teuchter
je suis teuchter
Not parking - pollution and traffic congestion. Yesterday you seemed to be concerned about it pushing traffic and pollution onto other roads:
Herne Hill news, chitter chatter and gossip
- Thread starter choochi
- Start date
Rocky Sullivan
Active Member
I am very concerned. No change there.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
So it's an "excellent scheme" but you're "very concerned" about it.
It's getting confusing trying to figure out what your position is, exactly.
Rocky Sullivan
Active Member
I'm all for calming traffic and stopping pollution - but you have to admit it has been poorly executed by Lambeth. It's moving the problem, not seeking to prevent it. Also very wrong to allienate and offer no positives to a large section of our community. My partner was out all morning door-knocking for reactions: shock, disbelief, anger all round I'm afraid. We're all very upset about the situation. At this time we need support and rallying around. That's me done (I need to get back to work!).
teuchter
je suis teuchter
Ok, so you don't think it's an excellent scheme after all, even though you said that just a few posts back.
I don't want to defend Lambeth or their shambolic way of going about things. But this is not a reason to write off the scheme, and its basic principles, from the start. It's a shame that you start off from the position of shock and anger, and that this is then conveyed to other residents, because I don't think your position is well informed - you seem confused about what you think the pros and cons are, contradicting yourself in different statements, and you seem unclear on the details of what's actually proposed.
It may well be that this is Lambeth's fault for failures of consultation and communication, but everyone (except perhaps habitual car drivers) loses if the scheme ends up getting binned due to fear and misconceptions about what's actually going to happen.
I hope you can be persuaded to take a positive approach to it, where you wait and see what happens. If it somehow increases congestion and traffic on your street (I really don't think it will) then at that point argue for it to be altered, using the evidence of what's actually happening, after it's been given some time to bed in.
If no particular benefit appears on your street, but you can see that it successfully creates a safer and calmer environment within the Railton Road/Poets Corner area, then argue for it to be extended to cover the North Shakespeare rd and/or Somerleyton areas.
I just hope this does not get trashed without good reason other than that those ideologically opposed to space being given over to pedestrians and cyclists take advantage of Lambeth's poor communications to wind up residents and make them scared of a whole load of stuff that just isn't going to happen.
How about support and rallying around, in this case, meaning giving it the benefit of the doubt - in spite of Lambeth's failings. You can support these interventions (which are not going to be perfect) without supporting Lambeth. You would be supporting a wide ranging effort that goes way beyond the borders of Lambeth to try and reclaim street space for the people that live on them, and do something about air quality and stop people getting killed and injured needlessly. It might sound over dramatic to say it's a once in a lifetime opportunity - but it's so difficult, in this country, to get these changes to happen, that if the moment is not seized just now, we might slip back into the grindingly slow rate of progress that has sadly been the norm in the past couple of decades.
Nivag
Well-Known Member
I hope the police will be stopping pedal bikes that break that speed limit as well
snowy_again
Slush
How would they do that when speed limits don’t apply to cycles?
lordnoise
Well-Known Member
Its a common solution - you give priority to traffic in one direction and create give way points in the road at distances apart that prevent traffic from travelling above 20 MPH. it works well in Effra Parade and other places.
Other forms of transport ? Like taking the useful P4 bus service that travels down Railton Rd away ?
Finally please stop using the pandemic as an excuse for foisting unnecessary overbearing restrictions on the movement of ordinary local people. Life for the struggling majority is bad enough at the moment and the recession will make it worse.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
"overbearing restrictions on the movement of ordinary local people"? Don't be silly.
I don't understand what you mean about the P4 bus. It doesn't go down Railton Road. It's the 322 that goes along Railton Rd isn't it? And I don't believe there's a plan to take it away - a reduction in traffic should allow it to run more smoothly.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
Effra Parade is a really quiet road with one give way place. There are already calming measures like that on Railton and the cars speed up between them, plus they are dangerous for other traffic going in the opposite direction .
Brixton had terrible pollution and congestion before the pandemic and you want to make it worse be not giving people an alternative to car travel.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
More details here:
rtstreets.commonplace.is
About Railton Neighbourhood
A space to learn about and feed into the Railton Low Traffic Neighbourhood.
rtstreets.commonplace.is
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
A minority of local people own cars.
lordnoise
Well-Known Member
You don't believe ? Please provide evidence and btw calling people names doesn't advance an argument.
sleaterkinney
Well-Known Member
60% of households don't. Page 10 of this: https://www.lambeth.gov.uk/sites/default/files/pl_Lambeth_Parking_standards_and_PTAL.pdf
lordnoise
Well-Known Member
A significant number of ordinary working people (especially with families) in our wider area of South London do own motor vehicles and rely on them to get on with daily life. The public transport system simply isn't extensive enough to cover all their needs.
These people don't have well paid jobs in the West End or City and certainly and don't have the time or energy to cycle to work.
Have we learnt nothing from the Brexit vote and an election which gave the Tories an 80 seat majority ?
