The original traffic order was for a space that wide. I think they shortened it as the church was concerned about parking.
Brixton Liveable Neighbourhood and LTN schemes - improvements for pedestrians and cyclists
- Thread starter teuchter
- Start date
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Yes that's correct - they confirmed at the time that they were worried about loss of parking spaces. Consequently it's not what was tested.
The road is ram jammed today and every weekend with people shopping in Brixton. If they were planning to get rid of that many parking spaces and want to discourage car visitors they surely should have extended controlled parking into the weekend to protect the remaining spaces for residents.
All up for that. What a meant, and answering your question, is presumably they’re allowed to do what their doing under the original traffic order.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Good to see Micky is still around (comments) but he’s mostly had his keyboard repaired.
Lambeth proposes changes to the Ferndale Low Traffic Neighbourhood in attempt to reduce traffic towards the west
The Ferndale Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) in Lambeth has been the subject of a report calling for additional traffic restrictions to be implemented.
www.brixtonbuzz.com
Rushy
basically a scrotum
It looks like they might have postponed the St Matthews plans. The four planters full of dead plants have gone, as have the parking suspension notices for the 6 March- 6Apr.
The final landscaping scheme was approved late September 2022 subject to public consultation. Perhaps they forgot the public consultation bit?
The final landscaping scheme was approved late September 2022 subject to public consultation. Perhaps they forgot the public consultation bit?
Last edited:
Was this not the consultation? It seems the same as the other Railton filters that are being done.
Rushy
basically a scrotum
The document you have linked to refers to a public engagement session in June which I attended - there were suggestions and ideas but no final design, or certainly anything referred to as a final design, on which to comment. This engagement was presented as a gathering of new ideas and feedback to inform development of a final design.
The final design was presented to council for approval in September 2022. The September 2022 approval of the final design is expressly conditional upon statutory public consultation of the final design. I can't see any reference to that consultation. Neither is that step mentioned in the timeline in the document you linked to.
Given that there was no final design available at the June session I would be very surprised if that could count towards statutory public consultation of it. In planning terms public engagement is a crucial part of significant developments but it does not ever replace the need for consultation on the final proposal. Whilst the June engagement could not count as consultation for a planning proposal which was not finalised until September, I can't claim to be familiar with the process which applies to roads. But it would seem odd.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I think “Statutory consultation” refers to traffic orders.
Given the ETo for the temp scheme set out a plan of same size? And that was made permanent I’m not sure anything else required.
It’s a street design. The public doesn’t get to fight the placement of every tree and bench
www.lambeth.gov.uk
Given the ETo for the temp scheme set out a plan of same size? And that was made permanent I’m not sure anything else required.
It’s a street design. The public doesn’t get to fight the placement of every tree and bench
Statutory consultations
You can view our proposals and participate in any active statutory consultation for current static (parking related) restrictions included in traffic or parking schemes via our map based Streets online portal.
www.lambeth.gov.uk
Last edited:
Cat Fan
Cats and stats
Lambeth not doing the best job when it comes to delivery.
See Hillside Passage, design competition held in 2021. But the build has not even been started.
"A voice note has been left by the winner." Wow.
streathamhilllowtrafficneighbourhoodproposals.commonplace.is
Now consulting on kerbside strategy around the corner on Amesbury Av.
What's the point in endless consultations if they can't actually execute anything?
See Hillside Passage, design competition held in 2021. But the build has not even been started.
"A voice note has been left by the winner." Wow.
Streatham Hill Low Traffic Neighbourhood
A space to learn about and feed into the Streatham Hill Low Traffic Neighbourhood.
streathamhilllowtrafficneighbourhoodproposals.commonplace.is
Now consulting on kerbside strategy around the corner on Amesbury Av.
What's the point in endless consultations if they can't actually execute anything?
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Whatever the scheme in the experimental order, a double gate was installed with a pedestrian area in between.
In response to complaints, the double gate was almost immediately (certainly within two weeks) replaced by a single gate so as to avoid loss of parking.
It was a single gate long before as well as at the time the experimental order was made permanent and remained one afterwards.
It has now been a single gate for almost three years.
