Loughborough Junction public space improvements - consultation begins

[critical1]

Heads will roll....

AC Waugh - Cycled to home last night and to work this morning feeling I had been chain smoking. That's a shame given that I last smoked as a student and I want to think that cycling is good for me. Brixton Road was especially bad as the buses were backed up a very long way, but still spewing diesel emissions ++.

Many cyclists were getting off and walking along the pavement but I thought I would stick it out along with other cyclists breathing the air from the buses in front and behind me. This is the problem with the creation of what Lambeth Cycling call "the Cell" that stretches from Brixton Road in the West, Coldharbour Lane to the South East and Camberwell New Road to the north.
All of these roads are jammed (they were before and it is even worse now) and all major roads leading off them are more often gridlocked at peak times. No-one at the Council or at Lambeth Cyclists/LCC seems to have asked where the traffic was meant to go when Loughborough Road was shut to traffic given that the surrounding roads were already at their capacity.
These are the roads buses, vans, ambulances and cars all need, but which we also need to cycle along (assuming we want to leave the Cell). And even within the Cell the pollution can only drift in the air (not even Lambeth Council can stop the wind).

I felt for the woman who posted on the Change.org petition that she cannot now open her child's bedroom window because of her child's asthma (itself a life-threatening condition).
The carrots on Loughborough farm may taste better, but being on the other side of the railway line cannot stop the pollution they absorb.
I would buy one of those black masks to wear but they do nothing for NO2 levels - of which Brixton had among the highest level in London and Europe before this mad scheme. God only knows what they are now.

 

[critical1]

The silence is deafening..... But here our local Cllr speaks volumes.

Dear Mr King

Thank you very much for getting in touch with us about the road closures. I take all your points on board, and wanted to let you know that thousands of other local residents and businesses have said similar things.

I opposed the closures when they were first suggested as it seemed to me that they had been poorly thought through, and most importantly that "the community had not been consulted. Unfortunately my worst fears have come to pass and the scheme has proved to be a disaster."

I am pleased to say that Cllr Brathwaite as the responsible cabinet member has agreed to bring the review date for the scheme forwards and is due to make a decision about whether or not to continue the 'experimental' scheme this Thursday 19th November. It is my hope that she will listen to the huge number of people asking her to stop the scheme now and do exactly that.

With kind regards,

Councillor Rachel Heywood

 

[CH1]

The closures have been scrapped - apart from Calais St and Padfield Road.

Having examined all the evidence presented in the eight-week review report, I have taken the decision to re-open Loughborough Road, Barrington Road, Lilford Road and Gordon Grove from Wednesday 25 November.

Padfield Road and Calais Street will remain closed under a new Experimental Traffic Management Order.

The road closures were part of a wider vision to improve the public space in Loughborough Junction, make it a safer and more pleasant place to live and help the area become a destination in its own right, rather than a busy through road for traffic to and from central London.

That ambition for Loughborough Junction is clearly shared, even though it appears that a majority of residents remain opposed to particular road closures.

It was important to trial this ambitious scheme as an experiment so we could monitor the impacts closely.

Having reviewed the evidence and listened to a wide variety of people in the area; it is clear that changes are needed but that the ultimate vision remains.

I hope to utilise the passion and strength of opinion that has been demonstrated on all sides over the last few months and bring people together to help guide the future of Loughborough Junction.

Over the coming weeks I will invite representatives from local businesses, ward councillors, community groups including LJAG, Loughborough Estate Management Board, Loughborough Estate TRA and the newly formed LJ Road Madness to join me and council officers on a steering group to begin the design work for public space improvements.

We will start with an open mind and welcome all ideas and contributions; there is money to spend from Transport for London, which if we work together and get it right, can make a positive and lasting difference to Loughborough Junction.

The experimental nature of the road closures made it difficult to communicate the wider benefits and vision for the area, and signage in some areas at the start of the trial was either unclear or ignored. Also, by focusing communications on the residents of Loughborough Junction, road users who travel through the area from further afield felt uninformed which undoubtedly led to confusion in the early stages.

However, it is clear from the review that more people are making journeys by foot and by bicycle through the area and I sincerely hope that continues.

Eight weeks was not enough time to provide any empirical evidence regarding response times and the Ambulance Service and Police did not oppose the continuation of the scheme, but the recent formal objection raised by the London Fire Brigade and anecdotal reports of increasing response times cannot be ignored.

That is why we will reopen Loughborough Road, Barrington Road, Lilford Road and Gordon Grove.

The process of removing signs and road markings will take a few days so to avoid confusion all restrictions will remain in place until Wednesday 25 November.