Ordinary people see closing useful local roads as pointless, high handed tinkering by a council whose only focus seems to be adding yet more pain to their lives. As we come out of this pandemic and resultant recession is this the best we can do for them ?
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Wow - so a majority of all households with incomes from 20k+ have access to a car. And almost half from 15K income. That surprises me.
Not sure what proportion 20K+ households make up of total households overall but the average household income in Lambeth was 45K almost a decade ago. Median 36K. So a hefty majority for sure.
Last edited:
Winot
I wholeheartedley agree with your viewpoint
Please let me know if you disagree with any of these statements:
1. Air pollution kills thousands of people in London per year.
2. It disproportionately kills low income people.
3. A major cause of air pollution in London is caused by vehicle emissions.
4. Most low income households don’t own cars.
Now assuming you agree with those, could you explain what positive measures you would take to stop low income people dying?
teuchter
je suis teuchter
That's London as a whole - which includes outer London, and wealthier boroughs, where car ownership is a lot higher than in Lambeth.
The overall average for London is 54%, the highest is 75%, and Lambeth is at 40%.
And of course, the area around Brixton is only part of Lambeth.
Cars per household varies from 0.4 to 0.8 across Lambeth, and the wards around Brixton are all at 0.4. By comparison, Dulwich Village is at 1.0.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Well, there were a relatively small number of people who made a lot of angry noise and in an unholy alliance with the rich folk of Dulwich. "Most local people" didn't get a chance to see what the real impact would have been given the trial was canned so early and there a lot of support for it in the consultation.
So many contradictions in the complaints about this scheme.
"It's just for the benefit of the rich people in poets" - really? The two streets that are going to see the significant reductions in traffic are Shakespeare and Railton - the two 'poorest' streets with the most social housing on them. Why was that the case? because they were noisy, busy and polluted because of the traffic.
Apparently North Shakespeare is going to be 'cut off' from the schools and shops of Herne Hill (a 5-15 minute walk away, or 5 minute cycle) which is outrageous but it would be alright if that bit of the street was 'included' - (it already is, with rat running traffic removed - likely well over 3000 vehicle's a day less). Presumably that means they want the barrier moved to the north end - so they can drive the tiny distance to Herne Hill? At which point it would be 'cut off' from Loughborough Junction instead (but that's fine for some reason)
Gramsci's against it of course as the council are involved. Worth looking at what he said about the LJ scheme after it was canned - he called for schemes like this (ie low traffic neighbourhoods) and for reduction of traffic in the more middle class areas. But not as middle class as Poets Corner presumably.
Gramsci from Loughborough Junction public space improvements - consultation begins
“How supporting unrestricted access to roads for motorised traffic ( for in practise that is the position of those here who opposed the road closures) is supporting the working class is beyond me.“
“For example one of the earlier discussions here was that these road closures were in working class areas and why not reduce through traffic by doing it in "middle class" areas. Such as at Hinton road? To deter through traffic?“
“What has happened is that the Council has now caved in completely to the motorist. There will be a further statutory consultation on the "improvements" that the new steering group are formulating. My opinion is that its a farce. All suggestions to reduce road traffic have been ruled out of the discussion. So the new improvements will be motorist first, pedestrians and cyclists second.”
“Walthamstow "mini Holland”. Waltham Forest Council pushed it through despite opposition. This article suggests its becoming a success. Lambeth have effectively ditched there manifesto committment to making Lambeth a cycle and pedestrian friendly borough. I have seen the Walthamstow Mini Holland as a friend of mine lives in it. It basically stops rat runs. “
Last edited:
Rushy
basically a scrotum
I find it hard to get my head around figures like this. There are 3,000 through or rat run journeys daily (on top of local journeys) on Shakespeare Road which will be cut out? That's one every 20s from 6am to 9pm - not including any locally starting / ending journeys such as all the depot traffic. I tend to avoid peak hours but I have always found that road pretty quiet. Is that an actual figure?
And I don't know the workings of the waste depot and council facility but isn't the argument people are making that the number of HGV journeys to and from the depot will remain unaffected except that, instead of journeys being split north and south, they will inevitably be 100% "filtered" to the north?
prunus
Tick tock.
There doesn't appear to be a count point for Shakespeare Road; for comparison for how they 'feel', if you know them: the north end of Milkwood Road seems to average about 6000-7000 motor vehicles a day - the south end more like 5000. Dulwich Road near the junction with Shakespeare Road about 12000.
Map Road traffic statistics - Road traffic statistics
Have fun
(Warning - one can spend hours on that site)
editor
hiraethified
According to that site, Milkwood gets more traffic that Brixton Road!There doesn't appear to be a count point for Shakespeare Road; for comparison for how they 'feel', if you know them: the north end of Milkwood Road seems to average about 6000-7000 motor vehicles a day - the south end more like 5000. Dulwich Road near the junction with Shakespeare Road about 12000.
Map Road traffic statistics - Road traffic statistics
Have fun
prunus
Tick tock.
