Hackney Transport Strategy : comments from Sustainable Hackney

Transcription

1 Introduction Sustainable Hackney is an umbrella group for organisations and individuals who support our aims. We have over 640 supporters registered on our website and a number of local organisations and individuals are paid-up members. We hold monthly open steering group meetings and our aims and constitution are available on our website at In April 2014 we published our Greenprint for Hackney following public meetings and consultation with our members. This submission is part of our work programme in support of the Greenprint. In our submission on the Transport Strategy we have focussed on the Public Transport Plan and the Liveable Neighbourhoods Plan. In the tables below we make some general comments about the Transport Strategic Vision and Transport Strategy. We also include comments from members of the public received via our website and at a public meeting held on 13th October. We are also making a separate submission on the Air Quality Action Plan. This submission has been approved by our Steering Group after consultation with our members and with the members of the public who attended the public meeting. Sustainable Hackney - October Contents Introduction... 1 Transport Strategy comments from members of the public... 2 Transport Strategic Vision our comments... 3 Transport Strategy our comments... 3 Public Transport Plan Objectives our comments... 4 Public Transport Plan Policies our comments... 7 Liveable Neighbourhood Plan our comments

2 Transport Strategy comments from members of the public Sustainable Hackney held a public meeting The Big Green Pow-Wow at Arcola Theatre on 13 th October to discuss the Air Quality Action Plan and the Transport Strategy. The event was attended by 30 members of the public. Council officers attended and answered questions from the public and a range of views were gathered and are included here as part of our submission: Abolish one-way systems Slow traffic Hanging bikes in trees - takes less space than bike hangars Install secured covered cycle parking as standard, not just demand - led Co-ordinate safe walking and safe cycling policies to ensure priority to pedestrians is preserved (separate planning will not work!) Allow taking multiple buses with one ticket Safe pavements for pedestrians/disabled by ensuring clear cycling/no cycling signage policy throughout Hackney Sharing best walking routes with online services (eg City Mapper) to avoid polluted areas. Why no plans for trams? (see Streetcar) Mini woods/planting on traffic calming islands. Poor condition of pavements a barrier to walking Public toilets/food growing in stations Ensuring space on roads provided for utility/cargo bikes. Cycle routes above railways (Skycycle). Plantable streets rather than edible streets. 2 Biodiversity gains are a better ambition than food strategy as there will be a resistance to eating street produced foods as people don t know where it is grown. More trees and more support for communal food growing. End the destruction of available green space in Hackney and the removal of trees including on Hackney Marshes. Extend the congestion charge zone to Hackney. Ban cars that aren t trade. Restrict parking on all new developments. Enforce environmental works in all new developments, eg Kingsland Basin, and ensure that all new trees and green roofs are actually watered and maintained by developers. Encourage discussion on liveable street improvements in Ward Forums so people can take ownership of street greening. Ensure much shorter waiting times at pedestrian crossings. Graffiti and street cleansing is excessive and polluting. Commission public art. Install public toilets. Install solar wherever possible. Small scale retail not big supermarkets, which will reduce traffic movements.

3 Transport Strategic Vision our comments Transport Strategy Vision Comments Proposed wording By 2024 Hackney s transport system will be an exemplar for urban sustainable living in London. It will be fair, safe, and responsive to the needs of its residents facilitating the highest quality of life standards for a borough in the Capital and leading London in its approach to tackling its urban transport challenges of the 21st Century. We support the vision, but would include accessible and sustainable in the vision. We would remove last section and add a vision of how transport can contribute to sustainability. By 2024 Hackney s transport system will be an exemplar for urban sustainable living in London. It will be fair, safe, accessible, sustainable and responsive to the needs of its residents facilitating the highest quality of life standards for its residents. Transport will contribute to sustainability by managing transport demand, improving air quality, reducing carbon emissions and reclaiming the streets for public use and enjoyment. Transport Strategy our comments Transport Strategy Comments Proposal Demand management We would like to see a new section in the transport strategy looking at demand management how changing employment, housing, retail, technology and stronger communities can impact and reduce transport demand and related policies to support that. Cycling Plan We support the submission from the Hackney Cycling Campaign New section of transport strategy to be developed. 3

4 Transport Strategy Comments Proposal Walking Plan We support the submission from Hackney Living Streets Transport strategy generally See comments from members of the public below Public Transport Plan See our detailed comments below Liveable Neighbourhoods See our detailed comments submitted separately Road Safety Plan We strongly support the introduction of 20mph limits on all roads in the borough with effective enforcement. Public Transport Plan Objectives our comments Public Transport Plan Objectives Comments Proposed wording 1. Crossrail 2 proposals will be well advanced with an alignment through Hackney that maximises the benefits to the borough. 2. There will be improved public transport accessibility for all our We support the objective, but the related policy proposal (PT09) needs to be clearer, and the phrase maximises the benefits is too vague. TfL recently consulted on proposals which would only see one Crossrail 2 station in the borough, rather than three in the safeguarded route. In order to influence TfL Hackney should make a clear case for the safeguarded route option to be retained based on the benefits for the borough and build public support. We support the policy, but it needs to be clear that this relates to areas with low PTAL scores, 4 Crossrail 2 proposals will be well advanced with an alignment through Hackney that includes at least two stations in the borough, and achieves maximum environmental, social and economic benefit for the borough. There will be improved public transport services for all our residents in areas where