The full report, which includes traffic survey data, official submissions from the emergency services and other important groups, a summary of public representations and the results of survey work undertaken by the Stockwell Partnership, is published below.

• Loughborough Junction Review Report

Loughborough Junction Masterplan
Last updated on Thursday 19 November 2015

 

[critical1]

Breaking NEWS...

Cllr Jenifer Braithwaite...
"Having examined all the evidence presented in the eight-week review report, I have taken the decision to re-open Loughborough Road, Barrington Road, Lilford Road and Gordon Grove from Wednesday 25 November."

Loughborough junction - what you need to know | Lambeth Council

 

[bimble]

 

[bimble]

I think that's a great letter / statement.
Could be headed "Loughborough junction public space improvement : Consultation Begins."

 

[LadyV]

The closures have been scrapped - apart from Calais St and Padfield Road.

Having examined all the evidence presented in the eight-week review report, I have taken the decision to re-open Loughborough Road, Barrington Road, Lilford Road and Gordon Grove from Wednesday 25 November.

Padfield Road and Calais Street will remain closed under a new Experimental Traffic Management Order.

The road closures were part of a wider vision to improve the public space in Loughborough Junction, make it a safer and more pleasant place to live and help the area become a destination in its own right, rather than a busy through road for traffic to and from central London.

That ambition for Loughborough Junction is clearly shared, even though it appears that a majority of residents remain opposed to particular road closures.

It was important to trial this ambitious scheme as an experiment so we could monitor the impacts closely.

Having reviewed the evidence and listened to a wide variety of people in the area; it is clear that changes are needed but that the ultimate vision remains.

I hope to utilise the passion and strength of opinion that has been demonstrated on all sides over the last few months and bring people together to help guide the future of Loughborough Junction.

Over the coming weeks I will invite representatives from local businesses, ward councillors, community groups including LJAG, Loughborough Estate Management Board, Loughborough Estate TRA and the newly formed LJ Road Madness to join me and council officers on a steering group to begin the design work for public space improvements.

We will start with an open mind and welcome all ideas and contributions; there is money to spend from Transport for London, which if we work together and get it right, can make a positive and lasting difference to Loughborough Junction.

The experimental nature of the road closures made it difficult to communicate the wider benefits and vision for the area, and signage in some areas at the start of the trial was either unclear or ignored. Also, by focusing communications on the residents of Loughborough Junction, road users who travel through the area from further afield felt uninformed which undoubtedly led to confusion in the early stages.

However, it is clear from the review that more people are making journeys by foot and by bicycle through the area and I sincerely hope that continues.

Eight weeks was not enough time to provide any empirical evidence regarding response times and the Ambulance Service and Police did not oppose the continuation of the scheme, but the recent formal objection raised by the London Fire Brigade and anecdotal reports of increasing response times cannot be ignored.

That is why we will reopen Loughborough Road, Barrington Road, Lilford Road and Gordon Grove.

The process of removing signs and road markings will take a few days so to avoid confusion all restrictions will remain in place until Wednesday 25 November.

The full report, which includes traffic survey data, official submissions from the emergency services and other important groups, a summary of public representations and the results of survey work undertaken by the Stockwell Partnership, is published below.

• Loughborough Junction Review Report

Loughborough Junction Masterplan
Last updated on Thursday 19 November 2015

Interesting that Ambulance and Police did not oppose the continuation of the scheme but the Fire Brigade did, that would be the nail in the coffin I would imagine. If they hadn't said anything I bet she might have pushed to leave them in place for the rest of the trial. My dad who is ex fire brigade said that it would come down to the emergency services, if they didn't object it would continue but the second one of them complain, the council can't ignore them.

Wonder how they are going to engage with the community and other road users to collect other ideas and contributions, we should refer them to here, we've had a few over the last 12 months

 

[Brixton Hatter]

Gutted.

A victory for pollution, congestion, traffic and dangerous streets.

 

[DJWrongspeed]

Gutted.

A victory for pollution, congestion, traffic and dangerous streets.

Agree , I hope they can rethink the scheme and make a better implementation. As it says the "Ambulance Service and Police did not oppose the continuation of the scheme." i feel like traffic is getting worse not better sometimes.

 

[bimble]

The ambulance service and police as far as I know were both strongly opposed but not much point arguing about that now.

 

[Crispy]

What a total fucking shambles

 

[Gramsci]

Agree , I hope they can rethink the scheme and make a better implementation. As it says the "Ambulance Service and Police did not oppose the continuation of the scheme." i feel like traffic is getting worse not better sometimes.

Realistically that is not going to happen.

Brixton Hatter is blunt but correct. This is a victory for the motorist and a set back to make London a city less dominated by motorised traffic.

Having attended public meetings and here it never was just about road closures. It was also mixed up with fears of gentrification ( correct imo).

