Here is the report from Hackney Council regarding potential traffic calming schemes for the LARA area. If you have any comments about these schemes, please leave a comment at the end of this post or email us at lara.n16@googlemail.com If you would like to see drawings relating to this report we can also send these via email.
There will be a public consultation in March relating to this report.
1. 0 Introduction
As part of the London Borough of Hackney’s Road Safety programme for 2011/2012, funding is available to consult upon (and implement) a 20mph Zone in the Brooke Road area of Stoke Newington.
The 20mph Zone is to be bordered by the Stoke Newington Gyratory (Manse Road, Evering Road, Rectory Road and Stoke Newington High Street).
In addition, several traffic management issues in this area have previously been highlighted by local residents, originating from traffic ‘rat running’ away from the main gyratory. As such, it is to be investigated whether any of the identified problems can be addressed as part of the proposed 20mph Zone works in 2011.
To this end, a meeting was held on the 26th October 2010 between representatives of the Hackney Council Road Safety Team and the Leswin Area Residents Association (LARA) to discuss their concerns with respect to traffic in their area.
Identified Issues
The main traffic problems raised (at the meeting and previously) were:
Rat running traffic along Bayston Road, Darville Road and Leswin Road.
Rat running along Lawrence Buildings.
Illegal left turns into Brooke Road from Lawrence Buildings in order to access Leswin Road.
Wider issues directly relating to the Stoke Newington Gyratory have also been identified. However, these issues relate to Transport for London’s Road Network (TLRN) and fall outside of the scope of the 20mph Zone scheme.
A drawing detailing some initial proposals relating to the 20mph Zone and traffic management schemes (Dwg TT-0220-BR-3, Appendix A) was presented to LARA at the meeting on 26th October.
This summary note will examine the implications of several suggestions made by LARA (Appendix B) and appraise the remedial options available.
OPTIONS APRAISAL
Option 1 - Gated Road Closures (Appendix F, Dwg: TT-0220-BR-8, TT-0220-BR-9)
One measure suggested by LARA in order to prevent ‘rat running’ along their residential streets is to provide gated road closures on Darville Road and Bayston Road. This would effectively cut off the parallel routes through the centre of the Stoke Newington Gyratory.
Advantages
The following advantages are expected from the implementation of permanent gated road closures:
Complete removal of ‘rat-running’ traffic from the residential streets within the Stoke Newington Gyratory. The minimal amount of vehicles displaced from these streets is not expected to significantly affect the capacity of the surrounding gyratory.
Relatively inexpensive to implement, estimated at £25,000.
Disadvantages
The following disadvantages are expected from the implementation of permanent gated road closures:
Severance of access to the local area resulting in inconvenience for residents.
Loss of on-street parking expected at each closure point in order to provide a turn around area for cars. The loss of parking is estimated at 12 spaces in total split equally across the 3 closure points (4 spaces on Bayston Road, 4 spaces on Darville Road, 4 spaces Leswin Road).
A turn around area for larger vehicles is not expected to be feasible at the proposed closure points. The occurrence of large vehicles (e.g. refuse vehicles) having to reverse over long distances will carry an inherent road safety risk.
The Metropolitan Police (Appendix C) have expressed concerns over the proposals (for similar reasons to those above).
The provision of closures on Bayston Road and Darville Road (as requested by LARA) is expected to result in traffic being displaced to Leswin Road, thus requiring additional measures at this location also.
Discussion
Provision of gated closures will of course remove through traffic altogether, a major objective for LARA. However, such measures would incur several disadvantages with respect to access for local residents and emergency services.
Issues regarding access may be resolved through a public consultation process. However, there are also concerns that turn around areas cannot be appropriately provided and loss of parking (estimated at 12 spaces) and additional road safety risks (as a result of reversing vehicles) will arise. The reduction in on-street parking on Bayston Road, Darville Road and Leswin Road is expected to face opposition during consultation with the residents affected.
Furthermore, when reviewing the results of speed and volume surveys (Appendix D) for the roads in question (Darville Road and Bayston Road) a major problem is not evident. Bayston Road recorded 85th percentile speeds of 22mph with a peak weekday average hourly flow of 93 vehicles. No collisions resulting in injury were recorded on these streets in the latest 36 months of data (Appendix E).
