Loughborough Junction public space improvements - consultation begins

[ChrisSouth]

When this thing is presented as an argument between the rights of motorists versus children singing as they walk to school under cherry blossom trees, I find myself totally agreeing with .. teuchter.
Thing is I don't think this particular scheme is any good.
I think alternatives still to be discussed and looked at by Lambeth could be a lot better for Loughborough Junction, for cycling, for public transport users.

I think it's a mistake to reduce the discussion to, basically, cars versus humans, because it means the pros and cons and alternatives to this particular scheme get completely left out of the conversation.

But that's what you've assisted in reducing it to.

 

[bimble]

The present scheme, which cuts off one end (for only 38 yrds) of a wide arterial road suitable for vehicles has already been relaid recently with wide cycle lanes in both directions and was perfectly safe for cyclists. Now it isn't safe.

Agree. As do the many cyclists who have taken the time to comment and express their opposition to this particular scheme.

 

[bimble]

But that's what you've assisted in reducing it to.

I'm sorry you think so. Never my intention (I'm someone opposed to this scheme who has never had a driving license).

 

[critical1]

I don't know about this development, but on a broader level it's a huge shame that in the UK we can't get it together to make safe cycle routes to schools. It's no wonder gangs can get a foothold when people don't feel safe walking and cycling in their neighbourhood. Streets dominated by cars do nothing to make our streets feel welcome.

I lived in Amsterdam where most kids cycle to school. It can only be helpful for both kids and parents if they have the opportunity to get to school under their own steam and inclination, rather than being dependant on a parent and oil.

I'm sure you can't compare this neighbourhood to the one in this thread, but I found this video illustrating how different our streets could be if we started to design them for people.

So gangs on bikes will now steal and upgrade bikes etc.. and make quick getaways and the elderly will do what exactly, considering we now have a large elderly & disabled population approaching, what should they do. Without the required infrastructure?

 

[fredfelt]

Surprising as it may sound to some posters here, I'm all in favour of redesigning to have more cycleways to encourage and enable more cycling from those both young and older who are able to do so: but not everyone can and it's not always feasible - it's difficult to cycle safely with school bags/sports kit/musical instrument/a model village you've done for homework, all of which is done in the pouring rain. One has to realise that vehicles need to be used for all sorts of reasons. I support the superhighway scheme in central london, with its concept of shared but separated use of the highway so that motors and cycles can co-exist - making it safe for the casual cyclist is important if you want to encourage more of them - again it's not always feasible for me to cycle if I have several lever arch files of paper to lug around. The present scheme, which cuts off one end (for only 38 yrds) of a wide arterial road suitable for vehicles has already been relaid recently with wide cycle lanes in both directions and was perfectly safe for cyclists. Now it isn't safe. The BBC news clip shows this. Additionally it has cut off those who live south of the block from getting anywhere north, and kettled those who live north of the block (there are still lines of parked cars all along so the suggested that this is low car ownership is a redherring) and its important to remember the longer part of LR is still used by motor vehicles -but then it comes to dead end where the 38 yards of space has no discernable benefit that I can see.

It's all about having the opportunity to use the right tool for the job. If you have luggage then clearly a bike is not always the best option. There's also no point in putting in badly designed cycle facilities - they should be central to any street design, rather than an afterthought.

 

[bimble]

What on earth is going on just aheAd of the lady with the wicker basket though.. Is someone on a wheelchair being mugged because the cobblestones are impeding his getaway?

 

[fredfelt]

So gangs on bikes will now steal and upgrade bikes etc.. and make quick getaways and the elderly will do what exactly, considering we now have a large elderly & disabled population approaching, what should they do. Without the required infrastructure?

Holland's streets are particularly well suited to the elderly and disabled. Wide flat cycle paths, the standard in Holland, are suitable for wheelchairs and other motility scooters.

You also shouldn't overlook the benefits cycling has for an aging population. Many ailments are delayed, even relieved through cycling. For example people with some forms of Arthritis and parkinson's struggle to walk a few steps, but regain their mobility give the option of a save environment to cycle.

I've no experience of gangs on bikes! Do they take advantage of streets devoid of people to do their gang things?

 

[critical1]

Imogen Walker (deputy leader of the council) has stepped in to say that yesterday's message (from the deputy mayor) - the one saying the trial will now continue uninterrupted until March- was.. just wrong:


View attachment 79225


PS. The big digital £130 signs have disappeared from the junction, they were still there last night.