I don't know what the process of changing to a single gate was or should have been in context of ETO.
Now the single gate is being replaced with a double gate with about 80m of pedestrian in between.
If what was in the original ETO was a single gate, then this is a substantial change.
If what was in the original ETO was a double gate, then that is not what was tested or maintained. The double gate was quickly deemed inappropriate and removed.
When consultation to make the ETO permanent was carried out on the St Matthews Gate - do you think people would have reasonably believed they were being consulted on the single gate with which they had been living with for 18 months, or the double gate which had been immediately rejected and removed.
In summary, Scheme A is proposed for testing, in response to objections Scheme B is implemented instead, consultation is carried out with scheme B in place, after 3 years of Scheme B, Scheme A is built?
Putting aside for a moment which outcome you prefer - does that sit comfortably with you as a process?
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
I get that you’re not happy with the removal of on street parking to create public space. But looking at the document linked above there’s negligible difference between the “consulted on” and final design.
It may be a shorter filter than the trial but if I were the council id argue that they were testing a filter to remove through traffic and the success of that is unrelated to the size of public space created.
The kerbside strategy says they’re going to remove 25% of on street parking in the next few years. Id guess a lot of people are going to be angry about that as it starts happening (and they simply won’t be able to deliver it if they have a process that allows people to block it by saying “I don’t want to lose parking on my street”)
It may be a shorter filter than the trial but if I were the council id argue that they were testing a filter to remove through traffic and the success of that is unrelated to the size of public space created.
The kerbside strategy says they’re going to remove 25% of on street parking in the next few years. Id guess a lot of people are going to be angry about that as it starts happening (and they simply won’t be able to deliver it if they have a process that allows people to block it by saying “I don’t want to lose parking on my street”)
Last edited:
teuchter
je suis teuchter
The document doesn't seem to be asking people "do you want to keep or modify the arrangement that's been in place for 2 or 3 years", and the arrangement in place for 2 or 3 years seems to have been this, "scheme B" if you like:
And that looks like something that only tests the principle of a modal filter in that location, it's not creating any public space.
Then, there's the consultation which seems to have asked what do you think about this, effectively "scheme C":
And has then concluded that the final design is this, "scheme D":
I'm not clear whether what they call the "co-design" process in that document is the same as the "statutory consultation" or whether the statutory consultation is just what automatically happens when a traffic management order is proposed, a bit like when a planning application is made, the statutory consultation is just the period of time where the application details are made public, anyone can comment and planning officers then decide whether to take any of those comments into consideration when they determine the application.
And that looks like something that only tests the principle of a modal filter in that location, it's not creating any public space.
Then, there's the consultation which seems to have asked what do you think about this, effectively "scheme C":
And has then concluded that the final design is this, "scheme D":
I'm not clear whether what they call the "co-design" process in that document is the same as the "statutory consultation" or whether the statutory consultation is just what automatically happens when a traffic management order is proposed, a bit like when a planning application is made, the statutory consultation is just the period of time where the application details are made public, anyone can comment and planning officers then decide whether to take any of those comments into consideration when they determine the application.
Looks like it’s still a single gate and vehicles can drive up to it eg. to gain access to the church.
Torpid Scorpion
Basket case
I dont believe this has been posted here, but worth knowing about next time we hear (absolute tosh) about how local businesses are being put at risk:
www.hackneycitizen.co.uk
TL;DR:
who would have thought it! A pedestrian or cyclist is more likely to stop and buy something than an angry driver in a surreptitiously-texting hurry.
Spending up on Church Street as Town Hall hails LTN’s ‘positive impact on retail’
Anonymous bank card data shows a recent 200 per cent increase in Mastercard payments
www.hackneycitizen.co.uk
TL;DR:
- footfall up 18% since implementation
- payment card receipts up 200% (some of that for sure is cash substitution but clearly overall up)
who would have thought it! A pedestrian or cyclist is more likely to stop and buy something than an angry driver in a surreptitiously-texting hurry.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Brixton is getting a long overdue cycleway. I wonder if this will just be a bit of paint on the road.
tfl.gov.uk
Three new low traffic Cycleways, connecting even more of London's communities
TfL launches three new low traffic Cycleways, connecting even more of London’s communities to the network
tfl.gov.uk
Cat Fan
Cats and stats
You can see the route on TFL's cycleways page.Brixton is getting a long overdue cycleway. I wonder if this will just be a bit of paint on the road.