The cost of implementing such measures is estimated to be £25,000 (a relatively inexpensive scheme). However, when considering the limited scale of the current issues and the potential for negative impacts on the wider community (i.e. severance of access, loss of parking etc), permanent closures are not considered a proportionate remedial measure to the issues highlighted by LARA.
Option 2 – ‘Point No Entries’
An alternative option to the permanent closures described above, would be to provide ‘point no-entries’ at the same locations (as shown in figure 2.1).
Advantages
The following advantages are expected from the implementation of ‘point no-entries’ on Darville Road and Bayston Road:
Will discourage ‘rat-runners’ from using these residential parallel routes.
Relatively inexpensive to implement, estimated at £6,500.
Will not result in loss of parking or the requirement for turn around areas.
Will not affect emergency service access (emergency vehicles can be exempted from the relevant Traffic Orders).
Will not give rise to the road safety issues resulting from reversing vehicles.
Disadvantages
The following disadvantages are expected from the implementation of ‘point no-entries’ on Darville Road and Bayston Road:
Severance of access to the local area resulting in inconvenience for residents.
Will not be self-enforcing and police enforcement is likely to be impractical. The measures will only serve as a deterrent to some motorists.
Additional street clutter is inevitable, although the existing ‘point no-entry’ on Leswin Road at its junction with Tyssen Road may be removed as part of this proposal and relocated to the Leswin Road/Evering Road junction.
May increase traffic speeds due to limited opposing traffic flow.
Discussion
It is acknowledged that signed ‘point no-entries’ are unlikely to be as effective (i.e. 100% effective) as permanent gated closures. However, they are expected to act as a reasonable deterrent to most ‘rat-running’ motorists. In addition, ad-hoc enforcement by specialist units could be utilised to ensure the measures continue to be as effective as possible.
Therefore, when considering the recorded low traffic speeds, low hourly traffic volumes and excellent existing collision history of the roads in question, such an approach is considered much more proportionate (than gated closures) and will result in fewer negative impacts on the local network and emergency services.
The cost of this option (estimated at £6,500) is expected to be cheaper than the implementation cost of gated road closures and will result in no loss of on-street parking.
Option 3 - Deterrent Measures (e.g. Junction Tables and Pinch Points)
Measures to deter rat-running without altering the priorities (or stopping up) of the local network have also been proposed by LARA as a different approach to solving the identified issues, by way of making the links in question (Bayston Road and Darville Road) unattractive to through traffic.
Specific measures suggested by LARA include:
Provision of junction tables at Tyssen Road j/w Bayston Road and Evering Road j/w Bayston Road (Dwgs: TT-0220-BR-5 & TT-0220-BR-7).
Provision of a pinch point feature midway along Bayston Road (Dwg TT-0220-BR-6).
Advantages
The advantages of this type of approach are as follows:
No severance of access for the local community will result from these measures. This is beneficial for both local residents and the emergency services.
Will help to self enforce the proposed 20mph Zone for the area (due to be consulted upon in 2011).
Disadvantages
The disadvantages of this type of approach are as follows:
When considering that extensive traffic calming already exists on the roads in question, further deterrent (and hence a reduction in rat-running) is not guaranteed by the provision of these additional measures.
The potential for significant speed reduction is not expected as the area is already extensively traffic calmed.
The measures are expected to be costly and will not provide value for money relative to the benefits attributed to them. The two tables (Tyssen Road j/w Bayston Road and Evering Road j/w Bayston Road) have an estimated cost of £60,000 and the proposed pinch-point on Bayston Road is expected to cost £10,000.
Extensive parking loss (estimated at 14 on-street spaces) will be required in order to implement the proposed ‘pinch-point’. This is expected to result in severe opposition during the public consultation process.
Major design issues are associated with the implementation of the junction tables at the two proposed sites as a result of the existing levels and cambers on the carriageway at these locations. Extensive re-profiling is expected to be required and to this end, topographical surveys and carriageway core tests (estimated cost £3,000) will be required.
Discussion
In the current financial climate, ‘value for money’ should be a key consideration before progressing any plans for remedial action.
The construction of junction tables at the proposed locations is expected to be more costly, and achieve less (in terms of addressing the issues identified), than the other options described in this report.
