 |
| Brixton town centre - image courtesy Lambeth council. Massive roads, masses of cars. "No space" to facilitate safe, convenient cycling. |
Earlier this month, Lambeth Council issued its draft strategic plan for Brixton town centre called Future Brixton. The plan comes out at the same time as Lambeth's Local Plan - a document which sets the planning policies for the borough for the next 15 years. A key part of that Local Plan involves infrastructure, including bicycle infrastructure.
Lambeth's broader Local Plan sounds pretty promising. It commits to a compelling vision in support of transport by bike: "Lambeth will promote cycling through improvements to routes, giving greater priority to cyclists in the use of road space, reducing road danger from other transport modes and through improvements to signage and facilities". There is much discussion, too, about improving bicycle parking in town centres and in residential streets and estates. All good stuff and considerably more positive about cycling than the draft Local Plan being developed in the City of London, for example (more on that later this week).
The Brixton plan has been written within the context of Lambeth's wider Local Plan. You can read all about the Brixton plan on Lambeth's website and fill out the online questionnaire to share your views.
The Brixton plan is where Lambeth's vision of "promoting cycling through improvements to routes and greater priority to cyclists in the use of road space" should move from lofty strategy to practical detail.
 |
| Masses of bike parking outside the shopping centre in Dalston, Hackney. |
I think it's instructive to have a look at a comparable Strategic Plan - one written by Hackney Council for Dalston town centre. Dalston is similar to Brixton to the extent that it is a busy inner London high street area with a heavy number of bus routes and links to major strategic roads out of London.
Hackney is extremely clear about how it wants Dalston to function better. It wants to "facilitate ease of movement by improving the network of streets and footpaths to make walking AND CYCLING as safe and pleasant as possible". Hackney talks about creating "seamless connections" between the town centre, its market, shopping centre and other key local points by creating new pedestrian and cycle routes. It has produced a map showing where those routes will be and how they'll benefit people walking and cycling to the area.
 |
| Hackney improved cycle and pedestrian routes to Dalston. Lambeth's plan for Brixton seems to completely lack any of these intentions. |
Lambeth's plan in Brixton starts out sounding full of promise. It describes how "greater emphasis and priority will be given to pedestrians and cyclists across the town". But look into the detail and what Lambeth is promising for Brixton sounds less than impressive: "Brixton will be easier and safer to get around for both residents and visitors. There will be an emphasis on enhancing the pedestrian environment and promoting the use of public transport".
No mention of cycling. And absolutely no mention of making it easier to access Brixton and get around the centre on foot or by bike, just some chatter about an "enhanced" environment. That's about style, not about substance. Substance would be a document that commits Lambeth to improving the way Brixton works for people to get around, not just the way Brixton's pavements look.
Where Hackney has a clear map of the cycle routes it would open up around Dalston, nothing like this exists in the Brixton master plan. All that Lambeth offers up is a vague plan for "greater emphasis" on cycling. When it describes what that 'greater emphasis' actually means, it promises "improvements to footway and carriageway surfaces, provision of raised table crossings on key pedestrian desire lines, enhancements to street lighting and removal of street clutter...Where feasible, the public realm enhancements will improve the supply of public cycle provision. New cycle parking will be provided".
 |
| Former rat run just off Kingsland High Street, Dalston. Now open for bikes and pedestrians only. None of this planned for Brixton? |
It may be that I'm being unfair on Lambeth. Perhaps I'm missing some of the detail. But it strikes me that Lambeth's plans for Brixton town centre are all about style over substance
I think that's a crying shame. Brixton is an amazing and vibrant place but one choked by excessive motor traffic. And Lambeth council's draft plan seems to utterly ignore the fact that it is deeply intimidating to cycle to and around many parts of Brixton town centre. What Lambeth seems to be promising is to create a more attractive public realm but nothing in this plan suggests that Lambeth will build the sorts of changes that genuinely make it easier for people to use a bike in Brixton than to use a car. These are the sorts of things that need to change to make Brixton a more vibrant place for people who work here, live near here and shop or go out here.
What Brixton needs is better, safer and easier access for people not coming by car. Not just some raised tables, expensive flower pots and some bike stands.
Lambeth has an online survey you can complete to share your thoughts on its plans for Brixton's town centre. The sole question relating to cycle infrastructure is '[Do you agree that] Improved cycle parking and the availability of bike hire bays will encourage people to cycle?" That's it. However, you can leave your thoughts in the Additional Comments section. I'd encourage anyone who lives or visits Brixton to add their comments and let's see what Lambeth's Brixton strategy team come back with.