5 Public Transport Plan Objectives Comments Proposed wording residents to access emerging employment centres in Central London, Stratford and the Olympic Park and the Upper Lea Valley. rather than disabled access which is covered in objective The East of the borough will have seen a substantial improvement in public transport services. 4. The Overground network will have had further improvements to provide additional capacity to keep up with increasing demand. 5. Significant capacity improvements and route upgrades will have been completed on the West Anglia Line. 6. There will have been a smooth transition of the West Anglia Line services to Mayoral control, with improved inner London rail services that have not lost out to nonstopping suburban services. We support the objective, but it should apply to the whole of the borough, and not just the East. Policies should be developed for each area including Queensbridge and Lordship which will see little or no improvement under the current proposals We support the objective. However we would clarify that we believe capacity improvements are needed at current demand levels. We strongly support the objective. We believe this is one of the key capacity improvement opportunities and can be delivered at a much lower cost than Crossrail 2 and in a shorter time-scale. We support the objective. We would add an objective to improve station facilities. 5 services are currently poor and improved access to emerging employment centres in Central London, Stratford and the Olympic Park and the Upper Lea Valley. The whole of the borough will have seen a substantial improvement in public transport services including all those areas which currently have low access. The Overground network will have had further improvements to provide additional capacity on overloaded services. No change There will have been a smooth transition of the West Anglia Line services to Mayoral control, with improved stations and inner London rail services that have not lost out to non stopping suburban services.

6 Public Transport Plan Objectives Comments Proposed wording 7. There will be improved interchange We strongly support the objective. No change. facilities and walking and cycling conditions at our key public transport stations. 8. The accessibility of Hackney s public transport will have been vastly improved with a fully accessible bus stop network, real time service information, and step free access to the majority of stations in the borough. We support the objective, but we would strengthen it by replacing majority of stations with most, if not all, stations. There are 13 stations in the borough of which 6 already have step-free access, so majority is not sufficiently ambitious over 10 years. We also think that there should be an additional objective relating to community transport The accessibility of Hackney s public transport will have been vastly improved with a fully accessible bus stop network, real time service information, and step free access to most, if not all, stations in the borough. 9. Hackney will have the most comprehensive and continuous bus priority network in London reflecting the fact we have the highest levels of bus usage in London. 10. The stations in Hackney will be safe and secure with all day activity and oversight. Community Transport services (see suggested wording below). We strongly support the objective. We strongly support the objective. There needs to be an objective on community transport. Without this community transport risks being marginalised and deprived of funding and resources. 6 No change. No change. Hackney will have improved community transport services for those who find it hard to access public transport, including the most vulnerable and marginalised within society so

7 Public Transport Plan Objectives Comments Proposed wording they can access jobs, education, services and have the simple freedom of being able to get out and about. Public Transport Plan Policies our comments Policies Comments Proposed wording PT1 Work with TfL and neighbouring boroughs to We strongly support the policy. achieve access improvements to the new Crossrail stations close to our border PT2 Support the reopening of Lea Bridge Station and We strongly support the policy. work with Waltham Forest to improve pedestrian and cycle access to the station for Hackney residents PT3 Lobby Network Rail to ensure the 3-tracking of We strongly support the policy. the West Anglia line benefits Hackney residents and enables a direct Clapton to Tottenham Hale service PT4 Work with the Mayor of London and TfL to We strongly support the policy. ensure that the devolution of West Anglia Line results in improved stations and services in Hackney PT5 Work with Network Rail to ensure that the We strongly support the policy. direct interchange between Hackney Central and Hackney Downs is completed by 2015 PT6 Support the electrification of GOBLIN and encourage increased usage of South Tottenham station amongst residents in Stamford Hill We support the policy. 7