It was a mistake by Council to link traffic calming/ road closures to making LJ a "destination". As I told LJAG last night the people on the Estate did not want a "parklet".

I was talking to a Council Tenant from another estate in Lambeth about LJ road closures (she is active in there TRA)- she said anything to do with parking and cars leads to ructions. And she was saying this as non car owner who is pro public transport and reducing dominance of car.

 

[Gramsci]

Gutted.

A victory for pollution, congestion, traffic and dangerous streets.

I agree. This was flawed scheme. But for once the Council were at least trying.

One can however feel better at success of the Cycle Superhighway. Im not a Tory but Boris pushed this forward against a lot of opposition.

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.

This all does show that "green" issues do not fit easily with class issues. Though imo opinion they are complementary.

 

[teuchter]

The ambulance service and police as far as I know were both strongly opposed but not much point arguing about that now.

The report demonstrates that they weren't. The idea that the ambulance service were opposed was widely circulated by various people as "fact" but as I suspected that idea was manufactured. As with many other objections.

I wonder if a lot of people living along Loughborough Road will shortly find themselves a little surprised by how much traffic has appeared on their doorsteps, having got used to it not being there.

 

[Gramsci]

The ones living in Loughborough road from fiveways to Brixton road will. As its been lot less gridlocked in morning due to less traffic.

 

[teuchter]

By the way I noted that in the report, the Fire Brigade's justification for their objection to the continuation of the scheme included mention of "gridlock" on various roads, including Herne Hill Road. There has not been "gridlock" on Herne Hill Rd. I'm pretty sure about that because I see it from my window every day.

 

[ricbake]

The public responses to the early review showed 44% of people making more journeys by foot and bicycle. It is a shame that the hysterical reaction of people being asked to adapt to an experiment demonstrating what is an essential policy of central and local government is to be lost.
Certainly it could have been done very much better but it was done the way it was and should have been given enough time to be properly assessed.
The police and ambulance service did not comment on the closures. Unofficially ambulance personel and hospital personel commented because it affected their journeys to work.
There is a real need for a reduction in car journeys in this area.

 

[Gramsci]

I felt for the woman who posted on the Change.org petition that she cannot now open her child's bedroom window because of her child's asthma (itself a life-threatening condition).
The carrots on Loughborough farm may taste better, but being on the other side of the railway line cannot stop the pollution they absorb.
I would buy one of those black masks to wear but they do nothing for NO2 levels - of which Brixton had among the highest level in London and Europe before this mad scheme. God only knows what they are now.

In which case a local resident has called for the proposed Ultra Low Emission Zone to be extended to Lambeth. Would you support this?

 

[Gramsci]

Wonder how they are going to engage with the community and other road users to collect other ideas and contributions, we should refer them to here, we've had a few over the last 12 months

And what do you suggest?

What I am no longer clear about is the position of the those here who opposed from the start this experiment.

From opposing this scheme appears to me that it slipped into opposing any reduction of car traffic. That roads should be left open so motorised traffic can find its way through London in the most "efficient" manner. That any interference with this will produce problems.

So my question is do you oppose changes to road use that will affect motorised traffic?

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?

 

[critical1]

By the way I noted that in the report, the Fire Brigade's justification for their objection to the continuation of the scheme included mention of "gridlock" on various roads, including Herne Hill Road. There has not been "gridlock" on Herne Hill Rd. I'm pretty sure about that because I see it from my window every day.

But yet St James Cress is an Isle of tranquillity as observed by yourself and refuted by the many who live there.

 

[critical1]

The public responses to the early review showed 44% of people making more journeys by foot and bicycle. It is a shame that the hysterical reaction of people being asked to adapt to an experiment demonstrating what is an essential policy of central and local government is to be lost.
Certainly it could have been done very much better but it was done the way it was and should have been given enough time to be properly assessed.
The police and ambulance service did not comment on the closures. Unofficially ambulance personel and hospital personel commented because it affected their journeys to work.
There is a real need for a reduction in car journeys in this area.

The question is 44% of what sample and what was the base line before?

 

[critical1]

And what do you suggest?

What I am no longer clear about is the position of the those here who opposed from the start this experiment.

From opposing this scheme appears to me that it slipped into opposing any reduction of car traffic. That roads should be left open so motorised traffic can find its way through London in the most "efficient" manner. That any interference with this will produce problems.

So my question is do you oppose changes to road use that will affect motorised traffic?

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?

Roads should be used as roads and pavements as pavements.....

Until infrastructure improves and the death of the MegaCity, it will be so.

 

[critical1]

.......The police and ambulance service did not comment on the closures. Unofficially ambulance personel and hospital personel commented because it affected their journeys to work.
There is a real need for a reduction in car journeys in this area.