-----
Note. It's well worth having a look at the Lambeth strategic plan for the Vauxhall area which is now considerably more disposed to safe, convenient cycling and walking. The plan was amended after consultation to include fairly sensible measures for cycling and walking under the following premise: "Cycling should be a preferred means of travel for short trips, especially given that this area is relatively flat. The Mayor has proposed that this area will “Go Dutch” and meet Dutch cycling design principles. Routes should be safe and direct with a coherent cycle network that provides safe routes for everyone. Existing routes are not necessarily the best
that could be provided and should be reviewed, which may mean providing different routes for commuters and leisure cyclists". Kennington People on Bikes blog has a full review of the Plan.
Note. It's well worth having a look at the Lambeth strategic plan for the Vauxhall area which is now considerably more disposed to safe, convenient cycling and walking. The plan was amended after consultation to include fairly sensible measures for cycling and walking under the following premise: "Cycling should be a preferred means of travel for short trips, especially given that this area is relatively flat. The Mayor has proposed that this area will “Go Dutch” and meet Dutch cycling design principles. Routes should be safe and direct with a coherent cycle network that provides safe routes for everyone. Existing routes are not necessarily the best
that could be provided and should be reviewed, which may mean providing different routes for commuters and leisure cyclists". Kennington People on Bikes blog has a full review of the Plan.
Hackney is head and shoulders above many London boroughs and I guess most of the UK - it had actually published a map of what they want to do.
ReplyDeleteUnless everyone can clearly see what the long-term goal is, strategies are essentially useless. I don't know Brixton, but it could be anywhere - big roads with a perception that parking for cars outside shops is the only regeneration option. Rubbish.
I don't know why Hackney is cited as one of the better boroughs in London with regard to cycling. They've ripped out more cycle infrastructure in the last year than they've installed - mostly to increase road capacity or provide additional parking bays. Their Head of Streetscene is, at best, agnostic on the value or even desirability of cycle tracks and lanes.
DeleteThat last question is awful, it doesn't allow the respondent to distinguish whether they think the proposed strategy is the right one, or they don't think there should be such a strategy at all. These views would be opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of attitudes towards cycling. Very badly designed question.
ReplyDeleteThis goes to show why cycling policies and cycling funding should be a national issue rather than left to councils. We need a countrywide strategy, not a microscopic patchwork quilt. The overarching thrust of health issues like smoking and alcohol aren't left to local government. Cycling mustn't be, either.
ReplyDeleteJust look at the following question in the online survey: 'Making the train station easier, safer and more pleasant to use will encourage visitors, residents and commuters to travel by rail'. Now replace 'the train station' by 'cycling'. This is not rocket science. Why Lambeth gets it right for rail travel but thinks that cycle parking is good enough to encourage cycling is beyond me. What a sad and complete lack of vision!
ReplyDeleteI haven't looked at the survey, and perhaps this is a little off-topic, but...I think one of the reasons why Hackney is now being so cycling friendly with its planning policies is because there's a critical mass of cyclists to justify it. Perhaps the improvements the council has put in place have helped to swell their numbers - but they were already there in large numbers before then. Long before Hackney council ever thought to put bike parking outside Kingsland shopping centre there were always lots and lots of bikes chained to the railings that used to be there.
ReplyDeleteI'm not defending Lambeth at all here (I haven't got round to scrutinising their no doubt lacklustre efforts) but I've just had a look at the Hackney Council Strategic Plan for Dalston, and I must say I can't find that much good cycling stuff in there either.
ReplyDeleteThere's lots of talk of cycle "routes" but these seem to be mainly signposts. There's a mention of a "northbound cycle lane" on Kingsland High Street and a new bridge over the railway. But where's the separated space on main roads? We're not going to build a cycling revolution on back streets, and nor will we build one if we expect people to mix with heavy traffic on the main roads.
According to "POLICY DTC 15 - USER HIERARCHY IN DALSTON" the top of the list is "pedestrians and those with mobility difficulties" followed by "cyclists" followed by "public transport including coaches and taxis". I wait with interest to see detailed plans for Kingsland High Street which prioritise walking and cycling over taxis.
Is there something I'm missing?
I think there is, to some extent (something you're missing). Kingsland High St is a TfL road. The issue on that road is that you have to do improvements bit by bit, at the whim of TfL. The section that has been upgraded is definitely not "Dutch" but is noticeably better than the sections that haven't been upgraded. So, wide carriageway, no lane markings, no cars parked, no loading bays. It is definitely easier to cycle along this section than the average inner London High Street complete with buses, narrow lanes, bus lanes, loading bays, parked cars etc.
DeleteGo take a look, though at how well the quiet streets do function and try and look at Kingsland High Street in the context of a slowly improving plan.
