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

[scmwalsh]

The Kerbside strategy and vision is great and not something I'd ever really thought about.

At the heart it is actually pretty basic, reclaim the kerbside from cars where possible. Am not sure how many other councils have a dedicated Kerbside Strategy so does feel quite innovative.

When you dig into the details there are 3 objectives that really excited me. Secure cycle storage every 100m, trees every 25 meters and 10% of permeable surfaces. However, they deserve some scrutiny.

Secure cycle storage minimum every 100m would mean 2900 cycle cycle hangers by my calculations. There are currently a little more than 334. This is probably not right on my calculations as that won't happen.

Trees every 25 metres on the kerbside would mean 12,000 trees. Many roads have street trees already so this suddenly becomes much lower. The Tree Planting Strategy aims for 5,000 trees this electoral cycle, not all of which will be kerbside and presumably not all street trees will be kerbside. Hope this is delivered but I remain sceptical that this scale is achieved by 2030.

SuDS are probably one of, if not, the best uses for kerbside. 10% of Lambeths kerbs to be permeable is fantastic but not sure if that specifically means SuDS and is 145kms which sounds massive. Using their sq meter numbers the £6mill program announced earlier this year would only cover 2.5% of the space needed and that SuDS program is not only using kerbspace. So this aim could be a mammoth expense and so I suspect from the wording will not all be SuDS - interested to see how this is implemented as am not an expert.

I deliberately haven't commented on the space for people as I personally don't see the kerbside as a space we should be prioritising as reclaiming for people - should better fund parks and community spaces. Council funded parklets is a waste of money in my opinion. However, if communities or businesses want a parklet give them as is better than car parking.

Overall, great to see the vision and marks a positive step as the current 6% sustainable uses is very meh - don't think they'll deliver 25% but there has obviously been no impetus to use this space in the past so an amazing opportunity.

 

[alex_]

The Kerbside strategy and vision is great and not something I'd ever really thought about.

At the heart it is actually pretty basic, reclaim the kerbside from cars where possible. Am not sure how many other councils have a dedicated Kerbside Strategy so does feel quite innovative.

When you dig into the details there are 3 objectives that really excited me. Secure cycle storage every 100m, trees every 25 meters and 10% of permeable surfaces. However, they deserve some scrutiny.

Secure cycle storage minimum every 100m would mean 2900 cycle cycle hangers by my calculations. There are currently a little more than 334. This is probably not right on my calculations as that won't happen.

Is it possible they mean secure bike storage within 100m of every property as that would be quite different ?

For anyone else Suds = Sustainable drainage system

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Where would the cars park out of interest?

 

[alex_]

Where would the cars park out of interest?

Against the 75% of remaining kerb.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

But presumably if 95% of the kerbside is regularly used for parking, where would the cars on the 20% go?

Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea of fewer parked cars by the kerb. However, unlike LTNs where the hope was that drivers would use their cars less, unless the aim is to encourage people to give up their cars period, there’s going to a lot of residents who won’t be able to park their car anywhere. Even if they hardly use them because of their commitment to clean air/the impact of clean air etc.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Personally I’d argue that if you can’t demonstrate you have a suitable place to park it you shouldn’t own a car

 

[Winot]

But presumably if 95% of the kerbside is regularly used for parking, where would the cars on the 20% go?

Don’t get me wrong, I like the idea of fewer parked cars by the kerb. However, unlike LTNs where the hope was that drivers would use their cars less, unless the aim is to encourage people to give up their cars period, there’s going to a lot of residents who won’t be able to park their car anywhere. Even if they hardly use them because of their commitment to clean air/the impact of clean air etc.

I guess it’s a combination of (a) the 95% isn’t fully utilised so everyone squeezes up and (b) over time the policy dissuades people from buying cars / persuades them to get rid of their existing car.

 

[Winot]

Personally I’d argue that if you can’t demonstrate you have a suitable place to park it you shouldn’t own a car

How would that work in practice?

 

[alex_]

But presumably if 95% of the kerbside is regularly used for parking, where would the cars on the 20% go?

But is 100% of available street space on100% of streets used for parking cars ?

Because looking out of my window right now, it isn’t.

Alex

 

[teuchter]

The aim will be to gradually reduce car ownership.

However, note that an "EV bay" counts as a "sustainable" use. So it looks like they could increase their sustainable use percentage simply by switching existing parking places to EV only ones. Seeing as people are already switching to EVs, this would have no impact on the overall number of vehicles... depending I guess on exactly what they mean by an EV bay. If they are for charging purposes only - so more expensive to discourage use simply for parking, then that would be better.

It's good to see an official policy to end, in principle, the idea of a right to free residential parking. And to see proposals to charge for parking based on vehicle size.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

How would that work in practice?

Either show you have a private driveway or pay for a specific residential space. If none are available, no car.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

Personally I’d argue that if you can’t demonstrate you have a suitable place to park it you shouldn’t own a car

I reckon most terraced streets round here could park a small to medium size car by their house. But then when you throw multiple car/occupancy households into things, the space runs out. It would be nice if the multiple car households shared your train of thought but that’s unlikely, causing problems for others parking their single car.

The neighbouring roads to us became residents only and the consequence was that our cul-de-sac, which was managing well before, suddenly got jam packed. Double parking/blocking people in the bays is now a common occurrence.

I definitely agree that car use needs to come down and that all but essential use needs to be discouraged, but the infrastructure isn’t there yet for certain people to get rid of cars completely.