Cllr Imogen Walker
Strange how the Deputy Mayor couldn't tell us themselves... Maybe what was said, was true....

 

[CH1]

I made that clear in my first post. Read my posts and you should realise that I'm speaking on general terms.

I don't currently live in Holland - but living there had made it very clear to me how discriminatory and isolating it is to plan urban areas around the motor car.

You don't live in Loughborough either though do you?

On the one hand people from outside the area, many of whom are totally unfamiliar with it prescribe solutions, or support unsuitable council "solutions" with no local knowledge and not having to live with the consequences.

Then you have the LJAGers, a group of well meaning middle class activists who live in the posher owner occupied streets. Many are relative newcomers to the area, but are seeking to do their bit for the community.

In this particular case they have been seduced by the utopian vision of a pedestrian and cyclists paradise, but failed to carry the bulk of residents with them. Residents many of who are used to living a certain way - as they have indeed for the last 50 or more years. Including cars.

I think that you, sir or madam, if you live in Lambeth, could consider doing your bit by pounding the pavements and getting elected as a Labour councillor here next 2018 for the good of our community.

Meanwhile we do have three Labour councillors here who have not exactly given the road scheme a vote of confidence. Far from it - two have called the scheme into scrutiny, one gave a residents petition to the council AGAINST.

Finally the third councillor is currently Mayor of Lambeth and therefore non-partisan this civic year. The Mayor did however award LJAG a prize as Voluntary Organisation of the Year 2014/15.

If this were Lewes some of LJAG might be with the Mayor on a bonfire in effigy like Cameron and his pig, never mind civic award.

 

[LadyV]

I can imagine residents on the Loughborough Estate having an effigy of Jennifer Braithwaite and George for their bonfire!

 

[fredfelt]

You don't live in Loughborough either though do you?

On the one hand people from outside the area, many of whom are totally unfamiliar with it prescribe solutions, or support unsuitable council "solutions" with no local knowledge and not having to live with the consequences.

Then you have the LJAGers, a group of well meaning middle class activists who live in the posher owner occupied streets. Many are relative newcomers to the area, but are seeking to do their nit for the community.

In this particular case they have been seduced by the utopian vision of a pedestrian and cyclists paradise, but failed to carry the bulk of residents with them. Residents many of who are used to living a certain way - as they have indeed for the last 50 or more years. Including cars.

I think that you, sir or madam, if you live in Lambeth, could consider doing your bit by pounding the pavements and getting elected as a Labour councillor here next 2018 for the good of our community.

Meanwhile we do have three Labour councillors here who have not exactly given the road scheme a vote of confidence. Far from it - two have called the scheme into scrutiny, one gave a residents petition to the council AGAINST.

Finally the third councillor is currently Mayor of Lambeth and therefore non-partisan this civic year. The Mayor did however award LJAG a prize as Voluntary Organisation of the Year 2014/15.

If this were Lewes some of LJAG might be with the Mayor on a bonfire in effigy like Cameron and his pig, never mind civic award.
View attachment 79229

Out of interest have you ever lived in a country where, for example, you take it for granted that your children are safe to cycle to school?

Sorry, I'm not really in a position to engage with you in the specifics of this plan. I don't know the area.

 

[teuchter]

Residents many of who are used to living a certain way - as they have indeed for the last 50 or more years. Including cars.

So we mustn't ever try to change anything. The arguments for the benefits of changing things might be strong, but people are used to doing things a certain way, so let's just ignore those benefits and carry on as we are.

 

[critical1]

What on earth is going on just aheAd of the lady with the wicker basket though.. Is someone on a wheelchair being mugged because the cobblestones are impeding his getaway?

If its in Lambeth yep, knife crime is up 29% here... so expect a lot of issues, in relation to crime and ASB

 

[bimble]

If its in Lambeth yep, knife crime is up 29% here... so expect a lot of issues, in relation to crime and ASB

Sadly that's what the police seem to think too, when I've spoken to any of them they have voiced concerns about increased crime as a result of the closures.

 

[leanderman]

it's difficult to cycle safely with school bags/sports kit/musical instrument/a model village you've done for homework, all of which is done in the pouring rain. One has to realise that vehicles need to be used for all sorts of reasons.

I understand your points about the closure, which make sense.