Either way, the area is considerably more friendly to cycle to and through than Brixton, in my view.
Ah, the age-old problem of London's fractured bureaucracy!
DeleteI do ride through Hackney every few weeks or so, and there really are some superb bits. The best one is the cycle path on Goldsmiths Row, closely followed by the Martello Street cycle path which runs up to Hackney town hall. (Sure, the crossing of Richmond Road could be handled better, but it works.)
But while Hackney is heading in the right general direction, I still wouldn't ride on the main roads, and my partner wouldn't even consider it for a second. The treatment of Kingsland High Street does look a little better than the average London high street, but wider lanes or not, people on bikes still have to pass stopped buses on the outside, taxis overtaking you, etc., which is simply not an option for most people.
I appreciate that maybe it's part of a gradual change and I should be more patient and compromising, but I think there's a danger that the authorities will get the idea that it's a great solution and provides for all bike users, when really it's only a baby step in the right direction. If there's enough room for widened lanes (and looking at Streetview they're pretty generous) then surely there's enough room for a cycle path?
Hackney should be pleased with the infrastructure it has created so far – especially the two Dutch-esque cycle paths I mentioned – but there's a long way to go before they start slapping themselves on the back!
I wasn't sticking up for Lambeth council at all, though. I've now read through the Brixton plans and couldn't agree more with this piece! Like all councils, it seems, Lambeth claims to have walking and cycling at the top of their priorities, with private cars at the bottom, yet the reality on the ground is nearly always the other way around. (Maybe the designers think the priority list is in reverse order?)
Aren't the main roads through Brixton - Brixton Rd, Brixton Hill, Effra Rd, Acre Lane, Coldharbour Lane - also TfL roads?
DeleteIs the Local Development Framework really the place to be looking for on-road cycle strategy? Isn't that supposed to be in the Local Implementation Plan (for the Mayor's Transport Strategy)?
ReplyDeleteThe LDF will cover more in the way of off-road provision, such as cycle parking, and the planning framework for new buildings. On the whole it strikes me that most of what they write in the main framework document is just so much ecofluff - worthy sentiments which won't get implemented, any more than they ever have been in the past, without some serious agitation.
The City is probably not the best borough on the local plan aspects but it is by far the worst. They have agreed for example to 125sqm of usable floor space per bike space for new office buildings, compared with 250sqm in the last, 2002, Plan, and compared to the 160sqm per space which is where they started. That is the minimum standard required for new office buildings. They have also made it clear that prima facie they will not agree to any car parking at all in new office biuldings except for disabled blue-badge spaces, unless a compelling case is made. Most developers seem to be accepting that cases just aren't compelling enough.
I meant of course "by far NOT the worst!
DeleteI live in the centre of Brixton and I'm afraid car-parking has to be part of the answer (I cycle and do not own a car).
ReplyDeletePeople use Brixton Market to buy bulk goods. Since the carpark closed a couple of years ago, traders, who are also being forced out by rent increases as restaurants and bars move in, have really suffered and so has the market.
Residents have also suffered as cars are now parked all down Electric Lane / Avenue in the evenings as shoppers try and squeeze their shopping into the couple fo hours when they can park in the town centre.
Residents and shoppers have been hit by cars. It is more dangerous to walk and cycle, and noise and disruption occur later into the evening.
Without some sort of car parking, Brixton market as it has been known, as a resource for local people rather than foodie tourists, may finally die.
Yes I think it's fair enough to have better car parking. I'm not trying to imply that part of the plan is wrong. And I know exactly what you mean about the cars parked all over the place. It's rubbish. The Hackney plan for Dalston also included better car parking provision.
DeleteTfL and Southwark council recently put Camberwell centre up for consultation, partly as part of the superhighway and partly the RevitaliSE5 programme.
ReplyDeleteFor me the main problem is the loading bays, especially those near the narrow end of Camberwell Church St. Is this something that has been solved elsewhere? I often think side streets would be better places to unload, and some vans and lorries do so on Kimpton Road and Grove Lane.
Are loading bays a council thing? I can't imagine there's much political will to remove them, they're pretty popular as free car parking outside of rush hour. There's a large, underused, car park in Camberwell, but it's not free.
As far as I can tell, the council wants to widen pavements and narrow lanes (à la Walworth Road) which is preventing TfL from doing anything better for bikes. Does this seem likely?
There'd be plenty of room for tracks if the new pavement was track and the loading bays weren't there. Indeed, a whole bus lane is going from the south side of Church St. Incorporating bus bypasses and still solving the two bus stops creating a bottleneck near the green like that could be done, I'm sure. But I'm no civil engineer.
Rant complete. I hope they listen.
ReplyDelete