8 Policies Comments Proposed wording PT7 Continue to lobby TfL for improved Overground services to match increasing demand We support the policy, but we propose clarifying that capacity is needed at current levels of demand. PT7 Continue to lobby TfL for improved Overground services to provide additional capacity on overloaded routes. PT8 Continuously review levels of cycle parking at stations and public transport interchanges (wherever possible) to ensure provision matches demand. PT9 Lobby the DfT and Mayor of London to quickly progress Crossrail 2 proposals and ensure the alignment and stations maximise benefits for Hackney PT10 Work with partners to ensure Hackney Wick station upgrade occurs in order to improve access to local area PT11 Lobby TfL and Network Rail to progress urgently needed station ticket hall upgrades to reduce overcrowding and improve accessibility PT12 Investigate options for alternative uses of station and co-location of community services/uses and potential use of stations for online delivery pickups PT13 Work with the West Anglia Line Group to progress four tracking the Lea Valley Line by 2019 We support the policy, but we believe a stepchange is needed, not continuous improvement. Replace Continuously review levels of with Provide investment in. Remove wherever possible We support the policy, but it needs to be strengthened and public support gathered to ensure the safeguarded route remains on the table and make it clear that proposals for only one Crossrail 2 station in the borough are not acceptable to the residents of Hackney. We support the policy. We support the policy. It needs to include providing step-free access at most stations. We strongly support the objective, but we think that the word alternative is a tacit acceptance of destaffing. We suggest replacing alternative with additional. We strongly support the policy. PT8 Substantially increase the level of cycle parking at stations and public transport interchanges. PT9 Build public support and Lobby the DfT and Mayor of London to quickly progress Crossrail 2 proposals and ensure an alignment that includes at least two stations in the borough, and achieves maximum environmental, social and economic benefit for the borough. PT11 Lobby TfL and Network Rail to progress urgently needed station ticket hall upgrades to reduce overcrowding and provide step-free access at most, if not all, stations. PT12 Investigate options for additional uses of stations and co-location of community services/uses and potential use of stations for online delivery pickups 8

9 Policies Comments Proposed wording PT14 Lobby for Stratford to become an international We are neutral on this policy. hub with stopping European services PT15 Work with TfL to improve bus access to the We support the policy. Olympic Park, Hackney Wick and Stratford from the rest of Hackney PT16 Improve bus journey times and reliability We strongly support the policy. through new bus priority measures - completing missing gaps in the network and reviewing bus lane hours PT17 Progress the implementation of major changes to Hackney Central and Stoke Newington without significant negative impacts on bus services We strongly support the policy, and agree that some impact on bus services is acceptable to achieve reductions in traffic speed and improved cycling and walking facilities. PT18 Continued work to ensure we are one of the first boroughs in London to have a fully accessible We strongly support the policy. bus stop network PT19 Continue to roll out bus countdown displays at bus stops where appropriate and help to make realtime bus departure information available wherever possible PT20 Work with partners to reduce crime and the fear of crime on the bus network PT21 Recognise the role of taxis and minicabs in the borough and look to expand the number of ranks in the borough whilst facilitating the shift to electric and zero emission vehicles PT22 Hackney Council will work with stakeholders and listen to their concerns about community We strongly support the policy. We think that the terms wherever appropriate and wherever possible should be removed as they tend to weaken the impact. We strongly support the policy. We support the policy together with the qualifications in section 8.3 Strategic priorities. We believe a greater priority should be given to community transport. Without this community 9 PT19 Continue to roll out bus countdown displays at bus stops and help to make real-time bus departure information available PT22 Hackney Council will proactively work with partners to provide an improved level and range

10 Policies Comments Proposed wording transport services and assist with lobbying and raising concerns with TfL and London Councils over specific issues. transport risks being marginalised and deprived of funding and resources and services for marginalised people could suffer. of services for those who find it difficult to access mainstream public transport. This includes lobbying and raising concerns with TfL and London Councils as well as providing support for local community transport services Liveable Neighbourhood Plan our comments Page no LN number Comment / question Overall comments: Generally there are several key themes where a more proactive approach is required with the council engaging with local or borough wide organisations Edible streets Green Action Zones Air Quality Estate based initiatives like cycle parking Play streets. Establish a borough wide liveable streets forum, tasked with monitoring progress, sorting priorities, helping encourage an active citizenship approach to the plan? Encourage discussion on liveable street improvements in Ward Forums so people can take ownership of street greening Trees Tree canopy ratio: at 18.5% now, increase to 25% by 2024 is this rate of increase greater, the same as or less than the rate of increase in the past 10 and 5 years? 10

11 Page no LN number Increase tree canopy from 15% to 25% Comment / question if its greater where/how are the implications for supply and maintenance going to be addressed? if its not greater, why not? More trees and more support for communal food growing. End the destruction of available green space in Hackney and the removal of trees including on Hackney Marshes. Enforce environmental works in all new developments, eg Kingsland Basin, and ensure that all new trees and green roofs are actually watered and maintained by developers. 1 Tree species list: is this a list of preferred trees for introduction or just a list of species that are good for air quality improvement as an example? all native? what pollinator, bird, or other species does this list support? 11 1: Action point 1 What does green infrastructure mean examples please Rephrase to Trees and green infrastructure will be an integral part of any scheme for the public realm and street that is approved by or funded by Hackney. We will introduce as many trees and elements of green infrastructure e.g [..] as is practical with every scheme Flood management Climate change adaptation 14 2, 3, 4: Action points Isn t SUDS already a requirement for all new developments? If not, ensure it is. Adaptation A flood mitigation programme is a big piece of work (LN2). Ensuring public realm & highways schemes consider flooding/climate change-led flooding (LN4) will certainly be part of that. Why is LN4 listed separately? Consider should be strengthened to incorporate mitigation into the approved design in any case Rephrase action point 1: Identify options for including sustainable urban drainage and bio retention as part of every public realm improvement scheme we undertake in the borough and include the SUDS and 11