Except the bit above. More than half of people don't need cars. They cope.

And if you can't cycle to school, you walk or take the bus.

Driving to school is polluting, unhealthy, bad for the environment, slows other traffic such as buses etc etc.

 

[critical1]

I understand your points about the closure, which make sense.

Except the bit above. More than half of people don't need cars. They cope.

And if you can't cycle to school, you walk or take the bus.

Driving to school is polluting, unhealthy, bad for the environment, slows other traffic such as buses etc etc.

That is why you have the school bus...

 

[CH1]

Out of interest have you ever lived in a country where, for example, you take it for granted that your children are safe to cycle to school?

Sorry, I'm not really in a position to engage with you in the specifics of this plan. I don't know the area.

This is obviously a trick question. I don't have any children - so cannot comment literally.

However its horses for course isn't it?

I can think of lots of places in Ghana where cycling would be completely safe. But not Kumasi, or Obuasi round the gold mines. Or anywhere in Accra.

 

[teuchter]

The present scheme, which cuts off one end (for only 38 yrds) of a wide arterial road suitable for vehicles has already been relaid recently with wide cycle lanes in both directions and was perfectly safe for cyclists. Now it isn't safe.

Why do you say it is now less safe than before?



And these are not "wide cycle lanes". It's better than nothing because at least it indicates to drivers that cyclists have a right to the road. But those lanes are maybe a metre wide, and using them in heavy traffic you are compressed between the door zone of the parked cars and the traffic - two wide vehicles passing each other on that road will be right up to the cycle lane (and in reality probably infringing on it). Like I say it's better than nothing but it's not an arrangement that is very encouraging to those wary of cycling on the road.

(there are still lines of parked cars all along so the suggested that this is low car ownership is a redherring)

What's that supposed to mean? You'd only be convinced that the low levels of car owndership were real if there were no cars parked on the road? Do you dispute the statistics that suggest onwership is somewhere around 20%?

20% of 10000 households is still 2,000 cars. Still enough to fill up a lot of space that coudl be used for other things.

 

[fredfelt]

...

Driving to school is polluting, unhealthy, bad for the environment, slows other traffic such as buses etc etc.

I have a friend who works for an organisation which quantifies such things. Air pollution takes six months off the average life expectancy in this country. The distribution is very wide so in the most polluted areas it's several years. Children are particularly susceptible to the dangers of filthy air.

 

[bimble]

Why do you say it is now less safe than before?

Like I say it's better than nothing but it's not an arrangement that is very encouraging to those wary of cycling on the road.

Just speaking as a wary cyclist.. It's not Loughborough Rd itself that feels 'less safe', it's just everywhere else (the junction, coldharbour lane, my own street also with the unexpected reversing vehicles and so on).

 

[fredfelt]

Why do you say it is now less safe than before?

View attachment 79235

And these are not "wide cycle lanes". It's better than nothing because at least it indicates to drivers that cyclists have a right to the road. But those lanes are maybe a metre wide, and using them in heavy traffic you are compressed between the door zone of the parked cars and the traffic - two wide vehicles passing each other on that road will be right up to the cycle lane (and in reality probably infringing on it). Like I say it's better than nothing but it's not an arrangement that is very encouraging to those wary of cycling on the road.




What's that supposed to mean? You'd only be convinced that the low levels of car owndership were real if there were no cars parked on the road? Do you dispute the statistics that suggest onwership is somewhere around 20%?

20% of 10000 households is still 2,000 cars. Still enough to fill up a lot of space that coudl be used for other things.

That's a picture of the road after it's been redesigned?

I'd be tempted to say no provision would be better than a narrow cycle lane in the 'door zone'.

 

[teuchter]

Just speaking as a wary cyclist.. It's not Loughborough Rd itself that feels 'less safe', it's just everywhere else (the junction, coldharbour lane, my own street also with the unexpected reversing vehicles and so on).

So assuming that things settle down over time *if* they do, and CHL traffic gets back to levels similar to pre-closures, and people learn the new layout so aren't turning around in your street...*overall* things would be better?

 

[CH1]

So we mustn't ever try to change anything. The arguments for the benefits of changing things might be strong, but people are used to doing things a certain way, so let's just ignore those benefits and carry on as we are.

I believe in consent. I sacked my last GP because he stuck a needle in me with Flu vaccine in it. Without my consent. Wish I'd taken him to the GMC or something.

