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

[alex_]

We recently saw a van driving through with the passenger making a rude gesture at the camera as they went

You are going to struggle to claim you weren’t aware with that on the picture !

 

[nagapie]

Just was walking down a street with a LTN exit and saw for the first time in a long time someone gunning through on a car, then through past the cameras with not a care in the world.

Given how many signs this exit had I can't see how they missed it so I guess they don't care.

Might be a blue badge holder allowed to use their one privileged LTN exit.

 

[domestos]

Really looking forward to the wooden plant pot blocking Bonham road and the huge increase in cars that will then have to be driven past my front door to get their drivers to their homes

EDIT: Branksome not Bonham

 

[BusLanes]

Might be a blue badge holder allowed to use their one privileged LTN exit.

Could well be.

I was more annoyed about the speed tbh. Going that fast on a quiet street just feels unsafe.

 

[nagapie]

Could well be.

I was more annoyed about the speed tbh. Going that fast on a quiet street just feels unsafe.

I do go through my exit very slowly because people don't expect cars through them.

 

[edcraw]

Really looking forward to the wooden plant pot blocking Bonham road and the huge increase in cars that will then have to be driven past my front door to get their drivers to their homes

Which filter’s that? No plans for one on Bonham Rd.

 

[domestos]

Which filter’s that? No plans for one on Bonham Rd.

I meant to write Branksome. Didn't know anything about the consultation until after it had finished

 

[edcraw]

I meant to write Branksome. Didn't know anything about the consultation until after it had finished

The trial will monitor traffic levels and a further chance to feedback after that. Can’t think what roads would have increased traffic on them though. Branksome Rd - Lambert Rd is a horrible rat run at the moment and those roads will be massively changed for the better.

Edit: if you do have any concerns do get in touch with your councillors they definitely want to hear about issue such as increased traffic.

 

[domestos]

Thanks. I have done, when I found out. Let's see what happens. I pointed out that Lambeth Council already has E-zone registration plates on file, so it would be easy to have a camera with ANPR so residents can continue using it but stop the rat runners. There's enough traffic on Acre Lane already and there are a lot of residential properties on it - do they need even more traffic going past. The first couple of roads past Baytree will now be the main access for Branksome and the roads off it up to Blenheim if there's traffic going up Brixton Hill which there usually is now

 

[sparkybird]

Thanks. I have done, when I found out. Let's see what happens. I pointed out that Lambeth Council already has E-zone registration plates on file, so it would be easy to have a camera with ANPR so residents can continue using it but stop the rat runners. There's enough traffic on Acre Lane already and there are a lot of residential properties on it - do they need even more traffic going past. The first couple of roads past Baytree will now be the main access for Branksome and the roads off it up to Blenheim if there's traffic going up Brixton Hill which there usually is now

I've been told by the council officers at a meeting that APNR exemptions won't be considered because it doesn't do anything to discourage local drivers from driving short distances and could even make it easier for them (since there's no through traffic)

 

[domestos]

Sounds like a flimsy cop-out to me. Anyone lazy enough to drive short distances and spend time trying to find and pay for parking would continue to do so. That road is already one way preventing drivers in this area nipping to Acre Lane already

 

[teuchter]

Sounds like a flimsy cop-out to me. Anyone lazy enough to drive short distances and spend time trying to find and pay for parking would continue to do so. That road is already one way preventing drivers in this area nipping to Acre Lane already

Do you want the existing block on Strathleven Road removed?

 

[Crispy]

There's enough traffic on Acre Lane already

I have to say my personal experience differs. My commute crosses over Acre Lane at Srtathleven Rd, at varying times of day and it never seems terribly busy to me. More often than not there's nothing coming and I can just coast over without even having to give way.

Now Acre Lane is a road that really could do with a proper redesign. All the way up to the pinch point at Northbourne Road, it's 21m+ wide to the property line. Plenty of space for proper bike lanes, plus a varying vehicle lane arrangement that always has an unobstructed lane each way, plus turning lanes, parking/loading bays, crossing islands, bus stops etc.



