Home > Neighbourhood plan > Streetscape & Transport
Penny farthing

Key issues

  • There is a tension between different transport modes – buses, cabs, bikes, trains, tourist coaches and walking and it is difficult to balance these. A predicted growth in passenger numbers in Waterloo Station of 40% will exacerbate the situation. The need to balance the ‘place’ and ‘movement’ functions of the area is also important.
  • Waterloo Station redevelopment is an opportunity to improve public realm and reduce the barriers to movement currently presented by the building.
  • Streets are not adequately maintained and too often investment in high quality public realm is wasted through a lack of resource to monitor and maintain schemes.

POLICIES: Streetscape and Transport

No Policy
P15 The neighbourhood plan has identified a network of pedestrian routes (‘greenways’) through the neighbourhood area which are situated away from heavy traffic, air pollution and noise.  The plan supports developments along these routes which:

i)      Create an improved, pedestrian-friendly streetscape as set out in design guidance

ii)     Contribute to an improvement in air quality and a reduction in noise levels

P16 Developments which create new public realm of a scale which requires pedestrian way finding should implement the Legible London way finding system in accordance with the Highways Act and relevant Highways Authority guidance

 

Other guidance

  • Changes can be made which encourage a better use of existing space. This broadly encompasses:
  1. Focusing the use of particular streets for particular modes where possible
  2. Improving investment in streets and their ongoing maintenance
  3. Rationalising buses and bus stops
  4. Reducing through traffic
  5. Creating new walking routes through the area which separate pedestrians from motorised vehicles, including alongside railways viaducts, under the station and through back streets
  • We support the strategic development of the following junctions and thoroughfares with the key objectives of:
  1. improving the environment for pedestrians
  2. enabling greater use of the space for events and animation
  3. increasing the level of green infrastructure and
  4. reducing the impact of motorised traffic
  •    Lambeth North junction
  •    Waterloo Road / Baylis Road Junction
  •    IMAX roundabout and subways
  •    Waterloo Rd between Old Vic and IMAX
  •    Addington Street Roundabout
  •    Westminster Bridge Road
  •    Blackfriars Road and St George’s Circus
  •    South Bank Spine Route (Upper Ground and Belvedere Road)
  • We recommend that transport assessments relating to planning applications should consider the complexity of transport movements in the area and the impact the development may have on the safe movement of pedestrians and traffic, including:
  1. Uplifts in relation to the visitor economy (i.e. spikes in visitors associated with tourism, including school holidays)
  2. Major events within the Central Activity Zone
  3. Differences between weekday and weekend modal/movement patterns
  • Developers normally only provide assessment of traffic movements during the working week. The area is subject to unique movement patterns which should be assessed throughout the whole week to give an accurate position of the likely impact of development on traffic
  • The neighbourhood plan supports development in railway arches which follows the principles of the ‘Low Line’ project. The Low Line is an initiative to encourage industry sector clusters in redeveloped railway viaducts between London Bridge, Bankside, Waterloo and Vauxhall. Schemes which enable access to and development of railway arches to benefit the local economy and provide safe, car free walking and cycle routes.


3 Comments, RSS

  • Alistair Bigos

    says on:
    October 13, 2014 at 12:26 pm

    Two points I think could be potentially be added for discussion.

    1. The local monitoring of streets for pedestrian flows should be more a constant “study” similar to smart space’s modelling of the shell re-development. Such consistent and constant modelling should become a shared resource for the council, Sbeg, TFL, and developers:
    a. This would reduce costs to developers, as the developer could quickly “plug in” to the model reducing survey costs and start-up costs(we can also charge the developer fee which is cheaper than their own monitoring).
    i. The results would be trusted and standardised.
    ii. Such results allow councillors, streetscape planners, and planning officers to easily understand and audit the developments. Saving time and advisor costs at hearings.
    b. This would allow for cumulative monitoring of the whole neighbourhood rather than by a development by development method. Such studies routinely become out of date and useless.
    c. This would allow for a data led targeting strategy for upgrading street scape. This reduces costs and increases efficiency as bench marks can be easily set and resources targeted efficiently E.g Objective reduce pedestrian flows from Roupell Street by 40% for max budget of £40,000, redesign achieved 34.8%, at a cost of £25,000.
    d. This would allow for a better designation of “primary”, “secondary” and “tertiary” commuter routes with diffing objectives e.g. Increase foot fall, manage footfall, divert footfall

    2. IDEA I had after I left the meeting : The neighbourhood should try, if possible, to create a set of designations for routes and streets. By this I mean that we should try and define the primary mode of transport and the primary “character” of that street. E.g A TFL Red route would primarily be motorised, and its primary character is the flow of people. Whilst lower marsh’s primary mode is pedestrian, and its primary character is relaxed commercial experiences.
    a. The designations themselves are not important, what is important is the requirements e.g for street furniture, café spill out widths, expected pedestrian comfort level, etc.
    b. We should have a limited but flexible designation system so that streetscape planners have an implantable but effective system.

  • michael ball WCDG

    says on:
    October 14, 2014 at 2:01 pm

    1. the 40% growth in numbers of people in the area – largely as result of development – is going to become unbearable unless those developments contribute space to the streetscape, particularly by increasing pavement space around their buildings, but also by incorporating infrastructure e.g. street lighting along York Rd could be entirely contained within the new Elizabeth House and Shell Centre buildings [NB planning policy in the Waterloo SPD and elsewhere already covers the issue of permeability through sites]. I raised this issue at the first walkabout and it got strong support
    2. Many major streets are under-used (Waterloo Rd being conspicuously empty except at rush hour, and the southern end relatively empty even them) which suggests a reduction in carriageway and increase in pavement (or cycle route) would not have a negative impact on traffic movement – see Kensington High Street!
    3. quiet areas (e.g. backstreets) need to be protected from additional transport noise – we could be identifying quiet zones (this issue overlaps with the air quality theme)
    4. to improve air quality and reduce noise all vehicles entering Waterloo (and indeed the CAZ I will be pushing for) during daytime should be electric (I realize this is a big aspiration which will require a future Mayor to take up, but it begs the question how aspirational can a Neighbourhood Plan be? We could be asking for this by 2030 say? I think that’s appropriate for a NP)

  • Charlotte Axelson

    says on:
    December 11, 2014 at 12:20 pm

    The needs of pedestrians should take a higher priority. I notice that pelican crossings often don’t allow sufficient time to cross roads for those who are a bit less mobile or with little children.

    It seems strange that the 59 is the only surface transport link between waterloo & waterloo east train stations and the Eurostar terminal at Kings Cross. An inter-station link would be much quicker for Eurostar passengers and make the 59 less congested.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*