 

[Agent Sparrow]

The aim will be to gradually reduce car ownership.

However, note that an "EV bay" counts as a "sustainable" use. So it looks like they could increase their sustainable use percentage simply by switching existing parking places to EV only ones. Seeing as people are already switching to EVs, this would have no impact on the overall number of vehicles... depending I guess on exactly what they mean by an EV bay. If they are for charging purposes only - so more expensive to discourage use simply for parking, then that would be better.

It's good to see an official policy to end, in principle, the idea of a right to free residential parking. And to see proposals to charge for parking based on vehicle size.

Is an EV bay an electric charge point? More of those is something I’d hugely welcome. We’ve got nothing on our street and no way of having a dedicated space to look into getting one set up ourselves.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

I reckon most terraced streets round here could park a small to medium size car by their house. But then when you throw multiple car/occupancy households into things, the space runs out. It would be nice if the multiple car households shared your train of thought but that’s unlikely, causing problems for others parking their single car.

The neighbouring roads to us became residents only and the consequence was that our cul-de-sac, which was managing well before, suddenly got jam packed. Double parking/blocking people in the bays is now a common occurrence.

I definitely agree that car use needs to come down and that all but essential use needs to be discouraged, but the infrastructure isn’t there yet for certain people to get rid of cars completely.

I guess my view is that yes, we need to hugely inconvenience/piss off car drivers. We need to make using one such a pain in the arse that people are forced to turn to alternatives. If those alternatives and infrastructure aren’t available then the political pressure to put them in place will increase.

It’s going to be a bumpy ride, and certain groups will fight it every step of the way. But we don’t have any other choice.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Is an EV bay an electric charge point? More of those is something I’d hugely welcome. We’ve got nothing on our street and no way of having a dedicated space to look into getting one set up ourselves.

EV’s are a dead end and solve nothing. We shouldn’t be encouraging them.

 

[Winot]

pay for a specific residential space

This would involve a huge administrative burden for the local authority. You’d need to map and log every potential space in the borough, have a marketplace for renting/buying them, and then have an enforcement system for checking that the right cars were parked in the right place.

 

[teuchter]

I reckon most terraced streets round here could park a small to medium size car by their house. But then when you throw multiple car/occupancy households into things, the space runs out. It would be nice if the multiple car households shared your train of thought but that’s unlikely, causing problems for others parking their single car.

The neighbouring roads to us became residents only and the consequence was that our cul-de-sac, which was managing well before, suddenly got jam packed. Double parking/blocking people in the bays is now a common occurrence.

The answer is to make everywhere CPZ which essentially is what this policy seems to be proposing.

I definitely agree that car use needs to come down and that all but essential use needs to be discouraged, but the infrastructure isn’t there yet for certain people to get rid of cars completely.

The infrastructure for many people to get rid of cars is definitely already there in Lambeth.

 

[alex_]

Is an EV bay an electric charge point? More of those is something I’d hugely welcome. We’ve got nothing on our street and no way of having a dedicated space to look into getting one set up ourselves.

street chargers are a fuckload more expensive than charging from domestic power though - I’m looking at one now which is 45p per kwhr and 79p per kwhr peak !

These guys are making a fortune when you charge overnight.

 

[thebackrow]

Secure cycle storage minimum every 100m would mean 2900 cycle cycle hangers by my calculations. There are currently a little more than 334. This is probably not right on my calculations as that won't happen.

Celebrating ten years of the Bikehangar® | Cyclehoop

The first Cyclehoop Bikehangar was installed ten years ago in Lambeth, providing safe, secure cycle parking for residents

cyclehoop.com

says 374 at oct22. Plans for another 5000 spaces (1000 hangers?) by 2026. if they hit the 2026 target they’d be on track for 2030.

 

[alex_]

EV’s are a dead end and solve nothing. We shouldn’t be encouraging them.

EVs are a dead end ?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

EVs are a dead end ?

Petrol powered cars in a city:





EV’s in a city:

 

[thebackrow]

How would that work in practice?

There is the Tokyo model Finding a Monthly Parking Space in Tokyo | Tokyo Cheapo

 

[alex_]

Petrol powered cars in a city:

View attachment 358753



EV’s in a city:

View attachment 358753

How are you proposing people get around ?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

This would involve a huge administrative burden for the local authority. You’d need to map and log every potential space in the borough, have a marketplace for renting/buying them, and then have an enforcement system for checking that the right cars were parked in the right place.

So, doable then.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

How are you proposing people get around ?

No idea. There’s obviously no other way to move people around a city than private cars. None at all.

 

[alex_]

No idea. There’s obviously no other way to move people around a city than private cars. None at all.

Your pictures above includes trucks, taxis and private hire vehicles.

So I’ve got no idea what you are proposing

 

[DaphneM]

EV’s are a dead end and solve nothing. We shouldn’t be encouraging them.

you shouldnt need a private vehicle in a city

 

[alex_]

you shouldnt need a private vehicle in a city

Are you an Uber shareholder ?

 

[Winot]

So, doable then.

Of course, at a cost. Presently Lambeth can barely manage to administer parking permits.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Your pictures above includes trucks, taxis and private hire vehicles.

So I’ve got no idea what you are proposing

A brief summary would be “make the use of private cars in a city become so incredibly expensive and miserable as to make doing so an utterly ridiculous choice, because the alternatives are so much cheaper and easier”