Three new low traffic Cycleways, connecting even more of London's communities
TfL launches three new low traffic Cycleways, connecting even more of London’s communities to the network
Just a short stretch through Railton road and Ferndale road, then joins onto Clapham High Street.
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
They'd better put some phased lights, boxes etc around brixton rd. That junction is horrible.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
So it's just TfL signposting Lambeth's 'Healthy Routes' that now meet safe cycling standards as the traffic volumes have been reduced by the LTNs.
The big weakness in that is the Atlantic to Ferndale link. It's OK in that direction due to the light sequence but really unpleasant going from Ferndale to Atlantic.
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
I'd barely call it ok in either direction. You're mixing it up with four lanes of two-way traffic. Completely offputting to anyone who hasn't already built up the nerve required to ride in London.
To make an actual substantial difference, the following would need to happen:
Bus/cycle only on Atlantic Road, except for certain times when vehicles can access for loading (well outside of rush hours)
Kick the coffee shop out and open the railway arch for pedestrian use
Which leaves enough room under the bridge for segregated bike lanes either way.
(I have measured - there is room for 1.5m lanes. Not the 2m ideal, but very workable)
Continuation of cycle lanes on Brixton Road proper are best left as an exercise for the reader
To make an actual substantial difference, the following would need to happen:
Bus/cycle only on Atlantic Road, except for certain times when vehicles can access for loading (well outside of rush hours)
Kick the coffee shop out and open the railway arch for pedestrian use
Which leaves enough room under the bridge for segregated bike lanes either way.
(I have measured - there is room for 1.5m lanes. Not the 2m ideal, but very workable)
Continuation of cycle lanes on Brixton Road proper are best left as an exercise for the reader
Last edited:
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Yes, it needs dealing with properly but I ride it regularly and you wait at the front of the queue on Atlantic, then turn into a full time bus lane. You've turned into Ferndale before a bus has caught you up. Navigating all the illegally parked cars on Atlantic is far worse.
Coming the other way you turn into two lines of stationary traffic pretty much all the time. That is horrible.
(edit - that bus lane went in some time after July 21)
Last edited:
nick
Pleomorphic Adenomas R us
If you can be arsed, then LTNs appear optional:
Walking down Amesbury Ave on Saturday to see a couple of lads taping cardboard over their number plate and then driving through the no entry.
The gave me a cheery wave when they stopped on the other side to remove the cardboard.
Next saw them when they popped out of Barcombe, onto the A23, and then dived back into the ABCD roads on Downton.
I guess all that jumping in and out of the cab to cover/uncover the plates over and over again must keep them fit
Jankowski Group rubbish clearance and removed "full licenced" 07553066033. FWIW
Walking down Amesbury Ave on Saturday to see a couple of lads taping cardboard over their number plate and then driving through the no entry.
The gave me a cheery wave when they stopped on the other side to remove the cardboard.
Next saw them when they popped out of Barcombe, onto the A23, and then dived back into the ABCD roads on Downton.
I guess all that jumping in and out of the cab to cover/uncover the plates over and over again must keep them fit
Jankowski Group rubbish clearance and removed "full licenced" 07553066033. FWIW
nick
Pleomorphic Adenomas R us
Have to applaud the ingenuity.
Apart from the bad-citizen angle of what they were doing, I was also vexed by the fact that they seemed to be taping the cover on by scratch.
Since they were patently going through the filters a number of times, I would have thought that at least some sort of drop down flap arrangement would have been more intelligent.
Guess you don't need a tertiary education to be driving a scrap lorry
Apart from the bad-citizen angle of what they were doing, I was also vexed by the fact that they seemed to be taping the cover on by scratch.
Since they were patently going through the filters a number of times, I would have thought that at least some sort of drop down flap arrangement would have been more intelligent.
Guess you don't need a tertiary education to be driving a scrap lorry
sparkybird
ask the bird...
Did you report them to Lambeth?
Similar threads