Here's a street of identical width in Copenhagen that's arranged just like this:

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.com

Even at that pinch point you can just about squeeze the bike lanes through if you ride single file.
(although this kind of random street width in British cities is what drives my inner urban planner mad)

 

[Winot]

I've been told by the council officers at a meeting that APNR exemptions won't be considered because it doesn't do anything to discourage local drivers from driving short distances and could even make it easier for them (since there's no through traffic)

I live in the area accessible via Branksome Rd and there has been a lot of talk on the neighbourhood WhatsApp about the affect on accessibility.

I cycle or walk down Branksome Rd daily. Cars travel very fast along it as it’s straight with no oncoming traffic. The filter would solve that and make it easy to cycle down to Acre Lane and access the Ferndale LTN.

I asked a neighbour what journeys she did by car. She cited a fortnightly big shop. I don’t think an extra 10 minutes via Brixton Hill is a huge hassle once a fortnight.

I suspect she also does a few journeys that she was embarrassed to admit to as she knows they are hard to justify. Those are exactly the journeys that this change is designed to dissuade. ANPR would enable them to continue. The council is right to resist this imo.

I also agree with Crispy that Acre Lane is not that busy. I also don’t agree with your point domestos about increased traffic on the roads off Brixton Hill (which enable access to the area in question). At the moment Branksome takes all this hit. Under the new scheme the traffic will be shared between Sudbourne/Hayter/Horsford/Trent which seems fairer. Also hopefully there will be less total traffic as some short journeys won’t happen.

 

[sparkybird]

I also agree with Crispy that Acre Lane is not that busy. I also don’t agree with your point domestos about increased traffic on the roads off Brixton Hill (which enable access to the area in question). At the moment Branksome takes all this hit. Under the new scheme the traffic will be shared between Sudbourne/Hayter/Horsford/Trent which seems fairer. Also hopefully there will be less total traffic as some short journeys won’t happen.

And of course the amount of drivers entering the LTN will be hugely reduced as the handy little cut through Acre-Branksome-Lambert- Brixton Hill will no longer be available. So only drivers living in or visiting will be entering.

 

[Rushy]

Thanks. I have done, when I found out. Let's see what happens. I pointed out that Lambeth Council already has E-zone registration plates on file, so it would be easy to have a camera with ANPR so residents can continue using it but stop the rat runners. There's enough traffic on Acre Lane already and there are a lot of residential properties on it - do they need even more traffic going past. The first couple of roads past Baytree will now be the main access for Branksome and the roads off it up to Blenheim if there's traffic going up Brixton Hill which there usually is now

Kensington and Chelsea has taken a similarish approach to what you propose. I forget what it's called.

 

[alex_]

Kensington and Chelsea has taken a similarish approach to what you propose. I forget what it's called.

The nimby zone ?

 

[domestos]

I agree with what has been said about rat-running from Acre Lane to Brixton hill but see no reason why zone E CPZ residents should be banned or that the traffic should be shunted onto the roads off Brixton Hill, four of which have school entrances. Instead of relying on hearsay, a properly conducted Zone E vote would be easy to hold and whatever was agreed on would be a reasonable reflection of local opinion. I am confident that the ANPR option would be popular

 

[teuchter]

Of course it would be popular if you only asked the people who would benefit from it.

 

[Torpid Scorpion]

Lambeth is consulting in increases to parking charges and increases in the steepness of the emissions charging element of this.

It’s generally a good proposal but does not have my support because they are doubling the cost of visitor permit books.

That disproportionally hits the less affluent, those who are already doing their part by not owning large polluting vehicles who thus require people to travel to them.

I support the higher charges and steeper emissions pricing gradient in the rest of the proposal.

Perhaps they should introduce an income test.

 

[Cat Fan]

Lambeth is consulting in increases to parking charges and increases in the steepness of the emissions charging element of this.

It’s generally a good proposal but does not have my support because they are doubling the cost of visitor permit books.

That disproportionally hits the less affluent, those who are already doing their part by not owning large polluting vehicles who thus require people to travel to them.

I support the higher charges and steeper emissions pricing gradient in the rest of the proposal.

Perhaps they should introduce an income test.

Time to buy visitor books now before the price goes up?

Or otherwise maybe the visitors can consider using public transport

I think it's a great idea to increase parking charges on diesel and vans. There is one particular person on my road who likes sitting in and idling his van for hours at a stretch while he is on his phone

 

[edcraw]

Details and consultation survey for this here:

Changes to emissions-based parking charges consultation

Have your say on our proposals to change the parking charges for residents, visitors and traders, based on the emissions produced by vehicles.

www.lambeth.gov.uk

The council gets no revenue from people owning and driving cars except parking fees so seems fair that the council should look to increase revenue from this.

 

[Cat Fan]

Details and consultation survey for this here:

Changes to emissions-based parking charges consultation

Have your say on our proposals to change the parking charges for residents, visitors and traders, based on the emissions produced by vehicles.

www.lambeth.gov.uk

The council gets no revenue from people owning and driving cars except parking fees so seems fair that the council should look to increase revenue from this.

Thanks for posting.

Good thing I wasn't drinking any tea or I would have spat it out.

The headline of increasing charges for the most polluting doesn't stack up with what they're actually doing.

Band A (zero emissions) 200% increase vs Band M 47% increase. So they're actually making it relatively much more expensive to choose low emissions than under the current system.

Under these proposals it costs more to park a low emission vehicle than the city of Brighton charges for a high emission vehicle. Bonkers.

 

[edcraw]

Thanks for posting.

Good thing I wasn't drinking any tea or I would have spat it out.

The headline of increasing charges for the most polluting doesn't stack up with what they're actually doing.

Band A (zero emissions) 200% increase vs Band M 47% increase. So they're actually making it relatively much more expensive to choose low emissions than under the current system.

Under these proposals it costs more to park a low emission vehicle than the city of Brighton charges for a high emission vehicle. Bonkers.

Think it deals with the fact that zero emission vehicles still aren’t great and have lots of impacts anyway. £40 is ridiculously cheap to store private property on public space. One of the aims is to discourage all kinds of car trips.

Here are the breakdowns for those interested:

 

[alex_]

Thanks for posting.

Good thing I wasn't drinking any tea or I would have spat it out.

The headline of increasing charges for the most polluting doesn't stack up with what they're actually doing.

Band A (zero emissions) 200% increase vs Band M 47% increase. So they're actually making it relatively much more expensive to choose low emissions than under the current system.

Under these proposals it costs more to park a low emission vehicle than the city of Brighton charges for a high emission vehicle. Bonkers.

I think the other thing is that zero emissions vehicles are almost exclusively owned by the upper middle classes.

Alex

 

[sparkybird]

I agree with what has been said about rat-running from Acre Lane to Brixton hill but see no reason why zone E CPZ residents should be banned or that the traffic should be shunted onto the roads off Brixton Hill, four of which have school entrances. Instead of relying on hearsay, a properly conducted Zone E vote would be easy to hold and whatever was agreed on would be a reasonable reflection of local opinion. I am confident that the ANPR option would be popular

I can also let you know that Lambeth have said quite categorically at several meetings that LTN implementation is not a referendum. They are happening and without APNR exemptions. What residents can influence is the design/location of elements to improve the streetscape.
New LTNs are installed on a trial basis and the decision to make them permanent is basis on if they meet their aims after the monitoring period.
Interesting to note that all trial LTNs have so far gone to permanent IIRC.

 

[Cat Fan]

The main stated aim is to reduce air pollution/emissions, but the fact they are increasing all emissions categories by such a large amount, even zero/low emissions makes it an obvious cash grab

 

[Cat Fan]

I think the other thing is that zero emissions vehicles are almost exclusively owned by the upper middle classes.

Alex

Low emissions vehicles, i.e. small cars/bikes are mostly owned by lower income households and they are also facing a 200%+ increase in parking charges while high emitting vehicles get off more lightly

 

[Cat Fan]

£40 is ridiculously cheap to store private property on public space.

What do we pay our taxes for?

It depends on the area really, the council should distinguish between high parking pressure and low parking pressure areas, like Brighton and Hove does.

 

[edcraw]

What do we pay our taxes for?

It depends on the area really, the council should distinguish between high parking pressure and low parking pressure areas, like Brighton and Hove does.

I don’t own a car - why should I subsidise those that do?

Cars are taking up public space. Why should that be free or subsidised?