I don't think so; Brixton Road is ~20k. The number in the screenshot above is the id of the count point not the count (although possibly I'm obtusely missing the joke...)
editor
hiraethified
Ah sorry - no I honestly couldn't makes sense of the map. If I click on a marker I just get these numbers pop up and that's it. What am I missing?
Rushy
basically a scrotum
Luckily I can't seem to get the map to load just now!There doesn't appear to be a count point for Shakespeare Road; for comparison for how they 'feel', if you know them: the north end of Milkwood Road seems to average about 6000-7000 motor vehicles a day - the south end more like 5000. Dulwich Road near the junction with Shakespeare Road about 12000.
Map Road traffic statistics - Road traffic statistics
Have fun
I'll try again later.
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
So, a very quick estimate from Google earth I reckon there might be 150 residential properties on Shakespeare North. Some are houses which will be split into flats. but let's call it 250 households. Lambeth stats say about 40% will have a car. That's 100 cars and actually that looks about the number that can be seen on google earth as well. Look around your streets and you'll see most cars don't actually move every day - commute share by car in Lambeth is less than 10% but we want to make this number high so lets say every car makes 1 trip every day as an assumption. That's 200 car movements by residents each day (one out, one back).
Add deliveries to that. There must be a dozen different courier companies. plus the post office, Plus veg boxes and a few Amazon drivers and supermarket home delivery. But surely not more than 50 vans coming each day so add another 100 movements.
Add some takeaway deliveries - 10% of homes day (I'm sure it's nothing like that high). 50 movements.
Add some carers and visitors.
We're still below 400 vehicle movements a day for residents who live on the street and that's probably a significant over estimate.
And of course, the residents at the north end don't drive past the homes on southern end so the road gets progressively quieter the further south you go.
the DFT figures aren't great - if you dig into them you'll find most years are estimates BUT lambeth took counts for the 20mph introduction in 2017 (and before in 2015) using those rubber strips in the street and they are accurate. Thats where the 3600 comes (combined count of both directions) What does the data say?
It looks like it separates it by number of axles so 14 HGVs a day (do these already all go north because of the height restriction on the bridge?) and 26 'trucks'. The only category that should be increasing on Shakespeare North is that 26 (but that includes the bin lorries and their routes routes are unchanged).
Rushy
basically a scrotum
OK, so the 3600 is a real measured figure. I have no idea how to estimate the resident associated traffic but nothing you guessed sounds immediately unreasonable. The rest is all a bit vague, isn't it. Local collection bin lorries should account for 2 movements a week. It's a waste management depot and skip lorries are largely 2 axel - there are 300 large 2 axel vehicles a day. They do go under the bridge. I can see why people would want to be sure that this had been looked at.So, a very quick estimate from Google earth I reckon there might be 150 residential properties on Shakespeare North. Some are houses which will be split into flats. but let's call it 250 households. Lambeth stats say about 40% will have a car. That's 100 cars and actually that looks about the number that can be seen on google earth as well. Look around your streets and you'll see most cars don't actually move every day - commute share by car in Lambeth is less than 10% but we want to make this number high so lets say every car makes 1 trip every day as an assumption. That's 200 car movements by residents each day (one out, one back).
Add deliveries to that. There must be a dozen different courier companies. plus the post office, Plus veg boxes and a few Amazon drivers and supermarket home delivery. But surely not more than 50 vans coming each day so add another 100 movements.
Add some takeaway deliveries - 10% of homes day (I'm sure it's nothing like that high). 50 movements.
Add some carers and visitors.
We're still below 400 vehicle movements a day for residents who live on the street and that's probably a significant over estimate.
And of course, the residents at the north end don't drive past the homes on southern end so the road gets progressively quieter the further south you go.
the DFT figures aren't great - if you dig into them you'll find most years are estimates BUT lambeth took counts for the 20mph introduction in 2017 (and before in 2015) using those rubber strips in the street and they are accurate. Thats where the 3600 comes (combined count of both directions) What does the data say?
It looks like it separates it by number of axles so 14 HGVs a day (do these already all go north because of the height restriction on the bridge?) and 26 'trucks'. The only category that should be increasing on Shakespeare North is that 26 (but that includes the bin lorries and their routes routes are unchanged).
prunus
Tick tock.
You should get a side panel like this:
Which you then click on download the data to get the detail:
thebackrow
Considerably more Brixton.
Is it only local bin lorries? I thought the Bin Lorry depot was on Shakespeare but the site runs through to Somerleyton Road (I went to the site once and entered on foot via Shakespeare). Looking at google maps it's entrance only on Shakespeare but it actually looks like entrance AND exit on Somerleyton.
I think you're right on the large 2 axle vehicles - I'd read that category as 'Transit vans' (so assumed it would be the 50 I estimated above and a load of rat running vans) but it would presumably include the flatbed transit based waste collection trucks as well so maybe that category wouldn't drop as much .
So maybe its a few hundred vehicles more than that 400 estimate and it obviously needs monitoring. Apparently the skip site has already been sold and it's going to become housing but of course finding somewhere else for it to go in the borough isn't going to be easy. The proposed site up at West Norwood is next to a school and of course other peoples homes.
Similar threads