The construction of a pinch point is unlikely to provide a deterrent to ‘rat-running’ traffic (wishing to avoid congestion on the nearby gyratory system) as the existing low flow conditions will not induce any calming in terms of a ‘give and take’ operation at the pinch point. Furthermore, extensive parking loss (up to 14 spaces) is a major barrier to implementing such a measure.
When considering the issues above, these measures are not expected to form part of a viable solution to the current traffic issues being investigated.
OPTIONS SUMMARY
Option 1 – Gated Closures
Cost: £25,000.
Loss of Parking: 12 on-street spaces for turn around areas on Bayston Road, Darville Road and Leswin Road (4 spaces at each gate).
Effectiveness: Total removal of ‘rat-running’.
Traffic Impacts: Severance of access for local residents and emergency services.
Option 2 – ‘Point No-Entries’
Cost: £6,500.
Loss of Parking: No parking loss.
Effectiveness: Medium to high reduction in rat running expected, improved by ad-hoc enforcement.
Traffic Impacts: Access/egress restricted northbound on Bayston Road, Darville Road and Leswin Road with no severance of access for emergency services.
Option 3 – Deterrent Measures (Junction Tables and ‘Pinch-Point’)
Cost: £70,000 (plus additional survey costs).
Loss of Parking: 14 spaces at ‘pinch-point’ feature (Bayston Road).
Effectiveness: Minimal reduction in ‘rat-running’ and speed.
Traffic Impacts: Minimal.
*Note: All of the above options will incur additional consultation costs.
RECOMMENDATIONS
When considering the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed traffic management measures listed above, it is recommended that the most appropriate option (subject to further public consultation) is the provision of Option 2 - ‘point no-entries’ on Bayston Road, Darville Road and Leswin Road (relocated from junction with Tyssen Road).
This is the most proportionate solution when examining the scale of the traffic issues evident from the speed and volume surveys undertaken and the existing collision history in the area.
Few adverse impacts are envisaged from the provision of such measures and it is hoped that they will provide sufficient deterrent so as to reduce the volume of through traffic currently using the parallel residential links.
In order to maintain effectiveness and driver compliance of the ‘point no entries’, ad-hoc enforcement measures (i.e. temporary camera enforcement) may be considered as part of the overall package of proposals.
Any measures must be consulted upon with the wider community in order to gain a full cross section of local opinion prior to any commitments with respect to implementing the proposals.
Sadly, introducing one-way segments leads - as you've commented - to increased speeds. It definitely leads to worse conditions for other street users (pedestrians, cyclists), as it also seems to always lead to an increase in the amount of road-side parking on both sides (because opposing traffic no longer needs to be able to pass)
ReplyDeleteFurther, no-entry signs into bi-directional streets are routinely ignored on quiet streets by motorists seeking short-cuts (exactly the thing you're trying to avoid) because of the lack of 100% enforcement.
The real answer to stop rat-runners is to get to the root-cause of why they're doing it - I would speculate that they're trying to avoid the extra journey time brought about by the gyratory. Trying to fix it by adding more one-way streets is madness, you've got to bring about an attitude shift within TfL to change their goals to ones of reducing traffic, not maintaining (or increasing) traffic (car) flow above all else.
I share the opinions posted by jfg.
ReplyDeleteThat said, until TFL have worked out how to replace the one-way system, we are reliant on changes made to the use of Darville, Bayston, Leswin and surrounding roads to calm the traffic.
At this stage none of the options are ideal, so perhaps we need to ask Hackney to come up with some alternative solutions?
Much traffic on the streets is already speeding since it is quite often unimpeded by oncoming traffic, so I don't think making them no-entry from the southern point will greatly affect average speeds. As a resident cyclist on Bayston I can vouch that it's definitely the northbound traffic that is most aggressive and impatient when I set off in the morning. The traffic counts have already shown that most of the traffic currently flows from south to north so I believe the proposed measures will be beneficial.
ReplyDeleteNote that no-entry from the south is not the same as one-way. Cars already parked on the road can still 3-pt-turn and travel north.
Realistically, getting TFL to make any changes to the gyratory will take many more years if not decades since they seem pretty intransigent. Furthermore, unless we actively come up with solutions ourselves Hackney Council are unlikely to be able to spend more time researching alternatives. It's taken quite a while to have even these 3 options considered.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete