a free market and privatised except parking and driving, which should always be either free or as cheap as possible, and all laws should be strictly enforced except if they relate to speeding or parking.

 

[Rushy]

He may well do, but that's not his role and responsibilities at Lambeth where he's a councillor not a salaried officer. Thats like criticising the Government Health Minister for the performance of the Air Force because they used to be a pilot. (that analogy may or may not work)

No it doesn't, does it. I think a better analogy might be criticism of an off duty pilot for standing by whilst the jumbo captain presses the wrong button and the plane plummets to the ground. "Yeah, I was going to say that he should have pressed the red one but I'm contracted to a different airline on Wednesdays".