I do not like being violated - and I don't like my area being violated either.

It may be for my and their own good. But the people potentially affected must agree and consent willingly.

We live here under a de-facto date-rape council - and you are defending their corner cutting and immorality because it coincides with your environmental ideals.

Major changes to people's lives MUST be properly discussed and agreed to by the people concerned.

 

[bimble]

So assuming that things settle down over time *if* they do, and CHL traffic gets back to levels similar to pre-closures, and people learn the new layout so aren't turning around in your street...*overall* things would be better?

If CHL traffic turns out to be unchanged and if the confusion disappears.. it will be about the same as before I guess, for me as a wary cyclist. Apart from the 20 seconds or so of the closed LR, which are improved?

 

[critical1]

What's that supposed to mean? You'd only be convinced that the low levels of car owndership were real if there were no cars parked on the road? Do you dispute the statistics that suggest onwership is somewhere around 20%?

20% of 10000 households is still 2,000 cars. Still enough to fill up a lot of space that coudl be used for other things.

Stats are simple things... Loughborough has the highest population density in Lambeth, with a majority living in Tower Blocks, High density Housing Lambeth calls it.
So care ownership is low compared to the density of population, that is all.
It does not mean that residents do not owns cars....

 

[teuchter]

That's a picture of the road after it's been redesigned?

Yes - here is the "before" picture




This is why I am getting frustrated with people going on about how we've already had all these great improvements for cyclists, and that this scheme is overly radical - no, what we have had is minor fiddling about in a way that is designed to work around having virtually no impact on things for drivers. This is what much of the cycling provision in london looks like - narrow lanes or just bikes painted on the road. It's not enough to change people's habits substantially. The cycle superhighways (although not in all parts of them) are much more ambitious and courageous because they actually properly reclaim a portion of the road. People are moaning about the one along the embankment, but it's a substantial enough alteration that I think it really will encourage people to use bikes more to get into the city. I sometimes use the Boris bikes for example, but going east-west through the city is not that pleasant at the moment so in many cases I wouldn't use them for such journeys. However, once that "superhighway" is done, I think I definitely will use it as a travel option much more. And that's one more passenger off the crowded tube.

 

[fredfelt]

I believe in consent. I sacked my last GP because he stuck a needle in me with Flu vaccine in it. Without my consent. Wish I'd taken him to the GMC or something.

I do not like being violated - and I don't like my area being violated either.

It may be for my and their own good. But the people potentially affected must agree and consent willingly.

We live here under a de-facto date-rape council - and you are defending their corner cutting and immorality because it coincides with your environmental ideals.

Major changes to people's lives MUST be properly discussed and agreed to by the people concerned.

An environmental ideal? I'd say that the status quo where 1/5 of people in London suffer premature death due to air pollution is a violation.

If you want to use superlatives like a 'date-rape council' I'd suggest we can also use 'murdering motorists'

 

[teuchter]

Stats are simple things... Loughborough has the highest population density in Lambeth, with a majority living in Tower Blocks, High density Housing Lambeth calls it.
So care ownership is low compared to the density of population, that is all.
It does not mean that residents do not owns cars....

Thanks so much for explaining this.

 

[teuchter]

If CHL traffic turns out to be unchanged and if the confusion disappears.. it will be about the same as before I guess, for me as a wary cyclist. Apart from the 20 seconds or so of the closed LR, which are improved?

But as a wary cyclist - with lots of improved sections like the LR road stretch connected together, if that means that potentially 80% of your ride to get to, say, the south bank, is on quiet streets, instead of 25%, wouldn't that make you much more likely to consider using a bike for such a journey?

 

[CH1]

An environmental ideal? I'd say that the status quo where 1/5 of people in London suffer premature death due to air pollution is a violation.

If you want to use superlatives like a 'date-rape council' I'd suggest we can also use 'murdering motorists'

I agree about air pollution. But why has it taken 100 years to act on this?
I guess it probably took 150 years to deal with coal though didn't it.

But the argument you are using is specious.

Air pollution caused by cars is a dangerous medical nuisance.
The Loughborough road closure will stop some vehicles using part of Loughborough Road.
Therefore the closure is merited on health grounds, whatever other factors apply.

Personally I feel you would need a Master of the Rolls like Lord Denning to get away with such an argument in court.