12 Page no LN number 15 5: Communal food growing - Action points 1 & 2 Comment / question bio retention option with the greatest impact on flood mitigation and biodiversity in each improvement scheme Rephrase action point 2: Ensure all new developments incorporate sustainable urban drainage and that each SUDS solution implemented does not add to pressure on the drainage network Communal food growing Waiting for people to request community food gardens/planters on carriageways is passive: Hackney should commit to actively promoting, encouraging Edible Streets, planters etc to residents as part of every consultation on public realm schemes. Facilitation should be actively supporting people to take over them over funding for a period listening to & working with existing local community orgs/people to learn lessons before implementing active promotion etc. Plantable streets rather than edible streets. Biodiversity gains are a better ambition than food strategy as there will be a resistance to eating street produced foods as people don t know where it is grown. Install solar wherever possible : Action points Cycling Approach is too passive: actively work with Hackney Cycling and other orgs to ID areas of high demand / low storage capacity & actively promote the hangers scheme. 21 & 22 8 & 9: Reduce traffic levels Action points Ore on street, covered cycle hangers. Traffic If local consultation generally doesn t want expansion of parking control (action 1), what then? All the investigate options for seem to imply that there is a need for a Freight Action Plan specific to Hackney. Commit to developing one and incorporate investigations 4, 5 & 6 into it. Extend the congestion charge zone to Hackney. 12

13 Page no LN number 22 8 & 9 Area wide traffic reviews : Poor air quality Action points Comment / question Ensure much shorter waiting times at pedestrian crossings. Ban cars that aren t trade. Restrict parking on all new developments. Small scale retail not big supermarkets, which will reduce traffic movements. Assume this refers to the Major Schemes section in Walking Plan (8.3, p30-36): Shoreditch Old Street Hackney Central Stoke Newington Seven Sisters Hackney Wick. For clarity, each doc in the suite should say where they connect e.g. where specific commitments are being made in one document and are not therefore repeated in the other for sake of brevity, the page numbers / headings / action numbers should be included in the other along with phrasing that commits Hackney to deliver on actions / commitments jointly & severally under both Air quality As above, this document needs to identify the pages / policies / actions that are fleshed out in the Air Quality Action Plan E.g. Green Zones, Zero Emissions Network, Last Mile Deliveries, work with taxis, Hackney s own fleet etc. are all directly map-able across the two docs. Need for action on Schools and actions on n Local Low Emissions. This is not helpful and can easily be remedied with a table that lists policies/actions that cut across the daughter docs, in which doc the detail is found, where they wind up in the SPD etc. Action 1: assume specific commitments are defined in the cycling plan.? Cross-check etc. 13

14 Page no LN number Comment / question It would be worth getting some more info on the council fleet and encourage its conversion away from diesel, but how about an action plan for, say, the 10 largest fleets in and around the borough - some are bound to be private sector : Action points More car sharing bays: The council suggests that by 2015 there ll be roughly an equal number of car sharing/club vehicles and bays for them (150 vehicles, 140 bays), with c. 6,000 members (43 members per vehicle/bay). It estimates potential membership between 23,000 & 63,000. So that s between 500 and 1,500 vehicles/bays if same membership ratio is needed to fund the scheme. include targets e.g. by 2019 = 300 vehicles/bays, 2024 = 600 vehicles/bays or increase by 100% every 5 years the number of vehicles/bays whichever is the greater. Action point 2 should have targets e.g. 75% of all new vehicles/bays/members are in under-served areas : action points More electric car points: Actions on electric car charging points are all seek to & investigate feasibility where is about residents and business vehicles. Influencing individual purchasing decisions by installing infrastructure is risky expenditure. Not sure what I think about this.. Action point 4: Rephrase to The Council will install publicly accessible fast/rapid charging points at all Council-owned car parks Action point 5 again The Council will install , 14, 15 Document states reducing dominance of private vehicle can only be done by managing on-street parking. What about the number of parking spaces per unit on new builds? Even if this appears in development docs it needs to be included here. What if consultation on new/more restrictive parking zones doesn t work? 41-16, 17, 18 The proposals and actions reveal the Council doesn t know what it thinks about motorbikes & mopeds. 14