I think you'll find yourself sadly misinformed, the Ambulance service was never about personal journeys... unless your talking about your personal 999 call outs?

 

[Gramsci]

Roads should be used as roads and pavements as pavements.....

Until infrastructure improves and the death of the MegaCity, it will be so.

Not an answer. Meaningless post.

To edit. It answers what I thought. That some of those who opposed the road closures said they want reduction in traffic, but not this scheme, but in reality support the status quo in a fatalistic there is nothing that can be done kind of way.

 

[critical1]

Not an answer. Meaningless post.

To edit. It answers what I thought. That some of those who opposed the road closures said they want reduction in traffic, but not this scheme, but in reality support the status quo in a fatalistic there is nothing that can be done kind of way.

Why didnt you initialy say what you thought, rather than attempt to bait! if that was your initial intention.

The status quo is as you say not so fatalistic as totally ephemeral, these road closures should have as several have said previously been consulted on, this would have obviously opened a fantastic array of traffic calming measures which may not have included road closures. It's imperative that roads serve a function is it not. A Road is indeed a road and serves its purpose well, it most certainly not for picnics or making "parklets" but if that's what they want let em ave it!

Ideally it would be great to have all electric vehicles, cycles.. but the reality is we're not yet at that point.. maybe one day. No more Blood Lithium please.
"The War is Worth Waging": Afghanistan's Vast Reserves of Minerals and Natural Gas

 

[alfajobrob]

Teuchter is too polite.

I'll just come out and call you all cunts. I don't even cycle anymore but hope you rot in traffic and your children enjoy all the stunted growth and asthma that traffic brings.

Enjoy your car journey and bless the kids

 

[ricbake]

I think you'll find yourself sadly misinformed, the Ambulance service was never about personal journeys... unless your talking about your personal 999 call outs?

There was no representation on any official level from the ambulance service.
The paramedic who stood up at that meeting was unable to be contacted afterwards because although he was in uniform he was giving his own opinion.
Just another car driver objecting to having his commute altered.
If you have any evidence to the contrary please let us see it.

 

[ChrisSouth]

I think that's a great letter / statement.
Could be headed "Loughborough junction public space improvement : Consultation Begins."

Fuck that. I hope it's the end of the consultation and LJ Road becomes a car superhighway. That's what you wanted wasn't it? Freedom to move and roads be roads.

For me, I don't care. I've got what I wanted, which was Padfield Road remaining closed. My nice middle class bit of gentrified south LJ is even quieter now. And I benefit from LJ being reopened, as I can now drive north, without being marginally, and only marginally, inconvenienced by going via Brixton or Camberwell. And the cycling won't be too bad (albeit more fumey), because the roads around north LJ and Fiveways will be gridlocked, making cycling the best way to get around. So I'm a clear beneficiary of this.

But it was never just about me. It was being able to stand a make a statement that people were prepared to experiment and trial new ways of traffic flows, and think about ways of limiting car usage and improving pedestrian and cycling facilities. I fear that's gone for ever. But at least people can drive to the Hero of Switzerland now.

 

[bimble]

Fuck that. I hope it's the end of the consultation and LJ Road becomes a car superhighway. That's what you wanted wasn't it? Freedom to move and roads be roads.

For me, I don't care. I've got what I wanted, which was Padfield Road remaining closed. My nice middle class bit of gentrified south LJ is even quieter now. And I benefit from LJ being reopened, as I can now drive north, without being marginally, and only marginally, inconvenienced by going via Brixton or Camberwell. And the cycling won't be too bad (albeit more fumey), because the roads around north LJ and Fiveways will be gridlocked, making cycling the best way to get around. So I'm a clear beneficiary of this.

But it was never just about me. It was being able to stand a make a statement that people were prepared to experiment and trial new ways of traffic flows, and think about ways of limiting car usage and improving pedestrian and cycling facilities. I fear that's gone for ever. But at least people can drive to the Hero of Switzerland now.

I think you're confusing me with someone else. I really hope you don't mean it when you say 'fuck that, I hope the consultation is over' if you have ideas for alternatives to the particular measure that has just been trialled.

 

[CH1]

The police and ambulance service did not comment on the closures.

Just to point out that at the LJAG/Network Rail meeting on Wednesday several of the tenants running businesses in the arches on Ridgeway Road were imploring Network Rail to speak up on their behalf to the council.

Understandably the nerdy and feckless Network Rail claimed they could not do so because Network Rail is a government body.

Maybe the Police and the Ambulance Service are government bodies? Or maybe just feckless? Who am I to say as a local resident whose Dad was a lorry driver.